Guest post by BHARAT PATANKAR translated by GAIL OMVEDT
Introduction: The Process of Exploitation
Exploitation arising from the caste hierarchy is a particular feature
of the South Asian subcontinent. There was no such exploitative system
in other continents or in countries outside of South Asia. But since
caste exploitation has been a reality for 1500-2000 years this shakes
the belief that only class can be the basis of exploitation. And because
of this we have to transcend the attempt to find a way only
pragmatically and deal with the issue on a philosophical and theoretical
level. Class has been theorized extensively in terms of exploitation;
to some extent gender also, but not caste. Exploitation as women in
various forms has also been a reality for thousands of years; this also
is not through “class”. This reality from throughout the world gives a
blow to the idea that exploitation can only be class exploitation. This
can also be said of exploitation arising on the basis of racial and
communal factors.
By exploitation we mean the extraction of surplus from labour by
those who do not themselves labour. The process of exploitation is not a
process in the cultural or social fields. The process of exploitation
can only come through the relations that exist among various human
beings while creating new products in the process of production. It is
not a historical fact that these relations are those of exploitation
everywhere and among all humans. Exploitation is not an “eternal” fact
and will not necessarily exist in the future. In the matriarchal society
the relations of production were not those of exploitation.
A system in which production gives more than is necessary for an
abundant existence is one in which “surplus” is created. Such surplus is
fundamental for a society of varied production. When the productive
forces give more than the food that is necessary to live on, then there
is a surplus created. When this happens then some humans are freed from
simply producing food. They can do such work as creating clothes and
tools. After producing the food or clothes necessary for themselves they
can then produce for others. The others may do varied forms of
production, or take leisure, or devote themselves to art and philosophy.
Thus a “social division of labour” is born. There is no necessity that
this must be one of hierarchy or exploitation. Initially it is one of
exchange.
However, when some people seize the “surplus” created in this
situation, exploitation begins. Or, when those who are direct producers
get simply enough to stay alive rather than the goods for an abundant
life, and the rest is grabbed as “surplus” then exploitation begins.
Thus arises a social division of labour based on exploitation.
Such an exploitative social division of labour may be based on class,
on caste or on gender relations. In Hindustan the characteristics of a
division of labour based on caste exploitation can be seen from about
600 BC. However this division of labour based on caste exploitation
became triumphant, fixed and general only from about 600 AD.
The General Characteristics of the Caste System
Dr. Ambedkar had argued that the form of this exploitation was that
of an “unequal hierarchy“. It was an exploitative hierarchy for the
extraction of surplus. The fundamental unit of this division of labour
is the caste. Its general characteristics are as follows:
1. Beginning from the lowest caste in the hierarchy, while giving a
small share of the surplus to every level of the hierarchy, the
greatest share goes to the top.
2. What is fundamental to the relations of exploitation is that in
the division of labour the surplus from every level goes first to the
level above it and then is channeled further “upward.”
3. In the division of labour all the castes which participate in
direct production can be called “toiling castes”. The proportion of
people of the society in these castes is greater than 90%.
4. Apart from the lowest castes among the toiling castes, the
“toiling castes” all participate in the “exploitation” of the castes in
the rung below them.
5. It is a special feature of exploitation in the caste hierarchy
that there is a mechanism for providing the greatest share from this
internal exploitation among the toiling castes to the higher
“exploiting” castes.
6. Because of these characteristics, Dr. Ambedkar had said in
regard to the internal division of labour in the caste exploitative
hierarchy that it was actually a “division of labourers”.
7. The type of work that people in the castes at each rung of the
hierarchy was to do was ordained from generation to generation by birth;
this is a special authoritative type of feature of the exploitation of
the caste hierarchy.
8. Besides this, there exists:
a) The compulsion to marry within the caste;
b) Caste-wise residence;
c) Dining only within the caste;
d) Exchange of daughters only within the caste;
e) Decisions regarding the internal affairs of each caste through its caste panchayat;
f) The principle of deciding caste by birth.
a) The compulsion to marry within the caste;
b) Caste-wise residence;
c) Dining only within the caste;
d) Exchange of daughters only within the caste;
e) Decisions regarding the internal affairs of each caste through its caste panchayat;
f) The principle of deciding caste by birth.
9. The lowest castes will do the work considered dirtiest and
requiring the most physical labour (these were the castes that were
previously considered untouchable).
