The ‘Raj’ Effect: Empire, Caste, and Indian Organizations

Empire has manifested in many forms, such as the impact of neo imperialism and neo colonialism in the economic sector as well as the dynamics between developing and developed societies, it has also had far reaching effects on the shaping of organizations in other ways. Empire, imperialism and colonialism (Hardt & Negri ,2000) have had a historical impact on the development of several societies and systems. This paper explores the impact in India in terms of the effects on organizational life. While the colonization of the Indian nation by the British is a historical fact, the impact of this colonization on the Indian psyche is far deeper and carries over even into the present day. (Nandy, 1983; Bhabha,1994; Spivak,1994 ). In this paper, I explore this impact in one particular area of Indian social organization, the caste system, and how then this had an effect on organizations. The Caste System Scholars studying caste have tended to agree that the presence of castes throughout the country is a universal feature (Dumont, 1970). The main form of the system has been described as “hierarchical polarity” and “institutionalized inequality” (Dumont, 1970). It has been argued that even though there are regional variations, the caste system in fact represents a uniform and universal ideology when applied to an understanding of Indian society. The system or ideology of caste has a powerful influence in the conduct of economic life, therefore economic life in India is very much a part of the social system. A discussion of the concepts of Sanskritization (Srinivas, 1989) and Westernization (Srinivas, 1955, 1962, 1998) throws light on how the British created an elite group of Indians in the civil services and administration by aligning themselves with the uppermost caste in the hierarchy. This then resulted in the capture of top positions by the upper caste, the Brahmins. However, even after India’s independence in 1947, this dominance of the Brahmins continued in terms of education, occupational and organizational privileges and performance. Sanskritization and Westernization The process of Sanskritization delineates a mode by which a lower caste moved up in the hierarchy by adopting some of the practices of the upper castes. Simultaneously, the Brahmins, whereby they imitated the British in their form of dress, education and other aspects, thus considering themselves ‘superior’ to the rest of the people, adopted a process of Westernization. According to Srinivas (1955), the caste system is a dynamic system, and the fixed and rigid view of caste is problematic. Especially in the middle ranges of the caste hierarchy, movement upward was possible. A lower caste was able in a generation or so to rise upward in the hierarchy by adopting the rituals and eating practices of the higher caste, such as vegetarianism. The Brahmanic way of life, the customs, rites and beliefs of the Brahmins was adopted. This process has been called Sanskritization. The other process that went hand in hand with the process of Sanskritization was Westernization. The acceptance of Western cultural ethos and ideas by upper caste Hindus and the process of imitation of British customs and habits was the main feature of this process. The upper castes had an advantage in taking to Western education because of a tradition of literacy. The kind of westernization that was taking place in different parts of the country varied from one region to another. For instance, in some cases westernization was confined to the acquisition of western science, knowledge and literature, while others adopted westernized styles of dress, speech, sports and gadgets. These congruent processes were two sides of the same coin. While the upper castes were westernizing themselves, they were declaring themselves separate and distinct from the lower castes, which were becoming increasingly sanskritized. The effect was thus to increase the gulf between the upper and the lower castes. The upper castes were brought closer to the British rulers, which gave them political and economic advantage. Thus, the social gap between the lower and the upper castes remained, only the forms and manifestations of their practices and rituals changed. Caste and Reservations The caste system has been interwoven with the Constitution of India, and the legal position. The historical background of the Scheduled Castes can be traced back to the Government of India Act, 1935. On the basis of social and economic disabilities and historical discrimination suffered by certain groups because of their belonging to certain castes, they were placed in the list of Scheduled Castes (Parvathamma,1984). When the reservation policy was started there was a rationale behind it. Reservations refers to the practice of ensuring a certain percentage or quota of positions in jobs as well as in the case of admissions to educational institutions for persons belonging to the categories of Backward Classes, as well as Scheduled Castes. The logic behind following this as a concerted program of action on