I: .

UNIT 17 IDENTITY POLITICS IN INDlA Ir '

(CASTE, RELIGION, LANGUAGE AND

ETHNICITY)
Structure
17.1 Introduction
17.2 What is Identity Politics?
17.3 Identity Politics in India
17 3 1 Caste
17.3.2 Religion
17 3.3 Language
17.3.4 Ethnicity II
1
17.4 Summary
17.5 Exercises

17.1 INTRODUCTION
Identity Politics has become a prominent subject in the Indian politics in the past few
years. Rise of low castes, religious identities, linguistic groups and ethnic conflicts have
contributed to the significance of identity politics in India. The discourse on Identity,
many scholars feel, is distinctly a modern phenomenon. Craig Calhoun aptly describes
' the situation when lie argues that it is in the modern times we encounter intensified
' efforts at consolidating individual and categorical identities and reinforce self-sameness.
This is primarily a modern phenomenon because some scholars feel that emphasis on
identity based on a central organising principle of ethnicity, religion, language, gender,
sexual preferences, or caste positions, etc, are a sort of "compelling remedy for anonymity"
in an otherwise iinpersonal modem world. It is thus said to be a "pattern of belonging,
a search for comfort, an approach to community." However, the complex social changes
and the imbrications of various forces, factors and events in this modern world have
rendeftd such production and recogilition of identities problematic. This is to say that
any search for an 'authentic seIfor identity' is not an innocent and unnuanced possibility;
it iilvolves negotiating other, often overlapping and contested, heterodox or multiple
'selves'. Cascardi succinctly elucidates this by observing, "the modern subject is defined
by its insertion into a series of separate value-spheres, each one of which tends to
exclude or attempts to assert its priority over the rest", thereby rendering identity-
schemes problematic. Nonetheless, the concerns with individual and collective identity
that simultaneously seeks to emphasise differences and attempt to establish commonality
with others similarly distinguished, have become a universal venture.

17.2 WHAT IS IDENTITY POLITICS?

But the question is how do discourses on identity fit into the political landscape? What
are the political underpinnings of these discourses on identity? What are the organising
principles of movements that characterise themselves as those based on identity concerns?

206
Can we define movements of workers as an instance of identity politics? In short wh,%t
is the politics of identity and what are its organising principles?

Identity Politics is said to "signify a wide range of political activity and theorising
founded in the shared experiences of' injustice of members of certain social groups". A s
a political activity it is thus considered to signify a body of political projects thiit
attempts a "recovery from exclusion and denigration" of groups hitherto marginalised
on the basis of differences based on their 'selj7zood' determining characteristics like
ethnicity, gender, sexual preferences, caste positions, etc. Identity politics thus attempls
to attain empowerment, representation and recognition of social groups by asserting the
very same markers that distinguished and differentiated them from the others and utilise
those markers as an assertion of selfhood and identity based on dfirence rather than
equality. Contrastingly placed, it is to imply that adherents of identity politics essentialise
certain markers that fix the identities of social groups around an ensemble of definitional
absolutes. These markers may be those of language, culture, ethnicity, gender, sexual
preferences, caste positions, religion, tribe, race, etc. institutionalised in jargons,
metaphors, stereotypes, and academic literature and reinforced through practices of
positive discrimination or affirmative action. The proponents of identity politics thus,
assign the primacy of some "essence" or a set of core features shared only by members
of the collectivity and no others and accepts individual persons as singular, integral,
altogether harmonious and unproblematic identities. These core markers are different
from associational markers like those of the workers who are defined more by their
common interests rather than by certain core essential naturally 'given' identity attributes
of the groups engaged in identity politics. Though many would argue that "worker" was
an identity deserving legitimacy and as a group, its movements can be referred to as
identity Politics, but probably the term "identity politics" as a body of political projects
implied to in contemporary discourses refers to certain essential, local and particular
categorical identities rather than any universalising ideals or agenda. The adherents of
identity politics utilise the power of myths, cultural symbols and kinship relations to
mould the feeling of shared community and subsequently politicise these aspects to
claim recognition of their particular identities.

