Integrate Struggles Against Class Exploitation

With Struggles Against Social Oppression

(Extracts from presentations made at Ambedkar Jayanti observations organised by the Left Front governments of West Bengal and Tripura on April 14, 2005 [Kolkata] and April 20, 2005 [Agartala] respectively)

  Sitaram Yechury

ONE of the important (amongst many) things that Ambedkar has said is the necessity of transforming the political independence achieved in 1947 into economic and social independence. This he said is imperative for the betterment of the conditions of the dalits in the country. To quote him, “On the 26th of January 1950, we are going to enter into a life of contradictions. In politics we will have equality and in social and economic life we will have inequality. In politics, we will be recognising the principle of one man-one vote and one vote-one value. In our social and economic life, we shall by reason of our social and economic structure, continue to deny the principle of one man-one value.

“How long shall we continue to live this life of contradictions? How long shall we continue to deny equality in our social and economic life?

“If we continue to deny it for long, we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril. We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has laboriously built up”. (From Dr B R Ambedkar’s speech in the Constituent Assembly on November 25, 1949) This is also one of the things that the communists are repeatedly telling the people of our country. It is this basic fact that makes Ambedkar relevant even today.

On another occasion, speaking of social reform, Dr Ambedkar had to say: “There is nothing fixed, nothing eternal, nothing sanatan; that everything is changing, that change is the law of life for individuals as well as for society…

“Stability is wanted but not at the cost of change when the change is imperative. Adjustment is wanted but not at the sacrifice of social justice…

“The path of social reform like the path to heaven at any rate in India, is strewn with many difficulties…Caste is the monster that crosses your path. You cannot have political reform, you cannot have economic reform, unless you kill this monster.”

Yet today even after more than 55 years of independence, the plight of dalits and the backward castes, for all practical purposes, has not universally improved. There may be individual cases, but on the whole, the statistical evidence suggests that in achieving the task of converting political independence into real, social and economic independence for the most oppressed sections of our society we still have a long way to go.

It is relevant to recollect a quotation from the poet, P B Shelley, which Ambedkar used in one of his writings to describe the plight of the dalits and the oppressed saying that they are:

“pale for weariness of climbing heaven, and gazing on earth, wandering companionless

Among the stars that have a different birth”      

RESERVATIONS AND DALITS

Addressing himself to the task of eradicating such a plight of the dalits, Ambedkar had spoken of constitutional safeguards such as reservations. The country had adopted the policy of reservations for the SC and ST initially for a period of 10 years which had to be extended till date. It needs to be extended further as the improvement in their lot has not matched either expectation or requirement. While constitutional safeguards such as reservations are important, experience has shown that unless the economic status of the oppressed is drastically improved such safeguards by themselves will not radically change the situation. This is a factor that Ambedkar not only accepted but also underlined. In the absence of any meaningful change in agrarian relations, such concessions must be supported. But no illusions must be entertained that this is the only solution.

In the very nature of things, these palliatives will neither solve the problem of poverty and unemployment nor change the condition of untouchables and other downtrodden castes. They will certainly offer some relief to individuals from these communities, enhance their confidence in their advance, but not change their status. For the ruling classes these concessions play an important role. In the first place, in the general competition for jobs etc, they pit one section of toilers against another. Secondly, they create an impression among some sections that the government is their real friend and they should confine the struggle within the framework of the bourgeois system. It is thus a challenge to the present socio-economic system from the most downtrodden sections is prevented.

Another phenomenon, which was taking place simultaneously, will also have to be noted. A parallel development that was taking place during the days of the freedom struggle and particularly after the independence was the process of emergence of a modern state in India. The vast multinational character of our country ensured that different sections – caste, religions, ethnic, regional – began to rightfully demand equality of status and opportunity in the new independent polity. But, however, as the economic crisis deepened in the post-independent decades, far from the expectations of these different sections being met, the disparities started growing. This led and continues to lead to a scramble for a share of the cake. As the size of the cake shrinks, this scramble takes the form of a conflict between various groups. Hence, the demand for reservations from new sections and the opposition to reservations from other sections becomes a common practice.

