Sumeet Mhaskar, a labour sociologist and professor at OP Jindal Global University, has been analysing non-Brahmin and OBC politics over the last century and how these communities respond to the question of Hindutva and their economic hardship.
In this episode of What’s Your Ism, host Sudipto Mondal and professor Mhaskar discuss the premise of Maharashtra’s Maratha reservation agitation and the sentiments driving other non-Brahmin communities to launch similar struggles.
As one of the few academics in India to study the economic factors behind the unrest within the socially dominant Shudra communities, Mhaskar applies the Ambedkarite lens to his economic and class analysis. Ambedkarism, he contends, is “misunderstood” to be primarily concerned with caste when it is also focused on class.
Watch.
Sumeet Mhaskar
Sudipto: [00:00:00] The most influential ism in the country today appears to be Hindutva.
It has taken a long time for this ideology to come of age. But what happened to the other ideological movements that began in the early 20th century? The RSS will turn a hundred years old next year. But So will the Communist Party of India.
Ambedkarism, Marxism, Liberalism, Dravidianism, Feminism, Gandhism. What role are these great big isms of the 20th century playing in the 21st century? What relevance do they have today? I'm an atheist in the same way as I'm an a leprechaun. Why have there been casteism existing in the country still today?
Feminism
-: by definition is the belief that men and women should have
SumeeT: equal rights. The nature of the system is to be as mean and rotten [00:01:00] as you can, uh,
-: to try to, uh,
Sudipto: The national elections are around the corner. And what better time than now to talk about isms. I'm Sudipto Mandal and welcome to this special election series of What's Your Ism?
Today we will try to understand the ism of Dr. Sumit Maskar. Dr. Maskar is a professor at the Jindal Global University. for joining us. Thank you for having me. And this subject that you specialize in, I found that a little interesting. You're a labor sociologist. Okay. What is that? So I look at the,
SumeeT: uh, the issue of labor, but with a wider intersection of society, economy, and politics.
Okay. Where generally people look only at the economic aspect of the labor. looking at the statistical figures of who, which labor is working, which kind of sector. Then there are, of course, sociologists who [00:02:00] specifically look only at the sociological aspect. Um, this is not to say that I'm the only one who does that, but my interest lies in the intersection of market economy and society, uh, and politics.
And where does labor figure in all these relationships.
Sudipto: It's a subject which is very niche, but I suppose, uh, in, in your case, what makes you, uh, stand apart or, uh, unique is that you are somebody who comes from the Ambedkarite tradition. And correct me if I'm wrong, uh, the traditional understanding is that Ambedkarites mostly focus on questions of identity and not class, uh, not labor.
And I think that is the one thing that we're going to talk about today to demystify this entire thing. thing and to probably correct some of these misconceptions, right? So you're an Ambedkarite who works on labor and class. Uh, how does your Ambedkarite lens Uh, firstly, before we get into the fact that Ambedkar himself had a deep engagement with class issues, [00:03:00] uh, in your case, being an Ambedkarite, how does it complicate, uh, the subject of labor?
SumeeT: Uh, as far as Ambedkarite is concerned, it absolutely goes very well with the questions of class. It goes with the questions of gender or caste or any form of inequality. So being an Ambedkarite opens you up to all kinds of inequalities and what is these days known as fashionable term called intersectionality.
So Ambedkarite scholar does not stop you in certain kind of fixed frame. And if that data doesn't fall in that frame, you just tend to ignore it. Okay. And that is an example. So for example, let's, when we talk about class, so when we are talking about class struggle, we will tend to downplay the factor of gender.
Or race or for that matter, caste in Indian system, uh, to see whether that actually is causing any trouble because the entire focus is on how should [00:04:00] the workers come together and throw the capitalist order.
Sudipto: And why is that analysis important? And is there something, uh, by way of a mistake that traditional activists or, or, or, uh, you know, ideologues who've been working on the question of labor.
Uh, is there something that they have done wrong in the past, which needs to be corrected now? You feel by bringing this analysis of you said, gender, you talked about, uh, caste. Why is that important? Is there some correction that needs to be made from this
SumeeT: perspective? Yes. There is definitely need to make a correction about two things.
One is how you view the society as well as analyze the society. And second thing is also how you view Ambedkarite movement and its politics. And it is only then we can actually appreciate the Ambedkarite lens of looking at the world, whether it is an economy, society, culture, or politics. So to, you know, to reinstate, restate your [00:05:00] point about, um, Ambedkar and Ambedkarism, uh, is that of course, scholars have absolutely been, uh, in some way very ignorant.
about Ambedkarite movement. So much of the scholarship, uh, till 1970s or 80s or even till 1990s is based on the assumption that maybe, yeah, it's Ambedkar and Dalits and therefore it has to do only with caste. But if you look at the historical perspective of any of the movement, uh, related to the anti caste politics, they have actively engaged with the question of what within court we understand as class.
So for example, the question of farmers, in fact, anti caste movement It actually has a long history of talking about the bonded labor, about the questions of agricultural laborers. And they are the ones who actually managed to bring together the industrial working class as well as the agricultural laborers together in 1930s.
And therefore, Ambedkarite [00:06:00] politics or even Ambedkarite ideology gives us a frame to actually look at wider inequalities and how do we can address the intersection of these inequalities.
Sudipto: You mentioned agricultural laborers, uh, you know, in terms of an example to pick, would this be a good example to pick in terms of how traditional movements such as the left, which look at the question of agriculture.