The strongest criticism against Identity Politics is that it often challenged by the very
same markers upon which the sense of self or community is sought to be built. It is
despite the fact that identity politics is engaged in numerous aspects of oppression ancl
powerlessness, reclaiming and transforming negative scripts used by dominant group:;
into powerful instruments for building positive images of self and community. In othei-
words the markers that supposedly defines the community are fixed to the extent that
they harden and release a process of in-group essentialism that often denies internal
dialogicality within and without the group and itself becomes a new form of closure ancl
oppression.

Identity Politics as a field of study can be said to have gained intellectual legitimacy
since the second half of the twentieth century, i.e., between 1950s and 1960s in the
United States when large scale political movements of the second wave-feminists, Black.
Civil Rights, Gay and Lesbian Liberation movements and movements of various
Indigenous groups in the U.S. and other parts of the world were being justified ancl

20 7
legitimated on the basis of claims about injustices done to their respective socidl groups.
However, as scholars like Heyes point out that although "'ldentity Politics' can draw
on intellectual precursors from Mary Wollstonecraft to Frantz Fanon, writing that actually
uses this specific phrase-Identity Politics-is limited almost exclusively to the last 15
years.

17.3 IDENTITY POLITICS IN INDIA

In India we find that despite adoption of a liberal democratic polity after independence,
communities and collective identities have remained poweiful and continue to claim
recognition. In fact, Beteille has shown that the Indian polity has consistently tried to
negotiate the allegiance to a liberal [individual] spirit and the concerns and consciousness
of community. According to Bikhu Parekh this process has recognised a wide array of
autonomous and largely self-governing communities. It has sought to reconcile itself as
an association of individuals and a community of communities, recognising both
individuals and communities as bearer of rights.

It was probably this claim for and granting of recognition of particular identities by the
post-independence state of India that led many scholars to believe that a material basis
for the enunciation of identity claims has been provided by the post-independent state
and its structures and institutions. In other words the state is seen as an "active contributor
to identity politics through the creation and maintenance of state structures which define
and then recognise people in terms of certain identities". Thus, we find identity politics
of various hues abound in India, the most spectacular however, are those based on
language, religion, caste, ethnicity or tribal identity. But having said this it would be
wrong on our part to assume that each of these identity markers operate autonomously,
independent of the overlapping influence of the other makers. In other words a
homogenous linguistic group may be divided by caste affiliations that may be sub-
divided by religious orientations or all may be subsumed under a broader ethnic claim.

17.3.1 Caste
Caste-based discrimination and oppression have been a pernicious feature of Indian
society and in the post-independence period its imbrications with politics have not only
made it possible for hitherto oppressed caste-groups to be accorded political freedom
and recognition but has also raised consciousness about its potential as a political
capital. In fact Dipankar Gupta has poignantly exposed this contradiction when he
elaborates the differences between Ambedkar and Mandal Commission's view of caste.
While the former designed the policy of reservations or protective discrimination to
remove untouchability as an institution from Indian social life and polity, the latter
considered caste as an important political resource. Actually, the Mandal commission
can be considered the intellectual inspiration in transforming caste-based identity to an
asset that may. be used as a basis for securing political and economic gains. Though it
can also be said that, the upper castes by virtue of their predominant position were
already occupying positions of strengths in the political and economic system, and when
the Mandal heightened the consciousness of the 'Dalits' by recognisisng their disadvantage
of caste-identity as an advantage the confrontation ensues. The caste system, which is
based on the notions of purity and pollution, hierarchy and difference, has despite social
mobility, been' oppressive towards the Shudras and the outcastes who suffered the
stigma of ritual impurity and lived in abject poverty, illiteracy and denial of po1itic:al
power. The origin of confrontational identity politics based on caste may be said to have
its origin on the issue of providing the oppressed caste groups with state support in the
form of protective discrimination. This group-identity based on caste that has been
reinforced by the emergence of political consciousness around caste identities is
il~stitutionalisedby the caste-based political parties that profess to uphold and protr:ct
the interests of specific identities including the castes. Consequently, we have the upper
caste dominated BJP, the 1-ower caste dominated BSP (Bhaujan Sarnaj Party) or the ISP
(Samajwadi Party), including the fact that left parties (for example use of caste idioms
for mobilising agricultural labourers in Andhra Pradesh elections in 1950) have tacitly
followed the caste pattern to extract mileage in electoral politics. The Cumulative result
of the politicisation can be summarised by arguing that caste-based identity politics has
had a dual role in Indian society and polity. It relatively democratised the caste-based
Indian society but siinultaneously undermined the evolution of class-based organisations.

