|
Dalit: The Error of Usage
Gail Omvedt
 Dalit”,
“Scheduled Caste”, “Ex-Untouchable” and “Harijan”. These are only
some of the many words used to refer to the most oppressed sections
of Indian society, “untouchable” in the traditional caste order,
performers of the most degrading task, and still today caught in the
throes of poverty, discrimination and the remnants of untouchability.
“Dalit” is still
probably the most widespread of these terms, but it is not
uncontested. Many are uncomfortable with its apparent militancy. It
means literally “crushed” or “ground down”, and it has an
interesting history. It is first found, apparently, in the ’30s,
when it was used as a Marathi and Hindi translation for the British
term “Depressed Classes.” (As elsewhere, “classes” here meant
“castes”, something to remember when we are discussing OBCs.)
Ambedkar used it in this way to refer to his Depressed Class
conferences, though in English we most often find him using the
simple and descriptive term “Untouchable”. His conflicts with Gandhi
in the early ’30s were at least partly a matter of terminology.
Gandhi had, for him, the brilliant idea of using the term “Harijan”,
taken from the bhakti movement. Ambedkar resisted this, just as he
resisted Gandhi’s attempt to turn an Untouchable League (which
Ambedkar thought should take up general issues of civil rights) into
a paternalistic organisation controlled by upper-caste Hindus. Ambedkar, and militant Dalits ever since, have seen the word
“Harijan” as demeaning and false, hence oppressive.
Then, in the
early ’70s, “Dalit” became a symbol of the new militant movement of
the oppressed, with the formation of the Dalit Panthers in
Maharashtra, the
Dalit Sangharsh Samiti in Karnataka, and many others. These groups
became involved in struggles against atrocities, sometimes in open
and violent clashes with caste Hindus. The word echoed in numerous
slum and village-based groups that emerged during that period. Its
militancy, its open proclamation of oppression, attracted youth
restless under the scorn of the so-called “upper” castes, ready to
fight. It became generalised, and used even in newspaper reports. It
is, after all, a more colourful expression than the cold and
official sounding “Scheduled Caste”. And, the Dalit Panther
manifesto proclaimed that “Dalit” meant “all oppressed”, including
workers and poor peasants. It seemed a fitting term for the new era
of assertion of the various “new social movements” of the ’70s and
’80s.
Yet the use of
“Dalit” has not gone uncontested. For one, Kanshi Ram rejected it
when he formed his Bahujan Samaj Party, though he earlier had used
it with DS-4, the Dalit Shoshit Samaj Sangh, as a militant
organisation. For his political party, however, he wanted to
formulate a wider appeal, and though the Dalit Panthers had given a
broad meaning to the term, still it had come to be used in practice
only for the Scheduled Castes. “Bahujan”, meaning literally
“majority” (and with some echoes from Buddhism, bahujan hitaya,
bahujan sukaya), was meant to be used for SCs, STs, OBCs and
minorities. Thus, in all his various disputes with other parties (in
particular the Republican Parties based mainly in
Maharashtra),
Kanshi Ram insisted that his was not in fact only a “Dalit” party.
Some of the more
militant Buddhists don’t like the term. Yashwant Manohar, a writer
from
Maharashtra,
said once, “Call me Buddhist, call me Mahar, call me Naga, anything
but Dalit!” It was its negative connotations that were rejected.
Many of these Dalits wanted a broader, more positive identity, that
moved beyond tradition; for this reason some have adopted the term
“Buddhist” in preference to any word implying a caste
identification.
Today, in
addition, with many disputes arising among the various castes of
ex-Untouchables, and with the formerly “weaker” SCs asserting
themselves in new ways, it seems clear that an all-embracing “Dalit”
identity is being rejected by many. The pendulum seems to be
swinging back to a caste identification. The conflict between the
Malas and Madigas in Andhra is only the most stark example, but
similar tensions are seen in north India, between the large and
powerful Chamar group and slightly smaller (but still very
widespread) castes such as the Valmikis, and in Maharashtra between
Mahars and Matangas. In Tamil Nadu, the former Pallars began
asserting themselves as DKVs, “Devendra Kula Vanniyars”. “Is Dalit
unity possible?” has become an important question and it is quite
likely that most of the former Untouchables would simply identify
themselves by their caste names.
It is difficult
to predict the future, but “Harijan” definitely seems to be out for
the conscious and assertive youth, while the ambiguity about caste
identities and an all-embracing “Dalit” identity remains. “Dalit”
remains the most useful inclusive term and — strikingly — in some
ways the least controversial.
Changing
terminology should surprise no one. In the US, the oppressed group
once known as “Negroes” or “Coloured People” (remember the National
Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, founded by none
other than the militant W.E.B. Du Bois) moved to a preference for
“Black” in the ’60s and ’70s, to the less colour-conscious, more
ethnic oriented “African-American” today. Mobile social groups,
finally, chose their own identities, and that is what the former
Untouchables, the Dalits, the oppressed sections of
India,
will do.
 Gail Omvedt, a
sociologist, is the author of Dalits and the Democratic Revolution
(1994), Buddhism in
India:
Challenging Brahmanism and Caste (2003) and Ambedkar: Towards an
Enlightened
India
(2004) and many other books. She is currently a Fellow In Residence
at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla. Her latest book
Seeking Begumpura: The Social Vision of Anti-Caste Intellectuals,
focuses on the worldviews of subaltern visionaries spanning five
centuries—Chokhamela, Janabai, Kabir, Ravidas, Tukaram, the
Kartabhajas, Phule, Iyothee Thass, Pandita Ramabai, Periyar and
Ambedkar. She charts the development of their utopian visions and
the socioeconomic characteristics of the societies conceived through
this long period. She is a major voice on issues of gender,
environment and rural development. The WSN salutes the spirit of
this US-born sociologist and human being par excellence who has
given her life to the cause of emnacipation of those suppressed for
centuries by the ugly system of Brahamanism that continues to rule
Indian society. This particular piece first appeared in the Indian
Express, and is being published courtesy that paper. Of course, WSN
has also obtained permission of the author to reproduce the piece.
29
July, 2008
|
Read Also