It's very much part of their discourse, their discourse in every, we were just before this interview, we were looking at the CPI document, uh, the party Congress document in every document, there'll be a reference to the peasantry. Right. And in that I was looking for, is there any other Right, So, yesterday I was speaking to Sitaram Yacchuri, actually, who is the General Secretary of the CPIM.
And in a manner of speaking also you can see his nomenclature, he says, uh, there are landlords, then there is a peasantry, then he divides, subdivides them according to the size of their land holding, which is medium or large, you know, uh, those are the [00:07:00] gradations in which he I would, you know, saw the entire agrarian economy, right?
Whereas you talked about landless labourers. I, in fact, asked him this, saying that why can't more contemporary terms be used for these sections? When I say contemporary, these terms such as, uh, Dalit, You know, such as Adivasi even, you know, you may say that, uh, it's probably last 10 years that these terms have come into usage, uh, to locate those terms in the rural economy, people have found different ways to locate those terms, not in the traditional Marxist sense.
So, when you look at the way that Marxists have done it in the past, right? How does this interpretation help in, uh, looking at the same agrarian economy? How would you interpret it differently? The agrarian crisis, let's say.
SumeeT: Yeah. I mean, uh, as far as looking at the agrarian question or the looking at the question of peasantry is concerned, which is the famous term that has been used across the world.
Uh, it's actually, we need to look at that. Are they actually homogeneous [00:08:00] or not? And this is where the trouble is that by just calling them peasantry, we actually tend to homogenize that particular group and not looked at the gradations within them. So obviously within peasantry, some were
Sudipto: saying no gradation, medium, large.
Yes.
SumeeT: What is the problem with that kind of gradation? There is absolutely no problem with the gradation, but then you tend to only look at certain groups and not all kinds of horizontal inequalities, so to say. So within peasantries, are they all same? The answer is no. Of course, there are certain with small and marginal farmers, some with large farmers, but within small farmers, are they all the same?
Probably the answer is no. Then how does caste work in this? Do a particular farmer who has three or four acres of land has similar kinds of rights and privileges? It's a question. Uh, like the same as a Dalit farmer? The answer is no. Because the kind of resources an upper caste farmer or a dominant caste [00:09:00] farmer had in the post independence era particularly was different kinds of access, especially the access to irrigation facilities.
These were not available to all castes within that peasantry group.
Sudipto: Can I stop you and ask you, so you're essentially saying that the, the, the landholding may be at par. Mm hmm. But, but the others, uh, resources that go into that land, there is a disparity there. Absolute disparity
SumeeT: there. And this is where caste plays a very important role also in terms of elections, who become the MLA or the minister and what kind of resources they divert to those particular regions.
But on this note, let me also add one more point, which is about landless laborers. So, we have, uh, Dada Sahib Gaikwad, okay, who was a very important, uh, leader in the Ambedkarite tradition. And he gave the famous slogan in Marathi, which says, Which means, land to the tiller, what about the [00:10:00] landless? So, he raised one of the very important questions.
And this is where I, uh, you know, bring your attention to the fact that scholars have done injustice to these kinds of movements, that when they say that Ambedkarite movement have been like, you know, not sensitive towards the within quote, the class question of the economic question, they have not studied Ambedkarite movement.
In fact, my actual accusation towards these kinds of historians or scholars is that they have largely relied on their own party documents. So to study a particular movement, you have to study their documents and not some other party documents, which obviously is going to be biased in their particular summarization of what exactly the other movement is doing.
And this is where I feel much of the misinterpretation. has happened over the past in the post independence era. And it is only now in the last 10 to 15 years, those frames are getting challenged, primarily because of the democratization of higher [00:11:00] education campuses, as well as the democratization of the knowledge production at a very high level.
Sudipto: And democratization of inquiry, of investigation, of going back in time, pulling out, like you said, there are people who are reading just their universe. They're, they're consuming literature and archives from their own parties and therefore they're coming to different kinds of conclusions, by which I assume that you are dealing with a different set of archives, that you have today the opportunity to go back into Ambedkarite history and bring out elements which, which display this, that there is a robust, a movement based on the question of labour.
within the anti caste movement. Am I correct in assuming that? Are you saying that the Ambedkarite movement, you said that the Ambedkarite movement has always addressed the question of class, right? Is that what you're finding when you go back different movements? I'm
SumeeT: definitely finding it. What I'm hinting at is that obviously much of those scholarships, particularly on the questions of labor, uh, have largely come from, of course, the upper caste.
community, but at the same time, they are [00:12:00] the ones who are inclined towards socialism or communism as a political ideology. And these scholars have never taken efforts to go to the anti caste movement and look at their records, or even the records which are produced by the colonial state, for that matter.
And it is in precisely these that they have narrowed down their material itself. And even when the material pretty much said, uh, about some things about caste, they pretty much overlooked it because in some way, at least from post 1950s, the assumption among Marxists, as well as among modernization theorists was that caste, gender, or religion eventually will disappear due to the force of, Uh, urbanization or large scale industrialization, that these things are going to be irrelevant.
And part of that, uh, was reflected in the kind of knowledge they produce.
Sudipto: In terms of relevance, I want to bring you to this point. You often keep saying that it is in fact irrelevant. The left, which is today lost relevance to a great [00:13:00] extent. We'll come to that. Uh, but while you're, while we are on the topic of archives, have you found evidence of, uh, Ambedkarite movements in the union space in, in labor organizing?