the part of the government of India was based on the principle of social justice and to set right the discrimination faced by these groups historically. The Constitution of India had provided for the idea of protective discrimination, or affirmative action for the sections of society that were traditionally faced with discrimination and with the burden of the past. As such, this resulted in the formation of the Backward Classes Commissions. The first such Commission was headed by Kaka Kalelkar and the report was tabled in 1955. The second Backward Classes Commission the Mandal Commission was set up in 1979 and the report was finalized in 1980 The Commission was also to identify the reference points of backwardness as social and economic backwardness. However, the impact of this second Commission was rather severe. Everywhere in the country there were antireservation stirs. In some cases, the policy advocated almost 50% reservations in jobs and educational institutions for the backward section of society. This resulted in the backlash against the recommendations of the Commission by the upper castes who felt marginalized. It also brought into the limelight the debate about merit versus reservations. That is, does reservations go against the concept of merit and due recognition being given to the talented and deserving? (Chatterji, 1996). Caste in contemporary India The stronghold or dare we say stranglehold of caste continues not only in terms of its visibility in all facets of life, but in the form of social marginalization. Despite Mahatma Gandhi's efforts to raise the status of the Untouchables by calling them Harijans, (the Hindi word which literally means people of god) the strength of caste as a way of social acceptance and political identification continues. Legislation protecting the castes who were oppressed for centuries has heightened the awareness of difference. "Caste is experienced not so much as something which you ' do’, as something which is 'done to you' by other (high caste) people" ( Searle -Chatterjee and Sharma,1994:11). The intertwining of the caste system with the political and economic life of Indian society continues. Thus, certain caste groups are the landholding sections of society and control powerful voting blocks in many of the regions in India. Further, when there is a concentration of a particular caste group in an area especially in industry and commerce, there is a bias towards appointments and positions of managerial authority being made from the same group (Barnabas and Mehta, 1965). Conclusion In essence, then, it is the main thesis, that while the caste system existed as a system of occupational division of labor, and later social inequality for centuries, the role of empire in India, served to deepen the impact of this schism in social life and this spilled over into organizational life. The effects have been seen in the operation of the reservation and quota system in Indian organizations (similar to affirmative action) and the backlash by the upper castes as a result. The impact in terms of organizational life have been in the areas of interpersonal communication between employees belonging to the underprivileged castes andothers, as well as in the area of perception of performance of such employees by peers andothers. ReferencesBarnabas, A.P.& Mehta, S.C. (1965): Caste in Changing India. New Delhi: The Indian Institute of Public Administration.Bhabha, H. J. (1994). “Remembering Fanon: Self, Psyche and the Colonial Condition”. In Williams, P and Chrisman, L (Eds). Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory: AReader. NY: Columbia University Press.Chatterji, P.C. (1996). Reservation: Theory and Practice. In Satyamurthy, T. V. (Ed.) Region, Religion, Caste, Gender and Culture in Contemporary India. Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress.Dumont, L. (1970): Religion/ Politics and History in India: Collected Papers in IndianSociology. Paris: Moulton Publishers.Hardt, M. & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. MA: Harvard University Press.Nandy, A. (1983). The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self Under Colonialism.Delhi: Oxford University Press.Parvathamma, C. (1984): Scheduled Castes and Tribes-A Socio-Economic Survey. NewDelhi: Ashish Publishing House.Searle-Chatterjee, M. & Sharma, U. (1995): Contextualising Caste: PostDumontianApproaches. MA: Blackwell Publishers.Srinivas, M.N. (1998). Village, Caste, Gender and Method: Essays in Indian SocialAnthropology. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Srinivas, M.N. (1989). The Cohesive Role of Sanskritization and Other Essays. Delhi:Oxford University Press.Srinivas, M.N. (1962): Caste in Modern India and Other Essays. NY: Asia PublishingHouse.Srinivas, M.N. (1955). “The Social System of A Mysore Village”. In McKim Marriott(ed),Village India. Chicago: University of Chicago PressSrinivas, M.N. Spivak, G.C. (1994). “Can the Subaltern Speak?” In Williams, P and Chrisman, L (Eds).Colonial Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory: A Reader. MA: Harvard University Press.