Faces of Discrimination in Higher Education in India

Quota policy, social justice and the Dalits

Samson K. Ovichegan

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317643449
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Higher Education

This book illuminates the experiences of a set of students and faculty who are members of the Dalit caste – commonly known as the 'untouchables' – and are relatively 'successful' in that they attend or are academics at a prestigious university. The book provides a background to the study, exploring the role of caste and its enduring influence on social relations in all aspects of life. The book also contains a critical account of the current experiences of Dalit students and faculty in one elite university setting – the University of Shah Jahan (pseudonym). Drawing on a set of in-depth semi-structured interviews, the empirical study that is at the centre of this book explores the perceptions of staff and students in relation to the Quota policy and their experiences of living, working and studying in this elite setting. The data chapters are organised in such a way as to first explore the faculty views. The experiences of students are then examined with a focus on the way in which their caste is still an everyday part of how they are sometimes 'othered'. Also, a focus on female Dalit experiences attempts to capture the interconnecting aspects of abject discrimination in their university life. Faces of Discrimination in Higher Education in India explores:

• 
  
  

• critical exploration of the Quota System policy and related social justice issues;

• 
  
  

• faculty voices: Quota, caste and discrimination;

• 
  
  

• students' perceptions and experiences of the Quota policy;

• 
  
  

• being a 'female Dalit' student;

• 
  
  

• positioning caste relations and the Quota policy: a critical analysis.

This study will be of interest to educational sociologists examining policies in education and analysts of multicultural and South Asian studies. It will also steer pertinent discussions on equality and human rights issues.

1 Introduction

DOI: 10.4324/9781315760865-1

For many centuries, the ‘hegemonic cultural system’ of caste has dominated the Indian sub-continent, shaping the consciousness and life experiences of Indians in various ways (Shah et al., 2006, p. 35). Caste hierarchy structures India’s social, cultural, economic and political systems, and in each case discriminates against individuals of the lowest caste, who are known as the ‘Dalit’ (Prasad, 2006). Despite the lip-service paid to egalitarianism and equality in Indian society, prejudice and segregation have long been part of the Dalit experience. Dalit communities continue to be restricted in their access to social benefits such as education, which in turn restricts their wider participation in Indian society and limits their opportunities in life (Chalam, 2007 a; Vasavi, 2008).

The caste situation

Caste: historical perspective

The word ‘caste’ comes from the Portuguese word ‘“casta”, signifying breed, race or kind’ (Shah et al., 2006, p. 35). In the eleventh century, India’s Portuguese colonisers applied the term indiscriminately to a range of social and professional groups within the Indian sub-continent. Their designations are largely sustained today (Sunderaj, 2000). The caste system in India is a ‘distinctive social structure’, with few parallels in other cultures around the world (Prasad, 1986, p. 39). In approximately 1500 bce, the ancient Vedas (Hindu holy scriptures) depicted the caste system in its nascent form. There were four Varnas formed – (1) Brahmin; (2) Kshatriya; (3) Vaishya; and (4) Shudra. Within the four Varnas, each Varna consists of several castes. According to the Rig-Veda, the gods divided the body parts of a human sacrifice, naming his ‘mouth the Brahmins, his arms the Kshatriya, his thighs the Vaishya, and his feet the Shudra’; the Dalit were located outside this physiological model of caste (Haslam, 1999, p. 9). The Dalit became known as pariahs, meaning ‘outcastes’; they belonged to the chatur-varna scheme of social stratification, which designated them as Panchamas (the fifth caste), or at times were considered out of the Varna system/caste system. As such, the Dalit were often referred to as ‘untouchable’ or ‘outcaste’ (Rao, 2007).

Caste distinctions delineated the socio-economic functions to be fulfilled by different castes. The Brahmins (first caste) were usually considered responsible for preaching and conveying the content of religious texts to the illiterate masses. The Kshatriyas (second caste) led in the areas of social welfare and governmental administration. The Vaishyas (third caste) were required to gain mathematical knowledge and skills for their role in business and accounting. Members of the fourth and last caste, the Shudras, were relegated to artisanal work and manual labour (Rao, 2007). Outside the caste system, the ‘untouchables’ or Dalit were excluded altogether from social and educational privileges, and were often employed as manual workers or scavengers, held responsible for performing the ‘lowliest tasks such as cleaning latrines and working in sewers’ (Rao, 2007, p. 24).