What rich history is there, uh, you know, of, of, of labor organizing in the Ambedkarite or the anti caste movement?
SumeeT: We have a very rich history in each different spheres, and I am an expert on, uh, Bombay city particularly. Right. And within Bombay city, Ambedkar was heavily involved in organizing the labor of different kinds of laborers, by the way.
And he was also the president of the municipal labor union. workers union. And therefore to say that, uh, Ambedkarite or Ambedkar himself was not part of the labor question is doing a disservice to the knowledge production itself. Because as a scholars, uh, individuals have biases and all individuals have biases.
Uh, but the one thing that sets apart scholars is the expectation that they will use scientific method that [00:14:00] despite their biases, the scientific method will allow all kinds of information to come in. And that will bring interesting insights into the analysis. And I think that is something, uh, that not just the archive will do it, but even scholars have to be open to different kinds of information.
And they have to also dig out different information, uh, to just rely on certain documents, which actually fits into your frame, uh, is not scholarship.
Sudipto: The other person who I can imagine immediately who works on the question of class, who also has, uh, connections to the Ambedkarite world is somebody like a Tel Tumde, Anant Tel Tumde.
Yes. Right. Uh, how would you differentiate your analysis from his, I mean, most often, you know, he uses some of this history. You talked about, uh, Ambedkar's, you know, position on labor and. Um, the class question to actually criticize the Ambedkarite movement
SumeeT: and things
Sudipto: like that. How would you, you know, analyze his critiques?
SumeeT: Yeah. So Anand Teltumde is a very [00:15:00] interesting person. Um, I mean, he comes from an activist tradition. He himself is trained in natural sciences and management. Uh, and then he began, uh, you know, he's a chronicler. Largely, one would say. So he documents things and, uh, much of what Anand also writes about maybe Marxism or Marxist movement or labor movement, trade union movement, largely again, relies on the frames which are already set by scholars who had, uh, affiliated to Marxist or socialist movement.
And in some way, Anand Lal Tumde reproduces those kind of. arguments, uh, even in interpreting the Ambedkarite movement. Uh, so obviously now we have reached a point where nobody will say that maybe Ambedkar is not talking about class question. So one variant would take Ambedkar to very different directions saying that, look, Ambedkar was a socialist by just looking at the name [00:16:00] independent labor party or some of his, so they will selectively cite him to say that he was actually a socialist.
He was a socialist even before Nehru was a socialist, something like that. So that is putting Ambedkar to another extreme. And using that fact, they delegitimize the Dalit movement, saying that actually Ambedkar was a socialist and the rest of the movement has done disservice. But if you look at the movement of 1960s, 70s, even Dalit Panthers for that matter, the Dalit Panthers were actually talking about the agrarian question as well.
So all those laborers who were working on the farms, They were denied wages. There was violence happening against them. So much of these are labor questions. essentially. And panthers were very much, uh, uh, raising those particular kinds of questions. So overall Dalit movement has raised different kinds of questions and, uh, what we call within code the class question or the economy questions.
Uh, but, uh, Anand El Thumdey's [00:17:00] reading has largely been clouded, uh, by those kind of earlier writings, where he tends to reinforce the same kind of idea, uh, that Dalits pretty much are still within the narrow, uh, issue of caste. And I think that is a misreading of, uh, Dalit movement, I would.
Sudipto: Okay. Uh, for those of you who are listening, I mean, some of it might have been a little, uh, dense.
to understand, right? Because this is a lot of conceptual stuff, a lot of scholarly stuff. Uh, if we bring it to contemporary times, right? Uh, if we talk simply in terms of inequalities, there is obviously a great deal of inequality today that we're dealing with. And once again, the question of, Uh, you know, equity, the question of movements seeking equity and equality become relevant today.
Uh, what kind of movements do you think are emerging today? Uh, as a result of the failure of the left to identify. [00:18:00] the class question within frameworks of caste and identity. Do you think that there are, it's giving rise to other kinds of movements, uh, in the same direction or are these perversions of the class question?
SumeeT: That's an interesting question, but actually one needs to, uh, really twist that question a little bit, uh, because the assumption here in the question is that the left moment was something that was a big moment and suddenly it has disappeared and which has provided space to other moments, uh, which is a, uh, incorrect reading in my view, because if you look at the period from early 20th century, left moment was one strand.
in all kinds of movement that existed in this country. So you had anti caste movement under the leadership of Ambedkar, but also anti caste movement elsewhere under the leadership of different regional leaders, but Ambedkar being the most towering figure. Then you have socialist movements. Uh, you have very important leaders coming from socialist movement, uh, coming [00:19:00] up to, uh, George Fernandes.
Then you have, uh, Gandhian movements. Uh, you of course have the Marxist communist movement. You have the right wing movement, uh, from RSS. So all of these are various strands, uh, that actually took place in the 20th century. Uh, eventually what we see in post independence era is, uh, that as far as the left ideology or the communist ideology that got restricted to Bengal, Kerala, maybe Tripura for, uh, to a certain extent, uh, socialist movement was largely area wise more UP and Bihar, uh, and some parts of Maharashtra, but then eventually, uh, all of these have gone into decline.
So therefore to say that, uh, left movement has, you know, declined and it has left a space would be incorrect reading. of the current situation as well as of the past.