- The toiling castes above these do comparatively less polluting and fully physical labour (the farming castes and the artisans who were not considered fully untouchable).
- The castes in the rung above these do not do physical labour. They will do the planning, organisation, deciding rules, and organising of the mechanisms of violence (the castes considered to be “kshatriyas”).
- The Brahman castes on the highest level will do no kind of physical labour. This caste will have a full monopoly of the mental field (taking and giving of knowledge). Not only will they do no type of work understood to be “polluting”; they will not even go near it.
These are features that underlie the “laws of motion” of the caste
system. Marxists refer to the “laws of motion” of a class-based economy,
but the same concept can apply here.
The Laws of Motion of the Caste System
In regard to the reality that comes to view in connection with caste
exploitation it is extremely important to distinguish the external
features and the laws of motion. The external features of any
exploitative system do not remain completely the same for the mode of
production of that system in every era. But its laws of motion must
remain the same. If they do not, then that system is broken. This
happens inevitably.
If we consider this, then the laws of motion which must continue for
the hierarchical exploitation of this system to go on appear to be the
following:
1. The caste of a person in the hierarchy is determined by the caste level of that hierarchy.
2. The castes doing the most polluting, dirty and most heavily
manual labour and the least mental work are at the very bottom, and to
the extent that the “polluting” nature of work and the severity of its
toil becomes less and the mental aspect increases, the level of the
caste in the hierarchy will rise. The castes at the highest level will
hold a monopoly of mental work and will do no “dirty” or physical
labour.
3. Due to the form of exploitation in the caste hierarchy the situation of the “division of labourers” is created.
4. A different form of hierarchy from that of the relations of
class production is created, one in which there is a basis for each
caste considering itself superior to those below it in the hierarchy.
5. Without breaking these “laws of motion,” even if other
characteristics of the caste system vanish, still as a system caste will
not be annihilated. It will continually be recreated and reproduced.
The Link of the Caste system to Class in the Capitalist System
Though the caste system as a system exists today, and though its laws
of motion are reproduced from second to second, still its hierarchy has
been joined completely and firmly to the capitalist relations of
production. Since this linkage is integral and encompassing, without a
movement to end the class system, there can be no effort to
“independently” destroy the caste system.
1. In the country, and Maharashtra, those who as sweepers fought
as exploited workers, for an “eight hour day” are 100% drawn from the
previously low castes. In doing such work, along with the laws of class
exploitation, the laws of motion of the caste hierarchy apply. There are
thus two sorts of exploitation, and it is not possible to destroy them
in separate stages. This linkage is also seen with the fourth-class
employees who collect waste, glass, paper etc.
2. Those who work as porters in the railways, carrying heavy
burdens and doing all kinds of physical toil in the cities are included
among “unorganized” workers. Here the previous farming castes (Marathas,
Dhangars, Kunbis etc.) work. Here also the principles of caste
exploitation on the one hand and class exploitation on the other apply.
In this connection also there can be no separate fights. The majority of
these castes work in the rural areas as toiling farmers, agricultural
labourers. It is also necessary to take account of the fact that among
them 3-4% have become capitalist farmers, cooperative barons, small
industrialists.
3. The capitalist class in the country has primarily emerged out
of castes of Brahmans, banias, and khatris (Ksatriyas). Within it some
1-1 ½ % come from farming castes, artisan castes to become small
capitalists. In fighting with these capitalists it is clear that the
struggle has to be both for the annihilation of caste and class.
4. In today’s ultra-modern imperialist system based on
“intellectual property rights” the people who monopolize a pure
intellectual field such as computer software and hold a main position in
areas from state administration to big companies have come mainly from
Brahman castes. This is also true of the financial field. Here also
there is an integral connection between class and caste. A dual struggle
will have to be given in this respect.
5. Aside from the Brahmans, banias and Thakurs who are considered
Ksatriya castes, about two to five percent of the people of the toiling
castes have become capitalists, capitalist farmers, cooperative barons,
or professionals in high level intellectual fields. This section will
not take part in a fight for the annihilation of caste. Only a few
individuals from them may possibly become part of the struggle. This is a
result of the ultra-modern capitalist class reality.