The Dalit (‘Untouchables’)

The Dalit constitute about 16.2 per cent (more than 200 million) of the Indian population (Thorat, 2009). In spite of some efforts on the part of various governments to ameliorate the condition of the Dalit, this social group is still the ‘poorest and most subordinated’ in Indian society (Thorat, 2009, p. 1). In the Manusmriti, one of India’s ancient Hindu texts, the Dalit caste is described as ‘polluted’ and ‘unclean’ from birth. The word ‘Dalit’, meaning ‘crushed underfoot’ or ‘broken into pieces’, is the contemporary version of the word ‘untouchable’. ‘Dalit’ is ‘not a class term but a caste term’ (Patankar, 1999, p. 111). The word gained currency in the 1930s as a Hindi and Marathi translation of ‘Depressed Classes’, the term used by the British for the communities now known as the ‘Scheduled Castes’ (SC) and ‘Scheduled Tribes’ (ST).

The SC and the ST are mentioned and included by the former drafting Chairman, Dr Ambedkar, in the Constitution of India (Thorat, 2009). The complete listing of the Dalit caste were formed by means of two orders – The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) ‘Order of 1950’, and The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) ‘Order of 1958’. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 records ‘1,108 castes across 25 Indian States’, while the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1958 lists ‘744 tribes across 22 Indian States’ (Thorat, 2009, p. 4). Also, the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes is an Indian statutory body that was established in 2003 and for the Scheduled Castes in 2004 (cited from the National Commission for Scheduled Castes: Jogdand, 2007; Thorat, 2009). Additionally, Article 341 of the Indian Constitution authorises the President of India to specify particular castes as SC. The term refers to ‘such castes, races or tribes [. . .] under Article 341 of the Constitution to be of the Scheduled Castes’ (Thorat, 2009, pp. 1–2).

However, in this book I will use the term ‘Dalit/Dalits’ rather than ‘Dalit (SC/ST)’. The existing literature makes use of both attributions; however, according to the terms of the Quota System: ‘Dalit are enlisted as Scheduled Castes (SC), and Scheduled Tribes (ST), and these by and large fall under the categories of being termed a “Dalit”’ (Kumar, 1999), or the ‘legal designation’ for ‘Dalits’ (Hart, 2010). Furthermore, the Dalit do not have a homogeneous culture and history, and, as such, their grouping together as ‘Dalit’ is solely for the ease of ‘sociological and political analysis’ (Gnanaraj & Krishnamurthy, 2000, p. 11). The preference for the term ‘Dalit’ does not, therefore, deny the heterogeneity of their communities.

It is also important to note the diversity of the Dalit community, which is divided into hundreds of sub-castes (Sunderaj, 2000; D’Souza, 2008) spread across different regions in India. Analysis of the Dalits’ social situation in Chapter 6 and elsewhere will take account of this diversity by examining the rise of the ‘creamy layer’ (elite class) of Dalits, who – by means of the constitutional provisions made by the Quota policy – have achieved educational mobility, enhanced their socio-economic status, and thereby reached the top of the Dalit community (Jenkins, 2003, p. 82; Rana, 2008). The poorer and more underprivileged Dalits will be termed ‘Quota’ Dalits for the purposes of comparative analysis.

The ‘Dalit’ caste

Origins of the ‘Dalit’ caste

According to the ancient Indian legal code of Manu, untouchability was the punishment meted out to a child born of the union of a high-caste (Brahmin) individual with a member of a low caste (Shudra). The offspring of such unions came to be known as ‘untouchables’. The consequences were yet more severe when the father was of a Shudra caste, and the mother of a Brahmin caste (Michael, 2007). The literature of the early twentieth century offered other explanations for the origin of an ‘untouchable’ caste. Dr Ambedkar, for example, who campaigned for the rights of untouchables, was of the opinion that marginalised men and women from the Shudra caste also came to be treated as untouchables (Keer, 1990).

Today, the term ‘Dalit’ is used in a positive manner and it reflects a unified class movement against inequality (Michael, 2007). It is an indigenous word used in Marathi, Bengali, Hindi and many other modern Indian languages; and many present-day Dalit leaders prefer to be known as ‘Dalit’ (Ghosh, 1999; Mohanty, 2003). The term came into widespread currency in the 1970s through the ‘Dalit Panther’ association (Guru & Chakravarty, 2005). It was chosen deliberately by the Panthers, and used proudly. Dr Ambedkar (activist and leader of the Dalit liberation movement) converted the negative identity of the ‘untouchable’ caste into the political potentiality and agency of the Dalit. Dr Ambedkar first used the term ‘Dalit’ in 1928, in his journal ‘Bahishkrit Bharat’ (‘Outcaste India’), where he characterised the Dalit experience as one of deprivation, marginalisation and stigmatisation. The name ‘Dalit’ came to signify a ‘suffering’ and ‘revolutionary’ person (Rao, 2009, p. 15).

