09 July, 2012

The Den Of Ignorance


M.S.Swaminathan believes that Indian agriculture will receive a big boost if the country takes advantage of its young population and woos them into the farm sector by making it lucrative. My own desire will make him happy as I am a passed out of Anna university who hated to sit in the campus interview waiting to be picked up by any random IT company. Though my grades might have not impressed the interviewers greatly, I still rejected that chance of even trying and let the way for my gut feeling to try what M.S.Swaminathan always loved – Farming. Being a chennaite from my childhood, I bid adieu to the city life and moved to my mother’s native village ready to till the soil. My younger sibling who passed away few years back was buried there. So emotionally my mother’s village was clearly the choice for me.  This village had a tinge of town outlook with few developments like railway station, bus stand and good roads but still it retained the typical Indian village sceneries- paddy fields, banyan and mango trees, bullock carts etc and adding to its beauty – mountains, forest and the monkeys for which it is famous for.

During the last few days before the end of April, Draupadi Amman Temple festival started in our village. Puzzled with its inauguration date as I remembered coming to the village during my childhood days to see the temple festival only during the summer holidays of May, I enquired my grandma. She said that the festival I am referring will also happen in May this year but the one happening right now is different. Confused again, I questioned her the rationale behind two festivals on consecutive months for the same village. Her reply depicted the classic explanation of the stratification in our Indian villages. It seems that the festival that is happening in April is for the so-called ‘upper’ castes and their gods and the one that comes in May is for the so-called ‘lower’ castes and their gods. More to the agony, the chariot that carried the gods of ‘upper’ cast failed to come to our street though it went through many nook and corners of the village. The reason- our street is in the ‘colony’ away from the main village and in the ‘colony’ only ‘lower’ castes live. Gods might have wanted to come but sadly the men who carried their chariot dissented with the gods.
Keeping the festival issue aside, few weeks back, my uncle’s close friend who also lived in the same village died. His death made me to remember my younger sibling who is sleeping forever inside the cemetery at the southern side of the village. I said to him though he will never hear me and I will never see him that “here comes another mortal being to give you company from today”. But my uncle’s friend was carried to the northern side of the village. It seems that there is another cemetery there meant only for the ‘upper’ castes. That night, in my hallucination, my brother was upset with me asking where is his companion who was to come that day.

Coming back to the festival issue, on its closing day, the village panchayat head has to honour those who lavishly donated money for celebrating the gods of ‘upper’ caste. What happened on the stage was the gestural attack on the panchayat raj system of the Indian democracy. As my village panchayat is reserved for women to contest and only women contested in the election held to it last year and for sure only a woman won the election to become the panchayat head but surprisingly who came on the stage claiming the place of the panchayat head was a man. I asked the villager standing next to me who the man was. “The village panchayat head” was the reply. "Then what happened to the lady who won the panchayat election last year?”  I enquired. “Well, that’s his wife” said the villager pointing towards the same man on the stage who is in place of the village head, her wife. Cunningly smart! A brilliant way to bypass the reservation of seats for women in the panchayat elections. Allowing the wife to contest and win in the election for rule sake and her husband becoming the “real” head of the village in every sense.

“What is the village but a sink of localism, a den of ignorance, narrow-mindedness and communalism”.The haranguer was B.R.Ambedkar. I vent out my thoughts not to justify the conviction of him. But after being in my village, I can see the truth in his words.

May be the Architect of the Indian constitution is not there to reform my village. But the MP, MLA and the Collector under whose jurisdiction my village comes definitely could help. Route for them- Banavaram, Arakonam  taluk, Vellore district. That’s where my village is socially rottening.

Is your native a village? Is that place has separate temples and festivals for humans labelled as ‘lower’ and ‘upper’ castes? Does really a woman heads its panchayat if it is reserved for women constitutionally? Now, with the answers in your mind if you think your village is rotten too, do inform to your constituency’s MP, MLA or the Collector. Believe me, there are some good politicians and bureaucrats who could bring the changes needed and truly I am not cracking a joke.

As the name board shows, this village in karur district is still unprepared to accept its women leader, Mrs.Sivakami.













01 April, 2012

Article 15 And 17 Of The Indian Constitution

Article 15- This article prohibits the “State” from discriminating any individual on the grounds of ‘only’ of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.

The fallout of this is, art.15 prohibits the state from discriminating any individual on the grounds of ‘only’ caste.

1.Does/ Should art.15  also prohibits the “Individual” from discriminating any individual on the grounds of ‘only’ of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.
Does/ Should art.15  also prohibits the “Individual” from discriminating any individual on the grounds of ‘only’ caste?
Yes, it prohibits such discrimination → 2nd question and 3rd question                                                                            
No, it doesn’t prohibits. The individual can discriminate on their own subjective basis. Law can only prevent such discrimination. It can’t force an individual to change if his attitude involves such discrimination → 3rd question

2. Then how come individuals are free to openly search for their life partners using public media under the clear headings of their caste names(referring to Matrimonial sections). Aren’t they discriminating ‘mainly’ on the basis of caste alone though other additional reasons exists? Give your views.

