Prachi Patil

Speech made at the protest organised by United OBC Forum and BAPSA on 9th June, 2016 against the discriminatory Anti-OBC Reservation circular of UGC/MHRD which denies OBC reservations in Faculty Recruitments and Promotions.

Jai Bhim Friends,

I will only take a few minutes of your time. Speakers before me have placed their important points on the issues of OBC reservation in Higher Education and Faculty Recruitment and spoken about the new Anti-OBC Reservation circular by UGC/MHRD. I will specifically talk about the condition of SC/ST/OBC women's representation in academic spaces, be it as students or as professors. Friends, few days back I was reading an article titled 'Dalit Feminist Standpoint' and when I read the author's name I found that the author was a Brahman woman! So you can see for yourself the condition of SC/ST/OBC women.

What is the reason that a Dalit woman is not allowed to write about her own standpoint in the academic spaces and that standpoint is written by upper-caste or Brahman women? Friends, I see many upper-castes writing papers and thesis on 'Dalit patriarchy' but someone needs to tell them that Dalit patriarchy is a matter concerning Dalit women and you should leave it to them, Dalit women have been fighting against it since ages. You should talk about your own patriarchy and casteism which you practise against SC/ST/OBC women to keep them out of the academic sphere. I want to question the Savarna women feminists from this platform, you speak of 'sisterhood', you speak of 'gender equality', you speak of 'gender justice', you speak of 33% Women's Reservation Bill, but I want to know why you are silent on the issue of 'reservation within reservation' in the Women's Reservation Bill? I wish to know when will SC/ST/OBC women get representation within the demand of 33% Women's Reservation Bill? Many friends have spoken before me about the reservation for OBC candidates, but let us not forget to include women in this. SC/ST/OBC women must have 50% representation within the SC/ST/OBC reservation.

Read more...

Sardar Ajmer Singh

This article is an excerpt from S. Ajmer Singh's book "Biswi Sadi Ki Sikh Rajneeti: Ek Ghulami Se Dusri Ghulami Tak" (The Sikh Politics of the 20th Century: From One Slavery to Another)

On the circumstances emerging after the partition of Punjab, and the creation of a Self-ruled Sikh state

After the partition of India, there was a significant shuffling of the various classes in proportion to the overall population in East Punjab. The Hindus and Sikhs of Western Punjab and the northwestern border areas were forced to leave their homes and cross the border into the newly formed Indian state. And from this side of the border, the Muslim population of Eastern Punjab moved en masse to West Punjab. The displaced or uprooted Sikh families from Lyallpur, Mintgumri and Sheikhupura came and settled in their ancestral villages in the Jalandhar division. A large part of the displaced Hindu population from Pakistan went and settled in the areas lying on the other side of the river Ghaggar. This shuffling or change in the population severely affected the relations between both the Hindu and Sikh communities. In the total population of East Punjab which stood at 1 crore 25 lakhs, the population of the Hindus reached about 62 percent and the Sikhs about 35 per cent. In this manner, for the first time in the history, the Hindus became a majority in Punjab. Similarly, for the first time in history the Sikh brotherhood achieved a majority in a united area (the areas between the rivers Ravi and Ghaggar).

There is no doubt that the Sikh community suffered a lot, both in terms of lives lost and material losses as a result of the partition of Punjab, but the political avenues that this catastrophe opened up for the Sikh community, is something only an astute mind like Dr. Ambedkar's could properly assess. In February 1948, when a deputation of Sikhs apprised Dr. Ambedkar of the difficulties being faced by the Sikh community due to partition, his researched and prescient reply* was:

Read more...

Radhika Sudhakar

In the Swathi murder case, as mainstream media increasingly plays the role of judge and jury, while evidence gathering, judgement based on facts and adherence to the rule of law takes a back seat, it does immense disservice to the victim's rights as well as the accused's rights. In the process, it also reveals the reinforcement of status quo in caste and patriarchal relationships between people. Radhika examines the socializing processes explicit in the responses to the murder of Swathi and critiques the demands to follow caste supremacist behaviour in gender relations at various levels – individual, family, celebrities, institutions and media. ~ Round Table India

What is the centrality of the multiple advice being given to non-brahmeans in the Swathi murder case? Are the arguments placed by commentators, celebrities included, aimed at abolishing lack of egalitarianism in society or is it to systematize inequality?

If it is not to systematize inequality, then why is it an acceptable argument to build gender parity questions when inherent casteism of the girl's family is not questioned; which incidentally, could be a murder motive too.