A Historical View: the Need for Struggle against Brahmanic Religion and Culture
Brahmanic culture and religion has functioned for 1500-2000 years to
give a firm foundation for the hierarchical exploitative caste system.
From the time of Gautam Buddha up to today there have been many
struggles against this culture and religion. Alternatives have been
given. Buddhist Dhamma expelled brahmanic religion and culture from the
main trend of the social structure Indian subcontinent for a long
time. Buddhist Dhamma and Jain religion remained as the main trends
for a thousand years in this country. But once the caste structure
became fixed, the place of Buddhism as the “mainstream” began to end; it
could not prevent the solidification of the caste system. As long as
the production system based on the exploitation of the caste hierarchy
is reproduced, no great blow can be given to brahmanic culture and
religion. This exploitative system has continuously reproduced both of
these. Because of this the struggle for the annihilation of caste must
go on two fronts – that of the material productive system, and that of
culture.
Brahmanic culture has in the last 2-3 thousand years had a major
effect on the society and its people. But in this lengthy period it has
also tremendously changed; along with the eras of various modes of
production change, so brahmanic culture has adapted and changed itself.
It has attempted to shape itself to suit the ideology of the newly
coming modes of production. Except for the nearly thousand years of
hegemony of Buddhist Dhamma, brahmanic culture has remained dominant in
Hindustan.
It appears that in the period of the decline of the Indus
civilization brahmanic culture first began to gain hegemony in some
parts of the subcontinent. It is proclaimed in the Purush Sukta of the
Rig Veda (dated to about the 10th century BC) that from the sacrifice of
the original “Purusha” the Brahman came from his mouth, from his arms
the Kshatriya, from his thighs the Vaishya and from his feet the
Shudras. The ideology of the superiority of Brahmans and the hierarchy
of superiority and inferiority dates from this period. But such four
varnas were not existent throughout the south Asian subcontinent. In
some places there were three varnas, in some two and in some the
Sangha-ganas of only one varna existed. Aside from the Sangha-gana of
one varna, the Kshatriya, in the other varma forms there was a clear
superiority of Brahmans. But in the majority areas of the subcontinent
these varna types did not exist. In most areas there was no exploitation
based on the hierarchy of a varna system or class system. In these
areas, adivasi communities existed. There were some doing settled
agriculture, some living by hunting and gathering food, grains and
fruits, and some shifting cultivation. Among these the majority must
have been matriarchal or matrilineal. The one or more varna systems with
brahmanic hegemony existed only among those doing settled agriculture.
In some of these areas, kingdoms began to appear around the time of the
Buddha.
After the defeat of the matriarchal or matrilineal communities, the
first exploitative systems founded on patriarchy and the exploitation of
women could be found also in the non-kingly sangha-ganas. Later,
societies based on kingship emerged. With the rise of agricultural
production and commerce, paid “karmakaras” or labourers began to appear
as the basic exploited toilers. In the beginning of the period of
Buddhism the kingdoms were growing. On one hand, destroying the
sangha-ganas, these kingdoms cleared the forests where adivasi
communities residing and forcibly turned them into settled
agriculturalists, collecting revenue from them. This created the
“kutumbin” farming class. The shrenis of artisans began to be formed in
the large cities; their heads of families began to be known as
“gahapatis.” Artisans organized in shrenis and as labourers in the
cities and in the rural areas the agriculturalist “kutumbins” were the
main producers, with dominant people, the “shreshtis,” taking the
production from agriculture. This was the general structure of society.
This was also the period of in which the land, forests and mines were
under control of the kingly states. Their administration developed the
roads and irrigation systems.
With the decline and end of this state power, the caste system
originated in the society it had ruled. By the time of about the sixth
century it was solidified and generalized, and with this the hegemony of
Buddhism ended and the hegemony of brahmanic culture and religion was
established. The defeated adivasi communities and clans now began to be
settled as “kutumbin” farmers doing agriculture, and with this their
various kinds of work were determined. In this way the exploitation of
the caste system, and the hierarchy of superiority and inferiority took
birth with the changes in the mode of production. In addition, a new
form of brahmanic culture consistent with this became established in the
place of the old forms of brahmanic culture. A new brahmanic religion
became created. In the beginning of this period, in the time of the
nomadic warlike Vedic Aryans, Indra was regarded as the “hero” who led
the battle against asuras and rakshasas – the indigenous peoples. Along
with such personalized gods as Indra, elements like the earth, water,
fire and sky were seen as divine. The yagna which reclaimed the
superiority of Brahmans was central to religious practice. Cattle were
sacrificed, and horses also. With this, all the “twice-born” varnas also
were of course eaters of beef. The Brahmans did the hegemonic work of
legitimizing the varna system and applying its restrictions, and of
controlling the snatching of the surplus of production so that it went
to the twice-born varnas.
