Apartheid and the Untouchables
By L. F. RUSHBROOK WILLIAMS MR. MACMILLAN'S talks in Delhi with Mr. Nehru are known to have covered many of the problems of the Commonwealth. Mr. Mac- millan can hardly have failed to be impressed by the importance which Mr. Nehru, in common with his countrymen, attaches to the question of racial equality. How deeply this problem bites into India's consciousness is seldom appreciated in' this country. The debate which took place in the Political Committee of the General Assembly on the South African Government's racial policy was scarcely mentioned here, although it was widely reported throughout Asia. There was over- whelming support for the motion regretting the failure of South Africa to co-operate with the United Nations in seeking a solution acceptable to humanitarian principles.
In actual fact, it is impossible to travel in Sotith-East Asia today without encountering much evidence that South Africa's racial policy is exercising an influence far beyond the sphere of its immediate operation in Union territory. Racial discrimination has become the bugbear of modern Asia; its adoption by a Commonwealth country is looked upon as a real threat to co- operation between the Orient and the Occident. On this issue, nations as deeply divided in policy and outlook as India and Pakistan react as one.
Feeling in India is particularly bitter. During last year I was told of hotels (although I never found them) where the management display notices reading 'Dogs and South Africans not admitted.' There seemed to me to be two reasons for this bitterness, in addition to the conviction, shared with other Asian countries, that apartheid is an affront to the dignity of non-white races. In the first place, India's success in upholding the prestige and importance of Asia in inter- national affairs makes her particularly sensitive to a racial policy which inflicts upon her own nationals the indignity of second-class citizen- ship. In the next place, India is deeply affronted by the customary South African retort that she of all countries has the least right to complain about apartheid since she has been practising it for centuries in the shape of the caste system. Criticism of this kind, many Indians complain, shows either ignorance or malice.
Can this attitude be justified? Or is it true that in spite of the secular State, adult franchise and democratic institutions, the caste system still con- demns certain sections of the Indian population to, perpetual social and economic inferiority. The practice of 'untouchability,' of segregating outcastes from the rest of society, is now illegal. It is forbidden by Article 17 of the Indian Con- stitution; and it is subject to severe penalties under the Untouchability (Offences) Act of 1955. Further, under the system of adult franchise, all the scheduled castes and tribes have the vote; so that if they care to exercise their potential political influence—and there are about 100 million of them altogether—they can make them- selves heard in no uncertain fashion. Moreover, there is a special official—the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Tribes—whose duty it is to watch over the interests of the so-called un- touchables, to judge how far the prohibition of untouchability protects them, and to present an annual report about their condition. Unfortu- nately, in spite of the legal ban on untouchability, the successive reports of the Commissioner are not reassuring. They make clear that the scheduled castes still lack the courage to assert their new rights and to break the social barriers anciently imposed upon them.
What do these barriers mean? In most villages the scheduled castes must dwell apart; they mix very little with the rest of the community. Where they have not a well of their own, they often have to wait until some charitably disposed mem- ber of a higher caste comes by, draws water from the well and pours it into a pit, whence people of the scheduled castes can scoop it up without polluting the well. In some villages no one be- longing to a scheduled caste may ride a horse or a camel. So far as concerns access to shops and restaurants (and in some cases even roads), only a few of the most advanced and enlightened of these Harijans—People of God, as Mr. Gandhi taught his fellow-countrymen to call them—have the boldness to exercise their legal rights, not because they are ignorant of them, but because they fear to offend caste-Hindus, on whom they -are dependent for their livelihood, by asserting them. Only in the matter of entry into temples is equality with caste-Hindus generally effective: This is because Mr. Gandhi himself made such'. a point of it that the opposition of caste-Hindus- crum bled.
The timidity in asserting their legal position' which still handicaps Harijans socially is reflected in the way that they vote: They have a number of seats reserved for them in the central and local legislatures. Only Harijans can stand; but: the electorate includes caste-Hindus as well. In- dependent candidates rarely come forward be- cause when they do they find little support. In practice the representatives of the Harijans a generally men acceptable to caste-Hindus, whose influence with the electorate is often decisive.
