In Indian politics, like it or not, the caste card has always been and will always be a robust rebuff to the Hindu card. It digs out the deep fault lines in the society and throws troubling questions at the champions of the latter. It’s obvious that over the decades they haven’t been able to produce satisfying answers. But rest assured, both will continue to keep our democracy on the boil till eternity.
The INDIA bloc, led by Rahul Gandhi, is going full steam ahead with the caste census. In Uttar Pradesh, Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh Yadav is making the rights of PDA (pichde, dalit and alpsankhyk) a talking point. Their persistent campaign has started delivering electoral dividends. As the 2024 election results suggest, it has neutralised the gains of the BJP from aggressive advocacy of Hindutva under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
It doesn’t come as a surprise. Those familiar with the Mandal versus Kamandal politics of the early 1990s, would know how caste turned into a bulwark against the surging Hindu sentiment generated by the Ayodhya Ram temple movement. It caused major changes in India’s polity. This time, once the caste census happens, one can expect an impact far bigger and far wide-ranging. For good or bad would be subjective, depending where you stand in the emerging social and economic equations.
It would be subjective like the understanding of Hinduism itself. People across socio-economic strata don’t have a consensus view about Hinduism though they may adhere to the broad rituals and practices of it. The view of the castes in the lower strata would be different from those in the upper rungs of the social spectrum on several critical issues (reservation, for instance). Because caste is not merely a marker of social position and status, it’s an instrument of distribution of privileges and control over economic resources too. It needs no emphasising that upper castes always had a lion’s share of both.
The institution of caste and the intrinsic unfairness within it are in the genetic code of Hinduism. In many parts of the country lower castes are still untouchable; hotels in small towns serve food to them on different tables; a Dalit riding a horse during a marriage ceremony or having his moustache twirled up can invite the wrath of the members of the upper caste in the same locality. The Constitution may have guaranteed equality to all, but the social attitude towards caste has not changed much.
The asymmetry within and the mutual fear and inherent distrust born thereof, are a constant in Hinduism. Thus a homogenising view of it – the one being pushed by the champions of Hindutva – is not likely to find acceptance beyond a point. For a large section of the population it would mean reassertion of the old equations of unfairness, disprivilege and injustice.
So whenever one political party raises religion, the others would find a counterbalance in caste. The ancient texts and guidelines of Hinduism would be countered with the Constitution and its egalitarian principles. It’s for the advocates of Hinduism to draw a balance and make their version of Hinduism acceptable to all sections. They have failed in it so far. And they are not likely to succeed.
(By arrangement with Perspective Bytes)