In all, caste has become an important determinant in Indian society and politics, the new
lesson of organised politics and consciousi~essof caste affiliations learnt by the hitherto
despised caste groups have transformed the contours of Indian politics where shiQing
caste-class alliances are being encountered. The net effect of these mobilisations along
caste-identities have resulted not only in the empowerment of newly emerging groups
but has increased the intensity of confrontational politics and possibly leading to a
growing crisis of governability.

17.3.2 Religion
Another form of identity politics is that effected through the construction of a community
on the shared bond of religion. In India, Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity, and
Zoroastrianism are some of the major religions practised by the people. Numerically the
Hindus are considered to be the majority, which inspires many Hindu loyalist groups
like the RSS (Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh) or the Siva Sena and political paflies
like the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) or the Hindu Mahasabha to claim that India is a
Hindu State. These claims generate homogenising myths about India and its histcry.
These claims are countered by other religious groups who foresee the possibility of
losing autonomy of practise of their religious and cultural life under such homogenising
claims. This initiates contestations that have often resulted in communal riots. The
generally accepted myths that process the identity divide on religious lines centre on the
'appeasement theory', 'forcible religious conversions', general 'anti-Hindu' and tllus
'anti-India' attitude of the minority religious groups, the 'hegemonic aspirations' of
majority groups and 'denial of a socio-cultural space' to minority groups.
th
Historically, the Hindu revivalist movement of the 19 century is considered to be the
period that saw the demarcation of two separate cultures on religious basis-the Hinldus
and the Musli~llsthat deepened further because of the partition. This division which has
become institutionalised in the form of a communal ideology has become a major
for a major part of the last century signified Hindu-Muslim conflict, in recent years
contestations between Hindus and Sikhs, Hindus and Christians have often crystallised
into communal conflict. The rise of Hindu national assertiveness, politics of
representational government, persistence of communal perceptions, and competition for
the socio-economic resources are considered some of the reasons for the generation of
communal ideologies and their transformation into major riots.

Identity schemes based on religion have become a major source of conflict not only in
the international context but since the early 1990s it has also become a challenge for
Indian democracy and secularism. The rise of majoritarian assertiveness is considered
to have become institutionalised after the BJP. that along with its 'Hindu' constituents
gave political cohesiveness to a consolidating Hindu consciousness, formed a coalition
ministry in March 1998. However, like all identity schemes the forging of a religious
community glosses over internal difierences within a particular religion to generate the
"we are all of the same kind" emotion. Thus differences of caste groups within a
homogenous Hindu identity, linguistic and sectional differences within Islam are shelved
to create a homogenous unified religious identity.

In post-independence India the majoritarian assertion has generated its own antithesis in
the form of minority religions assertiveness and a resulting confrontational politics that
undermines the syncretistic dimensions of the civil society in India. The process through
which this religious assertiveness is being increasingly institutionalised by a 'methodical
rewriting of history' has the potential to refbrmulate India's national identity along
communal trajectories.

