PROBLEMS
AND
MEANS
OF
INTEGRATION
OF
THE
DALITS
AND
BACKWARD
CLASSES
IN
THE
MAINSTREAM
OF
SOCIETY
(Government of West Bengal, Dr. Ambedkar Fortnight Celebration Committee Seminar on Social Justice, April 25, 1998)
Sitaram
Yechury
It
is,
indeed,
appropriate
that
the
Government
of
West
Bengal
is
observing
the
Dr.
Ambedkar
fortnight
Celebration
on
his
birth
anniversary
and
organising
this
seminar
on
social
justice.
The
topic:
"Problems
and
means
of
integration
of
the
dalits
and
backward
classes
in
the
mainstream
of
society"
is
one
that
must
engage
every
conscious
Indian
interested
in
the
progress
of
our
country
and
welfare
of
our
people.
In
recent
period,
this
issue
has
not
only
engaged
policy
makers
but
has
become
an
important
element
of
political
mobilisation.
While
we
shall
return
to
this
aspect
later,
it
is
necessary
to
recollect
the
following
warning
of
Dr.
Ambedkar:
"On
26th
January
1950,
we
are
going
to
enter
into
a
life
of
contradictions.
In
politics
we
will
have
equality
and
in
social
and
economic
life
we
will
have
inequality.
In
politics,
we
will
be
recognising
the
principle
of
one
man-one
vote
and
one
vote-
one
value.
In
our
social
and
economic
life,
we
shall
by
reason
of
our
social
and
economic
structure,
continue
to
deny
the
principle
of
one
man-one
value.
"How
long
shall
we
continue
to
live
this
life
of
contradictions?
How
long
shall
we
continue
to
deny
equality
in
our
social
and
economic
life?
"If
we
continue
to
deny
it
for
long,
we
will
do
so
only
by
putting
our
political
democracy
in
peril.
We
must
remove
this
contradiction
at
the
earliest
possible
moment
or
else
those
who
suffer
from
inequality
will
blow
up
the
structure
of
political
democracy
which
this
Assembly
has
laboriously
built
up."
(From
Dr.
B.R.
Ambedkar's
speech
in
the
Constituent
Assembly
on
25th
November,
1949)
On
another
occasion,
speaking
of
social
reform,
Dr.
Ambedkar
had
to
say:
"There
is
nothing
fixed,
nothing
eternal,
nothing
sanatan;
that
everything
is
changing,
that
change
is
the
law
of
life
for
individuals
as
well
as
for
society....
"Stability
is
wanted
but
not
at
the
cost
of
change
when
the
change
is
imperative.
Adjustment
is
wanted
but
not
at
the
sacrifice
of
social
justice....
"The
path
of
social
reform
like
the
path
to
heaven
at
any
rate
in
India,
is
strewn
with
many
difficulties...
Caste
is
the
monster
that
crosses
your
path.
You
cannot
have
political
reform,
you
cannot
have
economic
reform,
unless
you
kill
this
monster."
Yet
today,
after
50
years
of
independence,
the
plight
of
dalits
and
the
backward
castes,
for
all
practical
purposes,
has
not
universally
improved.
They
may
be
individual
cases,
but
on
the
whole,
the
statistical
evidence
suggests
that
in
achieving
the
task
of
converting
political
independence
into
real,
social
and
economic
independence
for
the
most
oppressed
sections
to
our
society
we
still
have
a
long
way
to
go.
In
a
sense,
even
after
50
years
of
independence,
it
is
relevant
to
recollect
a
quotation
from
the
poet,
P.B.
Shelley,
which
Ambedkar
used
in
one
of
his
writings
to
describe
the
plight
of
the
dalits
and
the
oppressed
saying
that
they
are
:
"pale
for
weariness
of
climbing
heaven,
and
gazing
on
earth,
wandering
companionless
Among
the
stars
that
have
a
different
birth"
Addressing himself to the task of eradicating such a plight of the dalits, Ambedkar had spoken of constitutional safeguards such as reservations. The country had adopted the policy of reservations for the SC and ST initially for a period of 10 years which had to be extended till date. It needs to be extended further as the improvement in their lot has not matched either expectation or requirement.
During
the
post-emergency
period
since
1977,
rightly
the
question
of
proper
integration
of
the
Other
Backward
Classes
(OBCs)
came
to
the
fore
and
the
Mandal
Commission
was
appointed.
The
recommendations
of
the
Mandal
Commission,
which
were
finally
adopted
by
the
Government,
as
a
policy
of
reservations
in
government
jobs
in
1989,
as
all
of
us
know,
generated
a
lot
of
heat
and
controversy.
