Many minorities at many levels
By Syed Shahabuddin
Minority-majority is a numerical concept to describe the classification of the whole into parts in accordance with a principle of categorization. When applied to human society or to population within a defined area, the concept becomes charged with politics, depending upon the principle of categorization-race, language, religion, caste, class, occupation/profession etc., and becomes relevant to the management of the polity, the economy and the society in the age of democracy.
Enumeration whether of the population of an area or of the composition of a social group-leads to two possible situations. One segment may account for more than 50% of the whole, while there may be one or more smaller segments. The first is the majority and the others are all minorities. A situation may arise when no single segment accounts for more than 50% of the whole but the segments vary in size. One may still designate the biggest segment as the majority and the others as minorities, but with the understanding that indeed there are only minorities and no majority.
The majority-minority question is of more than academic interest in any heterogenous society/state in the age of democracy in which numbers become the basis for distribution of social resources, goods and services. The democratic principle is further applied not only to ensure justice and equality in the principle of distribution but also in the distribution machinery-the government, the administration, the coercive apparatus and the adjudication system.
The results of social categorization of population will vary according to the area, both vertically and horizontally i.e., hierarchically and contiguously. Thus we can analyse and compare the population pattern vertically at the Panchayat, the Prakhand, the Zila, the Rajya or the Rashtra levels or horizontally in contiguous Panchayats or Prakhands or Zilas, Rajyas and even Rashtras.
But like the population in a given area at a given level, a social group inhabiting it, to the exclusion of other social groups, may also be classified by sects within a religious group, by sub-castes within a caste group, by dialects within a linguistic group, etc. The internal configuration or composition of a social group also becomes politically important when any of its sub-groups exhibits an inclination to assert its identity and stake a special claim of its own Social Identity in a Plural, Multi-level Polity.
The identity of the social groups in a plural society is no longer limited to geography: the village, the district, the region or the state. It has also become multi-dimensional. Apart from race, religion, language, caste and domicile, class and occupation also enter into its definition. Depending upon the situation, one set of solidarity may reinforce or cancel another on an interface with a third set. And the pattern may change with time. And it always varies in space. Thus the game of politics goes on, provided there is no dominant group with an overwhelming majority. If a dominant majority emerges at any level, then a situation of conflict will arise on its interface with the dominated minority group at some other level. Thus the pot keeps on boiling.
Politics of Plurality in India In our multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-linguistic, multi-cultural, multi-caste, and multi-class society, with history and geography having left their stamp on the people-their way of life and their consciousness, democracy based on ‘one man, one vote’ has given birth to rising expectations of equality and tends to crystalline and to congeal identities. Education and equality of opportunity have brought power within the reach of all definable and self-conscious groups and sub-groups. A churning is taking place. Ideological solidarity is breaking down. With groups disintegrating into sub-groups and like-minded groups coalescing across vertical jurisdictions and forming horizontal coalitions or alliances, society is both disintegrating and integrating at the same time. The quest of electorally viable solidarities is complicating the numbers game. Enemies of yesterday become friends of today and the allies of today confront each other tomorrow. Funnily enough, some sub-groups belonging to different groups my act as allies in one context and as adversaries in another.
The churning in this ancient land of ours is both fascinating and frightening. One cannot see the end of this game, at least not yet. Perhaps with overall progress, political and economic equality and social justice. The situation may slowly stabilize.
Unfortunately, those with a limited vision and a narrow mind see it only as a continuing collision between Hindus and Muslims and reduce politics to a permanent confrontation between religions.
Given the course of the Freedom Movement, religious consciousness has been primordial, so has caste when our mind is focused on immediate questions in the local setting. The fact is that while the Hindus form a majority in the country as a whole, they are a minority in several states in relation to another group or one of the minorities when no group commands majority. The Muslims or Christians, nationally minorities, form majority, or one of the minorities, in the absence of a dominant majority, in some others. The status goes on changing as one goes down from states to districts, to Prakhands and to Panchayats. No religious group, howsoever broadly defined, forms consistently a majority at all levels everywhere and every religious group forms a majority at some level somewhere.