Brahmanic culture was sidelined during the period of the hegemony of
Buddhism. Though in this period the “das” or slave system came to an end
and the ideology of brahmanic culture was proclaimed in the Manusmriti,
still it did not gain dominance in the field of direct production. For
this system was based on wage labour, on kutumbin farmers paying
revenue, and gahapatis in the large cities. The ideology of this society
was largely drawn from Buddhism. But from the decline of this society
and the rise of brahmanic kingdoms, the caste exploitation began to
grow. An ideology of a fully developed caste-based society could not be
created from Buddhism which completely opposed caste. And so this
ideology and Dhamma began to be sidelined. Because of this the dominance
of brahmanic religion and culture once again became created. However,
the base and shape of both of these became to be largely transformed at
this time; new deities were adopted, often from indigenous traditions.
Of course, the legitimation for exploitation based on superiority and
inferiority remained permanent.
The yagna and sacrifice of brahmanic religion in this period was
declining. Brahmans became completely vegetarian. New gods emerged.
Indra and the five principles were sidelined. Puranas were written and a
false history created. The imaginary fables of the Ramayana, Mahabharat
became of huge importance. A “book” known as the Gita began to be
praised. Krishna is shown as saying in this Gita that “I was the one who
created chaturvarnya on the basis of guna and karma,” and is treated as
the avatar of Vishnu who supposed preserved the universe. Such books as
the Vedas and Upanishads fell into oblivion. Although some sections of
the Vedas were taken where necessary to support the caste and varna
system, these books no longer remained the foundation for brahmanic
religion. The Manusmriti was brought forward as a weapon to establish in
a strong way the exploitation of the caste system.
From village to village social and cultural relations began to be
born which directly brought caste exploitation. The Puranas, Ramayana,
Mahabharat and of the Manusmriti and all were brought forward to
legitimize and give shape to this exploitation. Under the dominance of
the fully superior Brahman caste, people were taught that one should
behave according to the position giving in the caste hierarchy and make
to effort to do anything different. One should carry out the “duty” of
one’s caste. There will be punishment if the rules of caste are broken.
It was in the general era of brahmanic dominance that finally,
imperialism in the form of British colonialism intervened. Imperialism
made it possible for the capitalist mode of production, the capitalist
form of state power and ideology to begin to develop. In this new
reality, Brahmanism once again began to change. In today’s era,
brahmanic culture and religion has taken new form through these changes.
Without understanding this, it is impossible to understand what kind of
alternatives the cultural movement can give in order to annihilate the
exploitative hierarchy of caste.
The brahmanic culture of this age has made a special intersection
with imperialist capitalist and national capitalist culture. Because of
this such practices go on as the dances of Michael Jackson, a corrupted
copy of western-style dancing in marriage processions and in the sinking
of the Ganpati idols, the garba, the commercialization of women as
market objects and practices understood to be low according to the old
system.
The concept of calling the brahmanic religion as “Hindu religion” has
become established. Originally “Hindu” was a geographical conception.
The people living in the area from the region of the Indus river to the
east, north and south were described as “Hindus” by the Persians. In
their language “S” is pronounced as “H” for example, “Asura” had become
“Ahura”. Thus the Muslims knew the subcontinent as “Al-Hind” or
“Hindustan”. Its people were called Hindus; the term had nothing to do
with religion. But during the British period the meaning was changed, to
become a religion – with the implication that “Hinduism” is the
“national” religion of people of the subcontinent. Because of this very
clever and far reaching attempt, even while maintaining the oppression
from brahmanic religion and the brahmanic rules that establish what is
high and low, the brahmanic religion has been able to carry out the
effort of making the oppressed castes themselves participate in the
ideology of their oppression, using such slogans as “Hindus are all
one”.
In reality in the expansive region of Hindustan the religion
practiced by the people is completely different form Hindu religion.