Sudipto: Right. And you, you see that these are movements which have existed parallelly. Where do they at least [00:20:00] stand today? Uh, do you have a sense of that?
When you talk about, uh, say for example, uh, you know, you've been talking of late a lot about the Maratha. Mm hmm. question, right? Uh, and it, you know, I for one cannot make up my mind of about whether it is a class question or is it a caste question in your writings, right? I just noticed that, you know, there are Marathi channels lining up to speak with you where they want to know what is that analysis you've done of the present Maratha agitation.
And you say, uh, in your pieces that it is contractualization. It is privatization, globalization. liberalization, which has contributed to this. I'll let you talk about that for a bit and I'll bring you back to the actual question I want to ask. But what is this reading that you that that has got a lot of people in Maharashtra very interested in your work?
How have you analyzed the Maratha agitation? Can you talk about that first?
SumeeT: Sure. I think I'll start with this, uh, [00:21:00] very interesting paradox that you, you know, stated, which is Is it a Maratha caste question or is it a class question? Yeah. And I think this is a very interesting question to be understood because that's what also explains several kinds of dominant caste movements in this country.
Of course, the regional factors would vary. Give examples
Sudipto: as you go along. Yeah. For example,
SumeeT: the partidars in Gujarat, Jats in Haryana. Recently, your journalist did a very interesting story on Kapus in Andhra Pradesh. So you have different dominant castes. So as far as Maharashtra is concerned, the Marathas are the dominant caste and due to their superior social position, they have managed to exploit also the best paid job opportunities in the urban areas and best paid opportunities, uh, also for those who were higher, little or less educated and also those who are decently educated.
So all of them had exploited these opportunities in the employment sector. [00:22:00] But one thing I must state here is that the overall share of what we consider as good employment, whether it's in the private sector or the government sector has been extremely low. It has never went beyond eight, nine percent in the entire history of our country.
So what has happened is, That, of course, there is globalization, there is economic liberalization that happened in the 1990s, and which also saw the privatization of several government sector enterprises. Uh, you also saw the closure of several government colleges. You also saw now the closure of government schools.
So all of these processes have also come, uh, made things compliment, uh, contributed to this, contributed to the crisis. But what has happened here is that the moment the government decide the, decided to, uh, privatize the industries, uh, you don't have those jobs anymore. Government jobs.
Sudipto: Number one. Second thing.
So [00:23:00] it has hit a dominant politically influential community. Yes. A landed dominant politically influential community has been hit by. Yeah. This.
SumeeT: So, because they were the biggest beneficiaries of the secured jobs in this country. Of the formal sector. Of what is considered as the formal sector and within formal sector, the formal conditions of employment.
So, the biggest beneficiaries of these jobs have been the upper caste and the dominant caste. Here the caste and class come together. So, the first part here is that yes. The companies have been privatized or they have been completely shut down, which gave you the best employment. Second part is the government employment has been contractualized, which means the government is not hiring people on permanent basis, but on contractual basis, which means the wages are extremely low and the conditions are extremely exploitative.
It is a class question. Actually, contractualization is happening and people are now being left with [00:24:00] little option but to go into what is considered as the informal sector, which has low payment, more than stipulated working hours, no social security benefits. Now, where does caste come into this? Exactly.
Yeah. The caste comes here because if historically the upper caste and dominant caste have benefited. like a lion's share of the well paid employment, then obviously they are the ones who also had to bear the brunt of that particular process. So while every community is technically facing that brunt, But because they had taken over the lion's share, in their own view, they feel that they are the ones who have lost out.
And therefore, they feel that something ought to be done. And then what ought to be done is that they need secure jobs. And where are the secure jobs? Are only in the government sector. And it is this reason that the community, that particular dominant caste community, they feel that they [00:25:00] should actually go for reservation.
Because According to them, this is what going to solve their problem. But they're not taking into account the fact that what exactly proportion of jobs are left in the government sector and will that really fulfill their demand? And the answer is no.
Sudipto: That is as far as the class question goes. And there are some things in the caste question that I wanted to ask you.
See now a community like the Maratha, uh, they have interpreted their history also in anti caste terms, also as a Shudra community. The anti caste among the Marathas have also been part of Satyashojak movement, you know, uh, the entire, um, the, the royalty, right? The Maratha royalty, Shahu Maharaj and all of that.
Shivaji himself did not, uh, could not get his coronation. because he was not a so called Kshatriya. So the reason I bring out the caste thing is there are communities with similar histories across India, I've [00:26:00] noticed, right? You will find them, uh, invoking a glorious Kshatriya past and also at the same time saying that we were also Shudras, right?
And that there have been, there has been some social subordination over there. There is some amount of caste based disability among Marathas. Is that true? Yeah. Because, and I say this because you have other communities, right? Like you have the, uh, in, in the south, in Tamil Nadu, right? We have the Tevar, Vaniyar, Gounder, these communities.
You have the Kapu, you talked about our story, uh, on the Kapus, you have the Reddys, you have the Kammas, you have the Gaudas, you know, there's, there's any number of communities which are landed. Um, politically influential, not untouchable, but have some experience of, uh, caste exclusion. Does that contribute to their economic experience in present day neoliberal conditions?
SumeeT: I mean, there are several parts to this particular kind of question. Uh, one part is historical in terms of their shudra status. [00:27:00] Uh, so depending on which century you're asking this question, the answer changes. So if you ask this question of Marathas, whether they are Shudras or not, in 19th century, the answer would be yes.
