India’s Hate Crime Wave Burns Kids to Death and Modi Says Nothing

Link

India’s Hate Crime Wave Burns Kids to Death and Modi Says Nothing

The Indian prime minister has shown a callous disregard for caste-based or anti-Muslim violence in his country. It’s part of a broader strategy to make India a Hindu state.

At 2:30 a.m. on October 20, as a poor family slept in their home in Sunperh village in Ballabgarh, a town in Faridabad district, about 40 kilometers from India’s capital, New Delhi (and within the National Capital Region), a few men poured petrol from a window and set the home ablaze. Two children, aged 4 and 8 months, died in the fire; their parents were severely injured, with the mother fighting for her life. Initially the ghastly incident was described as the result of a property dispute, but the identities of the dead, and the perpetrators could not be hidden for long. The children who died and their parents were dalits; the men who poured petrol are reportedly Rajput, a higher caste.

Even as the outrage over that killing was bubbling over, there came the report from Gohana, another village in the same state of Haryana, where a 15-year-old dalit boy was charged with stealing a pigeon. He died in unexplained circumstances in police custody. Shocking as these incidents are, dalit activists say—and statistics bear this out—these are hardly surprising. National crime statistics show that in the decade ending 2013, crimes and atrocities against dalits in Haryana went up about 2½ times compared to the preceding decade, or from 1,305 to 3,198 incidents, according to the National Confederation of Dalít Organisations. These incidents include assault, murder, sexual assault, and gang rapes.

Across the country, according to India’s national crime registry, in 2014, there were 47,064 incidents of violent crime against dalits (known as “scheduled castes” in India) by non-dalits. In 92.3 percent of the cases charges were levelled, and the conviction rate was a paltry 28.8%. In case of crimes committed against scheduled tribes, the number of incidents was 11,451 and the conviction rate was higher, at 37.9 percent.

Most activists say that cases of crimes against dalits are typically under-reported, because in many instances the victims feel powerless and don’t press charges, and in some instances, police officers don’t register cases, partly because they are from higher castes, and partly because the perpetrators sometimes have links with well-connected politicians.

To be sure, violence against dalits is hardly a new phenomenon in India, and has occurred regularly since independence in 1947. In these 68 years, the Congress Party has ruled India for 55 years, and the Bharatiya Janata Party, which rules the center now, has earlier governed between 1998 and 2004. All major parties bear the blame for the state of affairs. But what is alarming in the most recent case is the casual way the BJP has reacted to the incident.

India’s hyperactive Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who loses no opportunity to pose for selfies with world leaders and supporters, and barely misses a moment to tweet, be they inane greetings to leaders like Vladimir Putin on their birthdays, posting homilies, or condoling the passing of celebrities, major and minor, has expectedly said nothing at the time of this writing. His minister of state for foreign affairs, V.K. Singh, who is a Rajput and was a former chief of the Indian army, said the government can’t be blamed for what happened. “For everything… like if somebody throws a stone at a dog, then the government is responsible … it is not like that,” he callously said. Later he attempted a meek non-apology, “if somebody’s feelings have been hurt.”

Singh is known for tactless and tasteless remarks; he has referred to journalists as “presstitutes,” a term used by government supporters to describe reporters they don’t like, and he has blamed the media for misinterpreting his remarks.

Indeed, that is part of a pattern within the Modi administration, where leaders have made crude and sometimes cruel remarks targeting religious minorities and opponents, while Modi remains silent. And his silence is the equivalent of dog-whistle politics, where he stays above the fray. If there is too much outcry—particularly in international media—he comes up with tepid expressions, such as reacting to a Hindu mob lynching of a Muslim man in a town outside Delhi, over suspicion that he had eaten beef, by calling such incidents “undesirable and unfortunate.” (In the lynching case, the man hadn’t eaten beef; beefeating is not a crime, although cow slaughter is; and in democracies mobs don’t take over administration of justice. What happened was a hate crime.)


Also, canine metaphors seem to be a favorite of Modi and his ministers. Before his election last year, in an interview with Reuters, he was asked how he felt over 900 deaths (by official count) with nearly two-thirds of them Muslim in rioting in 2002 in Gujarat state, of which he was the chief minister at that time. He said, “If we are driving a car, we are a driver, and someone else is driving a car and we’re sitting behind, even then if a puppy comes under the wheel, will it be painful or not? Of course, it is. If I’m a chief minister or not, I’m a human being. If something bad happens anywhere, it is natural to be sad.”

