Caste and crisis of fraternity

The Tamil Nadu Leader of Opposition, Udhayanidhi Stalin, made a controversial remark in the legislative assembly when he said Sanatana Dharma needed to be eradicated because it divides people. Faced with severe backlash, he later clarified through a post on X: ‘‘… I said the caste system that divides people must be abolished. Some people criticise me for this… When I say that the caste system should be abolished, it does not mean that no one should go to the temple. It means that everyone should have equal rights, not only in the temple but also in society.”

The remarks underline the stark reality of the persistence of jaati (caste) in Indian society. While the existence and persistence of caste are well known, B R Ambedkar’s idea of social democracy and its role in building an egalitarian society need emphasis. The supremacy of caste has extended beyond the comprehension of the human mind due to the hegemonic and ideological politics of successive governments. 

The persistence of caste supremacy, to the extent of undermining the credibility and legitimacy of institutions, such as the Supreme Court and the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), is a serious concern. Such incidents are symptoms of deeply rooted caste-based discrimination and marginalisation.

The continuation of caste discrimination is a disgrace to the country’s social development. Economic empowerment alone is insufficient to alleviate caste-based discrimination.

This could be one of the reasons why Ambedkar emphasised the need for social democracy to sustain political democracy. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste is a seminal work advocating the abolition of caste discrimination and the rightful inclusion of socially and economically disadvantaged sections of society.

The political values of equality and, most significantly, fraternity are in serious danger given the prevailing intolerance and the politics surrounding it. The normalisation of social violence is antithetical to liberty, democracy, and, more importantly, social democracy.

The dialectical relationship between the institution of caste and its continuing salience perpetuates occupation-based inequalities, as reflected in the suppression or under-reporting of data on deaths of workers engaged in manual scavenging. 

There has been a systematic erosion of the practices of equality and fraternity, driven by the uniformity of political ideology that seeks to establish a society based on the majoritarian values. These attacks send a message to those who disagree with the dominant political ideology, wherein caste and caste politics continue to operate in ways that sustain entrenched power relations. 

The persistence of caste-based discrimination is centuries old. Seventy-six years after India became a republic, the anti-discrimination policies enshrined in its Constitution stand in contrast to ideological and hegemonic politics. Antonio Gramsci rightly observed that democratic republics often provide greater scope for hegemonic politics than for emancipatory politics. 

Fraternity, which Ambedkar regarded as a foundational political value in the context of caste-based discrimination in India, assumes even greater importance today. His clarion call for the annihilation of caste and the establishment of social democracy must become urgent national goals, not merely constitutional ideals.

Ambedkar’s conception of social democracy is a true reflection of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and this vision must be taken seriously by policymakers and the executive for effective implementation. Among the trinity of political values—equality, liberty, and fraternity—it is fraternity that forms the basis upon which equality and liberty can truly be realised. 

Having constitutional provisions to prevent discrimination in all forms, along with rising demands for affirmative action from increasingly influential communities, presents a real paradox. The growing demand for reservations risks diluting the spirit of Ambedkar’s vision of social democracy. The persistence of caste and the politics surrounding reservations among communities contradict Ambedkar’s call for the annihilation of caste. The contradiction between economic prosperity and socio-political divisions calls for coherent and inclusive public policies to address these inherent limitations. 

The dismantling of caste discrimination requires a collective consciousness among the nation and its people. Restructuring and revitalising the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy (CSSEIP), along with Ambedkar Chairs in universities —central, state, deemed and private—is imperative. 

(The writer is an assistant professor at the Symbiosis Law School, Symbiosis International [Deemed University], Pune)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.