The advice thus far given to non-brahmean males are: 1. don't pursue (stalk) women. This, when we do not have evidence that the murdered girl was stalked or there was a relationship interest. 2. "accept no," from women. Accept no at any point in a relationship or out of it, not because we know it is the choice of women, but because there could also have been an unspoken social limitation in the manner of "you are not of my caste," rejection, which can also create violence not to be mixed up as a case of gender violence, which would be an attempt at simplicity and deliberate ignorance and diversion. Unless addressed, there can be no safeguard against this type of violence in a modern society. After all, can we bring up our kids telling them not to fall in love with (someone from) another caste? We are not sure if such advice was given to the murdered girl, but calls for a probe.

Is it fair in these debates to leave unaddressed the creation of a terribly constricted social environment where a healthy mingling of both sexes is prevented through casteism? Why haven't these become debatable points?

Read more...

Sweta Yadav

I have been a student of journalism; technically speaking, I hold a degree in Journalism and consequently have worked in many media houses, but had to resign every time. Sometimes because of the caste based prejudices, other times for not wanting to undermine my principles. In some of these places I also had a good working environment and a good salary but even in those places, many male coworkers and bosses treated me like a sexual object they were lusting after.

Believe it or not, but even today, men find it difficult to accept that there is world where a woman is not just a body, where women are not only successful but prove themselves as competitive co-workers. I remember that at one of these places I was undergoing such an experience and had become emotionally perturbed. Seeing my condition, a woman coworker, in an attempt to counsel me said, "Compromise, you have to lose something to gain something; if you want to live in Delhi and create a name for yourself in this bustling crowd you will have to compromise." My response was, "To lose something doesn't mean to lose dignity and conscience. And as far as recognition goes, the worst would be that I'll be one among the crowd ... that is acceptable to me! But I will never make any such compromise where I lose my dignified life itself!"

And all this was at a place where the culture was considered highly feminist. Here it is important to mention that in the whole organization, I was the only woman who came from the Dalit-Bahujan community. Many of you might disagree and many might get upset. Some might also say, "all this is talk from a bygone era. Where does this happen these days?" You may disagree with both the points I am raising: caste discrimination and gender discrimination. You can deny the existence of both. Please do. But in my eyes, your denial is an act of running away from reality, nothing else!

The greatest risk of sharing personal experiences on a public portal is that you become exposed to a lot of criticism. There is also the risk of character assassination. Not just that, people will bestow you with thousands of unsolicited advice on handling the situation: why didn't you do this, why didn't you complain to the police, you should have hit him back, if you didn't say anything back then why do it now, what did you do at the moment, etc. My intention is not to enumerate what I did or did not do. I'm writing today because there is no fear in me any more. So I thought of sharing with you the discrimination I endured for my caste identity and gender identity. Sometimes even if it isn't our own fault we end up blaming ourselves for it and even punishing ourselves for somebody else's fault.

Read more...

Chitralekha E 

To,

The Honourable Chief Minister of Kerala

Complaint submitted by Chitralekha, Kunjimangalam Village, Edat

Sir,

I am an auto driver belonging to a Scheduled caste community.  I and my family sat on strike (Raapakal samaram) for 122 days outside the Kannur collectorate protesting the casteism and violence that the CPI(M) has unleashed on us for the last 10 years. The district administration could not accept the demands we put forward. Later, after a meeting with the Honourable Chief Minister, he instructed the District Collector to allocate us a 5-cent plot of land in any panchayat near Kannur town. The sketch, plan and the land records of the plot identified for us were made available to us. Thereafter, we ended our strike. Although a year has passed since our demands were accepted, there has been no action whatsoever on the promises that were made. Meanwhile, based on a fake report by CPI(M)-affiliated government employees, the Honourable Chief Minister himself made the  baseless remark that I own acres of land in Edat. I understand this as part of an approach of untouchability practised by the government towards people of the Scheduled Caste communities. Apart from the land granted to my grandmother by the government as ‘hutment-dwelling’ (kudikidappu) rights, the report made by the Honourable District Collector has nowhere mentioned any ‘acres of land’ owned by me. 

Read more...