Fbrtunately, there is a brighter side to the' picture. Every Indian leader, from the Prime Minister downwards, is determined to end un .touchability, not merely in law but in fact. A• great deal of work is being done to bring the Harijans forward, to relieve their economic de pression and to raise their living standards. In the towns things are already easier for thetri;:,, caste origins are less regarded; personal qualifi- cations count far more in securing employment. In rural areas the scheduled castes are proving very receptive to the opportunities which the Community Development movement and the National Extension Service bring to their door. I visited several villages where the Harijans have given improvement schemes a big push forward by being the first to build themselves' good, modern houses to replace tumbledown huts. Since the caste-Hindus are unwilling to be left behind, such villages quickly become modernised and sanitary. Moreover, a great deal of money is being spent on scholarships, and maintenance grants for the scheduled castes; places in schools and colleges are reserved for them; they are en- couraged to enter government service and the defence forces. As soon as they acquire some professional and economic status their origin is politely ignored—especially as caste-Hindus are perpetually exhorted by India's most influential leaders to realise that because untouchability is a slur on the national good name it must at all costs be removed. Although this cannot be done overnight—for the practice is very old and is sanctioned by the kind of deep-rooted custom which is often mistaken for a religious injunction (which it, is not)—there are signs of a real change of heart among the caste-Hindus in the direction of admitting the Harijans to 'a place in the sun.'
However, untouchability is only one aspect of the caste system as a whole; indeed it could dis- appear and leave the caste system stronger than ever. The traditional division of Hindu society into the 'four orders'—Brahmins, Kshattriyas, Vaishas and Sudras—has been described as a sociological fiction, because it has never been a true picture of a society in which men from each 'order' are found in every walk of life. The real strength of the caste system lies in the 3,000 or so sub-castes, with innumerable ramifications, which divide society into a series of watertight com- partments because of the restrictions which they impose upon' eating and upon marriage. Where certain of the restrictions about eating are found to interfere with modern life, for example in travel or in business, they are quietly relaxed. Indeed, among the younger people, among the professional classes, among higher government servants, and especially in the defence forces and the colleges which prepare candidates for them, restrictions about eating only with caste-fellows have largely vanished. But the older people, and especially the women, are very conservative; and since a sense of filial duty is strong among In- dians, many 'advanced' men and women resume orthodox eating habits when they visit the family home. And it is remarkable how completely caste restrictions still dominate marriage arrange- Ments, even among people like university students Who loudly—and quite honestly—profess to de- spise them. An individual here and there does break away and marry •the girl of his choice regardless of caste regulations, but to do this Involves all kinds of difficulties for both families affected and often causes deep distress.. In a country where 'arranged' marriages vastly pre- dominate, there is as yet no widespread dis- position to defy caste restrictions in this sphere.
There is a world of difference, in fact, between the way in which the caste system works for those who belong to it and for those who hare outside it. To the untouchables it has brought an unmixed curse, the speedy removal of which Is imperative; to caste-Hindus it has been a useful cohesive force which has held Hindu society together in spite of India's subjection to the many different invading cultures of which history tells. Has it outlived its usefulness now that India is her own mistress? Many Indians attack it on the ground that caste loyalties are incompatible with the All-India outlook, with the exercise of individual judgment in politics, and with the urge to national social and economic advancement on which the Indian secular State must rely if it is to prove success- ful. In the long run the reformers may get their way, because the zeitgeist of modern India is behind them. Yet the caste system is so deep- rooted, so adaptable and so bound up with the Hindu outlook on life that it is unlikely to dis- appear quickly—especially if untouchability, the aspect on which it has been most vulnerable to attack, steadily yields to liberal ideas backed by legal sanctions. One thing, however, is clear : India has good ground for arguing that the caste system, in spite of all the criticisms which can be—and are—directed against it, is a purely social phenomenon which has nothing in common with the deliberate political exaltation of a 'master race' which damns apartheid in Asian eyes.
Previous page
