THE CASTE SYSTEM UPSIDE DOWN BY JOAN P MENCHER PDF

Preview

Summary

Critically evaluate the statement that Indian workforce is not committed to the
Industrial labour....

Description

THE CASTE SYSTEM UPSIDE DOWN BY JOAN P MENCHER In the article, ”The Caste System Upside Down”,Joan Mencher used a bottom up approach to look at the caste system in India.Here she studies the different castes such as Paraiyans,Pallans and Chakkilis in Chingleput district of Tamil Nadu to understand the role of caste system in our society.And while analyzing this article,we can see that caste has functioned and continues to function as a very effective system of economic exploitation and it prevents the castes from creating a commonality of interests or unity of purpose. In this article,she questions the high caste point of view that the low castes accept their position in the society and clearly states that it is the superior economic and political power of the higher castes that led to their supremacy in the society.And this system had also operated with the aim of separating people from one another in a context where they were not allowed to own land and had to serve as a source of agricultural labour.In the case of Paraiyans,she points out that their social position depended on many factors like the amount of land they owned,severity of unity among them,political position of high caste Hindu landlords,amount of unity among the dominant castes on the basis of wealth and number against Paraiyans, Paraiyans extent of support to leftist parties and the competition of other landless castes with Paraiyans in case of common class interests etc.Though these people were given more freedom,they were restrained in a way that they were expected to observe certain things in high castes’ presence.But this has also changed on the basis of economic dependence of Paraiyans on the high castes. Even when these kinds of changes possess a threat to the system,at another level,we can see that the system is getting stronger as the individuals’ are more aware of their own caste group as a political body and the significance of ‘group solidarity’.Government policies played a major role in improving the social status of people at the bottom of social hierarchy.And the impact of modern political system also increased the freedom of Paraiyans as they are more influential as a group in case of voting.Though there is a relation between caste and politics,there are difference in the ways in which the members of politically important caste deceive the low castes to obtain benefits for themselves.For maintaining their benefits and social status,they keep the low castes in suppression through certain ways like keeping them against the poor landless high castes,preventing them from attaining information about government benefits, maintaining divisions among the Paraiyans,buying off some potential Paraiyan leaders and spreading the conviction that those without money and influence cannot do anything politically and therefore the higher castes are the influential people in the society etc.

While looking from this bottom up approach,we can see a more briefly materialistic view of the people at the bottom in the caste system and their role in it than the people at the top as they have less need to rationalize its inequities.From the view point of high castes, “dharma” and “karma” are the more useful rationalizations of the system. Here this rationalization justifies and maintains the caste system.The untouchables may believe this to some extent, but still it is important to differentiate between the over acceptance of such values and holding of other values usually unexpressed to outsiders.This was mainly due to the fact that high caste landlords owned lands.And in any situation of economic oppression,one does not find out any evidence of recorded complaints as majority of the people in the past were illiterate as well as it was too dangerous to express in an ‘official’ way outside one’s own community.Even today,the people outside the community are not willing to hear the problems of low castes of traditional village community. Food is an another aspect where there is a clear division between the overt and covert values of the untouchables.For example: eating beef was always controversial in the sense there existed different view points on this matter.Sometimes it has been said that eating of carrion meat is the main reason for which the low castes have been disgraced.On the other hand,low caste people said that they never ate meat of sick animals and only consumed those that had died due to age or by accident and only a small portion.The high castes were also critical of Muslims who eat beef as Mencher has been told,they never make the rules about them and this rule was established way before they were Muslims. As mentioned earlier,the political manipulations of people in the dominant castes determine the positions of untouchables.Here,the political and economical power is controlled by dividing the untouchables among themselves and maintaining the barriers between untouchables and poor higher caste people.However the educated and experienced Harijans aspire that they can gain some political power because of their numbers,since political parties are trying to take advantage of this.Now they are also trying to make use of each and every situation where their numbers are a crucial aspect for others,which even led to the political domination by the Paraiyans.The Communist Party of India,Marxist was also able to assemble them against the landowners,however,Beteille points out that elsewhere they have not only found it difficult to isolate labourers from sharecroppers and small landowners,but also isolated the exploited class who were tortured by the distinctions within it between Harijans and caste Hindus. Thus the caste system has operated to prevent the formation of social classes with commonality of interests or purpose.In short,caste has been able to survive and maintain by the partial masking of severe socio-economic differences.The preponderating importance given to caste has always been one of the serious skew in understanding Indian society.What has been lacking in the studies was the all- inclusive study of interests.While examining from this