But if we talk about, uh, 20th century process, it begins to change. It begins to change with something called Vedakta controversy, that there were these particular rituals, which are only, um, you know, exclusively kept for the Kshatriyas and which were not, um, you know, performed for Shahu Maharaj. And then of course, that's the Vedakta controversy.
But from that particular point, it also gravitates the movement towards ization of the marata and within. So there is this, uh, KBI and Shatri, uh, Marta kind of debate.
-: Yeah.
SumeeT: So within the historical, uh, frame that we look at, 19th century, the kbi Marta was interchangeable to a certain extent, but there was always a hierarchy.
of those who were the, [00:28:00] uh, you know, senior rank, uh, army officials within the Shivaji's army, or even later period. But what happens in 20th century is that there is a particular, um, consolidation of Marathas as a separate identity. And that is absolutely important, particularly after 1920s and 30s, uh, when the colonial state begins to give more power to the provincial.
And this is where the Marathas already have begun a separate consolidation. In a sense, they have already closed the doors for themselves, which means also the close doors are closed for others to enter. And in 1931 census it is the Marata and their organizations, they're appealing to the KBI community that please report yourself as marata.
-: Hmm.
SumeeT: And the MARTA dominance pretty much continues and there is a straight consolidation. So this fuzziness. about whether the Marathas are actually Kumbhi of Shudra [00:29:00] origin. That debate is there. But if there was so like porous boundaries between, let's say the Kumbhis and the Marathas, then we would have also had a Kumbhi chief minister in Maharashtra.
There would have been intermixing of Kunbis and Marathas. Why do we only have Marathas as the dominant share of the political system in the state? So therefore, it is very clear that Marathas or even other dominant caste have managed to obtain a socially superior status for themselves.
Sudipto: In comparison to a kbi in comparison to the other.
Yes. Yes. But, uh, when, you know, I saw some of the numbers you, uh, put up, you know, saying that I think, uh, of the general category seats. Mm-Hmm. Uh, they're quite, the, the, the Marta are able to corner around 30%. Mm-Hmm. in excess of around 30%. Yeah. Of the seats. In
SumeeT: some cases 50% as well. Yeah.
Sudipto: And the other.
Part is, is, is by whom? Who, who takes the lion's share in that case? Is it the Brahmin? Is, is that? Yes, [00:30:00] there are Brahmins and there are other
SumeeT: upper castes who, non Brahmin, uh, upper castes, uh, who take that lion's share. Um, but what is interesting here is, uh, the tension, you know, uh, between Brahmins and the Marathas is also historical.
So when we say anti cast, again, we cannot homogenize. So within the Western Indian anti caste movement, there has always been three strands. One represented by the Marta, the second by the, what we consider today as bcs, or the Baja. And the third one by the dalis. That is the ambe tradit. So the first one that was represented by the marata was largely anti iBrain and not anti cast, which means they were not necessarily against the or of the caste order.
They were merely looking to replace the hegemony of the Brahmins. And that's why it's anti Brahmin and it's not anti caste. Then what [00:31:00] remains with anti caste is the OBCs and the Dalits. They are the ones, uh, continue to talk about the anti caste kind of philosophy. And within the Bahujans, uh, the OBCs and the Dalits, then eventually it remains only with the Dalits.
And that tradition has gone longer in terms of talking about. Uh, the transformation of the caste order or completely getting rid of the caste order. It's annihilation of caste. So that, so there are three strands we have to understand. We cannot always say that all of them were part, but they always maintain that distinct position.
Why they actually became part of non Brahmin movement, uh, everybody had a different purpose in that sense.
Sudipto: So I studied Tamil Nadu because it's closer to home and things like that, you know, where There are similar kind of strains that are visible over there, similar trends that are visible, where the accusation against the Dravidian parties is that they are anti brahmin, not anti brahminism.
Right. But, uh, though you identify three separate strains, which is [00:32:00] that one, the Maratha strain being anti brahmin, but not anti caste, then the fact that among the lower Or OBCs in general, yeah. Okay. You say OBCs in general. Is it really possible to generalize? Isn't there like a lower spectrum among the, there
SumeeT: could be, but also the bcs, which are dominant, they are.
They're being part of historically the part of the Bahujan politics and part of the anti caste movement. But you said is reducing. It reduced after the death of Mahatma Jyoti Raophal. Uh, so we, uh, what happened in Western India at least that, um, there was no leadership among that, um, largely what we now consider as OBC, uh, which actually took up the caste question.
Uh, so there were, of course, small leaders here and there, but no, no leadership as towering as, uh, Jyotira Phule or even closer to that. In that sense, the Ambedkarite movement has been fortunate that, uh, post [00:33:00] Ambedkar as well, there have been interesting movements that have emerged, Panthers being one of them, uh, which has consistently kept the movement, uh, of anti caste consciousness and the annihilation of caste questions alive.
And that makes them, you know, very different from these other two strands.
Sudipto: So what scope is there for anti caste politics? Because it can't possibly be restricted only to Dalits, right? They cannot be the, the principal movers of this ideology because the anti caste question extends all the way up to the Maratha also, right?
So in terms of politics, in terms of isms and ideologies, what emerging trends do you see? Because, okay, uh, in real political terms, you know, you, you look at the coming together of, um, Mm-Hmm. and the Marta based, uh, ena of re where they're invoking things such as re uh, grandfather of re Yes. Right. Which is, uh, Baabs father who speaks [00:34:00] about non in Tua who talks about the anti cast.
