Dear friends,

Merry Christmas.  Because Jesus was a social revolutionary and because
Ambedkar burned the Manusmriti on this day ikn 1927 we may celebrate
it as manavmukti din.

but along with joy and celebration I wish we could all think about the
following:

ORISSA and MUMBAI

Two major massacres have taken place in India recently.  One received
24 hour television coverage for several days, not only in India but
also in the U.S.  The other has been nearly blanked out of the
national and world press, let alone television, though it has gone on
for months.  One took place in the rich "heart" of Mumbai's "Fort"
area, in the opulent Taj and Oberoi hotels and several nearby
buildings; those targetted were the capitalist wealthy-- though the
killed also included middle class and workers caught in the crossfire.
 The other has been buried in the jungles and fields of Orissa,
Karnataka and Rajasthan, where Dalit Christians have had their homes
for centuries.

Muslim terrorism and Hindu terrorism.  It might be more correct to
call it "Brahmanic," except that what has been shown in Orissa,
Karnataka and Rajasthan is the ability of Brahmanism to conquer and
warp the minds of Adivasis and OBCs -- not to mention Dalits
themselves.

Muslim terrorism is a subject of endless discussion, vows, bitterness,
condemnation of the government.  "Hindu terrorism" is hardly even
admitted.  Yet the RSS and various affiliates have been practising it
on an awesome scale in the last months.

"Conversion" is the theme, and Christians are targetted.  In Orissa,
the Hindutva forces were able to take advantage of longstanding
hostilities between the dalit Panos and the adivasi Khonds.  Large
sections of the Panos have converted to Christianity.  The Khonds, in
contrast, have been wooed to think of themselves as convinced Hindus,
and to see the Pano Christians as aliens inhabiting what should be
their land.  The fact that the Christians have become marginally
better off, more educated, and with a new sense of pride, has
exacerbated the tension.

But what happened in the current attacks (some form of these has been
going on for years, though the latest started in October)  has no
satisfactory explanation.  Mobs of "Hindus" surrounded and burned the
houses of Christians in countless villages, primarily in the district
of the Khondmals, but elsewhere also.  They were forced into the
forest, told not to come back unless they became "Hindu."  Many were
beaten and killed; women, including nuns, were raped.  Priests and
nuns were special targets, but among the raped was a mentally retarded
nonChristian woman who had simply been living in a home provided by
the Christians.  Some have been forced to eat cowdung and other quaint
methods of brahmanic "penance" or prayascitta, and had their heads
shaven.

The terror has continued for months, with police and state complicity.
 Dalit Christians have either been cowering and hiding in the forests,
or shivering in refugee camps where they are told "you can go home if
you become Hindus."

Attacks have also taken place in states such as Karnataka and
Rajasthan.  Elsewhere, when they are weak enough, Christians are also
targetted,  In Himachal Pradesh, for example, many have been called to
the police station on charges of "forced conversion"; the intention
was not to apply the conversion law which in any case cannot be
enforced since almost never, anywhere in India, because there has
never been evidence given to show "force"  illegal "inducement" (aside
from conviction and gaining a sense of self-respect) -- but rather to
allow RSS goons an opportunity to beat them up.  The total number of
those expelled from their homes is approaching 50,000; and how many
have been killed is not known..  the number seems to run into
hundreds.

Why has there been no mass protest to this?  A fairly simple answer
suggests itself: the leadership in the resistance has been with the
Christian church and with their almost unconscious participation, the
pogrom has been projected as one on "Christians," not "Dalits", let
alone "Indian citizens."   Dalit resistance/protest has been minimal
(aside from sympathy) perhaps for this reason.  But this in turn has
to be understood in terms of the fragmentation of caste.  Dalits have
protested in mass to attacks that are perceived as being on them; one
case that immediately comes to mind is the uprisings all over
Maharashtra following the Khairlanji slaughter.  But this did not
happen immediately, but only some months later – following a
desecration of a statue of Ambedkar in Kanpur.  The conclusion can
only be that identification even among Dalits themselves is along very
narrow lines, and may even be getting narrower.  Those slaughtered and
driven from their homes in Orissa are not seen as "Dalits," let alone
Indian citizens; maybe they are seen in Orissa as
"Panos-converted-to-Christianity".  Orissa in any case has had few
mass movements, but it seems clear that Dalits outside of Orissa do
not identify with this particular community; they also do not really
identify as "Dalits" but as "Chamars," "Malas," "Madigas",
Mahars/Buddhists or the like.

Mayawati may find a lack in popular appeal even among Dalits outside
of north India for the same reason.  Had Barack Obama – a son of a
Kenyan and a white American, not part of the "real" African-American
community to the degree Michelle is – been born with an ex-Untouchable
father from outside of India , say, a Nepali dalit and a Brahman
mother, he would not have been considered "Dalit."

The narrowness of identification is a feature of the caste system in
India; people have been mobilizing lately (when they are not getting
mobilized as "Hindus" by the fundamentalists) as Malas,.Madigas,
Gujars, Meenas, etc. etc.  It can be seen even in relation to the
Mumbai riots: A central minister, A. Antulay, recently resigned after
an uproar came when he carged that the death of police superintendent
Hemant Karkare, who had done more than any other person in recent
months to make "Hindu terrorism" an accepted word, a death that has
been shown to be NOT coming from the terrorists guns, was
"suspicious."  Antulay was right – but that should have been publicly
stated by a "Hindu" politician, not by a Muslim one.  So far though,
only one of the "secularists" in Congress or other parties had spoken
up on this issue, as far as I know.

       We also have to ask, why the lack of news coverage on the Orissa
terrorism?  The answer that is obvious for India is the fact that the
media are not only capitalist, but "upper"-caste controlled; Dalits
expect no more from the "Brahman bania press" (or, as Dalit Voice
editor rajshekhar provocatively puts it, the "national toilet
papers.").  but what about the world press?  Here a different answer
emerges: those who control the world media have an interest in
stigmatizing and targeting Muslims,.while India is emerging as the
U.S.'s greatest ally and is therefore not to be easily criticized.
Cynthia Stephen
Independent Researcher and writer
Bangalore, India