Gandhi: Caste, Class and Gender To better

slide1. Gandhi: Caste, Class and Gender To better understand Gandhi and Gandhi’s India<br>
slide2. WHY pay attention to these categories? These are among the most important VECTORS of POWER in India
people’s lives (and identity) shaped by these categories
they determine the opportunities and disabilities people encounter
rich and poor, upper and lower castes, men and women do not share the same experience of nationalism or perception of Gandhi
This focus allows us to understand nationalism in general, and Gandhian nationalism in particular, in more complex ways
Might help us better understand Gandhi’s later marginalization<br>
slide3. HOW do we study this? In ADDITION to the textbook, we explore these via three sets of readings
1. Godaan to better understand the lived and intersectional reality of the three categories
2. Hardiman, “Father of the Nation” from Gandhi in His Time and Ours to better understand Gandhi’s own gendered worldview and its limitations
3. Ambedkar, “What do the Untouchables Say?”, Guha, “Gandhi’s Ambedkar”, and Hardiman, “Dalit and Adivasi Assertion” to understand the differences in perspective and politics of Gandhi and Ambedkar
The powerpoint Caste, a historical approach is critical background “reading” for all of the above, but especially #3
ALWAYS keep in mind that the three categories INTERSECT, so will make references that go back and forth between the three sets of readings<br>
slide4. Godaan Published in 1936, in progress before that, so depicts life in the 1920s and early 1930s
Premchand committed to “social realism,” that is to depict society as he saw it. His political inclinations apparent in the novel. He also inaugurates the Progressive Writers Association in Lucknow in 1936
Godaan is fiction, of course, but fiction that allows us to understand the workings of class, caste and gender among the vast majority of Indians who lived in rural India as intersecting hierarchies (i.e. inequalities)
To re-state the obvious, CLASS here refers primarily to ECONOMIC inequality, CASTE to those premised on the VARNA-JATI model, and GENDER to the inequalities between MEN and WOMEN<br>
slide5. Main Characters<br>
slide6. Class (Economic Hierarchy) Clear CLASS division between those on the left (poorer, steadfastly rural) and those on the right, who are richer, connected with a more urban and cosmopolitan, MODERN world. Most men, and some women are also familiar with English or have western-style education
Their ECONOMIC privilege also allows them to be much freer of caste restrictions. Think of their parties and contrast with restrictions on who could eat with whom in the village (and see Jhuniya, p. 68)
There are also clear class distinctions WITHIN the group on the left. People like Datadin, Jhinguri Singh, or Lala Pateshwari are much better off than the likes of Hori
Both Bhola and Hori are much better off than Harku or other untouchables
But caste matters a great deal more to almost all of the villagers, marking them off from the more cosmopolitan elite of the cities
Think of this in the context of Gandhi’s position on caste too, and his arguments about the real India living in the villages<br>
slide7. Digression (Reminder) Peasant Appropriation of Gandhi (see p. 177-78) Gandhi a SYMBOL l of righteousness, morality, of someone who stood for “doing the right thing”
Research has shown that in many cases common people, the masses, peasants, factory workers, homemakers, often had their own grievances. These were not always grievances against the colonial state, but often against other Indians, richer, more powerful than themselves, whom they saw as their immediate oppressors
They APPROPRIATED Gandhi to own actions, read into his message what they wanted to, and often worked in ways that were both supportive of Gandhi, yet against his prescriptions
For the INC, the importance of Gandhi lay in that he was able to focus people’s resentments away from conflicts within Indians, and pick up issues which directed the resentment toward the colonial state
In this process, his key precepts were of critical importance<br>
slide8. (Reminder) Gandhi Class and Status Quo Conclusion of HS (Ch. XX) asks doctors & lawyers give up their practices, but not ask the wealthy man to give up wealth. Hardly anything against merchants or moneylenders... and certainly nothing against landlords or zamindars, although nothing positive about them either! Was it because these were “traditional” occupations?
Although traditional, still exploitative... so despite what he says in Ch. XVI (pg. 63), that “by patriotism I mean the welfare of the whole people” he says nothing about THIS set of economic relations between Indians and other Indians that was HINDERING the welfare of the majority of the people
Gandhi’s ideas, his politics, allowed for controlled mass movement: One thing that HS reveals is that where SOCIAL and ECONOMIC relations WITHIN Indian society are concerned, Gandhian politics could well imply the maintenance of STATUS QUO …. To whose benefit does maintaining status quo work?