If, for the prime minister, the loss of nearly a thousand deaths is the equivalent a puppy’s death, for his minister of state for foreign affairs, the burning of two children is the equivalent of a dog being pelted with stones. In the Haryana case, the BJP has little excuse; the state adjoins the capital, Delhi, and the BJP rules the state government in Haryana.

If there is logic to the strategy, it does not make much sense. The BJP has long been viewed as a party supported by intermediate and upper castes of the Hindu hierarchy. It has had to struggle to expand its base to the dalits and minorities. While strategists within the BJP would like a gradual expansion, there are enough hardheaded, vehement leaders within the BJP who would like to assert the primacy of their own worldview, which would like to turn India into a Hindu state.

To be sure, the majority of Indians are Hindu, but the nation’s founding fathers opted for a liberal, secular democracy, and many BJP supporters, frustrated by the left-leaning Congress’s dominance of Indian politics, have opposed Congress’s view of secularism, which they described as appeasing Muslims. (There is some truth to that charge: 68 years after freedom many Muslims remain in poverty and their development indicators are poor. Many suffer from discrimination and abuses. The Congress policy towards Muslims has often strengthened the clergy, as against the marginalised sections of Muslims, such as women). Now the BJP has a majority in parliament, and some of its followers, including ministers, would like to go about methodically to implement their wild fantasy of making India a theocratic nation, or at least one where Hindu sensibilities prevail.

That means establishing a new order of relationships between Hindus and minorities, and within Hinduism, “rediscovering” the virtues of the past. Promoting “vedic” science and mathematics, vegetarianism, Ayurveda and yoga form one part, its softer side; re-establishing social hierarchies is the intended, but not admitted, effect.

For centuries, upper-caste Hindus have committed atrocities against lower-caste Hindus and dalits (many of whom have left Hinduism, embracing Buddhism, Christianity, or Islam to leave the stranglehold of caste, but their earlier identities continue to haunt them).

The caste system has been a remarkably durable social order affecting many South Asian societies, although it is most widely prevalent among Hindus. That hierarchical, hereditary order of professions and communities prevents social mobility, and even today, caste leaders disapprove of relationships across caste, with violent reprisals against those disrupting the stable order.



India has laws to outlaw caste-based discrimination. The British banned discrimination and untouchability under the Caste Disability Removal Act of 1850. Between 1943 and 1950 (India gained independence in 1947) Indian states passed 17 laws to end discrimination. In 1955 India passed the Untouchability (Offenses) Act and amended it in 1976, making it more stringent. Another law, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (POA Act)—came into effect in January 1990. Besides, the state has taken steps to re-engineer society through job quotas and affirmative action programs in the public sector and education, as well as criminalising hate crimes against dalits.

According to a Supreme Court directive such quotas cannot exceed 49 percent of jobs or admissions to universities, and dalits and other so-called backward castes form the majority of India’s population, which has meant a tussle among communities to get themselves declared “backward,” to qualify for quotas. This has further divided the population, and caused resentment against communities that already benefit from quotas, dalits included. The recent agitation in Gujarat, Modi’s home state, where the relatively prosperous Patel community has demanded quotas, is an example of the consequence of the quota policy. Continued violence against dalits is over the perception that they are beneficiaries of India’s constitution, getting more than they deserve—according to the warped logic—and therefore should be shown their place.

Eliminating prejudice is never easy; but a great supply of jobs and opportunities may make people less resentful. To do that, Modi has to focus attention on the agenda which he presented to voters—development and growth—and vigorously condemn the agenda many of his supporters have—reinforcing old prejudices. At present, his silences condone those prejudices.

Hindu extremists beat up Muslim man in northern India: Video

Link

Hindu extremists beat up Muslim man in northern India: Video

In this picture, a Muslim man, identified as Riyaz, is being thrashed by Hindu extremists from the Bajrang Dal organization in Muzaffarnagar, northern India, June 19, 2015.