As
the
economic
crisis
in
the
country
was
not
providing
adequate
number
of
jobs
or
opportunities
for
education,
the
upper
castes
and
the
privileged
sections
resisted
any
measure
to
share
a
part
of
the
shrinking
cake,
so
to
speak.
While
supporting
the
reservations
for
the
OBCs,
recognising
the
importance
of
the
struggle
against
social
oppression
carried
on
through
the
caste
structure,
the
CPI(M)
had
the
distinction
of
being
the
only
political
party
to
speak
of
combining
caste
reservations
with
economic
criteria.
The
reasoning
was
simple.
The
benefits
of
reservations,
however
limited
as
we
shall
see
subsequently,
must
reach
those
who
require
them
the
most.
Those
economically
better
off
within
the
OBCs
should
not
corner
all
the
benefits.
There
was
much
controversy
which
finally
settled
down
when
the
Supreme
Court
came
to
our
aid
through
its
historic
judgement
on
the
creamy-layer.
Despite
all
such
measures,
what
is
the
reality
today?
While
constitutional
safeguards
such
as
reservations
are
important,
experience
has
shown
that
unless
the
economic
status
of
the
oppressed
is
drastically
improved
such
safeguards
by
themselves
will
not
radically
change
the
situation.
This
is
a
factor
that,
both
Dr.
Ambedkar
and
Shri
Mandal
in
his
report,
not
only
accepted
but
underlined.
We
shall,
however,
leave
this
line
of
analysis
for
the
moment
only
to
return
to
it
shortly
in
order
to
consider
the
other
important
aspects
of
caste
mobilisation
and
review
briefly
the
record
of
our
experiences
in
the
post-
independence
decades
aimed
at
a
proper
integration
of
the
dalits
and
the
backward
castes
into
the
social
mainstream.
CASTE
MOBILISATION
During
the
recent
years,
caste
mobilisation
has
become
an
important
factor
in
shaping
Indian
politics.
Ever
since
the
issue
of
Mandal
commission
recommendations
for
reservations
in
government
jobs
for
the
OBCs
came
to
the
national
agenda
in
1989,
it
has
left
an
impact
on
the
evolution
of
national
politics.
For
a
Marxist
and
a
communist,
it
is
not
only
necessary
to
assess
this
growing
role
of
caste
assertion
in
Indian
political
life
but
also
to
map
out
the
manner
in
which
the
unity
of
the
toilers
is
strengthened
in
order
to
achieve
the
People's
Democratic
Revolution.
Unless
we
tackle
with
clarity
this
important
phenomenon,
we
will
not
be
able
to
overcome
the
potentially
disruptive
role
that
caste
mobilisation
can
have
on
toilers
unity.
It
is
for
these
reasons
that
this
issue
needs
to
be
addressed
with
all
seriousness.
At
the
outset,
it
is
necessary
to
debunk
a
common
fallacy
that
attempts
to
pit
caste
versus
class.
Vested
interests
often
advise
communists
that
since
they
believe
in
class
divisions
in
society,
caste
ought
not
to
engage
their
attention.
Such
a
mechanical
distinction
between
caste
and
class
is
not
only
a
vulgar
simplification
but
divorced
from
the
present
day
Indian
reality.
The
caste
stratification
of
our
society
is
something
that
has
come
down
to
us
from
centuries.
Despite
all
the
refinements
and
changes
within
castes
and
between
castes,
that
have
taken
place
over
the
years,
the
basic
structure,
in
so
far
as
the
oppression
of
the
Dalits
or
the
backward
castes
is
concerned,
remains.
It
is
within
this
social
stratification
that
the
class
formation
in
India
is
taking
place.
Capitalism
is
still
developing
in
India
and
the
process
of
the
development
of
society
divided
into
modern
capitalist
classes,
is
taking
place
constantly
within
the
existing
caste
stratification.
The
question,
therefore,
is
not
one
of
class
versus
caste.
It
is
the
formation
of
classes
under
modern
capitalism
within
the
inherited
caste
structure.
To
a
large
extent,
the
most
exploited
classes
in
our
society
constitute
the
most
socially
oppressed
castes.
And,
to
that
extent,
the
struggle
against
class
exploitation
and
the
struggle
against
social
oppression
complement
each
other.
These
sections,
as
it
were,
are
subject
to
dual
oppression.
It
is
this
complementarity
that
not
only
needs
to
be
recognised
but
on
the
basis
of
that
recognition,
it
must
follow
that
an
important
task
before
the
communist
movement
in
our
country
today
is
the
integration
of
the
struggle
against
class
exploitation
with
the
struggle
against
social
oppression.
As
we
shall
see
later,
it
is
only
through
such
an
integration
that
the
firm
unity
of
the
toilers
can
be
forged
and
strengthened
in
order
to
advance
towards
People's
Democracy.