bottom up approach,caste has always been a source of economic exploitation and not ever caste had its own special privileges.Though there was some kind of concord in the past,it was based on the forces that kept some people at the bottom so isolated that they could not unite in a way to change the caste system and those with greater economic and political power could unite whenever they needed.They also had the advantage of being a part of larger interregional communication networks while Harijans only had a narrow range of contacts and the higher castes would do everything to prevent their contact with non- village people like Community Development officials as possible.However,Mencher says that it doesn’t mean the notion that Untouchables are the only ones under economic exploitation,but to say that,caste system has always been functioned to keep the untouchables and the poor high castes from uniting for the purpose of aspiring for a better tomorrow.Thus we can come to the conclusion that the great emphasis given on caste by the people of wealth,power or influence in the higher castes had been an attempt to prevent the lower castes from having recognition and their conscious development,which may even challenge the very existence of caste system later.So they used caste system as a cloak for maintaining their political and economic power in the traditional society. Question: What all ways did the members of higher castes adopt to maintain their dominance in the society?

THE STUDY OF INDUSTRIAL LABOUR IN POST-COLONIAL INDIA BY JAN BREMAN In this work,Jan Breman discusses about the rural as well as urban labour, work force in terms of caste,trade unions and several concepts like labour bondage,migration etc.After conducting painstaking fieldwork and research ,he portrays the overall life of industrial labour in the Indian society through this work. In post-colonial India,labour was considered as a connotation of work in industry,replacing the agrarian rural order by urban one.The National Planning Committee set up in 1940 formulated labour policies but ignored Gandhian policies of development and was focused on industrial labour as it had an established trade union movement.Moreover,state had an important role as its active participation was necessary and labour legislation was enforced by it.Here,the attention was placed on industry due to its future and political significance.Later,the accelerated migration of labour acted as the precursor of the approaching transformation and the focus was shifted from rural economy to the labour surplus which had to flow towards the real poles of economic growth.

Classical texts depicted that economic necessity forced labour to migrate from villages where they remained socially and emotionally bound,explaining the lack of enthusiasm,slovenly work pace,high rates of absenteeism and claimed this as a non-transitory phenomenon.Several thinkers like Feldman and Moore,Kerr,Ornati published works which firms this view.They also pointed out that lack of commitment was due to lack of self-discipline,labour unrest etc.So in order to avoid these situations,factories created a reserve pool of casual labour called ‘badli labour’.However,later studies proved that the circulation between city and village was a product of nature of economic activity and not the habits of workers and the real reason behind lack of production was the lack of investment in training and management.Here,labour strike was seen as an adaptation to industrial way of life and transition from tradition to modernity was partial in the sense that,factories had features derived from caste and village,particularly jajmani system in which the employer had less power.The only escape here was through the use of job contracts and jobbers,however,when these disappeared,factory job became a permanent property,ultimately leading to establishment of casual labour in the long run with minimum benefits making the transformation from Gemeinschaft to Gesellschaft a dream in India.Some thinkers had the view that coexistence occurred between relations in industry and wider social environment,making ‘alienation’ a fictional term in this context.The conclusion was that commitment varies according to nature of industry,technology used and demands regarding training and skills at the time of recruitment. At last,the colonial thinkers admitted that non-western people have the ability to do industrial work,though it was really slow. The Second Five Year Plan prioritised the expansion of industrial infrastructure which resulted in the benefits of job like security of employment,various social provisions which gave the labour a new dignity.Workers were recruited by jobbers who often controlled the job floor, making him responsible for taking care of labourers.The increasing pressure on subsistence resources due to population growth and land alienation resulted in large-scale migration which made the decline of role of the jobber.The further introduction of new rules to professionalise major industries led to their disappearance and recruitment was later based on skills and qualifications.But the skilled labour was only need to a minimum as majority of jobs required unskilled labour which later led to the belief that induction into factory workforce can result in the loss of skills.The badli labour played a key role during this time as they could be employed for a long time without benefits and lack of formal contracts enabled employers the freedom to minimise their rights.By this,Breman comes to the conclusion that permanent employment becomes quickly and easily available at the times of rapid economic growth in factories and vice versa in times of recession.Hence labour productivity was low and management blamed it on worker and union militancy,though the real reason was owners’refusal to invest which often resulted in the poor working conditions,particularly for women.But still,it created a surplus

