All lives matter!
One of the biggest international news this week has been the racial unrest in the USA. And another great tragedy which has been playing out for the last 2 months in India is the way our migrant labourers have been treated. I will try to go into these two recent happenings, draw parallels and look at the reality of what remains to be done.
I am sure you know about this, but a quick recap: George Floyd was a 46-year-old African American man who worked as a bouncer at a music club until he was laid off when the pandemic hit and Minnesota went into Lockdown.
On the 25thof May, a grocery-store employee called the police
on Floyd around 8 p.m. and alleged he had tried to pass a counterfeit $ 20
bill. Derek Chauvin, a 44-year-old white police officer was one of the officers who responded. He, along with three other
officers, apprehended Floyd and although the police claimed that Floyd
“appeared to be under the influence” and resisted arrest, bystanders captured
video of Chauvin restraining Floyd by kneeling on his neck, for as much as nine
minutes, even as he kept saying that he could not breathe. Floyd was later
pronounced dead at 9:25 p.m. at the hospital. The officers was fired on May 26th After some days of dilly-dallying, Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder
and if convicted, he could face more than 12 years in prison.
In Minneapolis, protesters took to the streets in the days after Floyd’s
death to denounce anti-black racism and police brutality. The slogans of these
protests, ‘I can’t breathe’ and ‘Black Lives Matter’ evoked a long history of similar police-related killings of black men, such as the 2014 deaths of Eric Garner in New York and Michael Brown in
Ferguson. The protests continued to grow and spread to cities around the US and
took a destructive turn from May 28 when a police station was set on fire. By
the end of the first week, demonstrations and protests continued which claimed
large-scale destruction of property.
The unrest comes at an especially perilous time during the Covid-19
pandemic, which has infected and killed more people in the US than in any other country and black Americans have suffered causalities disproportionately. The protests began just as many states were beginning to ease their
stay-at-home measures. But our concern today is not about Covid-19; it is about
race relations in the US.
President Donald Trump has inflamed the protests by calling protestors
‘thugs’, threatening to send in the military and suggesting in one tweet that ‘when
the looting starts, the shooting starts’, an infamous phrase used in the 1960s
by segregationist presidential candidate George Wallace and a Florida police
chief who threatened a violent crackdown on civil-rights protests. Trump, a Republican who is running for re-election in November, has
a history of inflaming racial tensions. He blamed ‘both sides’ for violence
between white supremacists and left-wing counter protesters in Charlottesville,
Va., in 2017 and has been repeatedly castigating the immigrants crossing the US-Mexico
border.
But knowing President
Trump, what he said is not news. The news is that Trump had to be briefly hidden in a bunker under the White House as hundreds rallied nearby. It is news that he had to walk
back some of the outrageous remarks when, for the first time ever, Twitter
censured one of his tweets as “glorifying violence” and blocked it from view. It
is good news that Houston police chief criticized Trump for his handling of the ongoing protests and advised
him to ‘speak constructively or keep his mouth shut’. And it is indeed welcome
news and undeniably powerful imagery when a number of white people join black
folks in solidarity.
The discourse this
time in the US seems to be that a death like this happens, and they rage about
it, then the headlines recede and the world moves on. A few weeks later
something else happens and they are outraged again and then they move on, again
and that they have to stop this cycle.
We
hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these
are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 1776, Declaration of
Independence! Does all men here mean all humanity? Or white males? A struggle
between pragmatism and emancipation? There is a thought that while equality
here was itself limited sense, it was more in rebellion against the British
crown with reference to representation and taxation. You would hear frequently
that the spirit was feebler than the French Declaration. This can be another
debate in a historical perspective but is not central to the purpose of my
message today. And in spite of this strong foundation of liberty and life, it was
only in 1865 that slavery was abolished. Then it was nearly 150 years before white
women were allowed to vote and nearly 200 years before universal suffrage
became a reality and all African Americans could finally vote.
This
in a country which was born out of the concern for equality and liberty. 200
years! The underlying concept was the European philosophy of Enlightenment and
a belief in this concept made people like Elizabeth Stanton, Abraham Lincoln
and Martin Luther King derive the moral and historical high ground for equality
and achieve what they did. And yet the soft underbelly of racial divide is
exposed frequently. Obama
wrote on the protests that called on a new generation of activists to demand
change. An extract, “If, going forward, we can channel our justifiable anger into peaceful,
sustained, and effective action, then this moment can be a real turning point
in our nation’s long journey to live up to our highest ideals”.