Festivals such as Bendur (Bailpola), “Ghat basavane”, Hatga and others
are considered important by these people. No basic “religious book” has
said anything about following these festivals. The “Kulswamis” male or
female, honoured by these people as their own particular deities are not
mentioned in these religious books. Because of that the brahmanic
religion that is called “Hindu religion” today has an uneasy coexistence
with the elements it claims. It hides in fact what is a different
religion. These two religions scorn each other completely. The brahmanic
hegemony that exists over the non-Brahman people is primarily in
connection not so much with religious practice, but with the high-low
caste hierarchy. Because, though the brahmanic religion has continuously
functioned to give cultural support to this exploitative hierarchy. It
has also taken strategies. On occasion violent methods have also been
used. The caste exploitative hierarchy has the structure of the material
relations of production. This structure of material exploitation also,
consciously or unconsciously, is continuously reproduced by brahmanic
culture. As a result, the exploited castes themselves observe the
superiority and inferiority determined by the culture. Because of this
splits fall in the middle of the struggles they give from time to time,
due to emotions of suspicion and hostility. The “division of labourers”
takes place.
Strengthening one’s caste, living in caste-wise settlements even in
cities for self-protection, refusal of those exploited castes who
considered themselves “savarna” (including those who were not considered
“savarna” by the brahmanic religion, or were previously even
untouchables) to live near those considered lower, this was the
practice. In the last many years also caste was used as “vote banks” and
bought by capitalist leaders. The middlemen (dalals) in every
settlement and caste leaders were in a large way responsible for this.
This is also a huge obstacle in the way of ending the exploitation of
the caste hierarchy.
The commercialization of all deities and buwas has gone on in a big
way. A huge business has been made of making capital in the name of god.
The happenings after the death of Satya Sai Baba have been shocking in
this respect. In the name of these gods and festivals money, gold, and
silver are collected, demanding contributions and propagandizing
companies goes on everywhere.
The religious barons began to apply a new meaning to the books of
brahmanic religion. It is claimed that today’s ultramodern knowledge is
discovered in the Vedas, and such books as the Ramayana and Mahabharat.
Caste exploitation is done proclaiming that the “history” told in the
Puranas is a true history. This has also entered into the field of
education. In such subjects as “moral values,” history and geography
this tendency has infiltrated. The mysteries that remain in science are
gone into in the brahmanic method. The central government has provided
funds for the “modernising” of the baluta work done by various castes,
and so has given it a “modern” solidification.
On the basis of caste, community and clan, our democratic
independence is being crushed. The old rules and customs are changed.
Yet some remain. Bhangis still carry out the “traditional” duty of
removing excrement. Women are compelled to practice “sati” in many
areas.
Radio and television media are used for mythologizing, and spreading
the false history told by the brahmanic religion, and supporting the
casteism and superstition arising from the ignorance of brahmanic
culture.
The fact that a handful of people from the toiling, exploited castes
have entered capitalist state power is used to keep all the men and
women of that caste permanently in the thralls of caste. The ideology is
solidified that “our caste people” are in power. On this background
there is a great need for people of all exploited castes to unite to
give alternatives to Brahmanic culture and religion. It is useless to
simply give negative curses to brahmanic culture and religion. Realizing
the new knowledge and ignorance existing among the people, studying it,
we will have to examine closely the kind of alternatives that are
necessary. In working for an ecologically balanced, abundant society, a
team of conscious activists should work for a new realistic “religion”
and culture consistent with that, leaving aside their weariness and
hunger.
This work will not be done through movements organised simply on
immediate demands. Activists must be prepared to work in terms of an
ideology based on theory. It is possible to link movements on immediate
demands and the long-term struggle to permanently annihilate caste and
the exploitation of its hierarchy. For this a perspective and set of
tasks has to be prepared.
Note: The above paper was first prepared for the “People’s
struggle conference for caste annihilation”, held in Kankavali,
Sindhudurg District, Maharashtra, January 14-15, 2012. 
![Satish Acharya [Mayawati's growth]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHBXUBLgR8xXDPP2MuhsArd5IApqfy7CHhXeEZLEpswFdu4xlK7DzgmzrvELOhv-KCOCrmxOvVxZFiTKb82IX5mN6T5Eo5keMODUGHCEcLXr17j37FcOeE2DNobSciUnU9P75nHx8xmiI/s1600/280510.jpg)