In the cities, after the establishment of democracy, the practice of blackballing citizens almost immediately lost its zeal. But in the villages, due to lack of information and agencies that could protect the individual’s rights as ensured by the constitution, the age-old discriminatory practices continued. But the Maoist-led uprising uprooted the age-old system even from the villages. In many villages, people who belong to the upper castes suffered badly during the social upheaval. Never have “all” higher castes people been well-off and many were, and still are, just as poor, just as disempowered and just as victimized as the lower caste people, contrary to what is commonly perceived. The conflict not only worsened the situation of those upper caste people who were already poor and downtrodden, but also greatly altered the condition of those who were comparatively well-heeled. They were forced to flee their homes, their properties appropriated and in many cases their family members killed during the war leaving the surviving ones helpless and vulnerable.
So, practically, to a great extent, the caste-based discriminations are dismantled and whatever remains of the age-old discriminatory tradition probably exist more in the minds than in practice. The psychological change in the mindsets of both the upper caste who consider themselves superior and the lower caste who think of themselves as inferior might take some years.
What we all need to understand is that upper- or higher-caste people were definitely privileged and dominant in the past, but they are not necessarily superior. Lower caste, likewise, were less privileged and vulnerable, but certainly not inferior. That is exactly why some people from the so-called lower caste group manage to rise in socio-economic status and free themselves from the humiliating circumstances while some from the higher caste fall down and suffer the same humiliation any poor lower-caste person is expected to go through.
Social change has now reached a point where the social divide has only two sides: Rich and poor. And we all know on which side of the fence people are more vulnerable and marginalized. Generally speaking, the greater the chances of being exploited or afflicted, the more vulnerable a social group is. The vulnerable who are disempowered are exploited by those with better socio-economic footing. But they are also at the greater risk of being afflicted by diseases and disasters. Those who are well off are in a better position to defend against exploitation and guard against natural or manmade afflictions.
Even after the bloody war and many socio-political movements for the emancipation of the vulnerable and marginalized, this situation has not changed. The issue of vulnerability and marginalization, therefore, needs to be seriously reconsidered from the angle of poverty, empowerment and a society that is governed by a system and controlled by capable institutions. These are the universal criteria applicable to all countries and societies. The poor anywhere are vulnerable and those who are disempowered or excluded from the purview of the governing machinery will always feel threatened.
Empowerment and social inclusion go hand in hand. Unless those who have been discriminated and left untouched by the radical social change and development that took place after democracy are empowered, they will always be exploited and afflicted by situations that are beyond their means to surmount. If the vulnerable are not empowered socially, economically and politically for a long period of time, they are ultimately pushed to marginalization. And since in today’s changed circumstances, it is not just the people from the lower caste but all those who are economically weak that are vulnerable, the development approaches should not be confined by a narrow caste-based approach.
Though we talk about equitable society where all have equal rights to freedom and opportunity, the undercurrent that drives this whole social movement is the belief that you either dominate or get dominated by others. That is why instead of working together to create a balanced and just society, we are more interested to establish a fiefdom for our ilk so that we can assert ourselves over others. This approach will weaken our society as a whole and make our country open to a totally different kind of vulnerability: The exploitation by foreign countries.
So, what is the right approach to building an equitable and just society where everybody can feel safe and emancipated?
In this regard, the World Bank’s Gender and Social Exclusion Assessment report’s observation regarding empowerment might be a guiding factor. The report states,
“Empowerment is seen as occurring at the individual and group level and, to an important extent, has to do with changes in the internal self-perceptions of those who have been in some way negatively defined and marginalized by the dominant society. It also has to do with increasing their access to assets, capabilities and voice, and helping them to realize the power they gain from collective action. All of this builds their sense of agency or their capacity to act on their own behalf. Often empowerment approaches work at the grassroots “from below,” helping diverse groups of poor and socially excluded citizens to organize themselves to improve their livelihoods and to demand broader institutional change.”
The report, thankfully, does not specifically point at and emphasize “socially excluded citizens” as the main development targets and mentions “diverse groups of poor” to include all those who need to be rescued from their deteriorating status. Now, there is something that our social policy planners and those entrusted with overseeing its implementation can learn from the observation.
amendrapokharel@gmail.com
Investigation finds 4 to 5 km of Sikta canal vulnerable