Search

This paper attempts to demystify the antagonistic relationship between modernity and tradition as construed by Ashis Nandy. As a prominent voice in postcolonial scholarship, Nandy saw modernity as a colonial conception of rights, self, and society. Nandy's critique of modernity laid the grounds for several projects that rejected the modern consensus for its colonial origins. Juxtaposing Nandy's reiteration of early anti-modern nationalist thought with a multi-dimensional reading of colonial modernity in contemporary Ambedkarite scholarship, this paper explores the ambivalences of negotiating modern liberalism in a postcolonial order of hierarchical group identities. Despite the close imbrication of modernity with the imperial centre, Ambedkarite scholarship demonstrated how B.R. Ambedkar, synthesized a middle ground, where he incorporated the promise of modernity to liberate the 'individual' without dismissing the 'communal' collective self, construed by traditions. While postcolonial scholarship is heterogeneous, following Nandy, huge postcolonial melancholia has conflated modernity with coloniality. How do we rethink postcolonial theory from its current culturalist posturing to (re)claim the emancipatory potential of both modernity and tradition? Could it be that Nandy's anxiety and discomfort with modernity fail to 'contemporise theory'? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the concept of knowing in caste-ridden Dalit lives using the analogy of seeing in the context of the Black African-American racial society, where race is identified primarily through skin colour. Thus, the 'Black body' is marked by the act of seeing. A Dalit body, however, is usually discovered through knowing caste. Knowing is a complex mediated by caste, class, race, religion, occupation, spatiality, language and other forms of placement. Knowing is imperative in the context of a representative democracy to ensure social justice and the equitable distribution of government services. But does knowing someone's identity lead to equal treatment and equal respect, which constitute the substantive measures of democracy? I argue that knowing is a mode used to perpetuate caste, based on everyday ways in which Hindus live their lives. Pursuing this question, I problematise the concept of knowing in the trajectory of Dalit lives. I then take Ambedkar's 'Waiting for a Visa', situated in the genre of Dalit autobiographies, to illustrate the concept of knowing. Finally, I ask: given the politics of knowing, how do Dalit lives matter when practising caste? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the way caste is captured within the dominant and popular scholarly tradition of post-colonialism. It will also explore how Ambedkar's anthropological emphasis on the centrality of sociocultural relations for understanding caste dynamics opens up the limitation of a post-colonial understanding of caste. In doing so, the paper is oriented to advance a Dalit-centric historical anthropology of caste. The focus on the relationship between competing discourses on the histories of caste will provide critical insights into how Dalit movements negotiate with various politics of knowledge to develop varied pathways of progress for Dalits and other marginalized communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article shows how untouchability was framed as an ethnographic problem largely through a racial and Brahmanical perspective by looking at some of the main interventions made by British and Indian social scientists on this topic, such as H.H. Risley, G.S. Ghurye and Radhakamal Mukerjee. Dalit traditions, knowledge and theories about their origin were discarded and suffered an epistemicide. Reassessing the history of untouchability as an ethnographic concept is critical as the influence of these theories can still be perceived not only in common understandings about the origin of Dalits but also in the way sociology and anthropology are practised in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]