Before
we
take
up
the
task
of
trying
to
understand
the
nature
and
characteristics
of
caste
mobilisation
in
the
present
day
political
life,
one
needs
to
examine,
albeit
briefly,
as
to
why
caste
divisions
and
social
oppression
continue
to
persist
even
after
all
the
tall
claims
made
by
the
ruling
classes
through
the
post-independence
decades
to
overcome
them.
There
is
a
vast
amount
of
literature
on
the
evolution
and
sustenance
of
the
caste
system
in
India.
The
large
number
of
such
works
are
only
matched
by
the
divergence
of
their
conclusions.
I
am
not
here
going
into
the
origins
of
the
caste
system
or
its
tenacity.
Some
scholars
have
also
linked
it
with
a
discussion
of
Marx's
Asiatic
Mode
of
Production.
Without
any
disrespect
or
devaluation
of
such
work,
which
I
consider
is
of
immense
intellectual
and
political
value,
it
would
suffice
for
our
discussion
to
base
ourselves
on
the
fact
(agreed
upon
by
most)
that
the
caste
system,
in
Marxist
terms,
is
the
superstructure
of
an
economic
base
which
is
pre-capitalist.
In
that
sense,
any
attempt
to
overthrow
this
sinful
heritage
and
obnoxious
caste
oppression
will
have
to
target
the
elimination
of
the
vestiges
of
pre-capitalist
economic
formations.
This,
in
our
present
case,
is
the
elimination
of
the
vestiges
of
feudalism
and
semi-feudalism.
PERSISTENCE
&
TENACITY
This
does
not
mean,
even
for
a
moment,
that
such
elimination,
through
a
comprehensive
agrarian
revolution,
however
complex
and
difficult
it
may
be,
will
automatically
eliminate
the
caste
system
and
the
entire
range
of
social
consciousness
associated
with
it.
As
Engels,
in
a
letter
to
Bloch
says,
Marx
and
he
had
meant
that
the
economic
factor
is
decisive
in
the
final
analysis.
Even
after
a
change
in
the
economic
base
the
superstructure
and
associated
social
consciousness
may
persist
and
would
require
an
intense
ideological
struggle
to
eliminate
it.
But
without
the
attempt
to
change
the
pre-capitalist
agrarian
order,
mere
appeals
for
a
change
of
heart
or
behaviour
cannot
and
will
not
eliminate
this
obnoxious
social
oppression.
There
was
an
opportunity
to
effect
a
sweeping
agrarian
revolution
alongwith
the
anti-colonial
freedom
struggle.
But
this
was
not
to
be
due
to
the
compromising
character
of
the
leadership
of
our
national
movement.
The
main
reason
for
this
persistence
of
social
oppression
based
on
caste
stratification
is
the
inadequacy
of
the
ruling
classes,
during
the
freedom
struggle,
in
addressing
themselves
to
this
issue.
The
overcoming
of
caste
differentiation
was
sought
through
proper
social
behaviour
between
individuals
and
castes
without
going
into
the
social
roots
of
this
phenomenon.
The
sinful
heritage
of
caste
oppression
was
something
that
the
national
anti-colonial
struggle
could
not
repudiate
because
the
leadership
of
the
freedom
struggle
was
not
interested
in
going
to
the
root
of
the
problem
and
uprooting
it.
Even
if
it
had
a
correct
understanding
of
the
social
roots
of
the
problem,
it
did
not
have
the
courage
to
seize
it
by
the
roots.
By
refusing
to
sweep
away
the
feudal
and
semi-feudal
agrarian
relations,
which
were
the
bedrock
for
the
continuation
and
persistence
of
caste
exploitation,
the
leadership
of
freedom
struggle
not
only
permitted
but
in
later
years
perpetuated
the
caste
exploitation.
Thus,
the
struggle
against
caste
oppression
over
the
decades
of
freedom
movement
and
post-independence
India
was
divorced
from
the
anti-colonial
struggle
earlier
and
from
the
struggle
for
an
agrarian
revolution
later.
COLONIAL
RULE
With
the
advent
of
modernisation
under
the
British
rule,
particularly
the
railways,
many,
including
Karl
Marx,
had
thought
that
the
old
order
would
crumble,
paving
the
way
for
a
class
division
of
modern
society.
However,
this
did
not
happen
as
envisaged.
This
was
so
because
it
was
not
in
the
interest
of
the
colonial
rule
to
transform
Indian
society.
Its
interests
lay
in
exploiting
the
Indian
people
and
its
economy
on
the
basis
of
their
backwardness.
This
required
to
keep
the
rural
land
relations
intact,
in
class
terms,
modifying
them
only
to
advance
the
colonial
revenue
collections
without
disturbing
the
economic
or
social
relations.