17.3.3 Language
Identity claims based on the perceptioil of a collectivity bound together by language
inay be said to have its origin in the pre-independence politics of the Congress that had
promised reorganisation of states in the post-independent period on linguistic basis. But
it was the "JVP" (Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya)
Committee's concession that if public sentiment was "insistent and overwhelming", the
formation of Andhra from the Telugu-speaking region of the then Madras could be
conceded which as Michael Brecher mentions was the "opening wedge for the bitter
struggle over states reorganisation which was to dominate Indian Politics from 1953 to
1956". Ironically, the claim of separate states for linguistic collectivities did not end in
1956 and even today continues to confront the concerns of the Indian leadership. But
the,,problem has been that none of the created or claimed states are mono-ethnic in
composition and some even have numerically and politically powerful minorities. This
hqs resulted in a cascading set of claims that continue to threaten the territorial limits
of existing states and disputes over boundaries between linguistic states have continued
to stir conflicts, as for instance the sinlmeriilg tensions between Maharastra and Karnataka
over the district of Belgaum or even the claims of the Nagas to parts of Manipur.

The linguistic divisions have been complicated by the lack of a uniform language policy
for the entire country. Since in each state the dominant regional language is often used*
as t& medium of instruction and social communication, the consequent affinity and

+%.

2 10
allegiancehat develops towards one's own language gets expressed even outside~one's
state of origin. 'For instauice the fimhation of linguistic cultural and sooial grbups outside
one's state of origin helps to consolidate the unity and sense,of,comrnunity in a separate
linguistic society. Thus language becomes an important premise on which group identities
are organised and establishes the conditions for defining the '&-$rixpY. ~dd'ou&group":
-- -. --
Though it is generally felt that linguistic states provide freedom and autonomy for
collectivities within a heterogene~ussociety, critics argue that linguistic states 'have
reinforced regionalism and has provided a platfqrm for the articulation of a phenomenal
number of identity claims in a country that has 1,652 'mother tongues' and only fourteen
recognised languages around which states have been reorganised. They argue that the
effective result of recognition for linguistic groups has disembodied the feelings of
national unity and national spirit in a climate where 'Maharastra for Marathis, Gujrat for
Gujratis, etc" has reinforced linguistic mistrust and defined the economic and political
goods in linguistic terms.

17.3.4 Ethnicity
You will study in detail about the ethnicity in unit 26 of the book 2 of this course. There
are two ways in which the concept of ethnic identity is used; one, it insiders the
formation of identity on the basis of single attribute - language, religion, caste, region,
etc; two, it considers the formation of identity on the basis, of multiple attributes
cumulatively. However, it is the second way formation of identity on the basis of more
than one characteristics - culture, customs, region, religion or caste, which is considered
as the most common way of formation of the ethnic identity. The one ethnic identity
is formed in relation to the other ethnic identity. The relations between more than one
ethnic identities can be both harmonious and conflictual. Whenever there is competetion
among the ethnic identities on the real or imaginary basis, it expressed in the form ol'
autonomy movements, demand for session or ethnic riots. You will study about the
major examples of ethnicity in Unit 26 of the book 2.

17.4 SUMMARY
Identity has become an important phenomenon in the modern politics. The identification
of a members of the group on the basis of sharing common attributes on the basis of
all or some of the attributes, language. gender, language, religion, culture, ethnicity etc.
indicates the existence or formation of identity. The mobilisation on the basis of these
markers is called identity politics. Identity politics gained legitimacy in the 1950s and
1960s in the United States and Europe.

In India, the identity politics, hqs become an important aspect of politics. The rise of
the dalit politics, especially the I3SP and backward class politics following the
implementation of the Mandal Con~missionReport; linguistic organisation of Indian
states from the 1950s, and rise of the BJP, and the active role of the organisations like
the RSS; and the ethnic conflict, insurgency and autonomy movements in several parts
of the country are examples of the identity politics in India.

21 1
,
The democratic political system in India enables various groups to organise and assert
on the basis the common attributes which they share. Identity politics has both negative
and positive roles in Indian Politics.

17.5 EXERCISES
1) What is identity politics? Explain.

2) Discuss the role language in Indian Politics.

3) Write a note on the role religion and caste in Indian Politics-