Another study in the book ‘Blocked by Caste: Economic Discrimination and Social Exclusion in Modern India’ published in 2010 reports discrimination in Public Distribution System (PDS). fair price shops, are either owned privately or run by cooperatives.
An analysis by Thorat and Lee, drawing on a survey of PDS outlets in 531 villages across five States, shows that there was discriminatory behaviour against Dalits by the PDS staff in respect of prices in 28 per cent of villages and in respect of quality in 40 per cent. In 26 per cent of the villages, dealers practised untouchability “by dropping goods from above into cupped Dalit hands below, so as to avoid ‘polluting contact’.”
Check also – Caste Discrimination in Jobs at Private Sector. What is the caste of your company?
What Brahmin Scriptures Say about Beef Eating? #EatBeef
Read also – What Dr. Ambedkar Said about Beef Eating and Brahmins
Check also – Few posters against beef ban
For those who say there is no caste discrimination in private job market.
Book “Blocked by Caste: Economic Discrimination and Social Exclusion in Modern India” published in 2010 reports an experiment –
Thorat and Attewell ran an experiment to test caste discrimination in the urban labour market. For one year, researchers collected advertisements from leading English language newspapers for jobs in the private sector that required a university degree but no specialised skills. The researchers then submitted three false applications for each job. The applicants, all male, had the same or similar education qualification and experience. One of them had a recognisable upper caste Hindu name, another a Muslim name and the third a distinctly Dalit name. The expected outcome was a call for interview or further screening.
An analysis of the outcomes, using regression methods, showed that, although there were an equal number of false applicants from three social groups, for every 10 upper caste Hindu applicants selected for interview, only six Dalits and three Muslims were chosen. Thus, in modern private enterprises (including IT), applicants with a typical Muslim or Dalit name had a lower chance of success than those with the same qualification and an upper caste Hindu name.
For more detail read book named – BLOCKED BY CASTE, ECONOMIC DISCRIMINATION IN MODERN INDIA: Edited by Sukhadeo Thorat, Katherine S. Newman; Oxford University Press
Here is what Dr. Ambedkar noted almost a century ago, nothing has changed since then.
A much needed website (www.castediscrimination.com) has been launched by Dalits to record and highlight caste discrimination at educational institutions with the tagline of
Exposing Brahminism One Post at Time
One doesn’t need to stay silent now on the discrimination one is facing at the educational spaces. This website is one of its kind where one can report the caste discrimination. The website is another step toward raising voice against injustice and establishing equality in the society. Website’s aim and motto is –
…is an attempt to get real-time data of present and past instances of structural caste discrimination in higher education. Our hope is to track data that the Indian government has been lax in collecting but also to change the narrative from pathologizing Dalit Bahujan students to understanding how caste apartheid operates on our campuses.
One can report the caste discrimination by sending email to firstname.lastname@example.org or by simply filling the form on the website. The website was launched yesterday and many people have started reporting the caste discrimination happening at the colleges.
Every new website, photo, article or anything that challenges the Brahminical hegemony is important for us and should be spread as much as possible. Please share this website with others so that no other Rohith faces discrimination in the hands of casteist people.
Don’t be silent and report the caste discrimination!
Here are a few more screen-shots of the website.
Written by Nijam Gara
The brewing Kapu agitation today and the recent Hardik Patel led agitation for BC (Backward Class) status for Patidars (Patels) in Gujarat has reignited passions and stirred up debates about reservations again. The word “reservation” is a very charged term and evokes strong emotions in the country. It typically refers to constitutionally guaranteed protections and preferential treatment given to historically oppressed sections of the society – dalits (Scheduled castes i.e. SCs), tribals (STs) and ‘BCs’. The idea of such reservations is to help create a modicum of equal opportunity in the overwhelmingly unequal Indian society. Anybody with a rational, historical understanding of Hindu caste system should recognize that the classes that enjoy the true ‘reservations’ are not the SCs, STs and BCs but the upper castes and the well-to-do Sudhras with thousands of years of ‘reserved’ access to land, wealth and exclusive control of every aspect of economy and Hindu society. Those hereditary rights guaranteed by Manuvadi system have assured their continued hegemony in to the 21st century.