Members of an extremist Hindu organization thrash a Muslim man in India’s northern and most populous state of Uttar Pradesh as Muslims in the vast South Asian country continue to be targeted by sectarian violence.

Videos posted on social media networks show radicals from the Bajrang Dal organization, whose ideology is based on fundamentalist Hindutva, verbally abusing the victim as a fanatic mercilessly beats the man, identified as Riyaz, with a belt in the city of Muzaffarnagar, situated approximately 130 kilometers (80 miles) north of the capital, New Delhi, and in front of a large number of onlookers.

The ill-fated Muslim man is being tormented on the accusations that he was attempting to slaughter a cow in Shamli district of the city. Riyaz, however, has dismissed the claims and said he was just present at the site, where the cow was allegedly being slaughtered.

The video further shows Indian police forces arresting the victim, while taking no actions against Bajrang Dal extremists.

Meanwhile, local civil groups have blamed Samajwadi Party and Bharatiya Janata Party – the two major Indian political parties – of rekindling secretarial strife in Muzaffarnagar.

In September 2013, clashes between Muslims and Hindus in the Shamli and Muzaffarnagar districts of Uttar Pradesh state killed more than 50 and left 50,000 displaced. Many among the Muslim community fled their homes seeking shelter at relief camps.

A total of 294 people were arrested over the violence, despite nearly 6,000 being named as suspects.

Displaced Indian Muslims said their makeshift homes were being demolished by the state government in order to avoid negative media attention, following a report that revealed 34 children had died in the relief camps.

“Dalits are not definitely a block, and there is an intellectual blossom,” Kancha Ilaiah

Link

“Dalits are not definitely a block, and there is an intellectual blossom,” Kancha Ilaiah

Professor Kancha Ilaiah had well predicted that Narendra Modi would become the next Prime Minister under BJP, and he has also been instrumental in raising criticism on how Indian Left failed to understand the caste question. After the parliament elections, he described how the caste equations has been used in the country by the BJP. As soon as the BJP came into power, many decisions have already been taken by the ruling government, which will have far reaching consequences on the lives of dalits, adivasis, Muslims and Bahujans. In this context, Ajmal Khan and Anish engaged in conversation with Kancha Ilaiah, writer, a dalit rights activist and former Professor and head of the Political Science department at the Osmania University, Hyderabad, on contemporary politics in India, particularly on Muslim, Dalit and Bahujan politics. He argues, that Muslims will have to form their own national party or a national coalition of all the Muslim parties by retaining their political and social identity.

We have been talking about Beef and Beef ban, especially after Maharashtra government’s decision to ban beef completely. However, one important decision that didn't get much public attention was the Maharashtra government's decision to scrap the five % reservation for Muslims in education and employment. What are your thoughts on this?

Kancha Ilaiah (TCN file photo)

Yes, The Mumbai High Court had stayed the proposal for 5% reservation for Muslims and 15 % Marathas’. But the court had allowed quota for Muslims in state-owned or aided educational institutions, saying that, the community suffers from high dropout rate and the youth in the community need to be brought under mainstream education. On Maratha reservation, the court had observed that the community was a socially advanced and prestigious community. They (BJP) seem to think that they will go to the Supreme Court for Marathas but not for Muslims. The argument of BJP is that the caste will disappear once people convert into other religions.

According to BJP and RSS, there is no caste among the non-Hindus like Muslims and Christians. The argument for Muslims is that, whether Sachar Committee, Dr Mehmoodur Rehman Committee in Maharashtra or people like me who always speak for the need of reservation for Muslims – casteis a very historical thing, generationally people carry caste. If somebody converts to Islam,his or her occupational status does not immediately change. Of course, their name changes, their access to God changes, they get to read Quran etc. When a Hindu barber converts to Islam, his occupational status does not change immediately, everything else changes,the occupational status doesn't change easily. Therefore, I argue that Muslims should be given reservation on the basis of their caste and occupational identity considering the backwardness. Reservation in education is also important, here Muslims are a community that is historically now being treated after the partition as second-class citizens, and there is double oppression. Muslims first, as the second-class Indian citizens, and then, the oppression according to their caste status.

BJP recently seems to have argued in the court that, Muslims and Christians should not be given reservation and reservation is Hindu specific. If that is the case already, Buddhists and Sikhs are getting eservation and Buddhists and Sikhs say that they have nothing to do with Hinduism and they are not Hindus. Then how does BJP explain this?

