Of Riots and Racism

~
Sharad Pawar of the Board of Control for Cricket in India claims that no Indian can be "a racist." His rationale -- if it can even be called that -- is that India has been at the forefront of the "fight against racialism in its history." After my reaction of "eh?!" I'm tempted to note here that if one of my students offered me such "proof" in support of such an "argument," that student would have had the laws of argumentation explained her. At approximately the same time, and incidentally, in the same city from which Pawar's absurdities flow, there are near-riots on the streets: the people of Bombay, now dubbed "Mumbaikars" are being encouraged to kick others (namely, North Indians) out of their "Mumbai" by scions (metaphorically and literally, since the prime accused in this is one Raj Thackery, whose main claim to fame seems to be his close relationship with Bal Thackery of the Shiv Sena) of the BJP and allied right wing organizations. This isn't limited to Bombay; according to all the news sources here, across the state of Maharashtra, North Indians are being targeted by unruly mobs with the motto "Maharashtra for Maharashtrians."

Though I was born in Bangalore, and all of my family in India live in Karnataka, I have a Maharashtrian last name (courtesy of dad, whose father was born there): so I'd like to know if I count as a Maharashtrian? Having never lived there, and having only been to Bombay to fly in and out of the country, not speaking a word of Marathi, do I count? Am I -- unlike the hundreds of thousands of "other" Indians currently living and working all over the state -- welcome there? If I am, I'd like Mr. Pawar, or anyone else who feels qualified, to tell me how this is different from the racism of apartheid-era South Africa, or indeed, the current policies of the Jewish state?

If not, i.e, if I'm not "Maharashtrian" enough, then surely Maharashtrian-ness is a matter of nurture rather than nature. And surely those who've flocked to the state, who've contributed to its robust economy, who've chosen to live and work there have as much right to be there as anyone else?! So what price "racism" in India?

In the meantime, here in Karnataka -- and for those of you who are unfamiliar with Indian geography, Karnataka, the state in Mysore and Bangalore are located, shares a long border to the north with Maharashtra -- there are all kinds of protests over the lack of "quotas" for "Kannadigas" (i.e Kannada speakers, who are presumed to be Karnataka natives) in the Railways. Apparently too many Railway jobs (and keep in mind that in India, with its high umemployment rate (30%, I think), a job with the central government owned Indian Railways is pretty much a unionized-job-for-life and in the lower ranks, one of the few such things available to those with little education or experience, are being snagged by "North Indians" (those from Bihar and Madhya Pradesh, mostly).

Lest you go away thinking that there is a peculiar animus that "South India" holds against "North India," it's a little more complicated than that. I'm not sure that Maharashtra, until this newest of agitations against "North Indians," would ever have considered itself a "Southern state" -- in fact, even now, it probably thinks of itself as "Central India." The "South" is Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andra Pradesh. And my childhood memories attest to the historic denigration of "the South" by federal politicians in India, who have mostly been of North Indian origin. Historically, it's been a question of language rather than location: and the four states of the South have always rejected the imposition on Hindi as a national language. Add to this the sense of the rest of the country that the South is "dark" -- a legacy of the Dravidians (and don't get me started on the racist connotations of the Northern dislike of "darkness"; "uncivilized" -- because it did not take well to the Aryan invasions; and "hot" -- this last is true. And what we have now is a deeply alienated part of India that in the last two decades or so has suddenly gained economic power and social prestige through its ready acceptance of globalization. The IT industry is headquarted in Banglore, and next in line is Hyderabad, the capital of Andra Pradesh. Likewise, the call centre economy emerges from Bangalore. Ironically, this can be traced back directly to "the South's" rejection of Hindi and stubborn insistence upon English as a medium of education and communication.

My point is simply this: there is a lot of murky social history in India that is being brought to the forefront now as a result of the imbalances of economics. Given this, and given the turmoil against members of various groups -- all on the basis of alleged "origins" and "otherness" -- it is not just ironic to make absurd claims on behalf of all Indians, it is downright ridiculous.

Actually, it's worse than ridiculous but words fail me at this point so I'll leave it to your imaginations.