The History of Reservation
The concepts of government, jobs and inclusivity in British India led to the idea of bringing the hitherto ignored sections in to the ‘mainstream’. Reservations to oppressed castes were subsequently first introduced in British India in the background of movements organized by Jyothirao Phule, Periyar, etc. and also espoused strongly in princely states such as Travancore and Kolhapur (Shahu Maharaja, the real Chatrapathi). The year 1933 marked a flashpoint in the history of caste-based reservations when the British government introduced the Communal Award with separate electorates for Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and more importantly, Dalits. Ambedkar supported this but the ‘father’ of the nation (Gandhi) vociferously opposed it. Eventually, Ambedkar had to concede to Gandhi’s blackmail and Dalits remained under the Hindu fold albeit with reserved seats within. Following the adoption of the constitution in post-independent India, reservations to SCs, STs were formalized. OBC reservations were haphazardly implemented later on. The 1953 Kalelkar Commission and the 1980 Mandal Commission reports came up with the suggestion of 70% and 52% reservations for OBCs respectively but the ultimate number was set at 27% in 1992 following a court verdict a few years after the nation witnessed bloody street violence with anti-reservation sentiments touching a chord with the upper caste youth. Even this 27% reservation is not rightfully implemented in several sectors with a report in 2010 showing that only 7% of civil service positions in the country were filled with OBCs. Reservations are certainly a great tool of affirmative action that have helped scores of dalit, tribal and BC families leap out of poverty. However, for every educated dalit, tribal or OBC, there appear to be a million others who don’t even make the cut to qualify for these reservations. Thus, reservations are only one mode of support and rather an imperfect means to the end goal i.e. decimation of caste structure. True social reform is only feasible with a much deeper cleansing of the Hindu society which appears almost impossible today. How many centuries of reservations can counteract the economic power that is concentrated in the upper castes today across India? How many dalit entrepreneurs will it take to match the clout enjoyed by Kamma industrialists, reddy landlords, etc, etc? Why is a Rahul Gandhi or a Brahminized Narendra Modi (does it really matter if he is theoretically a BC?) a readily acceptable PM candidate but not a Mayawathi or Lalu Yadav?
Last week, I asked on Twitter that are you Non-casteist or Anti-casteism? (Non-Casteist = Don’t discriminate Anti-Casteism = Want whole caste system end)
I was overwhelmed by the response. 939 people voted with 30% saying they are non-castiest and rest 70% saying they want whole caste system to end. This result can be biased as most of my Twitter followers are from Dalit community so they want whole caste system to end. Maybe, same was represented in the poll results.
Now, the question is is being non-casteist just enough? 30% non-casteist, do they feel comfortable with discrimination happening to others? Following are the usual responses that I hear from most of the upper castes –
I don’t discriminate.
I won’t discriminate.
I never discriminated.
I am not casteist.
I can’t discriminate.
… and the list goes on and on.
Why even after 2000 years this caste based discrimination is there? Maybe because people in power tend to turn blind eye on caste discrimination. Because they are non-casteist (maybe) not anti-casteist.
Even if you are non-casteist, Dalits are still being discriminated, Dalits are still being raped, killed etc. It is not enough that you are non-casteist. You turning blind eye (being non-casteist) to caste discrimination is not going to change anything in society, Dalits will still be killed, discriminated. Most of Indians don’t get angry seeing caste discrimination; it has become a part of people’s lives in India and till we won’t get angry seeing caste discrimination, there won’t be any change in the society. Get angry and fight against caste based discrimination.
If we want any change, we need to stop being non-casteist to anti-casteism.
What you guys think? Let me know in the comments.
5 February 1951: Hindu Code bill was introduced in the Parliament
Following India’s independence Jawaharlal Nehru entrusted his first Law Minister Dr. Ambedkar, who belonged to the Scheduled Caste Federation, with the task of codifying the Hindu personal law as the first step towards a uniform civil code. Dr. Ambedkar formed a committee with himself as its chairperson. The other members were K Y Bhandarkar. G R Rajagopal of the Ministry of Law and S V Gupte of the Bombay Bar. The committee made only minor revisions to the draft that was presented to the Consituent Assembly in 1947 before Independence. But even before the bill could be put up to the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) some vocal sections of Hindu public opinion raised the bogey ‘Hinduism in danger’. Dr. Ambedkar and his team, however, was undaunted and continued with their efforts with all seriousness and presented the draft bill to Nehru’s cabinet, which unanimously approved it. Emboldened by this exercise, on 5 February 1951 he introduced the bill to the Parliament. But to his utter surprise, many Hindu members, including some who had approved it in the cabinet earlier, now resisted it. Sardar Patel as the home minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, Syama Prasad Mookerjee as the industry minister who belonged to the Hindu Mahasabha, and Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, a tradionalist Congressman, strongly opposed the bill. Pattabhi Sitaramayya, the Congress president, also opposed it, particularly keeping in view its negative impacts on Hindu votes in the election of 1951-52. Mookerjee said it would ’shatter the magnificent structure of Hindu culture and stultify a dynamic and catholic way of life that had wonderfully adapted itself to the changes for centuries’. Even women belonging to the Hindu Mahasabha came to the forefront to oppose the bill. Already a year ago, in a long letter to President Rajendra Prasad, Janakibai Joshi, the President of the All India Hindu Women’s Conference that belonged to the Hindu Mahasabha, had written on 4 February 1950 that any move to replace the concept of Hindu marriage as sacrament by making it contractual would destroy the entire family system of the Hindus. ‘The Hindu family should be taken as a unit and fragmentation of the property should not be allowed so as to go away to other family through daughter’.
Check also – 5th February (1988) in Dalit History – Remembering Dalits’ fight to get publish Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Books