He even talks about anti and all of that. Uh, in real terms, do you see these factors as contributing to. an alliance like this on the ground or do you think these are just, uh, alliances which are made because of certain ground level realities? Do you see it as a coming together of ideologies or just some convenience in the lead up to the elections?
SumeeT: No, I think one can interpret in different ways. Of course, if you ask this question in the moment of election, one will mostly treat that as an electoral arrangement. But a minor correction is needed here is that Shiv Sena, um, has not necessarily been a Maratha party. Uh, in fact, Shiv Sena is a very interesting party with Uh, it has lots of problems, uh, but it is one of the parties which has been, um, which, which social base has been very democratic, which means it has given representation to even the most smallest, uh, OBC communities [00:35:00] in the state.
So in that sense, the social profile of Shiv Sena representatives has been absolutely democratic. compared to any political party. And what has happened now is the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi, uh, is trying to not just rely on the Dalits. They are trying to also touch upon what you initially called as the lower OBCs, which means that there is Mali, Dhangarh, and one or two more dominant OBC communities may be dominant, uh, in terms of numbers.
So there are all kinds of minor OBC groups, which Vanchit Bahujan Agad is trying to mobilize and Shiv Sena also historically had that base of the OBC. So, in some sense, it is possible for them to also electorally come together as far as
Sudipto: socially. That electoral coming together could be possible only because of this base and this base is only possible because of the ideology, would you agree?
Is there something, so you said that there is a very [00:36:00] democratic base for the Shiv Sena as far as you
SumeeT: know, democratic meaning in terms of giving representation
Sudipto: at a representation level, I'm saying. And that comes from where you think? Yes. Does it come from an anti caste consciousness? Does it come from just electoral considerations?
Where does it come from? I don't think it's, it is, there is an essential difference between how the BJP deals with this and how the, of course, absolutely.
SumeeT: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Sudipto: And in, in the dealings of the two parties, do you see a difference in how they deal with caste? Yeah, they have
SumeeT: dealt with caste very differently, uh, historically, uh, at the very beginning.
In fact, uh, that is a very interesting, uh, you know, cartoon that was drawn by Bal Thackeray when, uh, Ambedkar embraced Buddhism and he drew a cartoon where, uh, you know, Ambedkar is hugging Buddha and he's, uh, that, you know, the title that he gives to that cartoon is the meeting of, uh, two great humans.
Something like that. So you have a different Balthakare of [00:37:00] 1956. Obviously, he changes. I mean, uh, once, uh, Prabodhankar Thackeray is not on the scene, um, Balthakare goes very different directions, but Balthakare and Shiv Sena has actually very complicated history in terms of alliances. It had its first alliance was with the Praja Socialist Party.
It had also made alliances with the Muslim League. also with the Republican Party of India, one section, then BGP. Uh, so in that sense, Shiv Sena has been really open in terms of aligning with all kinds of factions. Um, so I'm not saying it's democratic in terms of social transformative agenda, only in terms of giving a representation to a group.
And I don't think that was also done very consciously. It was just an open platform. on the language kind of movement, that is the Marathi Manus agenda. And it provided that scope for whoever [00:38:00] emerged and it actually gave them the space. So in that sense, it was not conscious in terms of stopping certain castes and communities from becoming the representatives in either at the municipal corporation or at the assembly or at the parliament, which is what BJP like party would be conscious from the beginning.
So that is the difference between Shiv and BJP. But at an operational level, they may not necessarily bring about big transformation in the lives of that communities, uh, who these members are representing.
Sudipto: But that history, uh, helps the, the Shiv Sena take claim to the anti caste space in today's time.
Would you agree? Because I see some of their, uh, rhetoric and there is a lot of anti caste rhetoric now, uh, in the Shiv Sena wherein there are Shiv Sena leaders using terms such as Peshwahi against. the BJP, right? Have you picked up on this kind of thing? So does this complicated history of the Shiv Sena allow it to occupy this position and say, yes, we are legitimately, uh, part of a [00:39:00] ideological alliance, let's say, even, uh, with the, with the Vanchit Bahuja Nagari, with Ambedkar, Prakash Ambedkar and all these things, because these are symbols, icons that they're invoking a lot today.
How does their history help them do that in today's time? That Shiv
SumeeT: Sena's history has changed in the last 25 years. That we have to understand. It's not current. Already in the 1990s, Um, she was, you know, had begun saying, uh, that we should have an alliance of shoe Shakti and beam Shakti. Yeah. So that is Shiv Sena and the Ambedkarites, um, Namdev Dasal, uh, his own political outfit supported Shiv Sena in the mid 1990s, late 1990s.
And later Uddhav Thackeray, who was pretty much, uh, at the helm of Shiv Sena's affairs was very much. vocal about these particular alliances. Of course, in the late 1990s, they did not get much, you know, response from the Ambedkarite and so did in the early 2000s as [00:40:00] well. It's only in 2010 or 12, it began to materialize.
Uh, began to show a particular kind of openness in making that alliance. But by then, she was saying I had also changed, uh, it's anti Dalit rhetoric. It's a hatred towards Ambedkar. Uh, it has already changed by 2000. So this is not to say that completely change, but Uddhav Thackeray has, if you look at his trajectory, he has been the brain behind, uh, evoking this Bahujan past.
And in fact, the current language that he passed off his own party, yes, own grandfather,
Sudipto: own grandfather.