Some of the Hindu nationalists argue that Buddhism and Sikhism are also part of Hinduism?

Yes, even Narendra Modi says that. They (Hindus) respect Buddha, Buddha is their ancient god etc.but Buddhist are saying, we are not Hindus and we have nothing do with Hinduism. If Buddhism is like Hinduism, then Buddhism abolishes caste within itself, untouchable can become monks and even Vihara heads. In Hinduism, it is not possible, we all know. So how can they say that Buddhism and Hinduism are one and the same?

Sikhismalso, yes some streams of Hinduism are there, but it is not the same, they have a Guru Granth, everybody can read it, all of them have one food cultural practice. If that is the case, why are RSS, VHP and other organizations talking about vegetarianism, which is only a Brahmin-Baniya food practice? It has never been all caste practice, so they seem to actually be practicing Brahmanism and projecting as Hinduism as monolithic religion, which is not true.

We have seen the trend of Hindu right wing forces co-opting of everything and everyone after the new government came to the power. Will they be able to co-opt everyone?

Yes, BJP and Hindu Right require to co-opt certain things. Once they have come to power, if they behave as they behaved earlier, than their legitimacy to rule the country will go. Muslims are not a small community, they need somebody to negotiate with Muslims. They need negotiation without giving Muslims the substantial share, ok! If they want to give equal share to Muslims in all respects than that would have been a different thing.

Here, BJP wants Muslims to be with them without giving substantial share from state and society; they are using different tactics (for it). Of course, in appointments of University heads and other strategic positions, they have to find someone who is palatable to them, who works for them. There are positions in Universities and other places where persons from only the Muslim community has to be appointed. So, for that they will try to co-opt several sections. They have already co-opted many sections of Muslims and admitting a lot of Muslims into the BJP.

There is also a section of Muslims who think that, ok, if they go there and live a normal life, if they get some political benefit, or at least, if there is no communal riots. But, we will have to see what implications this will have for the larger community’s life. Right now, Muslim share in power has come down, Muslim parliamentary share has come down. How much Muslim share is there in business and other sectors is an issue, because Muslims do not have much share in agriculture. They survive largely on urban informal economy. But they (BJP) will attempt to co-opt even Muslims.

Now, the Maharashtra government is saying that they will send Christians for pilgrimage, government will finance them. But Christians are saying they don't want anyone to send them for pilgrimage, they say, instead they want right to propagate their religion, they are asking for security and protection. BJP is in a real contradiction now. Let’s see what happens, it’s not like Vajpayee’s times. During his time, it was a coalition government. Some unpleasant things had happened then also, but now they are in full power and they are straight away coming on minorities.

How do you see the Muslim politics in this context?

See, the Muslim political leadership is really weak, those who existed as Muslim leaders in the Congress were not connected to the poor and marginalized Muslim masses. The mass Muslim leadership did not get politicized. Recently MIM is a party which is trying to spread across the country. Asaduddin Owaisi is definitely a modern Muslim leader in India. Neither Congress nor BJP want a leader like him, who organizes his own people. So, in my view, a time will come when Muslims will have to form their own national party or a national coalition of all the Muslim parties by retaining their political and social identity. That will give them much more strength than working from within the other parties. They tried that in Congress, and except Abul Kalam Azad, I don't think anybody else got significant space in the Congress system. There may be ministers but they were not having significant powers.

In one of your interviews, you said Nehru had used Ambedkar at the same time and thrown out when his role was over.

My re-reading of early independent days is that, Jawaharlal Nehru had global vision and western education, who was also a model leader in many ways. If Dr Ambedkar would not have been allowed to become the chairman of Constitution Drafting Committee, the Constitution might have had many loopholes. Only Ambedkar could work out that kind of a Constitution.

If Nehru was not allowed to be first Prime Minister, then who would have been the real ruling person at that time? Gandhi's role in administrationwas minimal, Gandhi agreed upon Ambedkar's name to be the chairman of drafting committee, Gandhi said he should play a key role and Nehru supported and he became chairman of the drafting committee. That has really helped the nation. The combination of Nehru being the first Prime Minister and Ambedkar heading the drafting committee of the Constitution created a positive situation to experiment the adult franchise, it is not that easy to experiment adult franchise in an illiterate country like India. If Shyamaprasad Mukherjee or Sardar Vallabhai Patel or someone else from right wing would have been allowed to become the first Prime Minister, India would have ended up in dictatorship. So the so called Patel's legacy should not be taken seriously by people like us.