The roots of India’s caste hierarchy lie in the ancient ‘Varna’ system. The four Varnas exemplified a theoretical social structure, while the ‘J{a-}ti’ (often translated as ‘relationships’) reflected the actual functioning of society. In fact, J{a-}ti is better translated as caste. Varna defined an individual’s rank, while J{a-}ti described status, allowing any position within the hierarchy to be assigned clearly and easily. Caste organisation was consequently a system of protecting the division of ‘authority’ and ‘control’ through reserving the limited social goods, such as ‘education’ and ‘administration’ for those in control, and ‘menial’ occupations for those without power (Prasad, 1986, p. 40). Nirula (2005) quotes from Manu X: 97 (also known as Manu-samhita or Manusmriti), which states that

it is better that one should live by doing the vile works allotted to his caste than embrace the vocation of a superior caste for livelihood – living by adopting the vocation of another caste, one becomes degraded that very day.

(p. 58)

With the Varna system operating as a form of religious control, India’s caste hierarchy has survived for an extended period of time. Due to this enduring stratification of society, members of the lower castes have suffered continual discrimination, resulting in their educational and economic marginalisation (Nirula, 2005).

The caste system attributes to each individual a fixed status; levels of power and privilege vary according to birth. Even if an individual were to secure a high level of educational and/or economic status, their caste would remain, on the whole, a central component of their identity (Prasad, 1986). Put simply, Calestine Bough describes the Varna system as predicated on three primary values: ‘hereditary specialization’; ‘hierarchy and repulsion’; and segregation of one group from another (cited in Jaiswal, 1998, p. 33).

DeLiege (1997) argues that caste is integral to Indian society and its institutions, so much so that Dalits seldom ‘consider opposing the system into which they are integrated’ (p. 106). The anthropologist Hutton believes that caste difference originated in the division of labour by the ‘pre-Aryan’ tribes of India. According to Hutton, ‘untouchability’ is the outcome and consequence of ritual uncleanliness. The origin of the Dalits, he argues, is partly racial (due to alleged physical appearance), partly religious (due to differences in belief), and partly a matter of social norms and customs (Hutton, 1963). Although economic inequality and differences in status continue to afflict many developed societies, the concept of ‘untouchability’ is particular to India, with its roots in the country’s ancient Varna system (Prasad, 1986, p. 40). Thorat (2009) describes untouchability as a social concept that has become ‘embodied in customs’ in India (p. 2).

Chitnis (1997) identifies the outcastes’ predicament with the use of the term ‘untouchability’ (p. 95). In October 1909, the Maharaja of Baroda used the term ‘untouchable’ while addressing the Depressed Classes Mission in Bombay. However, this attribution was abolished in 1950 under Article 17 of the Indian Constitution. According to the Untouchability Offence Act of 1955, the practice of untouchability and discrimination in public places was an offence. In 1976, the Act was reviewed in order to make it more ‘stringent and effective’ and was designated the ‘Protection of Civil Rights (PCR) Act’ (Thorat, 2009, p. 12). The execution of policies concerning the eradication of untouchability is the responsibility of both central and state governments in India. The Ministry of Home Affairs ‘formulates such policies’ and controls their implementation (Paswan & Jaideva, 2003 a, p. 170). Although the Dalit are no longer officially designated ‘untouchables’, in practice many Dalit still endure the effects of the ‘stigma they have been forced to live with for a century’ (Rao, 2007, p. 21). Even today, the Hindu caste hierarchy continues to prevail in India (Verma, 2005).

Exclusion and discrimination: ‘race/class and caste’

The Dalit have been excluded and discriminated against for centuries. This exclusion arises to some extent from issues of ‘race’ and class; it is ‘racial’ exclusion in so far as a specific ethnic group is treated differently due to some perceived shared characteristics. As a result, people of minority heritage are frequently punished for being ‘other’, and remain positioned at the ‘bottom’ of society (Thorat, 2009). In its 1996 reports to the International Convention to End All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), however, the Indian government argued that Dalits did not fall under the purview of the ICERD because ‘“caste” implies class or social distinction’ and does not ‘denote racial difference’ (Hart, 2010, p. 52).

The Fourteenth Amendment of India’s Constitut...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• Abstract
• Brief overview of book chapters
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Critical exploration of the Quota System policy and related social justice issues
• 3 Faculty voices: Quota, caste and discrimination
• 4 Students’ perceptions and experiences of the Quota policy
• 5 Being a ‘female Dalit’ student
• 6 Positioning caste relations and the Quota policy: a critical analysis
• 7 Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index