Is it state policy to promote casteism?

Two new schemes announced by the Karnataka government, ostensibly to help poor Brahmin women, go against the spirit of the Constitution and violate all good norms and standards of public policy. The schemes, to be launched by the Brahmin Development Board, are intended to give financial assistance to women of the community to get married. One scheme offers Rs 25,000 for marriage of women from economically weak families of the community.

Under the other scheme, women who marry priests from the community will be given Rs 3 lakh. These schemes add to some existing ones that provide assistance to persons who want to be trained in pooja and other rituals and to provide scholarships to students from a poor background.

There is no good reason for the State to formulate and promote specific programmes for particular communities except those provided for by the Constitution, like reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and backward castes. Brahmins do not belong to the socially and educationally backward classes and there is no need to create special schemes for them, except schemes like scholarships to help further education among the financially backward among them. It may be recalled that the Siddaramaiah government had run similar social schemes for religious minorities, which Yediyurappa had rightly criticised.

But the latter has now set up special development boards for many communities on the basis of caste, which is wrong, too. State policy should not be aimed at separate communities, it should be aimed at society as a whole and promote the welfare of all people. Nurturing of separate communities will increase divisiveness and disunity. It is bad politics and governance, and Karnataka has gone too far on this wrong road.

The government is reinforcing casteism and casteist attitudes through the two schemes. There is no justification for only Brahmin women to be given financial support for marriage, and it is worse when they are rewarded for marrying Brahmin priests. If women are reluctant to marry priests for any reason, it is not for the government to increase their attractiveness and eligibility with a financial dole for the brides.

Caste is perpetuated through marriage and breaking the link between the two is key to breaking casteism, a key aspiration of the Constitution. It is those who marry outside their caste who should actually be rewarded. The social reform movements of the past tried to eradicate caste, but their gains are being devalued and frittered away now. There is not even the insincere claim to work for a casteless society, and we are openly and unapologetically on a retrograde course to a deeply and flagrantly casteist past.