The
British
also
required
that
a
powerful
indigenous
Indian
capitalist
class
did
not
arise.
The
result
was
an
alliance
with
the
feudal
landlords
for
its
political
survival
and
the
superimposition
of
minimum
modern
capitalist
relations
on
the
existing
feudal
land
relations
which
sustained
the
caste
system.
Thus,
we
find
that
under
the
British
rule,
a
contradictory
process
was
set
into
motion.
The
effect
of
modern
relations,
as
Marx
had
foreseen
--
railways,
communications,
growing
market,
few
industries,
trade
--
accentuated
the
tendency
towards
destroying
the
old
structure
and
with
it
the
caste
system
and
replacing
it
with
modern
day
class
divisions.
On
the
other
hand,
the
vital
interests
of
the
colonial
power
lay
in
seeking
political
and
economic
support
from
the
landlords
and
feudal
interests,
thus
maintaining
the
old
land
relations
and
thereby
supporting
the
caste
structure
and
institutions.
Thus,
the
process
of
change
of
the
old
society,
under
the
British
rule,
was
slow
and
painful
and
never
destined
to
be
completed.
TWO
TRENDS
IN
FREEDOM
MOVEMENT
Simultaneously,
within
the
freedom
movement
itself,
there
were
two
main
trends
that
contributed
to
the
persistence
of
the
caste
institutions.
One
was
the
revivalist
ideology
which
gripped
a
number
of
leaders
of
the
freedom
movement.
Coming
from
upper
caste
Hindu
background,
these
leaders
in
the
struggle
against
the
British
drew
sustenance
from
India's
so
called
past
and,
in
the
process,
defended
the
social
institutions
of
that
past.
Tilak
was
a
classic
example
of
such
a
tendency.
Rajni
Palme
Dutt
in
India
Today
summed
up
this
line
of
thinking
most
appropriately
by
the
following:
"So
from
the
existing
foul
welter
and
decaying
and
corrupt
metaphysics,
from
the
broken
relics
of
the
shattered
village
system,
from
the
dead
remains
of
court
splendours
of
a
vanished
civilisation,
they
sought
to
fabricate
and
build
up
and
reconstitute
a
golden
dream
of
Hindu
culture
--
a
`purified'
Hindu
culture
--
which
they
could
hold
up
as
an
ideal
and
a
guiding
light.
Against
the
overwhelming
flood
of
British
bourgeois
culture
and
ideology,
which
they
saw
completely
conquering
the
Indian
bourgeoisie
and
intelligentsia,
they
sought
to
hold
forward
a
feeble
shield
of
a
reconstructed
Hindu
ideology
which
had
no
longer
any
natural
basis
for
its
existence
in
actual
life
conditions.
All
social
and
scientific
development
was
condemned
by
the
more
extreme
devotees
of
this
gospel
as
the
conquerors'
culture
:
every
form
of
antiquated
tradition,
even
abuse,
privilege
and
obscurantism,
was
treated
with
respect
and
veneration"
(page
327).
Similar
is
the
attitude
of
present
day
communal
forces.
Precisely
because
their
ideological
roots
are
based
on
revivalism
and
obscurantism,
they
are
opposed
to
a
thorough
agrarian
revolution.
Even
at
the
level
of
the
superstructure,
despite
mouthing
radical
slogans,
they
only
strengthen
the
caste
hierarchies
of
the
old
Hindu
order.
The
other
tendency
during
the
freedom
struggle,
which
prevented
the
liquidation
of
the
old
order,
was
the
vacillation
of
the
Congress
towards
landlords
and
feudal
interests.
At
a
time
when
huge
mass
peasant
revolts
had
started
growing
against
landlords,
the
Congress
in
the
1922
Bardoli
resolution,
calling
off
the
national
campaign
against
the
British,
stated:
"The
Working
Committee
advises
Congress
workers
and
organisations
to
inform
the
ryots
that
withholding
of
rent
payments
to
zamindar
is
contrary
to
the
Congress
resolutions
and
injurious
to
the
best
interests
of
the
country.
The
Working
Committee
assures
the
zamindars
that
the
Congress
movement
is
in
no
way
interested
to
attack
their
legal
rights
....."
Thus,
the
Congress's
efforts
to
achieve
independence
were
divorced
from
the
agrarian
revolution.
In
fact,
as
we
shall
see
later,
instead
of
carrying
on
a
sweeping
overthrow
of
the
old
feudal
order,
the
Congress
compromised
with
the
landlords
sharing
power
with
them
in
post-independent
India.
