Society

Explained: From Supreme Court Quota Ruling to Panchjanya Editorial—How Caste Comes to the Forefront of Indian Politics

Critics argue that defending the caste system perpetuates social inequalities and undermines ongoing efforts to address historical injustices.

Geetha Sunil Pillai

New Delhi- Caste continues to be a significant and contentious issue in Indian politics, as recent events and statements have thrust it into the spotlight. The debate encompasses a range of issues, from historical justifications and contemporary criticisms to legal rulings and political remarks.

This report examines three key developments: the controversial editorial in the RSS-affiliated Panchjanya magazine defending the caste system, BJP MP Anurag Thakur’s remarks about Rahul Gandhi’s caste background and the Supreme Court's recent judgment on the creamy layer criterion in reservations.

1. Panchjanya's Defense of the Caste System

The latest editorial in Panchjanya, a weekly magazine affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has ignited significant controversy by defending the caste system. The piece, penned by the magazine's editor Hitesh Shankar, characterizes the caste system as a "unifying factor" in Indian society, sparking heated debates in political and social circles.

In the editorial, Shankar argues that the caste system was not merely a hierarchical structure but a mechanism that integrated various classes in India by aligning them with specific professions and traditions. He asserts that the system played a crucial role in maintaining societal cohesion after the industrial revolution. According to Shankar, the caste system was a target for invaders like the Mughals and missionaries, who sought to undermine it to disrupt India's unity.

Shankar claims that the Mughal rulers used military power, while missionaries employed reformist rhetoric to attack the caste system. He suggests that the caste system's breakdown was a strategic move by these groups to fracture India's societal fabric. Shankar further posits that the missionaries recognized the caste system as central to India's identity and sought to dismantle it to weaken the nation.

Criticism of Historical and Contemporary Forces

The editorial also critiques historical invaders and missionaries, alleging that they aimed to destroy India's traditional industries and alter its cultural identity. Shankar argues that the caste system, despite its flaws, helped preserve the skills and traditions that distinguished Indian craftsmanship, contrasting it with the perceived inferiority of foreign industrial products.

Moreover, the editorial targets the Congress party, accusing it of using caste divisions to create discord within Hindu society. Shankar contends that the Congress's push for a caste census is a tactic to deepen existing divisions and undermine Hindu unity. He parallels this with the British strategy of dividing Indian society along caste lines to maintain control.

Context and Implications

The timing of this editorial is particularly noteworthy. It follows recent controversy involving BJP MP Anurag Thakur's remarks on the caste of Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, which have fueled discussions on caste and reservation policies. In this context, Panchjanya's editorial seems to be reinforcing traditional RSS narratives that position the caste system as an essential aspect of Indian identity and unity.

Shankar also references Anurag Thakur's remark in the article. He states that if one were to ask about India's caste from the perspective of history and society, the answer would be "Hindu." However, if the question were posed to the Congress party, Shankar suggests the response would be "East India Company and A.O. Hume."

This defense of the caste system is juxtaposed with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat's earlier statement expressing support for continuing reservations for oppressed classes if necessary. The apparent contradiction between these positions has drawn criticism from various quarters, with some accusing the RSS of attempting to reconcile support for reservations with a defense of the caste system itself.

The editorial has elicited strong reactions from political and social leaders. Critics argue that defending the caste system perpetuates social inequalities and undermines ongoing efforts to address historical injustices. Supporters, however, claim that the editorial provides a necessary counter-narrative to contemporary critiques of the caste system and its role in Indian society.

2. Anurag Thakur’s Casteist Remark on Rahul Gandhi

BJP MP and former union minister Anurag Thakur recently made headlines for his remarks about Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s caste background in the Lok Sabha. Takin a jibe at Rahul Gandhi's continued demand for caste census, Thakur without naming anyone, had stated, “Jiski jaat ka pata nahin wo ganana ki baat karta hai (whose caste is not known is talking about caste census).” Thakur probably hinted at the inter-caste marriages of Rahul Gandhi’s grandmother Indira Gandhi and father Rajiv Gandhi to suggest that Rahul’s caste cannot be determined.

BJP defended Thakur as the party national spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said, "Divider-in-chief Rahul Gandhi whose Rajiv Gandhi Foundation has no Dalit, whose father late Rajiv Gandhi called the OBC community who was demanding reservation, 'Buddhu' - people of the country are asking Rahul Gandhi that when you are talking about dividing the country into castes and religions, and when your divide and rule agenda is exposed, why are you worried...The issue is larger, it is about the national interest of India and in the national interest." Bhandari contrasted this with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s development-centric policies, which he claims have uplifted Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs).

Supreme Court's Judgment on the Creamy Layer Criterion

In its verdict on August 1, the Supreme Court of India addressed the issue of the “creamy layer” within the reservation system.

The Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud permitted states to create sub-classifications within the SC and ST categories for the purpose of according wider protections — through fixed sub-quotas — to the most backward communities within these categories. This overturns the apex court’s 2004 decision in E V Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradeshin which it had held that the SC/ST list is a “homogenous group” that cannot be divided further.

The ruling had six separate opinions — five in favour of sub-classification, and a lone dissent by Justice Bela Trivedi.

The ruling is significant because it reinforces the principle that reservations are meant to aid those who are economically and socially disadvantaged within the reserved categories.

Meanwhile, this decision has sparked widespread discontent among various social and political groups, leading to calls for a significant demonstration of dissent. It has been criticized by numerous academicians, scholars, and leaders who argue that it undermines the original intent of affirmative action policies aimed at uplifting historically marginalized communities.

Noted Filmmaker Pa Ranjith condemned the court's ruling. He stated, "Caste is a socio-cultural identity, not altered by economic status. Reservations are already insufficient relative to the SC/ST population, giving rise to significantly underrepresentation. The bench's Brahminical perspective fails to address the systemic oppression faced by SC/ST population, instead perpetuating further exclusion. The focus should be on expanding quotas to reflect demographic realities, not creating new divisions."

Many bahujan organisations have called for a nationwide bandh (strike) on August 21 to protest against the ruling.

You can also join our WhatsApp group to get premium and selected news of The Mooknayak on WhatsApp. Click here to join the WhatsApp group.

Kerala Teacher Forces 6-Year-Old Dalit Student to Clean Classmate's Vomit, Sparks Outrage

Karnataka BJP Continue Protests Over Waqf Land Notification

CPI(M) Looks to Hire Professionals for 2026 Bengal Elections

75 yrs of the Indian Constitution: A Museum to Advance Civic Education

UNICEF, KITE collaborate to develop AI programs for Kerala's special needs students