The largest “class” in India was peasantry. Reason for Gandhi being the political phenomenon he was, was because of support of peasants. Yet worked as both mobilizer and brake on peasant movements<br>
slide9. Everyday World of Caste Godaan helps us better understand why and how caste hierarchies worked “on the ground” and some of the intersections of class and caste (gender too)
Varna categories alone would place Hori and Bhola on the same varna, Rai Sahib and Jhinguri Singh as the same, and Malti, Matadin, and Omkarnath too
Shows importance of jati and biradari (brotherhood), the fact that Bhola and Hori are different jatis makes Gobar and Jhuniya’s marriage a problem (Caste is not the issue for Mehta and Malti, though Rai Sahib wants his children to only marry other Thakurs)
Shows how important jati was to community, to one’s economic standing and ultimately to one’s identity. Shows how separation of castes enforced by the village council
Hypocrisy of the rules that work in favor of richer upper castes, e.g. the ease with which Datadin offered to have his son readmitted to caste
Finally, and very important, through the example of Matadin’s defilement (305-06) Godaan reveals the new “Dalit” consciousness that was emerging in the 1930s (see discussion of Ambedkar, below)<br>
slide10. Intersectional Hierarchies: Gender, Class, and Caste Though there are evident class and caste differences between the characters in Godaan, hierarchies along gender lines operate both intersectionally with, and independently of class and caste
Within the contexts of their own families and friends, Dhaniya, Jhuniya, Siliya, Malti, and Govindi suffer some clear disadvantages. Dhaniya and Malti often able to give back as good as they get, but Godaan makes a strong case for recognizing inequalities between the sexes
At the same time, clearly, Malti and Govindi have some advantages bases on class (economic resources), over women like Dhaniya or Jhuniya
Focusing on a character like Siliya, we can see how class, caste, and gender together frame the matrix of her oppression<br>
slide11. Back to Gandhi Gandhi claimed (in Hind Swaraj) that the real India lived in its villages
Where does he stand on questions of inequality WITHIN Indian society?
Godaan, for most part, stays away from comment on nationalist politics (though given only the elite discuss nationalist politics in the novel, that could be read as a comment on nationalist politics too)
Starting with Gandhi’s ideas about and engagement with women, we will then move on to examining his debates with Ambedkar
Through these engagements, we hope to better understand Gandhi’s connection with the subordinated sections of Indian society and ways in which Gandhian politics helped and hindered the politics of subordinated (subaltern) groups in India of the time<br>
slide12. GENDER : Gandhi and Gendered Nationalism (from earlier slide set) Gandhi’s masculinity/sexism
Constant use of MANLINESS as a desirable trait, though these ideas not necessarily MANLY e.g. in the way that colonial rulers would think of manliness.... Courage, bravery etc., hardly exclusive to men, women probably have greater ability to bear pain
Yet when Gandhi talking about the ability to suffer, and bravery, he calls it MANLINESS... Why? Product of his time?
His gendered language, Parliament as Prostitute, as sterile woman, what does that say to us?
What do these factors tell us about the sort of NATION he is imagining, and constructing ? What sort of position does he see for women in it? This is one of the questions I have posed for you for your third discussion<br>
slide13. Background to Gandhi’s Ideas on Gender BRAMHACHARYA, which can be glossed in a number of ways. Easiest for our purposes is CELIBACY. Very old idea, going back (it is claimed) to the Vedas (~1200 BCE), that semen represents vital force, preserving which will increase spiritual and in some readings, physical strength
similar ideas had widespread currency in the late 19thC and early 20thC world
19th C Indian REFORMIST nationalism (see M&M pp. 144-50 and Banerjee) that associated nation with woman, woman with purity, and the preserving protecting the purity of women as representing protecting purity of nation against colonial onslaught
For many, protecting this notional woman (the slogan, “mother India” e.g.) was more important than the rights of real flesh and blood women. Thus women confined to homes, married off while very young, supposedly to protect their PURITY (and by implication, of the nation)
This in turn was based on the idea (never expressed) derived from ancient classical texts, that women’s sexuality was voracious, and needed taming and controlling<br>
slide14. GANDHI on Gendered Sexuality As with many of his other interventions (see Caste, later) Gandhi is both a product of this milieu, and challenges these ideas
Close connection with broader ideas of self-restraint & self-discipline outlined in Hind Swaraj (traumatized by own personal history of having sex while father died)
Reverses traditional ideas to argue that it was men whose sexuality needed controlling (need for brahmacharya) while women’s sexuality weaker, saw them as “pure and virtuous” as sisters and mothers
While reverses traditional patriarchal ideas about women’s voracious sexuality and need for constant surveillance, imposes on them the BURDEN to live up his idealized notion of women’s sexuality
Women who did NOT live up to his expectations were vilified, e.g. a “loathing for prostitutes” that was not matched by disdain for others (104-05)
In 1928 he blamed women as victims of rape (107) and even justified killing of daughter over “dishonor” (108)
He does, however, CHANGE his mind on rape, arguing quite the opposite in 1942, justifying the rights of a woman to fight back with violence against her rapist (108-09)
His aim of moral regeneration to create a stronger nation, though, different from others, stressing a “feminine” principles of love and sacrifice over the claims of a “muscular nationalism” of Vivekananda and others (103)<br>
slide15. Gandhi and Marriage Complete patriarch in the fullest sense of the word
“Naturalizes” Separate Spheres: Believed women’s place was in the home
Yet, does not naturalize hierarchy, women not possessions of men
Valorizes marriage as an institution for the STABILITY it brings (much as he does with Caste or at least varnashrama dharma)
Argues for women to resist oppression in marriage via satyagraha
As a husband, he disregards KASTURBA’s wishes, thought she was fortunate to marry him and generally shows her little respect
Thought of himself as her teacher who had to be cruel to be kind (96-97)
Why did she take it? What alternatives might she have had?