These
two
tendencies,
put
together,
prevented
any
meaningful
attack
against
the
social
oppression
of
the
caste
system
associated
with
the
feudal
and
semi-feudal
order
existing
in
the
country.
It
was
only
the
Communist
Party
of
India
which
linked
the
struggle
against
British
imperialism
with
a
comprehensive
agrarian
revolution.
Right
from
the
Platform
of
Action
of
1930
to
the
memorandum
submitted
to
the
National
Integration
Council
by
the
CPI(M)
in
1968,
the
communist
movement
constantly
underlined
that
caste
exploitation
and
social
emancipation
could
be
possible
only
through
sweeping
changes
in
agrarian
relations.
However,
in
the
absence
of
a
powerful
agrarian
movement,
this
task
has
remained
unfulfilled
to
date.
As
a
result,
given
the
compromising
attitude
of
the
bourgeois
leadership,
the
atrocities
and
caste
oppression
continue
to
persist.
SOCIAL
REFORM
MOVEMENTS
Another
current
also
needs
to
be
properly
analysed
in
order
to
understand
the
persistence
of
the
caste
stratification
to
date,
i
e,
the
social
reform
movement.
There
have
taken
place
powerful
anti-caste
movements
in
the
country
and
they
wielded
significant
political
influence
at
their
time.
Amongst
the
giants
who
stand
out
in
such
movements
was
Jyotiba
Phule.
Jyotiba
was
a
great
secular
democrat
whose
passion
for
the
untouchable
and
sense
of
justice
was
unheard
of.
He,
personally,
had
absolutely
no
caste
bias
and
the
movement
demanding
equal
treatment
was
named
as
the
satyashodhak
--
a
movement
against
untruth,
injustice
and
hypocrisy
of
the
Hindu
social
order
dominated
by
the
Brahmins.
Ideologically,
Jyotiba's
movement
was
an
uncompromising
attack
on
the
ancient
and
feudal
superstructure.
However,
this
uncompromising
attack
did
not
go
beyond
to
attack
the
basic
agrarian
structure
based
on
feudal
land
relations
which
was
the
basis
on
which
this
superstructure
existed.
While
this
movement
contributed
immensely
to
raise
the
consciousness
against
caste
exploitation,
it
could
not
reach
the
levels
of
that
structure's
elimination
precisely
because
it
could
not
mobilise
the
peasantry
for
an
agrarian
revolution.
Similar
has
been
the
experience
of
Ambedkar.
This
most
outstanding
and
tireless
fighter,
who
on
behalf
of
the
Dalits
exposed
the
upper
caste
hypocrisies
and
lambasted
the
Congress
and
its
policies,
had
to
finally
ask
his
followers
to
embrace
Buddhism
to
escape
the
injustices
of
Hindu
society.
But
the
grim
social
reality
based
on
unequal
land
relations
did
not
change
because
of
conversion
to
Buddhism.
Unfortunately,
smashing
the
present
socio-economic
system
as
the
decisive
step
for
elimination
of
caste
exploitation,
was
replaced
by
formal
declarations
of
equality,
reservation
of
seats,
jobs,
etc.
It
was
once
again
shown
that
despite
a
leader
of
Ambedkar's
stature,
and
despite
the
strength
of
the
movement,
the
objective
could
not
be
achieved
because
it
failed
to
target
the
basic
source
of
this
exploitation,
i
e,
feudal
and
semi-feudal
land
relations.
Similar
also
has
been
the
experience
of
the
Dravidian
movement
led
by
Periyar
E.V.
Ramaswamy
Naicker.
Periyar
did
succeed
in
creating
a
great
feeling
against
caste
oppression
and
his
voice
loomed
large
against
untouchability.
But
yet
again,
viewing
this
merely
at
the
level
of
superstructure
without
attacking
the
economic
base
that
nurtured
such
a
monstrous
iniquitous
caste
stratification,
the
movement
could
not
reach
its
logical
culmination.
Thus,
we
find
that
the
social
reform
movement,
despite
the
glorious
uncompromising
role
of
its
leaders,
could
not
achieve
the
stated
objective
as
it
either
ignored
or
bypassed
the
tasks
of
the
agrarian
revolution.
Thus,
we
find
that
at
the
time
of
independence,
all
these
currents,
put
together,
had
created
a
situation
where
the
tasks
of
the
democratic
revolution
--
chiefly
the
agrarian
revolution
--
remained
unfulfilled
under
the
bourgeois
leadership
of
the
freedom
struggle
that
not
only
vacillated
but
compromised
with
landlordism.
COMPROMISE
WITH
LANDLORDISM
This
process
gets
manifested
in
a
concrete
expression
in
post-
independent
India.
The
Indian
bourgeoisie,
in
its
eagerness
to
capture
state
power,
compromised
on
the
one
hand
with
imperialism
and
on
the
other
with
landlordism
and
semi-feudal
forces.
