In UP, it’s dignity vs development

Lucknow: Empowerment is THE issue in the politics of Uttar Pradesh. As parties busy themselves digging up hidden histories of castes at the bottom of the heap to carve out pockets of loyalty, the exercise does not look without sense. It is the acknowledgement of the existential reality in the state: people value dignity more than development. This is linked to the collective memories of oppression in the castes at the bottom of the social pyramid.

Politics has been a perfect vehicle for the hidden aspirations among castes which have been suppressed and neglected throughout history. It is easy to scoff at the Mandalisation of UP politics over the last two decades but it is difficult to ignore how it has empowered people who would otherwise wallow in sub-human conditions for ever.

Dalits can file police complaints now; not long ago they would be turned away by police officials, who were either influenced by people of higher castes (to which the culprits mostly belonged) or were members of the higher castes themselves. Many of them are in jobs in government offices now, sharing common space with members of other castes. Many are economically sound now, thanks to the aggressive policies of Mayawati. Caste rigidities have softened a great deal though inter-caste marriages and common dining — two things that are still no-no areas.

All this would not be possible without politics. It has proved to be an empowering tool and a great agent of change, though with a lot of imperfections. Dalit empowerment is a work in progress in UP and as all parties try to break into hierarchies within the Dalits, the process is likely to be hastened. However, the process is not about this section of the population only. It applies to every caste, and to the Muslims too.

“The talk of development is bullshit,"’ says Ramesh Dixit, a retired professor of the Lucknow university and an avid watcher of UP politics. “If development is defined in terms of malls, flyovers and bridges, which generate employment, then building of gardens by Mayawati should also be counted in. These create employment too,” he adds.

Nothing qualifies as development if ordinary people are excluded from it, he believes. Mayawati has been able to co-opt hitherto ignored people into the process. That makes her the most popular leader in the state, forget the corruption allegations and charges of misgovernance and misusing Central funds for megalomanic initiatives like parks and memorials etc. Such issues are far separated from the lives of the people she draws her support from.

“The Dalits, particularly the Yadavs (chamars), will stand by Mayawati come what may,” says Pradeep Kapoor, senior journalist and an expert in UP politics. “The Yadavs are numerically superior to other Dalits sub-castes and traditionally better off than castes like Bhangis, Pasas, etc — which are the lowest in the social and economic ladder — have benefitted most in the BSP rule. They will never ditch her,” he says. That explains the desperation of other parties to woo other Dalit groups, the untouchables among the untouchables. That seems to be the only way to go for them.

The expansion of the power of Dalits means contraction of the powers other castes which had been enjoying dominance for long. The Brahmins, for instance, were a force to reckon with when it came to government service and administration before the Mandalisation started off with great vengeance. Now, they have lost that position. Reservation in promotion means efficient officers from this caste have been virtually sidelined, says Kapoor. This has affected decision-making at the level of top administration. Development has suffered too.

However, as is the case in all castes, the benefits were being enjoyed by a few Bramhins who had access to good education. The parties are now after others in the caste, a majority of whom is as good as Dalits when it comes to living standards and quality of life. Politics, after all, has its uses.

Is caste politics good or is it bad? It is difficult to answer, since a lot depends on which position of the society you are assessing the developments around. There are losers and gainers in the exercise but if it addresses the issue of the dignity of the individual then it is in agreement with the core values of democracy. The only problem is it might end up in reverse discrimination and suppression of merit, which seems to have started in UP.