SumeeT: That's why he actually is able to make that alliance with. Uh, that if you look at the last seven years off, it has inducted people who actually have anti caste past. So Sushma [00:41:00] Andhare comes from a OBC community.
Uh, and she was initially working with Ambedkarite political organization, including Pankaj Ambedkar. And she's now the spokesperson of Shiv Sena. Uh, she's the deputy leader, one of the deputy leaders of Shiv Sena. And she uses very much anti caste language. She uses language of Bahujan politics. And therefore, uh, they are now able to have people who can use that language.
who are already used to using that language. And Shiv Sen is also comfortable that let's now revive Prabodhankar Thackeray's legacy. So yes, Hindutva is there, but now we need to also explicitly talk about Prabodhankar's, uh, legacy. And my understanding that the reason Prakash Ambedkar could also make an alliance here is because of this shift towards Bahujan, politics by, uh, Uddhav led Shiv Sena and that explains that particular alliance rather than [00:42:00] some like electoral arrangement.
Uh, so even Shiv Sena as a political party has gone through various transformation, particularly because its alliance partner, has outgrown its image. That is the BJP.
Sudipto: And, uh, this transformation, I'm just curious to know, has it, what are the factors that impose this transformation? Has this, is this, is this a natural evolution or is this an evolution that has been brought about because of the times?
Right. In which I want to again, go back to The economic question and the caste question. Uh, do you think that, uh, a basic contradiction has emerged? The Shiv Sena thing is so interesting for all of us in other states because the Shiv Sena's existence shows a basic contradiction in the Brahminical narrative of let's say the RSS and the BJP.
Right. Is that contradiction becoming more apparent because, uh, you know, in the, in, in Karnataka, we saw this contradiction. See, Yadurappa, right? There are a lot of his followers who will say that there is this Brahminical [00:43:00] RSS based out of coastal Karnataka,
-: Udupi,
Sudipto: which is not allowing the growth of a quote unquote Bahujan or
-: a non Brahmin
Sudipto: leader.
Do you think that there are certain caste conditions that have pushed the Shiv Sena into this, into this situation. And similarly, other economic conditions. I mean, you might want to reiterate some of the things you said in the beginning, those factors has, it created conditions for the Shiv Sena to become a party like this today.
SumeeT: Yeah, actually, uh, the political economy of Bombay has much more to do with what Shiv Sena has become today. Because Shiv Sena began with the movement of jobs to the local and they were very much clear that it is the giving priority to the local Marathi speaking people in government employment or the best paid employment.
Now, as I said at the beginning, the best paid employment has more or less disappeared. And it began disappearing already in 80s and 90s for sure. And therefore, Shiv Sena had to adopt [00:44:00] to newer kind of, one can say, rhetoric. to hold on to its constituency. So it's actually, you cannot now rely on the large scale jobs which are available, which you can actually dole out to your supporters and you can retain your support system.
All the street performance that Shiv Sena did in terms of challenging the political opponent, uh, doing mass, uh, demonstration class of people employed
Sudipto: in these industries. You're saying
SumeeT: very much. Also, in addition to that, the other things also, but this was a biggest support for the Shiv Sena as well, because this also provided the youth working in the Shiv Sena that at some point he or will, she will get certain kind of a public job or a better paid job.
But that's go pretty much. Disappeared at. So that's, that is the economic reality. Yeah. So that is definitely the economic angle,
Sudipto: the social reality. What, what, what is the coming of someone like a fave with the, with the emerge, I mean, faves and gri. Mm-Hmm. are the two [00:45:00] poor people who are the most prominent in the BJP and all that.
Do you think that it has created a cast contradiction within the Hindu thing and therefore are the lessons in other parts of the country where the, where Hindu is? Of course,
SumeeT: uh, Gadkari or for that matter, Fadnavis, uh, they both come from Vidarbha region, which is Nagpur. Yeah. And they both are Brahmins.
Chitpavan? Uh, no, no, no. But they're both Brahmins. Brahmins. And the point here is that the Shiv Sena's growth story in Maharashtra was done under the leadership of Gopinath Munde, who was an OBC person. And therefore, some contradiction. is ought to happen. In fact, when BJP won, uh, the election in 2014 in Maharashtra state, uh, we have a leader.
I'm not recollecting his name right now. Uh, but he was the contender for the chief minister's position after, uh, Gopinath Munde. And he began making statements that people feel that, [00:46:00] uh, the chief minister should be from the Bahujan Samaj. He deployed the language. Yeah, he exactly used the term Bahujan Samaj.
Uh, but then obviously we know the history that, um, uh, Devendra Fadnavis became the chief minister. And, um, what of course has happened from 2019, um, is an absolute mess for the rest of the political analysts that constantly there are parties which are breaking and different kinds of alliances are happening.
But BGP, uh, will find it difficult to hold on to these kinds of constituencies. Uh, this is not to say that BJP will not, uh, succeed, uh, because BGP has also done hard work among the OBC communities. obc Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, but then there was also a leader, like Go mue, who was seen as OBC leader who was with, uh, them, and therefore, right now they don't have a leader of Gomes who would also, uh, be seen as a link [00:47:00] between the community and the Brahmin leadership.
Sudipto: And this is a phenomenon that you think will has a potential to become the ultimate contradiction of Hindutva because when we project the end of Hindutva, the end of this era, we project the possibility of it imploding on the question of caste. That is the expectation. That's the expectation. So does the Maharashtra example, you know, hold some keys for the rest of the country?