Is that the reason why Patel is getting much more importance now a days?

Yes, they will give lot of prominence to Patel. Firstly he is a Gujarati and Modi might also be considering him as a Shudra and he has also used the military force. So, there are certain combinations in him which are liked by RSS and VHP. But what would have been the situation of the country if Sardar Vallabhai Patel would have been the first Prime Minister? If he were to be the first Prime Minister perhaps KM Munshi, during that time, would have been appointed the chairman of the drafting committee of the Constitution, then we need not say what would have been the situation. India would have been Hindustan in the likeness of present day Pakistan.

You have been arguing that the Western theories will not fit for our realities and we have to work out our own theories. How will someone expect to work out one’s own theory when the theory building process itself is fully controlled by the Brahmins and the upper castes?

Yes, my strong belief is that, if all Indian children are given same quality education, preferably in English language, given the vast expansive space that we have, the kind of experience that rural children gain, the kind of exposure that they have with nature, production and so on, we would produce better intellectuals. India is capable of producing indigenous theory, which can be used by the rest of the world.

I don't mean any indigenous theory only we can use, but theories that emerge out of social practices, social convergences, social changes. Indians are capable of producing new books and theories which even other countries are not able to. Buddha is an example, he constructed a religion, he formed Sanghas; there is so much literature around it. The world is now using it. China, Japan Korea, all are using it. For example, two prophets came from Asia – Jesuscame from Israel and Muhammad came from Arabia. It’s not that, the world is against Asian thinkers but Brahmanical forces didn't produce such talent and a God who could be worshiped by the whole world. The only god India produced is Buddha, the world is willing to engage with him. So my feeling is that, Indian social sciences should examine the strength of the native social thinking. After all, we are a big society when compared with Europe. We have lot of new ideas, the only thing is that we should read, write and ask questions. In all my writings I make an attempt not to imitate anyone but to produce original thoughts from our own lives.

People like Amdekar become central even within the right wing discourses. So how difficult it is for the people like you to defend yourself?Because, you all created another kind of knowledge which challenged the dominance of upper castes and the nature of Hindu religion.

Yes, it is a difficult struggle. When I wrote ‘Why I Am Not a Hindu’ there was a lot of opposition, backlash, criticism and even threats. But luckily the Dalit movements extended their support to me and the Bahujan Samaj Party was almost in power in Uttar Pradesh. I managed to get the support from within the civil society also in this regard. Also, either for Mahatma Phule or Ambedkar and people like me, we all took to very non-violent form of dissent, we took up that line. After all, historically India has the tradition of non-violence. The dalits/backward castes never fought with upper castes with violence. And Buddhism, which emerged here, also created a space with a theory of ‘Middle Path’ (Madhya Marga). Hence Buddhism became a big cushion for people like Phule, Ambedkar and even for me, because when I wrote my book ‘God as a Political Philosopher’ I had to struggle a lot, going back to the ancient texts and comparing them withWestern thinkers, Indian Brahminic thinkers like Kautilya and Manu.

So we all are positioned in terms of reform, but even that was not acceptable to the Brahminical forces. There were many attempts to suppress my voice in the Osmania University. Even now some sections of people want my writings and speeches to be banned.

I think, we should create new knowledge, sometimes you may risk. (But) this risk factor cannot completely be ruled out. I think it is a social reform struggle. Luckily, first Buddha carried out, then came Jyotibha Phule, then Ambedkar, Periyar, Kanshiram have also done some kind of serious work. So now the Brahminical forces are on defensive mode otherwise there would have been more and more violence. They are basically the worshippers of violence, but when it comes to moral and ethical issues, the Buddhist morality has a very strong base.

Does the electoral politics played by BJP possess a direct threat to small/regional parties, how do you see this whole dynamics of state making?