Sweta Yadav

आज़ाद भारत जी हाँ आज़ाद भारत! सिर्फ आज़ाद ही नहीं बल्कि दुनिया का सबसे बड़ा लोकतान्त्रिक देश | लोकतंत्र का जश्न मानते हुए भारत के नागरिकों को लगभग 68 वर्ष गुजर चुके हैं लेकिन आज भी कुछ सवाल जस का तस हमारे सामने मुह बाए खड़े है | समानता का अधिकार देता हमारा संविधान यह सुनिश्चित करता है की इस देश में रहने वाला प्रत्येक नागरिक एक समान है सभी को सम्मानित जीवन जीने का अधिकार है और किसी भी कारण से यह अधिकार यहाँ के नागरिकों से कोई भी छीन नहीं सकता और यदि कोई भी ऐसा करने का प्रयास करता है तो वह दंड का अधिकारी माना जाएगा तथा उसके लिए संविधान सजा का प्रावधान करता है| भारतीय संविधान की सबसे बड़ी खासियत है, यह एक शब्द जिसे हम “समानता” कहते हैं| यदि इस शब्द को आइन से अलग कर दिया जाए तो हमारा संविधान प्राण विहीन हो जाता है| कुछ शब्द सुनने में जितने अच्छे लगते है उतना ही मुश्किल होता है उन्हें सहजता से जीवन में उतारना कुछ इसी तरह का शब्द है समानता | भारत विभिन्नताओं का देश है यहाँ अलग – अलग जाति, धर्म, बोली और संस्कृति के लोग रहते हैं जिन्हें किसी एक लीक में बांधना मुश्किल है | इतिहास गवाह है की जब-जब इस तरह की कोशिश हुई है तब-तब देश में अशांति फैली है| कुछ ऐसा ही हुआ अयोध्या में | अयोध्या एक लम्बे समय से विवाद का विषय रहा है जिसमें मंदिर -मस्जिद का मुद्दा विवाद का विषय है| भारत में मुस्लिम समुदाय अलप्संख्यक समुदाय है| जिसे कुछ तथाकथित हिंदुत्ववादी लोग इस देश का नहीं मानते हैं और बार-बार उन्हें नुकसान पहुचाने की कोशिश करते हैं| दरअसल यह ब्राह्मणवादी व्यवस्था के वह अभिजात्य लोग हैं जो किसी भी सूरत में अपने वर्चस्व को खोना नहीं चाहते | अपना वर्चस्व कायम रखने के लिए यह किसी भी प्रकार का हथकंडा अपनाने से नहीं चूकते| अपनी स्वार्थ पूर्ति के लिए यह धर्म, राजनीति, समाज, भाषा सभी का इस्तेमाल करते हैं |

6 दिसम्बर 1992 को विवादित स्थल पर कार सेवकों के नाम से बड़ी संख्या में भीड़ इकट्ठी होती है और जय श्री राम और हर-हर महादेव के नारे के साथ देखते ही देखते बाबरी मस्जिद को मलबे में तब्दील कर देती है| आखिर कौन लोग थे यह, कहाँ से आई थी इतनी बड़ी संख्या में भीड़ जो धर्म के नाम पर कुछ भी कर गुजरने को तैयार हो गई| और सबसे बड़ी बात इस विध्वंस के लिए 6 दिसम्बर का ही दिन क्यों चुना गया? इन सवालों के जवाब जानने के लिए हमें भारत की सामजिक संरचना को समझना होगा| भारत में जाति एक बहुत बड़ा मुद्दा है जिसे किसी भी सूरत में नकारा नहीं जा सकता ब्राह्मणवादी शक्तियों को यह किसी भी सूरत में स्वीकार नहीं की निचली समझी जाने वाली जातियों को बराबरी का दर्जा दिया जाए | सवर्ण जातियों के लिए शुद्र का मतलब इन्सान नहीं बल्कि जानवरों से भी बदतर स्थिति का एक ऐसा तबका जो उनके मुलाजिम बन कर रहें | ब्राहमणी सत्ता  के लिए दूसरा सबसे बड़ा खतरा मुसलमान हैं | ब्राह्मणवादी यह कभी नहीं चाहते की इस देश में अल्पसंख्यक और ओबीसी, एससी, एसटी एक हो क्योंकि वह जानते हैं की अगर ये एक साथ मिल गए तो यह बहुसंख्यक की स्थिति में हो जायेंगे, जो की यह अभी भी हैं | इनके एक हो जाने की स्थिति में ब्राह्मणवादी वर्चस्व का सत्ता और समाज में सर्वोपरी बने रहना मुश्किल होगा | जिसके लिए इन्होने विवादित ढाँचे को गिराने का विकल्प चुना | चूँकि 6 दिसंबर डॉ. भीमराव आंबेडकर का परानिर्वाण दिवस है इसलिए इन तत्वों ने इस दिन का चुनाव किया और धर्म के नाम पर हिंदुत्व के नाम पर ओबीसी और दलित लोगों को बाबरी मस्जिद के विध्वंस में शामिल किया | ऐसा कर के इन्होने एक पंथ दो काज किया पहला तो यह की मुस्लिम समाज और ओबीसी समाज में एक दूरी पैदा की और दूसरा यह की इसके लिए 6 दिसम्बर का दिन चुना जिसे दलित बाबा साहब के परानिर्वाण दिवस के रूप में मानते थे उसे बदल कर शौर्य दिवस का रूप देने की कोशिश की | इस विध्वंस के पीछे देश की एक बड़ी राजनितिक पार्टी और उसके सहयोगी दलों का खुला हाथ रहा इतना ही नहीं जिस समय यह शर्मनाक घटना घटी उस वक्त उत्तर प्रदेश में यही पार्टी सत्ता में रही | और आज केंद्र में यही पार्टी पूर्ण बहुमत के साथ सत्ता में है |

Read more...