While
there is a rush of empathy and outrage for ‘Black Lives Matter’ in India as
well, similar alignment of forces of public at large against caste, class and
religious violence in India is largely absent. Is this not performative
wokeness? People are more involved in promoting themselves, social media ‘likes’, or selling books and lectures, than
about actual deliverables. Should woke be selective? Let me say something which
may sound scandalous as the happenings in US go through censure and critique.
Not good. The US, as so many other countries, has its undercurrents of racism yet
we do not need to show solidarity with them but to learn from them. We in India
only embraced these principles 70 years ago and have a long way to cover. There
is no gainsaying that the Indian freedom movement and its constitution were more
potent attempts for social change; they must be viewed with the perspective
that these changes evolved by drawing upon the concepts and wisdom, liberty and
equality learnt from the west. Ours not being a natural progression towards a
truly free society, we have a long way to go in spite of strong intervention by
the governments and politics.
I thought for long whether it was correct to talk of these
issues in the same breath, but a lack of empathy for the migrant labourers in
our country could not be ignored or sugarcoated. One could see spontaneous outpouring of empathy and angst
for ‘Black Lives Matter’.
Standing in
solidarity with other downtrodden communities seemed so meaningful; why are we
not shaken by similar horrific violence right in our midst? Is there a double
standard, a hypocrisy? Do privileged Indians speak out with similar alacrity
about the apathy of the state towards the plight of migrant labour, violence
against lower caste communities and religious mayhem? Lynchings. Police
brutality. Absolute denigration of the underprivileged in our everyday life.
It
does appear as if true solidarity has been replaced by a performative one.
Bereft of sincerity, it is a ride on the bandwagon of a fashionable cultural
movement to emulate our western counterparts. Add to that the recent fad of
calling out racism with anti-Trump sentiments which is like a new status symbol
for Indians.
The comparison between American and Indian affirmative action
systems becomes even more interesting upon observing that blacks in the US and
lower castes in India share similar histories of discrimination. But there is a
difference: in India, the government has legislated quotas and reservations,
whereas in the US it is the society at large - including universities and colleges
and corporations - which encourage wider participation of minorities through
various outreach programmes instead of a quota regime. But have we reached even
close to where the US is today? I am not at all speaking against our system of
quota and reservations. Those are necessary.
I also do not intend to make this political. Disturbing that
they are, I do not want to berate merely the recent happenings in our country
alone. What I am talking about is you and me. Us. Have we changed the discourse
in these 70 years?
We
have countless videos of similar nature in circulation in India. Why is the
debate on our stark societal infractions so binary, so politically-motivated.
Why is the plight of all the underprivileged not met with the same anguish and pain?
Do we need to check if we have a minority of good liberals and a majority of
sham liberals? Why this litany of angry or insincere rhetoric from these so
called liberals in India flowing with a political colouration?
Violence,
physical or verbal, is the norm in India. We have to shred apart our collective
subconscious and the explicit political tools which justify all instances of
violence and indignities. Why have the gross cases of inequality and execution
of repressive actions become so invisible to the privileged? Would the average Indian
upper caste or class respond with the same empathy and shock to any
institutional murder of a lower caste or underprivileged class person? Examples
abound. I will steer clear from naming instances as most of these incidents
have assumed a political prism. My point is that numerous instances exist but
the debate is derailed in some form of political one-upmanship.
Genuine
empathy can never be zero-sum and so outrage over injustice in India and the US
are not mutually exclusive, so a comparison between them is not reductionist.
The asymmetry with which these incidents of violence are received, the
selectiveness with which people react, are good indicators for comparison. Just
as black lives are treated as less valuable, are Dalit lives more disposable?
In
India, we have another problem. Our colonial legacy has conditioned us to
emulate the west and racism is no exception. Consider the treatment frequently
meted out to African and even North-East Indian students in the rest of India.