Though he does nurse her “with devoted care” as she was dying (101) and she dies in his arms<br>
slide16. Gandhi and Family Family in the abstract is to be celebrated as “a force for restraint” (107)
Relations with own family are not that great though
Terrible relationship with HARILAL (eldest son) [film Gandhi, my father explores in more detail] who never adjusted from shift to westernized, prosperous, lawyer’s household to Gandhi’s later austerity
Seeks to control all his son’s choices. Asks for harshest punishment after insisting Harilal participate in satyagraha. Refuses Harilal request to study in a University (as Gandhi himself had)
Harilal’s debts, alchoholism, and conversion to Islam appear to be all calculated as direct affronts to father<br>
slide17. Gandhi, Women, and Politics Many contradictory impulses at work
Gandhi FEMINIZES politics, CHARKHA (the spinning wheel) traditionally seen as women’s work, now becomes the central symbol of nationalist politics
Feminine qualities valorized in Gandhian nationalism
Gandhi’s assassin said he killed him because Gandhi was making India effeminate
Despite his belief in a woman’s place being the home, he actively encourages women to participate in politics. Resulting in women’s political participation on an unprecedented scale (see details, 111-116)
Argues that “to call a woman the weaker sex is a libel” (110)
Praises women who chose to remain unmarried as serving society, a greater good than serving a family<br>
slide18. Gandhi Patriarchy and Feminism Though Gandhian mobilization of women facilitated the growth of political feminism, he was no feminist
Women gain confidence and pride with Gandhi, but were not allowed to challenge patriarchy (much as peasants were not allowed to challenge landlords, or untouchables the caste system itself!)
Hardiman does not mention his debates with Margaret Sanger or Marie Stopes on birth control, or differences with early feminists such as Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay, though a great supporter of Gandhi, saw his opposition to birth-control as man’s “desperate attempts to thwart women’s efforts to achieve social and economic freedoms”
Gandhi resisted feminism not only on account of his own “patriarchal bad habits” but also because feminism would, in his own perception, undermine the unity of nationalism<br>
slide19. Gandhi on Caste and Untouchability “Untouchables” = jatis deemed to be OUTSIDE of Varna by the Brahmins; the touch or even a shadow of an untouchable considered polluting to the SAVARNA (literally, those with Varna, usually referring to top three Varna categories)
Gandhi believed untouchability was not a part of Hinduism, was morally repugnant (though Ambedkar has some sarcastic remarks about it!)
Yet more ambiguous on caste itself, though his ideas change
Maintained varnashrama dharma (the spiritual and moral duty of each varna to fulfill its given role in society) was a source of social harmony
In the 1920s he said caste was a better form of division of labor than class (Hardiman 126)
As late as 1924 agreed with Savarnas in Vaikam (Vaikom, Kerala) Gandhi agreed that Untouchables were the result of bad karma in pervious life (though also said that humans no right to add to punishment God meted out)
Pressed by Ambedkar perhaps, began to be more critical. By 1935 Gandhi said the sooner it was abolished the better. By 1946 urged caste-Hindu women to marry Dalit men (Hardiman 127)
Faced tremendous opposition from Savarna Hindus, whether the religious orthodoxy, or even many members of own party who were resistant to losing social privilege
As lower caste movements, particularly Ambedkar’s, pick up steam, Gandhi also faced severe criticism for his conservatism on social issues, particularly caste and untouchability<br>
slide20. Political Context of Gandhi Ambedkar dispute “The untouchables” (also known as “depressed classes”) was a legal category created under British rule that brought together different jatis that under this umbrella classification
Since 1909 seen as a distinct political constituency in British India
During the 2nd Round Table Talks (to decide political future of India) in 1931 in London, Gandhi and Ambedkar disagree. Ambedkar wanted to maintain the depressed classes’ separate status, while Gandhi insisted they be part of the generic category of “Hindu.” No resolution at the talks
In 1932, the British government proclaims that Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, AND Depressed Classes would have SEPARATE ELECTORATES in the coming elections (Communal Award) 
Gandhi, while in jail, undertakes a fast unto death against the separation of Caste and Untouchable Hindus. His argument was that separation would mean savarna Hindus would not have to change attitude to untouchability
