How sub-classification will change Dalit politics

BR Ambedkar, Palwankar Baloo, Jagjeevan Ram, Annabhau Sathe, Swami Achootanand, and Ajodhya Prasad Dandi, among others, represented Dalit opinion in the first few decades of the 20th century. Interestingly, all these leaders appeared at different times within the first half of the 20th century and provided a base for the rise and growth of the Dalit movement in India. Most emerged from numerically larger communities within Dalits, which had moved qualitatively towards education — such as Mahar and Harijan. The other communities in the Scheduled Caste (SC) list haven’t produced leaders who held sway over the larger Dalit politics. The few from these communities who had leadership potential could not acquire national influence. Masuriya Din from the Pasi community, Badri Balmikanand from the Valmiki community in Uttar Pradesh, and Bhola Paswan Shastri and Yasoda Devi from the Paswan communities from Bihar are notable.

Since Dalit politics in pre- and post-colonial India remained largely dominated by leaders of the numerically-dominant communities such as Mahar, Chamar, Pasi, and Paswan, the Dalit movement, as well as the larger Indian political discourse, was centred on these voices. Thanks to political visibility and other reasons like the spread of education and the competition for the benefits of development and social justice-related resources, the numerically large communities dominated policy formulation and political opinion. Slowly, however, social tensions due to the unequal distribution of social justice and developmental resources started becoming apparent. The smaller Dalit communities started expressing their angst against the dominance of the larger communities in courts and various other forums. Popular voices from the smaller communities began to assert the need for sub-classification, with the provision of “quota within quota” for the relatively more deprived communities among the SCs.

The recent Supreme Court ruling allowing the state governments to make sub-classifications in reservation must be seen against this backdrop. This has sparked a furore among sections of Dalit politics. Most parties and politicians connected to the larger communities, such as Mayawati and the Bahujan Samaj Party, Chandrashekhar Azad and the Bhim Army, and Chirag Paswan and the Lok Janshakti Party, oppose this verdict. However, Jitan Ram Manjhi and the Hindustani Awam Morcha, and various activist groups connected to castes such as Valmiki, Musahar, Dhobi, Koree, Madiga in Andhra Pradesh-Telangana, and Matang, Mang, and Chambhar in Maharashtra have hailed the apex Court ruling.

Since the larger communities dominate Dalit politics, their pressure has forced national parties such as the Congress to keep silent on the issue. However, the party’s leaders in the states, such as Siddaramaiah in Karnataka and Revanth Reddy in Telangana, have supported this verdict — given the growing political assertion of non-dominant Dalit castes in their states. The Court ruling has met enthusiastic support in Tamil Nadu, which had already enacted sub-classification legislation in the interest of Dalit groups such as the Arundhatiyars.

Due to constant pressure from Dalit leaders belonging to dominant Dalit communities, the National Democratic Alliance government has never been able to legislate a creamy-layer limit for SC reservations. It doesn’t explicitly oppose sub-classification of the SCs or a creamy layer for SC reservation.

How will the issue affect the larger Dalit politics? First of all, castes in favour of sub-classification may get cleaved away from Dalit political outfits led by dominant Dalit communities. A competitive political contest may emerge in Dalit politics, fragmenting it into two blocks — castes that have benefited the most from affirmative action and the more disadvantaged castes. There have been many calls for leaders from non-dominant Dalit groups to quit and oppose the BSP and the Bhim Army. There is another dimension to this appeal: To support only those political parties who vocally support the sub-classification issue.

So, it will weaken the politics of Mayawati, Paswan, and others while opening up possibilities for the rise of smaller Dalit communities within the larger Dalit politics. It may foster the so-called rainbow alliances of smaller Dalit parties. This, in turn, would mean a reorientation of Indian democracy towards smaller social groups. This new configuration may be echoed in the national political parties that will speak about the most marginalised, disadvantaged communities. Leaders of the second- or third-largest Dalit communities, such as Valmiki in Punjab, Madiga in Telangana, Matang in Maharashtra, and Musahars in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, will likely become more weighty voices in Dalit politics.

This moment in Dalit politics could also mean a churn outside the communities by, for instance, forcing the media to highlight the opinions of leaders from communities that have remained unheard in the mainstream so far. How this heteroglossia of Dalit aspiration provides a new form and life to Dalit politics remains to be seen.

Badri Narayan is director, GB Pant Social Science Institute. The views expressed are personal

Get Current Updates on…

See more