You think? I
SumeeT: won't have a clear answer to that, honestly speaking, because one thing we must understand is that the BJP as a political party. has actually benefited from the Mandal agitation. Of course. Yeah. Okay. And even when people like BGP or its supporters were very much at the forefront of opposing the Mandal reservation, BGP happens to be the biggest beneficiary of Mandal reservation.
So therefore the OBCs and the work within the OBCs, BGP was very much adapting [00:48:00] itself and going within the other backward castes and mobilizing them. And therefore, it's not one day work. They have had their social and cultural organizations that are working in these castes and communities. And it was therefore one of the very interesting things about caste census that people expected that the caste census will actually break the Hindutva kind of agenda and destabilize it.
But interestingly, that has not happened. We are almost approaching the next general elections, and it doesn't look like the OBC communities across the country are going to vote differently on the caste census agenda. If they had to, already a large scale movement would have happened. And in fact, it seems that As of now, that caste census may not even become an election issue.
It may become issue in some states maybe, but overall it may not become an issue. So therefore Hindutva is adopting very fast to
Sudipto: So what is the [00:49:00] Ambedkarite response then? I mean, all of this, uh, you know, comes down to the question of What ism therefore holds the key to, to, to, to unlock the potential of, of the masses, right?
To, to kind of, uh, you know, d, d, dismantle the Hindutva framework. What, what do you, where do you think it'll come from? What kind of alterations in the Ambedkarite movement do you think need to be made to do that?
SumeeT: See, Ambedkarite movement, of course, like any other movement has to adapt to newer situations and have to devise newer ways of dealing with their political opponent, if one may say them.
But one has to also understand that we tend to fix Hindutva to a political party. which is BJP, which is not incorrect, which is absolutely the case. But Hindutva kind of tendencies are there across all upper caste parties. Of course. And that is something we have to think about. That there is something called everyday Hindutva.
There is, of course, the political Hindutva. So there is political Hindutva of which the BJP [00:50:00] is the torchbearer, but there is an everyday Hindutva. There are kind of different kind of prejudices. that are circulated, uh, which happens to be part of any political party. If you are from a privileged caste or upper caste group, uh, you may share those kinds of prejudices.
And therefore, we need to also rethink about Hindutva at both levels, at a political Hindutva, as well as the everyday social cultural Hindutva.
Sudipto: Which puts us against not just the BJP, but a range of other parties which claim to be representing the other side.
SumeeT: And that's what Ambedkarite movement has always worked against.
And therefore, they have always a contradictory relationship with all kinds of political parties. Because they will always raise these questions of inequality, particularly based on caste, whichever political party is ruling. And that makes any political party unstable or [00:51:00] very, you know, not very comfortable.
Um, with the presence of Ambedkarite politics. And I would definitely say we need to really work on these two, three Hindutvas. So Hindutva is not just one political party, tomorrow BGP may actually lose the elections, which it has happened in Andhra Pradesh, uh, or Telangana, sorry. Yeah. Yeah, exactly.
Telangana. So, uh, has Hindutva at a social and cultural level disappeared? The answer is no. And therefore, what has happened now, we are pretty much clinging onto elections. All our analysis. Which is important, but all our analysis boils down to Hindutva means is equal to BJP, whether they win election or not.
Of course, it is important. But at the same time, who is serious about Hindutva? Are we asking that question? By serious, even in electoral terms, And the answer is actually no. Look at different political parties who are fighting elections. Are they saying that Hindutva is actually a [00:52:00] challenge in front of country?
Let's forget our differences, dissolve for a moment and let's come and fight together. I'll give you a very trivial example, which is that of the Communist Party in UP. Look at the elections from 2014 and Communist Party has contested elections in Uttar Pradesh at, on various seats and they have barely managed to secure 100, 200 or 500 votes.
Now, in ideological terms, if Communist Party is so serious about fighting Hindutva, it should use whatever little energy it has to either go with Samajwadi Party or go with Bahujan Samaj Party. These are the two major contenders in that state. That tells us that probably even they are not serious then.
Election is taken as one example. Likewise, we have all kinds of political parties. Congress, uh, Nationalist Congress party in Maharashtra. Uh, so are they really serious about Hindutva? Are they ready to let go their kind of political stakes? So that [00:53:00] answer actually is no. And therefore, when we talk about Hindutva, somehow I have this particular feeling that constantly the burden is shifted on anti caste politics and Dalits.
That somehow if they behave correctly, the Hindutva will disappear. And that is an incorrect reading also in terms of numbers that Dalits have only certain constituencies in the country they can influence and not majority of the constituencies. So that has to be taken into account.
Sudipto: Thank you. So that was Dr.
Sumit Maskar and his ism. Some of you, I'm guessing would agree with him. Some of you would disagree, but I'm sure all of you who listened to this discussion came away knowing where you stand and what's your ism. Thank you. See you next time.
SumeeT: Thank
Sudipto: you.
-: News Laundry and the news minute are possible because of our paying subscribers. We don't run on corporate or government ads. You [00:54:00] can be part of changing the news model. Go to news laundry.com. Slash subscription or the news minute.com/subscription. Be part of the community that pays to keep news independent for the smoothest podcast experience.
Download News, laundry, zap. Watch our shows. Listen to our podcast, read our reports. Stay in font. Pay for news. Protect democracy, save the world.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
