The importance of a Dalit president

Very shortly, and most likely, India will see a Dalit president occupying the highest seat of power in India but what does this mean? What does it signify for the working masses of India and the non-ruling class. For all useful purposes, nothing at all since the Presidential chair is a rubber stamp in the Indian Parliamentary Bourgeois Democracy. It is not like the outgoing President did anything path breaking and caused a Constitutional crisis by not following the diktats of the elected leader, the Prime Minister. So, the question then is, if this tokenism should even be acknowledged? The answer is resounding in the affirmative and this is because it has to be understood in the following realms of significance.

The Dalit identity and ascent

In an interview to Kafila.org, Dalit ideologue Kancha Ilaiah had proclaimed, though erroneously in retrospect, that Dalits should stand behind Modi if it allows them a direct path into the houses of power. The rationale at that time is that the Liberals and Left parties had ignored Dalits thus far. This is of course correct without a doubt from a tactical perspective. From an ideological perspective, Kancha’s views were akin to stating that Communists must support Fascists to get rid of Liberals. But that is to miss the real point being made; if nothing else, Dalits taking the seat of Power and being in the seat of power. This is important to Dalits. This is especially important to project in light of a Hindu Fascist Govt that does intend to eliminate Dalit consciousness politically and economically. Thus, when the Hindus give the ceremonial post to a Dalit, who is their member, the Good Dalits and Bad Dalits are now separated. A Good Dalit for Hindus is one who is a loyal servant of the Hindus. A good servant can thus be rewarded with these piecemeal measures. A good Dalit can have a good life under the Hindu boots – as long as he looks away from the obvious atrocities the Hindus are religiously obliged to perpetrate upon his ilk. I draw a parallel here to an African American Republican party member for common reference. This is a person who has been “Whitened” from being a Slave because he has accepted his master’s voice as the “Way”. For the mass of common Dalits that are not in the realms of power, this distinction is invisible. The mechanism they see is of a Dalit who has broken through – to hell with the fact that it is by siding with the oppressor; in fact, maybe siding with the oppressor was the way all along? Maybe Ambedkar was wrong? All these points aside, it is still good that a Dalit will be the President because that is one less post that is occupied by a Brahmin. The endeavour should always be to ensure zero representation to and complete oppression politically and economically of Brahmins and their guard dogs the Kshatriya and their sponsors the Vaishyas.

The political angle.

Politically, the BJP has affected a masterstroke. Understand that the BJP knows the “Indian” DNA very well. It understands that the intellectuals’ line of argumentation is that of compulsive antagonism and that of the lumpen proletariat is compulsive obedience to power. The BJP calculated that the opposition would oppose the appointment and thus seize the Dalit narrative and paint the opposition as the Brahmin Elite – and the idiots did fall for it by antagonising compulsively and not objectively. In the backdrop of Sharanpur, this appointment then divorces the BJP from the UP State BJP that will now be seen as one odd cousin in the family. Again… it would be foolish not to notice how the Dalit is preferable to the Muslim for the North Indian Hindus. Thus, in the minds of the lumpen proletariat of Dalits, the Ambedkarite notion of Dalit-Muslim unity has fallen apart.

The Moral of the story

It is simple. The age old Indian Rope trick of fooling the audience continues: A token post, a head of state that is not elected by the masses and a rubber stamp that will only take orders from the inbred Brahmins in the BJP. But that is so much more than even what the Dalit movements themselves have achieved! The mighty orator Jignesh Mevani has spent more time attacking the Communists than attending to the rights of Dalits in Gujarat. Mayawati’s idiotic battle tactics in UP played to the BJP’s communal and caste polarisation tactics. As far as the world can see, the existent Ambedkarite movement is an impotent force that only demonstrates and sings songs at rallies. It has thus fallen into the JNU left trap of theatrics and polemics rather than action on the ground. It is only UP’s Bhim Army that is really providing direction to the Dalit Community but even that will fizzle out unless Armed Struggle against the Brahmin Hegemonic state begins soon.

Most important question is…. Why didn’t opposition come out with a Dalit leader? And thus, the Dalits walk further away from what Ambedkar taught into the chains of the inbred, backward, savarna

On the question of what is to be done with Brahminism….

India is a unique country on the Sociological landscape because it is one of the few countries in the world, along with others in South Asia, that practices institutionalised Feudalism. One of the great mistakes that we as common people make is to assume that Brahminical Feudalism is just simple Racism –  it is not! It is a well-crafted paradigm with its roots in economic enslavement. Before we proceed, it is important to understand economic systems from a Historical perspective.

