Recently
I have observed a trend in Facebook and other social media. Somebody, say a Brahmin, puts up an ad to
sell some foodstuff dubbed to be some brahmin savories - that is on their wall
or some group. Suddenly it starts
getting intense reactions, rebuttals, outrage, on one hand, and a vengeful
support from the opponent group on the other hand, which ensures that the ad
catches the maximum attention and garners more sales. Well, since the people who put up this kind
of ads are from poor and helpless families who must be doing this for their
livelihood, that kind of momentary emotional reactions helped the family in a
way - good.
But
beyond this, it gives raise (must give raise) to a few serious thoughts. Before we embark upon the same, let us try to
summarize the criticisms that have risen against selling community related
(read Brahmin) food:
- Brahmins have been treading
down all other communities (!!!), especially the last community of the society,
for thousands of years now
- While doing so, the community
which is just 4% in strength, has been able to access and control the
major share of the country's economic, political, social resources. This is the "Social Capital" of
that community.
- This social capital is the
sole factor that enables a Brahmin succeed in life, no matter how poor he is
initially; the others can never make it no matter how rich they are.
- The caste indicator of a
Brahmin is a part of his Social Capital
- To use this 'illegitimate'
Social Capital is to deprive the others of their opportunities. Hence, to be fair, Brahmins should never use
their caste anywhere in their endeavors.
- Hence it is a social injustice
for the Brahmins to form community associations, to carry trade/commerce in the
name of their community, to promote their caste brands, or doing any
vocation/trade that is associated with their castes.
Of
course, there must be an element of truth in the fancy story of this minuscule 4% having
down-trodden all the other castes for thousands of years - but how big is that
'element' is still debatable. But it
must be true that, for at least a few hundred years at some point in the
history, if not for thousands of years, the Brahmin community got embroiled in
their superiority complex, trod down several communities, with many Brahmins
enjoying royal patronage, land-lordships, endowments etc (And let us put aside
the question of how many hundred years, how much of the Brahmin population
enjoyed this 'superiority' and what has been the fate of the legendary
traditional 'poor brahmin' during this 'hay time'). Having read the spiced up and bloated history
based upon the thin thread of this truth, many modern-day brahmins have really
repented their past, and have taken many personal and social measures to make
good for their 'sinful' past, let us not forget that (just have a quick glance
at the list of modern secularists who are Brahmins by birth). Let us also take note of the fact that the
ugly practice of untouchability, which was rampant till a few generations back,
is almost extinct in the present generation of Brahmins. Then, there is this 'Reservation Policy' of
the government which aims at rectifying the social injustice caused over the
past. Let us, for the time being, forget
the fact that there are quite many anomalies and flaws in its use and implementation
though it is absolutely just in its spirit, and remember that these very
Brahmins have in a way accepted it, albeit grumbling; of course there have been
opposition, but which government measure does not face the opposition? They say 60% of
the power positions are occupied by Brahmins (I don't know). If that be the truth, do you think this 60%
could not do away with Reservation which is dubbed to be opposed by the
Brahmins? Shouldn't these 'cunning jackals'
have removed it cleverly? That must either
disprove the fact that 60% of power is controlled by Brahmins, or it must prove
that they are not as bad, after all. Or
could it be that they have kept quiet fearing the rest 40%? If yes, then it just goes to prove that this 60%
is a bunch of weaklings. Then why
fear/hate them so much?
Fine,
let's now have a look at this Social Capital.
Before that, let's have a quick glance at real capital. There is an estimate that about 30%
of the total wealth of the country is controlled by 1% of
the population; and a meager 8% of the wealth is distributed over 50%
of population. Remaining 62%
wealth is controlled by 49% of the population, so says the estimate.
Now,
can we say this 1% (around 1.3 Crores) that controls about 30% of
wealth belong to Brahmin community? I
don't have any statistics to indicate this, but I don't see a single Brahmin in
the list of top ten wealthiest persons in the country. And, among 60-70 billionaires
in the country, excepting some 5-6 (whose caste I could not make out), the rest are all Baniyas,
Farss, Kayastha, Muslim, Christian, Nadar etc (Let's count these unidentified
castes to Brahmins only - a maximum of 10%). That means, percentage of
Brahmins in this wealthiest bracket controlling 30% of
wealth is 10% of 1%, i.e., 0.1% of the population.
Brahmins constituting about 4% of total
population, where do the remaining 3.9% stand? Shall we put them in the second bracket of 49%
that controls 62% of wealth? No
sir, there have been poorest of poorest in Brahmins, since ages - who find it
difficult even to make one square meal.