It
shared
power
with
the
latter
in
the
ruling
class
alliance.
Thus,
instead
of
sweeping
away
the
feudal
and
semi-feudal
land
relations
in
the
course
of
the
anti-colonial
and
anti-imperialist
struggle,
the
ruling
classes
perpetuated
these
relations,
seeking
only
to
modify
them
for
their
interests
by
attempting
to
superimpose
capitalism.
Thus,
instead
of
a
sweeping
overthrow
of
the
old
order
from
below,
what
happened
over
these
years
of
independence
was
a
limited
superimposition
of
capitalist
relations
in
agriculture,
that
too
in
limited
pockets,
without
overthrowing
the
social
relations.
This
only
perpetuated
the
social
consciousness
associated
with
the
semi-feudal
relations
--
caste
and
communalism.
Further,
the
system
of
parliamentary
democracy
that
was
adopted
was
based
on
an
electoral
system
which
tended
to
reinforce
the
caste
consciousness.
Instead
of
guaranteeing
equality,
irrespective
of
caste,
the
electoral
system,
itself,
nurtured
the
perpetuation
of
caste
consciousness
in
terms
of
choice
of
candidates
and
the
appeal
to
the
electorate.
The
ruling
classes
have
consistently
refused
to
accept
the
CPI(M)'s
suggestion
to
introduce
proportional
representation.
Apart
from
its
other
advantages,
as
people
would
have
to
vote
for
parties
and
not
individuals,
this
would
have
minimised
the
appeals
based
on
caste,
religion,
community,
etc.
While
both
these
factors
tended
to
reinforce
the
perpetuation
of
caste
oppression,
the
Congress
leadership
continued
to
mouth
concern
over
caste
oppression
and
continued
to
appeal
to
people
to
change
their
way
of
life
and
outlook
rather
than
attack
the
economic
basis
on
which
this
oppression
thrived.
The
inability
to
proceed
with
even
the
limited
land
reform
legislations
because
of
the
alliance
with
the
landlords
prevented
in
the
past
and
prevents
today
the
Indian
bourgeoisie
to
complete
the
tasks
of
the
democratic
revolution.
This
is
reinforced
by
the
attitude
of
the
Congress
leaders,
even
those
coming
from
the
Dalits.
A
case
in
point
is
the
experiences
and
opinions
of
Shri
Jagjivan
Ram
in
his
book
Caste
Challenge
in
India.
Unlike
many
other
Dalit
leaders
who
stood
aloof
from
the
national
movement,
Shri
Jagjivan
Ram
has
a
proud
distinction
of
active
participation
in
the
freedom
struggle,
including
imprisonment.
With
justified
passion,
he
recounts
the
plight
of
the
Dalits
and
the
oppressed
castes.
Intellectually,
he
accepts
the
fact
that
the
struggle
against
caste
oppression
can
only
be
successful
as
an
integral
part
of
the
struggle
of
the
exploited
classes
of
India.
Despite
emphasising
this
consistently
in
his
book,
the
final
solution
he
offers
is
characteristic
of
a
bourgeois
leader.
He
abhors
class
struggle
for
the
emancipation
of
the
poor
and
urges
the
people
to
adopt
the
Gandhian
way,
i
e,
the
elimination
of
such
oppression
with
an
exercise
of
the
force
of
morality.
Thus,
once
again,
we
find
that
while
understanding
the
problem
correctly,
while
describing
the
situation
graphically,
the
modern
day
leaders
of
post-independent
India
also
fought
shy
of
mobilising
the
people
for
a
sweeping
agrarian
revolution
as
the
basic
solution
of
the
problem.
RESERVATIONS:
NO
FINAL
SOLUTION
Let
us
now
return
to
the
initial
line
of
analysis
concerning
the
issue
of
properly
integrating
the
dalits
and
backward
castes
in
the
social
mainstream.
The
net
result
of
the
post-independence
decades
has
been
not
the
building
up
of
a
movement
for
the
eradication
of
social
oppression
that
the
caste
system
represents,
but
for
palliatives
offered
to
redress
to
some
degree
the
suffering
of
these
sections
through
the
extension
of
the
British
concept
of
concessions
such
as
reservations
in
educational
institutions
and
jobs.
These
are
projected
as
an
end
in
themselves.
This,
despite
the
plethora
of
statistical
information
that
this
has
not
substantially
altered
the
conditions
of
a
vast
majority
of
the
oppressed.
In
the
absence
of
any
meaningful
change
in
agrarian
relations,
such
concessions
must
be
supported.
But
no
illusions
must
be
entertained
that
this
is
the
only
solution.