NATURE OF PRESENT CASTE ASSERTION

It is in this background of deepening crisis in our country, that one must understand the nature of the present caste assertion. There are two aspects to this. On the one hand, as a result of whatever limited development has taken place since independence and in the background of the deepening crisis, there is a growing consciousness amongst the oppressed castes to rebel against their conditions of social oppression. This is a positive aspect. Without such a growing consciousness the struggle against oppression and exploitation cannot be carried out decisively. This is a consciousness that needs to be nurtured and strengthened with an effort to integrate this consciousness with the struggles against the present socio-economic system. It is only through such an integration of the struggle against social oppression and the struggle against modern day class exploitation that the struggle for an agrarian revolution can be strengthened and carried forward to its logical culmination.

There is, however another aspect to the present day caste assertion. This is the attempt to try and confine this growing consciousness within the parameters of the concerned caste. This is resorted to by some of the leadership of the present day movements. While appealing only to the caste consciousness and ignoring, if not evading, the basic issue of the struggle against the existing agrarian order, these leaders are once again appealing for a change in the superstructure without affecting the base. In doing so, they treat this growing consciousness amongst the dalits and the backward castes as separate compartments, as vote banks for their political fortunes, rather than addressing themselves for a genuine solution of the problem.

During the recent years, caste mobilisation has become an important factor in shaping Indian politics. For any scientific analysis, it is not only necessary to assess this growing role of caste assertion in Indian political life but also to map out the manner in which the unity of the toilers is strengthened in order to achieve the peoples’ democratic revolution. Unless we tackle with clarity this important phenomenon, we will not be able to overcome the potentially disruptive role that caste mobilisation can have on toilers unity. It is for these reasons that this issue needs to be addressed with all seriousness.

At the outset, it is necessary to debunk a common fallacy that attempts to pit caste versus class. Vested interests often advise communists that since they believe in class divisions in society, caste ought not to engage their attention. Such a mechanical distinction between caste and class is not only vulgar simplification but divorced from the present day Indian reality. The caste stratification of our society is something that has come down to us from centuries. Despite all the refinements and changes within castes and between castes, that have taken place over the years, the basic structure, in so far as the oppression of the dalits or the backward castes is concerned, remains. It is within this social stratification that the class formation in India is taking place. Capitalism is still developing in India and the process of the development of society divided into modern capitalist classes, is taking place constantly within the existing caste stratification. The question, therefore, is not one of class versus caste. It is the formation of classes under modern capitalism within the inherited caste structure. To a large extent, the most exploited classes in our society constitute the most socially oppressed castes. And, to that extent, the struggle against class exploitation and the struggle against social oppression complement each other. These sections, as it were, are subject to dual oppression. It is this complementarity that not only needs to be recognised but on the basis of that recognition, it must follow that an important task before the communist movement in our country today is the integration of the struggle against class exploitation with the struggle against social oppression. It is only through such an integration that the firm unity of the toilers can be forged and strengthened in order to advance towards peoples’ democracy.

ROOTS OF CASTE OPPRESSION

There is a vast amount of literature on the evolution and sustenance of the caste system in India. The large numbers of such works are only matched by the divergence of their conclusions. Some scholars have also linked it with a discussion of Marx’s Asiatic Mode of Production. Without any disrespect or devaluation of such work, it would suffice for our discussion to base ourselves on the fact (agreed upon by most) that the caste system, in Marxist terms, is the superstructure of an economic base which is pre-capitalist. In that sense, any attempt to overthrow this sinful heritage and obnoxious caste oppression will have to target the elimination of the vestiges of pre-capitalist economic formations. This, in our present case, is the elimination of the vestiges of feudalism and semi-feudalism.

This does not mean that such elimination, through a comprehensive agrarian revolution, however complex and difficult it may be, will automatically eliminate the caste system and the entire range of social consciousness associated with it. As Engels, in a letter to Bloch says, Marx and he had meant that the economic factor is decisive in the final analysis. Even after a change in the economic base the superstructure and associated social consciousness may persist and would require an intense ideological struggle to eliminate it. But without the attempt to change the pre-capitalist agrarian order, mere appeals for a change of heart or behaviour cannot and will not eliminate this obnoxious social oppression. There was an opportunity to effect a sweeping agrarian revolution along with the anti-colonial freedom struggle. But this was not to be due to the compromising character of the leadership of our national movement.