labour,who managed to reach urban economy and penetrate into the permanent factory employment. And here,we can also see that the literacy rates of workers in factories were quite high and educational qualifications have been continually upgraded for recruitment.Though poor landless labourers were the first ones who worked in factories due to their economic vulnerability being lower caste,higher castes also joined industrial employment as its respectability increased, which often showed the caste composition of workforce in factories where higher castes were at the top and respectable positions while lower castes were at the bottom.Even in a capital-intensive major enterprise,staff are recruited on the basis of requirements that show a bias towards the higher castes.On the other hand,positive discrimination helped Scheduled castes and tribes to improve their position in the social ladder.Women were also excluded from industrial labour due to their biological functions and were only assigned in jobs which require precision and alertness.Such progressive elimination led to further strengthening of male dominance in economic life. In the organised sector,factory workers shared a number of characteristics in the industrial culture like family accompanying at the time of migration,low female participation in industrial workforce,transition from caste to class,break-up of joint family etc.Thus it led to ‘compartmentalisation’,which often made modernisation a complex process where tradition might rule in one sphere and modernity in another.In case of dominant working class household,cohabitation was based on earnings and specific conditions of employment rather than a joint or nuclear family,where the new phenomenon of overcrowding was frequently seen.New consumption patterns in food and clothing was also a later development during this time.Conditions of employment were governed by well- defined rules established by legislation and partial trade union pressure. One unique feature of regular employed workers during this time was that they consolidated into trade unions to negotiate improvements in the working conditions and rights. In this context,class consciousness of factory workers can be seen in their willingness to organise and union membership was seen as an evidence for readiness to collective action as well as solidarity,which also includes women.However,some critical authors have the view,that trade union leaders operate as brokers and use their power to deal with employers,politicians and rival unions.For Breman,Indian Trade Union plays an important role by providing the feeling of protection to its members.Though wage increases was an early demand of trade unions,its programme of action further broadened to protest against heirarchical order of industry and society,cherishing the principles of equality and social justice.Assertions of dignity were met with oppression by employers as they saw it as negligence to obedience,though it really was based on dependency and inequality.

By 1970s and 80s,drastic changes took place due to the restructuring of industrial economy. Rationalization of production became a major trend in both public as well as private industries which resulted in further ‘downsizing’.Permanent workforce was replaced by cheap labour than technological advancement and exit policies of retirement schemes further reduced the numbers.The efficiency drive gave rise to ‘flexibilisation’ of industrial work resulting in lower workforce in formal sector and larger in informal,though job security of permanent workforce was reaffirmed and improved their bargaining position.Later,with the new combination of working class radicalism and businesslike unionism led to a new stage in industrial relations. Nonethless,the industrialists’ organisation were in favour of ‘one factory,one union’ principle, as they need a strong leader to disciplinize the labourers rather than quarrelling unions.This work is remarkably thoughtful in the sense that it outlines the systematic issues and also takes up new ones like consumerism,assertiveness among the poor workforce etc.Though the relation between the capitalism and labour bondage In India is depressing,it also gives us hope in different aspects during discussion. Question:Critically evaluate the statement that Indian workforce is not committed to the Industrial labour....