Even in the regime of so many Brahmin Dewans, Amaldars, Zamindars,
Ministers, Prime Ministers, the common Brahmin has been the legendary "Poor
Brahmin" only; Many brahmins in Delhi work in public toilets, many pull
cycle rickshaw, run auto-rikshaws (no, I am not telling all this with a sorrow
that the Brahmins have got to resort to these vocations, well there have been
many other communities doing these since ages; I am telling this only for the
sake of statistics). Likewise, there
have been a lot of Brahmins across the country who 'work' in government-controlled
temples for peanut salaries (there are around 35000 such
temples just in Karnataka alone). And
there are countless women like the one who gave the ad which is the matter of
current discussion, who prepare and sell Happala, Sandige, curry powder
etc. None of these can come within the
above second bracket. They must figure somewhere
in the lowest rungs of those 50% that accesses just 8% of
the wealth. No matter how much their number
is, most of them are helpless illiterates, they won't even know priest job -
they somehow run their life doing some cooking, services and miscellaneous
household chores. The 01%
rich Brahmins above have never been of much help to these hapless
people, nor have their so called 'Social Capital' been able to uplift them as
well. Most of them are people of self-respect,
won't hold out their hand for alms, like to somehow lead a contented life of
self-esteem, with whatever they have, doing whatever little they know to earn a
living. They have never begged, nor
demanded for some privilege from the government, nor even requested somebody to
bail them out by buying their products.
They have some products and services; they know that there is a specific
demand for Brahmin-made products and services in the society, and they are just
offering that. Now that there is this
social media, they are just trying to expand their traditional trade through
social media. What should one say if we
find 'fault' of some Social Capital hitherto unknown to them, instead of
admiring and appreciating their effort for self-reliance? There has been a traditional relationship
between the vocation and the caste; and the society has been living like this
for ages - Priests (Brahmins) for marriages etc, Washer men for washing the
clothes, Barbers for haircut and playing auspicious musical instruments
etc. Is it right or wrong, is a
different debate; it is also a different debate whether one can pursue the
other's vocation. But these people are not as read as us, they cannot deliver lengthy speech about
Social Capital etc. Filling their tummy every
day is their immediate concern, and they have a trade in their hand. They carry it out, with dignity. Brahmins have been traditionally known for priestly
works, cooking etc (I am not telling they do it cleanly etc) but that is their ancestral
vocation; there have been distinct communities that demand their products and
services - these demanding communities could be Brahmins or non-brahmins. When there are suppliers and demanders, what
is our business between them? And it's
their brand as well - specific castes and communities are known for specific
savories, and there is an opportunity for everybody to enjoy it. Earlier the savories of Lingayats and Gowdas
were not as famous; now they have built their brand and sell in the market. There are buyers for that as well.
Now
there arises a question, a rather ill-meaning one - "fine, but do you eat
in a Dalit eatery?" Ill-meaning
because there is no real concern here, the intention is to just rake up
discontent and spread hatred. Well, I
can't give a blind answer like "Dalits have never sold their brand till
now, how can I say?". Yes, there is
that social 'stigma' even today. We must
agree that many people do not patron a Dalit Khanavali. But does it help the cause of Dalit Khanavali
if you bar a few others from using their traditional brands? Why, not all people go to Lingayat, Gowda or
even Brahmin khanavali. It is an
individual's choice, isn't it? But new
brands have never stopped coming up. Who
knows, even Dalit Khanavali can find its root in due course. What is important is encouraging them to
undertake it like many other vocations, not curb the other people from carrying
out their vocations in their traditional settings. Personally, I don't have any specific
'choice' of people with whom to dine - as long as they have no objection dining
with me - I dine with anybody happily. I
know there are thousands like me. Why,
even in our offices, cafeterias, hotels, do we think who is sitting next to us,
who is serving us, and how is cooking for us?
Does their caste even cross our minds?
How long can we keep muttering the mugged-up lines from the age-old sociology
textbooks, without recognizing these social changes?
And
there is a counter question for those who ask where Dalit canteens really
work. Well, if true, it is really sad
thing that the Dalit canteens/coffee-bars won't work at least in urban
India. Diehard cattiest won't drink in
Dalit coffee-bars, let's leave them aside for now. I drink; there are scores of people who think
like me, they drink; and there is a huge non-Hindu community that keeps blaming
Hindus for their casteism at every single opportunity (They are almost 25%
of the country's population).