The main reason for this persistence of social oppression based on caste stratification is the inadequacy of the ruling classes, during the freedom struggle, in addressing themselves to this issue. The overcoming of caste differentiation was sought through proper social behaviour between individuals and castes without going into the social roots of this phenomenon. The sinful heritage of caste oppression was something that the national anti-colonial struggle could not repudiate because the leadership of the freedom struggle was not interested in going to the root of the problem and uprooting it. Even if it had a correct understanding of the social roots of the problem, it did not have the courage to seize it by the roots. By refusing to sweep away the feudal and semi-feudal agrarian relations, which were the bedrock for the continuation and persistence of caste exploitation, the leadership of freedom struggle not only permitted but in later years perpetuated the caste exploitation.

TWO TRENDS IN FREEDOM STRUGGLE

Within the freedom movement there were two main trends that contributed to the persistence of the caste institutions. One was the revivalist ideology which gripped a number of leaders of the freedom movement. Coming from upper caste Hindu background, these leaders in the struggle against the British drew sustenance from India’s so called past and, in the process, defended the social institutions of that past. Tilak was a classic example of such a tendency. The other tendency during the freedom struggle, which prevented the liquidation of the old order, was the vacillation of the Congress towards landlords and feudal interests. Thus, the Congress’ efforts to achieve independence were divorced from the agrarian revolution. In fact instead of carrying on a sweeping overthrow of the old feudal order, the Congress compromised with the landlords by sharing power with them in post-independent India. It was only the Communist Party of India which linked the struggle against British imperialism with a comprehensive agrarian revolution. Right from the Platform of Action of 1930 to the memorandum submitted to the National Integration Council by the CPI(M) in 1968, the communist movement constantly underlined that caste exploitation and social emancipation could be possible only through sweeping changes in agrarian relations. However, in the absence of a powerful agrarian movement, this task has remained unfulfilled to date.

Another current also needs to be properly analysed in order to understand the persistence of the caste stratification to date, i.e. the social reform movement. There have taken place powerful anti-caste movements in the country and they wielded significant political influence at their time. Among the giants who stand out in such movements was Jotiba Phule. Ideologically, Jotiba’s movement was an uncompromising attack on the ancient and feudal superstructure. However, this uncompromising attack did not go beyond to attack the basic agrarian structure based on feudal land relations which was the basis on which this superstructure existed.

Similar has been the experience of Ambedkar. This most outstanding and tireless fighter, who on behalf of the dalits exposed the upper caste hypocrisies and lambasted the Congress and its policies, had to finally ask his followers to embrace Buddhism to escape the injustices of the Hindu society. But the grim social reality based on unequal land relations did not change because of conversion to Buddhism. Unfortunately, smashing the present socio-economic system as the decisive step for elimination of caste exploitation, was replaced by formal declarations of equality, reservation of seats, jobs etc. It was once again shown that despite a leader of Ambedkar’s stature, and despite the strength of the movement, the objective could not be achieved because it failed to target the basic source of this exploitation, i.e. feudal and semi-feudal land relations. Similar also has been the experience of the Dravidian movement led by Periyar E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker. Thus we find that the social reform movement, despite the glorious uncompromising role of its leaders, could not achieve the stated objective as it ignored or bypassed the tasks of the agrarian revolution.

OUR TASK

It is our task today to integrate the struggle against social oppression and against class exploitation in one, overall wider class struggle to change the existing socio-economic system and unleash an agrarian revolution. This is the challenge of our times. We should be as active in mobilising the people in the struggles against the new economic policies, against communalism, as in mobilising the oppressed in the struggles against social oppression. It is precisely because the communists seek and strive for such an integration that various caste leaders pour venomous attacks on the communists. For, when such an integration takes place, there is no room for sordid political bargaining and manoeuvring that is done by some leaders in the name of exploited castes.

Therefore, while supporting reservations for the dalits and the backward castes, we should unhesitatingly emphasise that this is not the final solution. While all caste leaders mouth the necessity of radical economic reforms to improve the lot of the oppressed, it is by now clear that unless the struggle for a sweeping agrarian revolution takes place, no meaningful emancipation of these sections can be achieved.