The first economic systems were what we call Primitive Communism – a system of small groups of people producing and consuming as per their needs only. With increasing social groups, a need for more resources and manpower forced the social groups to start invading and enslaving other groups. Thus, the shift from Primitive Communism to Slavery as the Economic form. The fall of the Roman Empire and the spread of Christianity into Europe made Slavery a crime and inhuman. This is where we see the transition from Slavery to Feudalism – a system in Europe where the church mandated that no land can be owned as it was created by God but the custodians will be the feudal lords and those who work the land, serfs – because God said so the Priestly Class.  What was the difference between Feudalism and Slavery? Only that people could not be bought and sold but their productive output was still owned by their new de facto owners, the Lords.  The French Revolution here changes all this in the most radical way by violently destroying the rule of Kings, Lords and the Church. Thus is ushered in the economic system of Capitalism – where all labour is free to be bought and sold by the seller and buyer’s mutual agreement. We pause at this stage and return to India.

The Indian feudal system is what we call the Caste system today. The four castes: Brahmins (Priests), Kshatriyas (Warriors), Vaishyas (Traders), and Shudras (Laborers). Beyond this were the Ati-Shudras. At the face of it, it looks like just a medieval division of labour but time has shown that it is still a system of Slavery that was enshrined in the Hindu religion sanctified by the Brahmins who called the shots of what the religion was. Logically, one could argue that the Kshatriya would be the caste-in-charge because military power rested with them. This was never to be because of the sway of religion. Hinduism is what Brahmins define it as, not as what the majority decides. And if the Kshatriya had to rule, the people and armies needed the blessing of Religion to enshrine that rule. Thus, despite having Military Might, the warrior class remained servants to the Brahmins – much like a dog remains loyal to its owner despite sharing no equality with him or her. Caste is graded inequality and as you move down the hierarchy you are lower down the order to the point of being untouchable. But Why? Why did the Brahmin mandate this very pointless act? Simple, by degrading a human being, you remove that person’s humanity. By removing the person’s humanity, he is thus a slave and an animal. This is a time tested method used globally, be it the enslavement of Africa or the Nazi holocaust against Jews.

Here we must recall that every Feudal system in the world was destroyed and replaced with Capitalism. Why then did it continue in India? There are many reasons here.

First, there was no violent revolution that seized power – economic, political, and social – from the ruling triad of Brahmins, Warriors and Traders.

Second, the coming of the British was not a social revolution but an Imperialist Economic invasion and the low and subservient Labor suited their Capitalism just fine. Note here that Capitalism freed the European serf but collaborated with Feudalism and Slavery elsewhere in the world seamlessly to continue the legacy economic systems.

Thirdly: The Indian Independence movement, as revolutionary as it was, was not a movement for a complete end to Imperialism and Monarchic rule. Indian Independence simply replaced the British with the Brahmin. This of course was never the objective but the natural consequence of a Indian society that never wanted the end of Feudalism because it suited them not to be equal AND Hinduism blesses it.

Fourth: The Leadership of independent India was not a Socialist leadership – at best it can be defined as a Social Democratic one. What is the difference? A Socialist leadership would have consolidated the masses of India that had fought for India’s independence to further destroy the Hindu Caste System and its hegemony. The Social Democratic leadership by protecting the rights and the rule of the rich Bourgeoisie thus decided that India’s greatest enemy was the Socialists and Communists. Barring some pockets of India, Feudal Social Consciousness prevailed while the Capitalistic Mode of Production was practiced.

One could argue that Capitalism destroyed Feudalism and instituted separation of the church and state in Europe. So perhaps that is what is underway in India today as well? False!

No such change is happening. The change in Europe happened only because the economic and military prowess was seized from the ruling class by a mass revolt. In India, that did not happen so the Brahmins and ruling classes, just converted their Economic wealth into Industry and Property – sanctified as forever theirs by the Indian Republic.

In education, we promote the Brahminical practice of rote learning and not analytical, application based learning, thus creating a population that is still repeating what the Brahmins in power decide that you are good for – case in point, notice how most lower than Brahmin caste captains of industry are all foreign educated?

In Society, marriage is still within the same caste. In housing, people still live in caste based housing. In politics, you will see token to no representation of the working classes and Dalits. Even leaving Hinduism cannot change the stigma of caste as the same rotten system of the Brahmins was so reinforced that it exists there as well.

In summation, Caste, can only be destroyed by seizure of the Economic means of production from the Brahmins and their two servant castes. Here we must also ask whether a simple transition from Caste to a Class based society solves anything as well. Here then we must look at Socialism and Communism to make the final transition from Barbarism to Socialism, from a Society that discriminates based on how much you have to making human intellect and merit the only division, from moving away from the rule of Castes and the Moneyed to the rule of the people….A proletarian democracy!