In
the
very
nature
of
things,
these
palliatives
will
neither
solve
the
problem
of
poverty
and
unemployment
nor
change
the
condition
of
untouchables
and
other
downtrodden
castes.
They
will
certainly
offer
some
relief
to
individuals
from
these
communities,
enhance
their
confidence
in
their
advance,
but
not
change
their
status.
For
the
ruling
classes
these
concessions
play
an
important
role.
In
the
first
place,
in
the
general
competition
for
jobs
etc,
they
pit
one
section
of
toilers
against
another.
Secondly,
they
create
an
impression
among
some
sections
that
the
government
is
their
real
friend
and
they
should
confine
the
struggle
within
the
framework
of
the
bourgeois
system.
It
is
thus
that
a
challenge
to
the
present
socio-economic
system
from
the
most
downtrodden
sections
is
prevented.
Another
phenomenon,
which
was
taking
place
simultaneously,
will
also
have
to
be
noted.
A
parallel
development
that
was
taking
place
during
the
days
of
the
freedom
struggle
and
particularly
after
the
independence
was
the
process
of
emergence
of
a
modern
state
in
India.
The
vast
multinational
character
of
our
country
ensured
that
different
sections
--
caste,
religions,
ethnic,
regional
--
began
to
rightfully
demand
equality
of
status
and
opportunity
in
the
new
independent
polity.
But,
however,
as
the
economic
crisis
deepened
in
the
post-independent
decades,
far
from
the
expectations
of
these
different
sections
being
met,
the
disparities
started
growing.
This
led
and
continues
to
lead
today
to
a
scramble
amongst
these
different
sections
for
a
share
of
the
cake.
As
the
size
of
the
cake
shrinks,
this
scramble
takes
the
form
of
a
conflict
between
various
groups.
Hence,
the
demand
for
reservations
from
new
sections
and
the
opposition
to
reservations
from
other
sections
becomes
a
common
practice.
TWO
ASPECTS
OF
CASTE
ASSERTIONS
It
is,
in
this
background
of
deepening
crisis
in
our
country,
that
one
must
understand
the
nature
of
the
present
caste
assertion.
There
are
two
aspects
to
this.
On
the
one
hand,
as
a
result
of
whatever
limited
development
has
taken
place
since
independence
and
in
the
background
of
the
deepening
crisis,
there
is
a
growing
consciousness
amongst
the
oppressed
castes
to
rebel
against
their
conditions
of
social
oppression.
This
is
a
positive
aspect.
Without
such
a
growing
consciousness
the
struggle
against
oppression
and
exploitation
cannot
be
carried
out
decisively.
This
is
a
consciousness
that
needs
to
be
nurtured
and
strengthened
by
the
communists
with
an
effort
to
integrate
this
consciousness
with
the
struggles
against
the
present
socio-economic
system.
It
is
only
through
such
an
integration
of
the
struggle
against
social
oppression
and
the
struggle
against
modern
day
class
exploitation
that
the
struggle
for
an
agrarian
revolution
can
be
strengthened
and
carried
forward
to
its
logical
culmination.
There
is,
however,
another
aspect
to
the
present
day
caste
assertion.
This
is
the
attempt
to
try
and
confine
this
growing
consciousness
within
the
parameters
of
the
concerned
caste.
This
is
resorted
to
by
the
leadership
of
the
present
day
movements
whose
outlook
is
no
different
from
the
ones
we
discussed
above.
While
appealing
only
to
the
caste
consciousness
and
ignoring,
if
not
evading,
the
basic
issue
of
the
struggle
against
the
existing
agrarian
order,
these
leaders
are
once
again
appealing
for
a
change
in
the
superstructure
without
affecting
the
base.
In
doing
so,
they
treat
this
growing
consciousness
amongst
the
Dalits
and
the
backward
castes
as
separate
compartments,
as
vote
banks
for
their
political
fortunes,
rather
than
addressing
themselves
for
a
genuine
solution
of
the
problem.
LIMITATIONS
OF
CASTE
MOVEMENTS
The
appeal
of
such
caste
leaders
to
their
following
is
not
to
strengthen
the
common
struggle
to
change
the
present
socio-
economic
system.
The
appeal
is
to
elect
their
brethren
to
power,
thus
spreading
the
illusion
that
coming
to
power
within
the
same
system,
that
protects
the
existing
socio-economic
order,
is
a
solution
to
their
problems.
This
may
serve
the
lust
for
power
of
the
leaders
but
the
living
conditions
of
the
mass
remain
as
backward
as
ever.
This
has
been
the
experience
of
the
governments
that
have
come
to
power
in
Bihar
and
UP.