Yes, there is, you are right. One is that the BJP putting Narendra Modi with a specific OBC identity in our national politics as a Prime Ministerial candidate. Congress never fielded either an OBC or a Dalit candidate forthe post of the PM. BJP put up such a candidate with his own ambitions and organizational base. So, they came to power in the Center. Now they are gradually coming into power in different states, but there, they are also compromising and they are also going for manipulative methods.

In Maharashtra’s case, they were thinking that they would not come to power (as) Shiv Sena was weakened after the Lok Sabha elections. Though BJP could not come into power on its own but now they are the ruling party. In Jammu and Kashmir, PDP aligned with BJP, and the PDP seems to think that Modi’s approach is different from RSS. Modi wants to carry some history with him, that Kashmir he cannot leave behind, so let it be and PDP should go for a compromise. They will try with this model, if the PDP model works. Well, they will say that we solved the problem.

In any case, they are trying to expand, but where they are failing is on the front of talks with Christianity. Their attacks on churches is giving a badimpression of BJP across the globe. If investment does not come, then Modi’s development agenda itself will be in a crisis.

So they have not calculated the implications of attacking Christians or forcing them to reconvert. That is where the President of America had to say that religious freedom is universal in nature, it cannot be violated. During the BJP’s rule,it will globalise the caste and untouchability issue much more. If they want to address it, reconcile and tell the Brahmins and other priestly communities that you have to give equality to all people whom you define as ‘Hindu’, then may be Hinduism may reform.

I find problem with their books in this regard, things like God created human beings hierarchically. I think these kinds of writings in the texts itself pose challenges, for this, either they have to delete it or reject it. In any case, these five years will be a testing period.Because, this is the first time they got power on their own. If they create social tensions, if they go after people, the beef ban has created a strong negative feeling among the people, that signal is not going to keep quite.If they don’t allow the power to slip out of their hands, they will go for some time like this and then, they may try to transform and change themselves. Or, if they use this status for establishing Hindu Rashtra, then there will be a huge ‘civil war’ that I have been talking about for some time now. It all depends on their approach in the next four years. At this stage, it is very difficult to predict.

Simplenumbers in Parliament does not make any sense. Rajiv Gandhi had much more numbers but he could not sustain.

If this is the case, how do you look at parties such as AAP and other regional parties?

If small regional parties don’t use powerful tools such as English education and integrate their thinking with national level and give up their family control on parties, BJP will swallow them. That is possible. Most of these regional parties are family-oriented parties except BSP. But BSP, its leader Mayawati, did not show the required courage and confidence in handling the post-election crisis. She is not building up SC-OBC unity; she is also not building up the leadership in all stages.

I think the parties like APP will remain as a regional party, I don’t think that they can really challenge the BJP. The real challenge should be from the Congress and other political forces united, particularly the Leftists. The Leftists are in terms of caste, are with the upper caste and in terms of class they say that they are with working class. So the Left has absolutely failed in understanding the caste structure/religion in this country.

In this context how do you see the caste annihilation programmes proposed by Leftist organizations such as Communist Party of India (Maoist)?

No, they would not have a major role in annihilation of caste. Annihilation of caste was the agenda of Ambedkar but in those days dalits were not very well educated. Now dalits want to survive, they need identity and power. Among dalit leaders there is hunger for power. They are making alliances with parties such as BJP and Shiv Sena, leaders like Ramvilas Paswan and Athawale are best examples.So, the power without thinking about social reforms, ideological struggles and concrete writing of new theoretical formulations is not useful. I think BJP can finish them off but if they take them in, they don't get any prominence. I have not seen any role for Ramvilas Paswan and Athawale after forming of the new government. Paswan has just become as an insignificant minister. You see only a few ministers nationally visible like Arun Jaitly, NirmalaSeetharaman, Smriti Irani, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Peeyush Goyal. Where is Ram Vilas Paswan who played such a role? So, the dalit leaders are working with them only for power. I think it is self-degradation. I don’t want to see dalit leaders suffer that kind of self-degradation.

Recently,dalit leader Jitan Ram Mahji has been sacked from the post of CM paving the way for Nitish Kumar to take up the same post. In Telengana, the ruling party TRS leadership was criticized for betraying dalits. So how do you see these political upheavals?