The same is true of language as the basis of classification. At the national level, Hindi, even with all its variations, is not the mother tongue of the majority of the people but of the largest minority group, and in a majority of State/UT’s it is a minority language vis-à-vis the dominant majority language. Every major national language (except Urdu & Sindhi at state level) is a majority language in some states and a minority language at other levels and elsewhere.
The same is true of caste. Even if one ignores the sub-classification of each of the Varnas among the Hindus (or the break-up of the Muslims among the Ashraf, Ajlaf and Arzal, no Savarna forms a majority in the country or in a State or in a Zila or in a Prakhand. Perhaps it might, in some Panchayats. The same is true of the Sarvanas, as a whole. The Shudras may together but not individually form a majority of the people at same levels in some places but not universally throughout the country. The same is true of the Ashraf-Ajlaf-Arzal stratification among the Muslims. But when-with the rise in democratic tempo and the surge of ethnicity, the Shudras and the Ajlaf/Arzal begin to show their cleavage lines, no single sub-Shudra or sub-Ajlaf/Arzal will command a majority anywhere at any level. The same would be true of the identities consolidated into artificial constitutional entities called the SC’s or ST’s, which bind together various sub-castes and tribes. Their numerical strength will vary both vertically and horizontally, except that in the case of the tribes, the pattern of dispersal and concentration due to historical factors is such that in many more Panchayats and Prakhands and Zilas, a particular tribe or a group of tribes together may form a majority.
Democracy is not adequate; it has to be supported with secularism social justice and multi-culturalism. All identifiable groups and sub-groups or their affinities form majorities and minorities at the same time, depending on the level and the jurisdiction. As pointed out the political game of seeking alliances based on religious, linguistic and caste affinity of a group or its sub-groups at the highest possible level, control the widest possible space and thus build up bargaining power in the political market place, will go on. It cannot be stopped nor replaced by purely ideological beliefs or solidarity. Nor should it be, as it is part of the struggle for equality and justice, if the objective is to prevent the strongest to emerge as a dominant majority, riding roughshod over the minorities.
Universal and Reciprocal Recognition of Minority Rights
What is required therefore is to add another chapter to the book of Rules-a chapter on Minority Rights based on the Constitution, which anticipated, to our honour, the UN Declaration on Minorities, 1992. A National Code on Minorities Rights should be formulated, providing for the rights to be enjoyed at various levels by the minorities, irrespective of their identity marker and constitute a National Minorities Council to monitor the status of minorities at all functional levels, without identifying the term minority with a particular religion, language, caste or culture. To give an example, Hindus in J&K should enjoy the same rights as Muslims in other states; Hindi-speaking children, the same rights in non-Hindi states, as the Urdu-speaking, in the Hindi-speaking states; the Yadavs in non-Yadav majority villages as non-Yadavs in the Yadav majority villages.
If every majority group, at any level, does not ignore or forget its duties towards the minority groups and respects their rights, the polity shall weave an unbreakable web of mutual confidence and cooperation, what is more important, of reciprocal dependence.
Universal Justice Through Proportionate Distribution
Secondly, the state must by law institute a distribution pattern in which the benefits of development and of welfare measures reach in proportionate measure to all identifiable social groups, which constitute the distinct identity at the appropriate level.
Universal Representation in Power Structure
Thirdly, the State structure including the legislature and the administrative machinery must be so organized as to ensure that every identifiable social group at the appropriate level has due representation and say in the decision-making process with reservation in legislature and governance if necessary.
Justice to Sub-minorities
Fourthly, every macro-minority must ensure due justice to all component micro-minorities which means due sharing of all authority, power, benefits and concessions.
India as a Model for the Multi-ethnic Word
The political consequences of the ethnic heterogeneity and the pattern of dispersal make India-a land of multiple and multi-level pluralities-the biggest social laboratory of our times and a model for the world. One cannot underestimate the difficulties on the path ahead, but not only the future of India but also the future of the world depends on our successful management of our diversities, pluralities and ethnicities which are on a continental scale, and at multiple levels.
_________________________________________________________________________________
This article first appeared in the August issue of the monthly magazine Muslim India.