Tipos y características principales de los ROA

1 he Prime Minister, in his musings from Goa, played a trick with secularism and his comrade Ashok Singhal put it in the air as he said that the VHP's next target was secularism. Most of the Dalit-Bahujans also have their own ambiguities with the notion of secularism in the form that it operates in India. Many do not seem to understand what it is and do not know how to relate to it. While there is clarity about Hindutva and its negative impact on the Dalit-Bahujans, a serious debate about secularism in relation to anti-caste movements has to take place.

Secularism as a notion emerged out of the writings of Machiavelli and others who followed him. In Machiavellian discourses it con- noted a meaning that politics must be separated from religion. In Machiavelli's time Italy was a nation of one religion—Christianity— hence his main problem was how to separate the then all-pervasive religion from politics. Even to achieve that goal he suggests that the political realm must adopt methods of both the 'lion' and the 'fox'. In Britain even after the emergence of a mature democracy, for a long time a total separation of politics from religion did not take place. Places of worship existed in and around the houses of Parlia- ment and parliamentarians decided the course of their politics in them, only implementing their decisions through parliamentary means. However, the notion of secularism pushed the political realm towards independence as religion's control over the political system was reduced. A systematic discourse on secularism gradually led to

Secularism: The Predicament of OBCs 77

the separation of religious from political authority, then to a subordi- nation of the religious authority to the political one. In that situation secularism made sense to people who were both inside religion and outside it.

In several countries where civil society was becoming multi-reli- gious the secular state acted as a neutral and balancing agent and concentrated on promoting economic development. Thus, clear-cut classes emerged and class conflicts led to class wars. In many coun- tries these class wars took the shape of civil wars as well. The resolu- tion of these conflicts eventually led to social equality and economic development in those countries, though initially there was blood- shed, prejudice and bad feeling. Secularism could negotiate with multi-religious class societies which were otherwise fairly uncompli- cated, but the question is, does it have the necessary understanding to negotiate with a caste-centred multi-religious society like India? India is not only a country of several religions but also of mutually exclusive castes as well.

T h e concept of secularism in the European sense separates reli- gion from politics but does not ask for a separation of caste from poli- tics simply because European secularism did not encounter caste at all. T h e Nehruvian secularism that became the model in India did not separate caste from politics, and consequently while being secu- lar in religious terms, one could quite comfortably remain brahminic ail through the Nehruvian era. More significant was that the state could be rendered brahminic in the name of secularism. This para- digm has not shifted even subsequently.

T h e Left had adopted secularism as an unavoidable ideal in the Indian context without altering its received European definition in any sense. Ambedkar, however, tried to read the direction which secularism was likely to take in India. He seemed to have thought that one could not be an upper caste Hindu and pretend to be secular at the same time. One could not practise untouchability and claim to be a secularist. For Hinduism is not a spiritually democratic religion like Buddhism, Christianity and Islam. Hinduism is in essence com- munalism operating through the invisible hand of caste. Those who have been suffering at its hands know that casteism is the worst form of communalism. In that sense secularism in India always remained a cover for the caste operations of the Indian brahminical elite. Be- cause Ambedkar de-essentialized secularism the Dalits chose Bud- dhism and Christianity as instruments both of spiritual liberation and

78 Orr Caste

of political empowerment. As of now the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) have no idea how to engage with the project of secularism. Neither the Congress nor the communist parties have been able to evolve as caste-free secular political platforms. Secularism thus is not a de-casteizing agency, but rather operates as a protective cover for the 'casteocracy' of Brahminism. T h e Dalit-Bahujans do not know how to handle the casteocratic politics that have sustained the hegemony of Brahminism under the guise of secularism.

The only weapon that the Dalit-Bahujans have at their disposal is caste that is turned into a fighting category. When they began to use this as an instrument of social and political empowerment the secular theoreticians quite strangely blamed the victims themselves. They did not see caste in their own 'enclosed secularism' but when the victims of caste sought to use caste as Marxian workers used class out of their self-realization, as happened in the case of European workers, they were heckled, cajoled and construed as uncivilized.

There is this talk of secularism being the only alternative for the present morass of the Indian polity. But what does that mean to the OBCs who want some space in all national structures? During the whole phase of the secular Nehruvian polity, the OBCs were not allowed to grow in any structure. The Dalits acquired some space in that secular polity because they challenged Hindu reli- gion and began to construct themselves as a religious minority at the same time as they began to move into Buddhism and Chris- tianity. T h e secular parties are entering into a crisis with Hindutva recruiting more and more OBCs, first as muscle men and later as minor partners of state power.

Secularism recognizes communities that are organized into reli- gious communities but it does not recognise caste communities like the OBCs who neither have spiritually integrated space in Hinduism, nor have a historical vision of constructing their own religion that can negotiate a space for themselves in the secularist polity. They had some hopes of the reservation agenda but they were punctured by economic globalization and Hinduization of the polity. The Mandal agenda was subverted by both secularists and communalists as both groups saw the danger of the upper castes being replaced from all spheres of hegemony.

T h e brahminic castes that were controlling the political economy of the nation were willing to accommodafe the Dalits in

Secularism: The Predicament of OBCs 79

certain spheres but they were not willing to accommodate the OBCs as that would take the casteocracy to its logical end. Before the OBCs started asking for a share in the national cake, the na- tional cake was shared by the dwija castes like Brahmins and Banias and some Sudra upper castes. If the OBCs that constitute a vast majority of the population join that casteocracy, brahminic hegemony slowly but surely gets sidelined. In the Congress, ex- cept Sonia Gandhi, who does not have her own caste roots, the old guard is conditioned by upper caste feudalism. Sonia Gandhi does not seem to have the necessary conviction and strategy to set aside the upper caste feudals and fill the party with an OBC, SC and ST leadership which would have given a new meaning to its secular- ism in the face of the rise of Hindutva.

T h e communist leaders are suffering from their caste baggage and cannot think of a caste-secular party in the near future. They have not shown any initiative in de-casteizing the party. T h e com- munist parties' growth in India has been casteocratic and the OBCs do not seem to look up to them. This is a tragedy in itself but upper caste communist leaders seem to be willing to celebrate this politi- cal tragedy indefinitely.

Secularism in itself is not an alternative to a stagnant caste soci- ety, even one that is showing symptoms of social awareness and ask- ing for socio-political and spiritual equality. When communalism is offering its own mode of anti-Islamic and anti-Christian social engi- neering by deploying OBCs as muscle power, secularism cannot ap- pear as an alternative to these forces. T h e upper castes within the secular camp occasionally talk about social justice as the integrative process of secularism. Let us not forget the fact that social justice is a concept that has emerged in the European context in order to ad- dress gender, environmental and ecological questions. Social justice does not resolve the historical question of caste. For this a major cri- tique of Hinduism, not just Hindutva, has to take place. The upper caste intellectuals in the Congress and communist parties are not willing to do that.

T h e theoretical position of secularists, namely, the Sangh Parivar that is guilty of equating Hinduism with Hindutva, is beg- ging the question. T h e Dalit-Bahujans expect a radical position on annihilation of caste and they want real results in real life. Unfortu- nately there is no communist critique of Hinduism and the reli-

80 Orr Caste

gious ideologies that have emerged in India. In a country like In- dia atheism does not work as a widely applicable social position. A serious debate on spiritual democracy and spiritual fascism as they are operating in the world in general and India in particular must take place. Otherwise there exists the danger not merely of Gujarat being replicated everywhere but of a full-scale religious civil war gripping the country.