They must certainly not have any qualms drinking these coffee-bars; And
the Dalits themselves form more than 15% of Indian
population (and I believe they must not have any caste restrictions within
themselves - because as far as the 'narratives' hitherto go, casteism is the
forte of 'forward' communities like Brahmins, Lingayats, Gowdas etc); you can
definitely enlist their support in the smooth running of their own hotels; Then
there are these secularists, diehard ones - seeing their noise and dust across
Facebook, I don't think they are very small in number. Now if you say Dalit hotels won't run even
with this huge number of people outside the cattiest groups, should we take
this 'secularism' fake? Isn't the
pseudo-secularism more dangerous than the open, albeit wicked, casteism?
Well,
let's, for now, set aside the Brahmins of 'low economic strata'. Let's see how this Social Capital has helped
the people of economically lower middle class like me. While in college, even I had thought a lot
about this Social Capital stuff; had felt a lot bad about the 'injustice' caused
by my ancestors; I firmly believed that it is a shame to tell one’s own
caste. Hence, I left the fields of caste
and religion while filling application for the college admission. The clerk called me and scolded me to fill
these fields. I tried to deliver speech
on the line of secularism etc. He got
angry and shouted at me that I was actually trying to hide my caste in order to
get the government privilege like free ship, scholarship etc. He also threatened me to complain my father
whom he knew. Forget it, even today, try
to fill some government online form - the fields of caste and religions are
usually mandatory. It is unfortunate
that the so-called secular government does not recognize you apart from your
caste.
Okay,
let's keep aside this technical matter.
Let's accept, for now, that is is a shame to tell one’s own caste,
especially for Brahmins. Instead let us
call it a "Social Capital Caste (SCC).
I was born in this SSC. My father
was a teacher with Rs. 100+ as salary.
Naturally I studied in a government school - we had the students from
'all' castes there. Barring a few
wearing their caste marks on their forehead, I don't know the caste of anybody
even today; it didn't even occur to us then to ask. Subsequently I left this school and joined the
school where my father taught. More than
half of the students there were from Dalit communities; a couple of us were
from SSC (Social Capital Caste), and the rest were from other communities. We fought occasionally, but those fights were
due to some childish reasons, never for caste reasons. A few among these boys were my close
friends and at times my saviors as well - they protected me in many quarrels :)
. My father never taught in my class,
for he did not like to give me one more Social Capital that I was a
"teacher's son". There were
many teachers from Dalit community too, a few of them really good teachers, and
a few not as good; there were a few not-so-good teachers from the other
communities as well. Teachers used to
beat us, but never for caste reasons. In
the Seventh class, a girl came first to the class. She was quite brilliant and did not belong to
SSC community. I came second. But I don't remember anybody raising ruckus
over "gender inequality, social capital etc" (None of us were aware
of these things those days, hence I must guess our life was far cooler). At home, my father scolded me that day, that
I did not study properly.
There
was a teacher in High-school whose name has been etched in my heart forever. Her name is Doddamma 🙏. She was our Kannada teacher (a few friends
who are still active in FB can vouch for this). This affectionate lady was from the same Dalit
community, and if today I have any passion towards classical Kannada, I owe it
to her. It was for the first time that I learnt that Kannada could be spoken so
beautifully and so elegantly. She would
encourage her students so passionately to study classics. Not that she was a
scholar, but she was a quite academic; if she could not resolve our questions,
she would find it out and revert to us next day (I heard unfortunately she
later developed some serious mental illness and died a couple of decades ago).
This is the 'social capital' I hold, her bounty. As much as it enriched my inner life, it
didn't help in my vocation, let's remember.
There
was another teacher, a Lingayat. He
taught us English. I never liked this
stout man of ill-health because he took a lot of special classes. I always bunked his classes. He disliked me equally, for the same
reason. But what he did during these 'unnecessary'
special classes was, he thoroughly and comprehensively taught English grammar
(what is specified in the syllabus and and also what is not) and gave detailed
notes. I, who was always looked down
upon by him, realized the value of this only after I completed my high school. Fortunately, I had scribbled most of these
notes from time to time from the notebooks borrowed from my classmates. I sat during the holiday before the college,
made a neat note of the whole English grammar notes and learnt my English
solidly during holidays. This is the
'capital' that has helped me a lot in my vocation, his bounty 🙏. I don't know if you call this
a Social Capital or what else.
And
I never got any job or privilege from the government. In private interviews they have never asked
me about my caste. So, as far as I know,
it is the skill I learnt that helped me in my job, no my 'Social Capital'
called caste. I know there are hundreds
of stories like this. When this is the
case, let us not get envious or judgmental about people who are deprived of all
other capitals, if they use their social capital for their livelihood (not for
building a bungalow); let's be happy that they are building their own lives
without being a burden on the society.
Instead, let us redirect the same effort in thinking about how to fill
the capital for those who are deprived of their capital.
-------------
Please click
here for the Kannada version of this write-up.
Posts