3.Then do you feel that the individual is suffering from harmful and immoral beliefs(conviction) of discriminating others ‘mainly’ on caste basis?
No, the individual is not having any immoral belifs → 4th question and 5th question                                                                                                      
Yes, the individual is having immoral belifs →5th question

4. Explain your views

5. Isn’t matrimonial, in most cases, facilitates negative discrimination of caste than other positive reasons(like culture related) of caste. Is State has the right/power ‘not’ to promote those platforms which further facilitates the individual to discriminate negativelyon caste basis?
No to both→6th question                                                                                                                           Yes to both →7th question

6. By this idleness, isn’t State ensuring the continuance of inequality in the society through such discrimination. Explain your views.

7.Then why can’t State prohibit/ban those ways in matrimonials which ‘primarily’ and ‘negatively’ discriminate on the basis of caste alone? (The advertisements for groom/bride preferences is given under the clear headings of different caste names. Hence Caste is the ‘primary’ basis for discrimination under such advertisements. And for example, if a Brahmin advertises further under his sub caste, isn’t that further promote ‘negative’ discrimination (and further unwanted divisions) as the variation of culture(which is otherwise justified to be considered with caste as a positive criteria) within Brahmins as a community  is very less). Give your views.   

Based on your above answers, proceed further.

In matrimonial, when an individual searches for his life partner he expresses his wishes of how her life partner should be. By doing so, he includes caste as one of his criteria. It is only an ‘additional’ criteria (Art.15 is not violated) when he gives such advertisements in the matrimonial. Do you agree to this?

Yes, Caste requisite is only an additional criteria. The main expectation he is expecting from his life partner may be certain educational qualifications, financial stability, kindness etc  → 8th question               

No, Caste requisite is the main criteria (or one of the main criteria). This is evident from the fact that the advertisement is given under the heading of his caste name (culture as a reason to nullify this statement is unjustified as the culture he expects includes within its fold few other related sub-castes also. With this as the case, why can’t he include those sub-caste which goes completely congruent to his caste(culture wise) in his preference list. Isn’t his act of ignoring those congruent sub-castes in his matrimonial advertisement tells that culture as the reason for him to consider caste is not true. There is some true ‘negative’ discrimination with caste as the criteria but he escapes under the cover of reasoning- culture associated with castes → 9th question

8. If it is so, why he gives his advertisement under the heading of his caste name. Isn’t that makes caste as the main/primary (or one of the main/primary) criteria?
Yes, It makes caste as the ‘primary’ criteria → 9th question                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        The individual gave his advertisement under his caste name as that is the usual procedure in matrimonial advertisements → 9th question                                                                                                                
No, It doesn’t makes caste as the ‘primary’ criteria → 10th question    
                                                             
9. If it is so, isn’t this act of individual and the matrimonial section’s established norm of giving advertisement under the caste name violating the “letter and the spirit of the law” as given under article 15? Give your views (and remedies, if your answer is ‘yes’ to the question).

10. Give your views.

Few other questions:

11. Isn’t matrimonial, in most cases, facilitates negative discrimination of caste than the other culture related positive/acceptable reasons that caste can deliver?

12. Discriminating on the grounds of ‘only’ caste.                                                              Discriminating with caste as the ‘main’ criteria (along with other positive reasons that may or may not be equally significant to caste as the ‘main’ criteria)
 Can you say that the wrong intent in both as one and the same? Does article 15 prohibits both?

13. If a person advertises in the matrimonial with caste as the ‘only’ criteria, does law prohibits it? Can one say this as the ‘discrimination’ on the basis of ‘only’ caste?

14. Does/ Should article 17(abolition of untouchabilty) also includes abolition of caste? If  not why?

15. In your words, define Untouchability (a Comprehensive definition).

16. The constitution didn’t define untouchability but supreme court has defined it. Can we consider untouchability as a discrimination both in physical and mental form while answering the following  question?
If discrimination on the basis of caste is ‘negative’ and is harmful, can it be included under the connotation of untouchability? If  Yes, shouldn’t caste be abolished to the extent it promote such ‘negative’ discrimination (i.e untouchability)

16. Is caste division the basis and one of the reason  for introduction of reservation system? Can it be argued that it is unjustifiable to remove reservation system leaving behind the caste system to continue?
If it is seen that caste has some positive functional role and it is absurd to take steps to eradicate it since it carries some negatives with it, then shouldn’t there be laws that clearly and strictly prohibits any kind of ‘negative’ and harmful discrimination that flows out of caste. And can we say that at present there is loopholes in laws which facilitates such ‘negative’ discrimination toexist and occur (Matrimonial is a classic example where many go for caste preference with irrational reasonings in their mind but still remain under the cover that their preference of caste is only an additional criteria)?

17. If abolition of caste hasn’t been included in the constitution since such caste based discrimination may not be always in unacceptable manner read the news report attached here (http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=365814&catid=35&show=archive&year=2011&month=4&day=13&Itemid=66) and proceed further.

Isn’t even the efficient activists (politicians) who have a great role in the politicization of caste is agreeing through the protest mentioned in the news article that caste is now totally a negative word as they are condemning even the mere use of caste names while referring to national leaders or ‘any other individual’.

If caste names have become “not to be used” kind of word, isn’t it is high time to go for abolition of caste (which will also provide a strong reason to remove reservation in the near future). Just keep outside the thought of possibility of such thing to happen and give your views to this question