This dialogue will go on. Dalits are not definitely a block, and there is an intellectual blossom. All of us came together and made these issues international; it went to the US Congress, British Parliament, European Union etc. So through internationalization of caste, untouchability and women trafficking and so on, we will have to have impact on this new style. But OBCs do not have that visible space, whereas OBCs have state power. Dalits do not have state power, except Mayawati, there is no other dalit leader, who could become Chief Minister on her own.

So this is a phase where all new experiments are taking place and BJP has given up the classical demand that Hindu-Brahmin-Kshatriya should rule. They have tried it with Vajpayee, but they seem to have shifted from that stand and brought a so called lower caste person as the prime ministerial candidate and now he is the Prime Minister. Within the next four to five years there will be a new combination of political forces; alliances and re-alliances will takes place, so we could see some kind of new unfolding is likely to happen.

Mulayam Singh is saying that he doesn't mind joining Congress, we haveto fight it. In 2002, when I predicted that Narendra Modi would become the Prime Minister if the Congress and Left behave in the same way, theydidn't take it seriously, and in reality, Modi became the PM of India. From here, where does it go? Already the negative results are coming out. Maharashtra banning beef and Haryana banning beef, it will definitely create crisis in agriculture.

Now, Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) is also trying to organize beef festivals across the country to challenge the ban. But the discourse on food culture initiated by dalits/ OBCs especially students in academic institutions was ideological in nature. They articulated it in a distinct way and it was not just about the intervention of state on the food choice of citizens. So what do you think about these Leftist interventions?

The Left has committed a blunder earlier by not giving the power positions to dalits and OBCs. The upper caste hang on to the power in the party. But now, after communal party like BJP,there is re-working on the issue of caste, and then there is lots of debates and writings coming from the new intellectuals from dalit/OBC background. So, the Left leadership is now rethinking its position.

On food culture, it is totally different. After Osmania beef issue came up, they also fed participants with beef during the party Congress recently in Telengana. I think, some positive steps have been taken by them, but yet, the leadership remains the same. My feeling is that we should really take the Leftist along with us, though they are castiest, despite their limitations, it is better to take them along because they have at least a theoretical position.

In terms of financial corruption, they are not very corrupt. Let us negotiate with them, let us have a healthy relationship with them. Dalits, OBC’s and the women intellectuals should come together. Even for the feminist discourse, the Leftists opposed it initially. (But) later they accommodated it.Now they are ready to debate cultural rights, food culture and so on. So, we need to educate the Leftists more and more and communist can re-educate us more through Marxism, Leninism, etc. They are re-thinking now. In CPIM when the road blocks like Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechuri go, if they do away, may be some changes will come. I feel, we should work in friendly relations with the Communists. I think it’s inevitable and lets us hope something better will emerge.

Despite the strong dalit movement in Maharashtra atrocities against Dalits continues?

Atrocities also take place when oppressed fight for equality and equal rights, the upper caste get enraged with this. Secondly, atrocity happens because upper caste can commit atrocity and get away. It is like, there is resistance to rape. There are state battles but there is also response to this resistance. So it’s a transitory situation in a culture of rape and religious relationships which are projected into sexual relations and so on.

Caste group and cultural relationships are also changing. There are castes that get mobility through education and employment. There are also castes, their status remains constant or goes down. When one caste’s status increases due to education and employment, the other gets angry with them and fights emerges between them. They are competing within themselves. Today dalits are not competing with Brahmins, Baniyas and other traditional capitalist. If Mahars are growing, the Matangs get angry, this is a transitory phase.

See, during British period, the Brahmins fought more severely among themselves than they fought others, even than with British. They gotempowered by that. So, my point is that, let each dalits, Bahujan groups compete with each other among themselves and to others.Identities do not change easily and now-a-days dalit issues are being found in most of the political parties’ discussions and documents. This is a positive change.

The writings and creative interventions of Dalit-Bahujan intellectuals have contributed to this. It’s important that we need to engage in the thought process and creating more books of our own. It’s not that dalits, adivasis and backwards too could not fight with upper castes and Brahmanism, but they could not fight with their brains. They could not fight with their writings and books. Tukaram was told to burn his books in those days, who can remove my books “Why I am not a Hindu" from Internet today? More critical writings and thinking should be produced by the youth and students and I am hopeful about these new generations.