Ambedkar is pressured into accepting a compromise (the Poona Pact) where he accepts RESERVED SEATS (where only the so-called “untouchables” could contest from certain electoral districts) but ALL HINDUS would vote for them<br>
slide21. Gandhi’s Response and Ambedkar Gandhi steps up his efforts to make the issue of untouchability more central to his program
Coins the term “Harijan” (children of God) to refer to untouchables and starts the Harijan Sevak Sangh (HSS or Servants of Untouchables Society)
Though during disagreement with Ambedkar he does make what Hardiman calls a “shabby” remark that if Untouchables got separate seats, they would “make common cause with Muslim hooligans and kill caste Hindus” (131)
Ambedkar and Gandhi had some fundamental disagreements, as Guha says:
Gandhi wished to save Hinduism by abolishing untouchability, Ambedkar ultimately saw abandoning Hinduism as only solution. Gandhi was a rural romantic, Ambedkar a modernist who dismissed the Indian village as a den of iniquity. Gandhi was suspicious of the state; Ambedkar a steadfast constitutionalist, who worked within the state and sought solutions to social problems with the aid of the state<br>
slide22. Ambedkar’s critique Ambedkar saw Gandhi as both patronizing toward the untouchables and trying to appropriate them to his agenda that Ambedkar saw as serving the interests of status quo, that is Upper Caste dominance
Points out that though Gandhi claimed to have seen untouchability as a sin since he was 12, only really addressed the issue seriously after 1932 (when it became politically necessary)
Abolition of untouchability was to be a part of the drive toward Swaraj in 1921, but never followed up on
Gandhi never made opposition to untouchability a condition of joining the INC, as he did spinning yarn or boycott of foreign goods in 1924
Gandhi never used satyagraha to secure civil rights of untouchables (such as access to wells, temples, public places) against upper caste Hindus
“By the time of the Round Table Conference, the Untouchables had become completely self-reliant and independent. They were no longer satisfied with charity from the Hindus. They demanded what they said was their right” (Ambedkar Ch. X)
But these rights, Ambedkar argued, were undermined by Gandhi’s fast against the Communal Award (which he terms “a vile and wicked act”)
“There is no doubt that it is to kill this spirit of independence among the Untouchables that Mr. Gandhi started the Harijan Sevak Sangh. The Harijan Sevak Sangh by its petty services has collected a swarm of grateful Untouchables who are employed to preach that Mr. Gandhi and the Hindus are the saviours of the Untouchables.” (Chapter X)
Gandhi, Ambedkar says, “does not want Swaraj at the cost of disrupting the structure of Hinduism which is what political emancipation of the Untouchables means”<br>
slide23. Assessment Hardiman says Gandhi wanted to channel Dalit resentments into the nationalist movement, via an orderly transformation using constructive work
Both Ambedkar and Gandhi agreed that untouchability needed to be abolished as part of the agenda of nationalism. The question was how, and what priority it had for the two sides
Ambedkar and his followers saw nationalism as positive only if it addressed the inequity at the heart of this nation, and saw little point in nationalism if it was to perpetuate their absolute subordination
For Gandhi though, evidently, national unity and not provoking savarna resentment was a higher priority
Though many of Gandhi’s ideas were radical from the point of view of the savarna elite, they were decidedly conservative when seen from the perspective of an increasingly assertive lower caste population<br>
slide24. Gandhi and Caste, Class, Gender Gandhi’s interactions with peasants, women, and untouchables reveals some important fractures as he translates his VISION into POLITICS
Gandhi’s vision is premised on a sympathy for the underdog, and that is an important reason for his mass appeal
For peasants, e.g., see M&M, pp. 177-78
His vision also includes many radical critiques of existing society, most clearly captured in the arguments of Hind Swaraj
BUT, Gandhi is also a great believer in gradual change (change of heart, at the center of satyagraha, is necessarily a slow process)
His political agenda too, necessitates carrying ALL sections of Indian society together and that precludes support for any measures that would be divisive, such as peasants against landlords, women against men, or untouchables against upper castes
For Gandhi and INC opposition to independent peasant movements, see M&M, pp. 185-88
Thus, without necessarily being committed to maintaining social, economic or cultural privileges, Gandhi ends up supporting the status quo
Alienation of support from groups who he mobilized and whose expectations he raised (think peasants, or Harijans or women) may well have been one reason why Gandhi becomes marginal to the game of nationalist politics post 1935<br>