We conveniently
ignore the fact that we, all the educated well-to-do, benefit from a power
structure that oppresses all those on lower levels of a forced socio-cultural
hierarchy. Take for example, our police. No one can deny the police have a
tough job. But they are peace officers, to protect all of us. But what is the
lasting image of police during the migrant labourers’ crisis and that of others
with no means to survive without daily work? The baton and the lathi. Those not
privileged enough are the ones who bear the brunt of police brutality. The
‘order’ in ‘law and order’ does not mean the deadly suppression of
underprivileged people; when will it start to mean transformation to a society
so we can all feel free and safe to live in peace with each other?
Let me make a
reference to the book Sapiens
by Yuval Harari. Ever since the Cognitive Revolution, Sapiens have been living in a dual
reality. On
the one hand, the objective reality of landscape, animals and perceivable
racial differences and on the other hand, the imagined reality of nations, corporations,
religions. As time went by, the imagined reality became ever
more powerful. One such imagined reality is equality of all humans, universal
liberty and demolition of racial divides.
Intersubjectives exist for good
reason. Laws exist for the benefit of society but they are made up by humans.
Money is useless on its own, but if we say it holds value, it does. Gods and
nations are some of the most powerful coordination technologies out there,
allowing Sapiens to work, trust, and even die for complete strangers. Unlike
all other species, humans can cooperate in flexible ways with countless numbers of
strangers. That is why we rule the world. I quote, “Humans have no natural rights, just as
animals have no natural rights. But don’t tell that to our servants, lest they
murder us at night.” Existence of human rights is a result of
growth of intersubjectivity constructed by humans themselves.
We
in India have to construct a new imagined reality for ourselves. We have to keep
repeating it till becomes a powerful force like so many other imagined
realities of our world. Instead of perfunctory sympathy and performative
resistance, we ought to learn from the bravery and resilience of all those on
the frontlines of this fight. To do justice to the communities protesting this
oppression the world over, we need to do more than just pay lip service to these
movements and take up the fight against systemic casteism and classism and
racism here in India. We have to dismantle the structures of power that keep us
from reimagining a collective future.
The
all-pervading caste system in India has its roots in some form of racism or
colourism in the past; the caste system has been institutionalized in India
since ancient times. In later medieval period it was called in question by
Muslim invaders and later Christian missionaries, providing an alternative to
the Dalits who converted to Islam and Christianity to get rid of the curse. But
the system of discrimination was actually cemented as the rulers in medieval
period as well as the Britishers were lighter skinned. We as people have not
been motivated enough to impugn the clear divisions along caste or racial
lines. But the issue is largely intersectional. The oppression people face due
to casteism is paired with, and magnified, by gender, social status, financial
status and education. Despite the longevity of the issue, why is the civil
society not seriously beginning to dismantle entrenched discriminations?
The presumption of
equality is a manufactured belief, agreed upon among reasonable persons for a
practical political purpose; it is based not on some natural fact that all
humans are truly equal but on an attempt to eliminate the risk of destructive
disagreement that would arise when natural inequalities are used as a
justification to rule or dominate. Only equality can be agreed to be an
undoubted right on which to found government. So far so good. But this
manufactured belief must pervade and overwhelm our thinking too, our mind sets,
for it to totally eliminate the periodic fissures between races, castes,
classes, religions.
Movements
against beliefs held over centuries must start to gain momentum if Indian
society has to head strongly towards a more inclusive and progressive future.
Many organizations centre their education initiatives on younger generations,
because they are the future, open-minded and willing to change their imagined
beliefs which we can also call their worldview. Most of the activists leading
movements against obvious disparities are based in cities and while their work
could be a vehicle for change and liberation, those in remote rural villages,
especially young women, are not necessarily granted the same opportunities.
Effective and lasting change for the entire country will only be made possible
when everybody is liberated from the deeply-ingrained societal racism.
Friends, India is not
at all immune to the disease of racism and inequality. The conversation I am
trying to provoke now on inequality is one which is either sidestepped or lost
in a maze of politics. It can be difficult, but it is a conversation we need to
have with our children, our neighbours, our co-workers, our classmates, our
community and our leaders. We need it to happen and we need it to start now.
…
In India if there is a problem with racism or casteeism they get converted to other religions.
ReplyDeleteYes, thanks for your input
ReplyDelete