DALIT DILEMMAS

Dr Anand Teltumbde has been known for some time now for his writings on dalit issues, particularly Hindutva And Dalits and Ambedkar In And For The Post Ambedkar Dalit Movement. His latest, the first in a series called Holocaste, published by Navayana Publishers, is called Khairlanji, A Strange And Bitter Crop. While the book is to be launched on October 10, it's author talks to us before so that we may bring to you his reactions on the judgment of the case his book was based on.







1. Rural India is full of instances of atrocity. How do you decide whether a massacre is biased by caste?

It's not that crimes are committed only on dalits. I think we are intrinsically a violent society. Violent clashes are thus ubiquitous. They do occur between people of the same caste. But when the clash involves dalits, violence gets an extra intensity, extra viciousness with a tinge of extra hatred. Caste lies in that 'extra' and demands sensitivity to see it that way. If the Bhotmanges had not belonged to Mahar caste, it is improbable that they would have met the horrific fate they did. The disputant may have beaten them, harassed them but would not have been successful in mobilzing entire village in the gruesome violence. It is because of the refusal of dalits to submit to dictates of caste Hindus, that they're taught 'a lesson' by the latter through acts of violence. Every crime against dalits invariably has this 'extra' casteist dimension. It is precisely for this reason that the Atrocity Act has a simple definition of atrocity - any crime committed by a non-dalit on a dalit person.

2. Why do you feel the khairlanji massacre should have been addressed under the SC and ST (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act?

There is no additional justification required for Khairlanji massacre to be tried under the Atrocity Act than the fact that the victims were dalits and the perpetrators of crime were non-dalits. Any crime against dalits could be easily attributed to non-caste factors such as land dispute, poverty, gender and so on. This is a kind of self delusion that blinds oneself to the reality of caste. The early communists obsessed in seeing things in 'class' terms had suffered this delusion, which their successors painstakingly try to overcome today. This tendency to deny the blemish of casteism is innate in the caste society. The very fact that a Khairlanji like crime also can be painted as lacking in caste dimension, only shows this self-deceptive attitude. Precisely for that reason has the Atrocity Act adopted a very simple definition for atrocity on a dalit.



3. The perpetrators of the khairlanji massacre were from OBC (Other backward castes – here, Kunbi mostly). Those in the Chundur massacre were from Reddy and Telaga caste, and those in the Neerukonda massacre from the Kamma caste. Do you think the perpetrator's caste (and its status quo) determines the build-up and intensity of caste crimes?

The post-independence development paradigm has created the contemporary phenomenon of caste violence by OBC castes against Dalits. While these castes benefited economically by the land reforms, Green Revolution, and capitalist development in the countryside and politically by consolidating themselves into a formidable constituency, the dalits, despite an increasing assertion of their human rights, were left relatively powerless. This basic power asymmetry in the rural setting has been at the root of increasing violence against dalits. All the infamous atrocities have these castes as perpetrators of crime. Earlier the oppression of dalits was embedded in social process and seldom had to manifest into violence acts. Now because of increasing resistance of dalits to accept these processes and the aspiration of the OBCs to flaunt their new found baton of Brahmanism added by their relative lack of cultural sophistication, the caste order is sought to be enforced often by violence against dalits.



4. The reservation allotted to SCs by constitution and various laws allows for their upliftment. Yet the same reservation imposes a stigma on them. Is there a solution to this paradox?

The paradox lies in the prevailing conception of reservation as a device of upliftment of dalits who are assumed to lack in ability. In the context of India, reservations ought to have been reckoned as the countervailing force of the state against the disability of the society to treat its own constituents with equity. The disability is with society, not with dalits. This simple alteration in conception would remove this paradox. Reservations then would become coterminous with society overcoming this disability and would even present a challenge to dalits to transcend its limitation. Unfortunately, the reservation stereotypes are getting strengthened with each passing day by our politicians.



5. Do you think conversion to Buddhism - or another religion - actually creates a separate identity that liberates a dalit from the chains of caste? Or is this in practice ineffective?

Conversion of dalits to Buddhism has certainly given dalits an emancipatory identity resulting in an almost instantaneous increase in self-esteem and perception of self-worth. However, it could not liberate them from the chains of caste. The foremost reason is that dalits did not have an existing Buddhist community to get merged with and lose their caste identity. This was merely an identity transformation. They remained mahars or jatavs for others. But Buddhism is not the only case of conversion. Dalits have earlier converted to Islam, Christianity, Sikhism - all anti-caste religions in theory - but not escaped their caste chains. I do believe that these religious conversions have been ineffective in liberating dalits from caste bondage.



6. There have been allegation cast on Congress, NCP and even BJP members for effecting a cover-up operation in context to Khairlanji. Who would you place the most blame on? Why?

All of these parties represent the establishment and they have stake in suppression of the Khairlanji case. BJP is seen responsible in the cover up operation because the village largely belonged to it and the local mla was seen actively performing dubious roles (in raking up a case of Ankita Lanjewar for instance by organizing an anti-dalit demonstration by the so called OBC Bachao Samiti). The ncp also did not remain far behind thereafter. Congress, though not as visible, also cannot be absolved from these acts of commission and omission because it is in power at the center as well as the state. Personally, I do not see them any different vis-à-vis the lower classes and castes. They never reflect contradiction on any policy issues relating to the interests of common masses of people. All have their share in whatever has happened in Khairlanji.



7. Issues of casteism, like those of communalism, are tricky. In trying to get justice, a writer faces the danger of propagating further reaction - and hence violence. How do you deal with this dilemma?

I don't agree. No doubt, issues of casteism and communalism are somewhat tricky to write on. But they are too important to be shied away from. Unless some one comes forward to hold a mirror for society to see its ugly face in, there will never be any hope of the latter to rectify itself. If likes of Phule and Ambedkar had not written on caste, India would never have woken up to this revolting reality. Whether the writing evokes an ugly reaction or furthers violence depends upon the kind of writing. If one writes for promoting communalism or casteism as protagonists of the Hidnutva movement try to do, it will certainly provoke such a reaction. But, if one writes against these evils, as the sources of violence, such writings could be a veritable mirror that impels people to introspect. These writings work as antidote to the disease of society. Frankly, I never faced this dilemma. I have always written against the contemporary reaction on behalf of people and found my writings getting great reception from them and activists working for them.