None
of
them
even
initiated
the
implementation
of
existing
land
reform
legislations
that
the
West
Bengal
Left
Front
government
has
done.
By
exploiting
the
growing
consciousness
amongst
the
socially
oppressed,
the
leadership
is
thus
perpetuating
the
very
edifice
of
exploitation
of
the
existing
socio-economic
system.
Instead
of
sweeping
agrarian
changes,
they
seek
to
preserve
the
existing
order
that
perpetuates
the
caste
system
and
its
oppression.
Yet,
why
is
it
that
a
significant
section
of
the
oppressed
castes
are
carried
away,
at
least
momentarily,
by
their
leaders'
appeal?
Here
one
must
understand
the
tremendous
sense
of
caste
solidarity
that
exists.
In
the
face
of
atrocities
committed
by
the
upper
castes,
the
only
source
of
resistance
and
protection
the
oppressed
have
is
the
strength
of
their
being
together.
This
is
particularly
so
among
the
Dalits
as
they
are
often,
and
in
many
cases
to
date,
huddled
together
and
their
habitations
confined
to
certain
areas.
The
bonds
of
kinship
forged
through
common
suffering
shape
a
common
consciousness
of
solidarity.
Their
moving
together
is
not
due
to
lack
of
education
or
civility
as
the
upper
castes
contemptuously
tend
to
describe.
It
is
out
of
sheer
necessity
to
offer
the
strongest
possible
resistance
to
the
oppression
heaped
on
them.
The
net
result
of
this
is
that
this
dual
nature
of
the
present
caste
assertion
presents
itself
in
a
manner
as
though
there
is
a
duality
of
social
consciousness
amongst
the
oppressed.
The
communist
movement
itself
has
experienced
instances
of
how
the
oppressed
sections
are
willing
to
brave
the
worst
police
oppression
in
their
economic
struggles
under
the
red
flag,
but
when
it
comes
to
electoral
preferences
and
voting,
they
appear
to
be
guided
by
their
social,
kinship
and
caste
affinities.
It
is
this
apparent
duality
of
social
consciousness
that
the
vested
interests
of
the
caste
leadership
seek
to
preserve
for
electoral
benefits.
But
in
the
process,
they
seek
to
divorce
the
struggle
against
social
oppression
from
the
struggle
against
modern
day
class
exploitation.
Thus,
instead
of
strengthening
the
unity
of
the
toilers
against
the
present
socio-economic
system,
they
tend
to
separate
the
two
struggles
thereby
weakening
this
unity.
STRUGGLE
FOR
AGRARIAN
REVOLUTION
It
is
the
task
of
the
communists
today
to
integrate
these
struggles
against
social
oppression
and
against
class
exploitation
in
one,
overall
wider
class
struggle
to
change
the
existing
socio-economic
system
and
unleash
an
agrarian
revolution.
This
is
the
challenge
of
our
times.
The
red
flag
should
be
as
active
in
mobilising
the
people
in
the
struggles
against
the
new
economic
policies,
against
communalism,
as
in
mobilising
the
oppressed
in
the
struggles
against
social
oppression.
It
is
precisely
because
the
communists
seek
and
strive
for
such
an
integration
that
various
caste
leaders
pour
venomous
attacks
against
us.
For,
when
such
an
integration
takes
place,
there
is
no
room
for
sordid
political
bargaining
and
manoeuvring
that
is
done
by
the
leaders
in
the
name
of
the
exploited
castes.
Hence
Shri
Kanshi
Ram's
preposterous
attacks
against
the
communists,
particularly
the
CPI(M).
Therefore,
while
supporting
reservations
for
the
Dalits
and
the
backward
castes,
the
communist
movement
unhesitatingly
and
always
emphasises
that
this
is
not
the
final
solution.
Enough
statistics
can
be
adduced
to
show
that
despite
reservations,
the
plight
of
these
sections
have
not
substantially
improved.
While
all
caste
leaders
mouth
the
necessity
of
radical
economic
reforms
to
improve
the
lot
of
the
oppressed,
it
is
by
now
clear
that
unless
the
struggle
for
a
sweeping
agrarian
revolution
takes
place,
no
meaningful
emancipation
of
these
sections,
who
continue
to
pay
for
the
sins
of
the
past,
cannot
be
achieved.
Thus, for a thorough and proper integration of the dalits and backward castes into the social mainstream requires all of us to carry forward the struggle that Dr. Ambedkar initiated and undertook in his time, in modern day conditions. The source of inspiration of the glorious peasant struggles in Bengal in the past must motivate all of us to unleash a powerful agrarian movement to sweep away the semi-feudal land relations. This is the only manner in which social oppression and economic exploitation can be overcome, leading to the liberation of the millions of the oppressed and exploited brothers and sisters of ours.