equal by law, unequal by caste - International Dalit Solidarity Network

Vol. 26, No. 2 Equal by Law, Unequal by Caste 309relationship of economic dependency between Dalits and their “uppercaste”employers remains intact. 307In the overwhelming majority of cases, the sheer brute force withwhich caste rules are enforced, and against entire Dalit communities, actsas a form of collective punishment. As noted above, punishment fromthe law enforcement machinery against perpetrators of such acts iscomparatively non-existent. The contradiction is not ironic; it is thelogical outcome of that which justifies the violence itself. Theobservance of “untouchability” and the punishment of those who darestep out of their ranking as “untouchables” are acts “of religious merit,the non-observance of which is a sin.” 308 If the act of discriminating andpunishing is seen as just, and laden with economic incentive, then howcan just punishment be punished? Seen in this light, the impunityperpetrated by the police—who are products of the same hierarchicalsystem—is not impunity from the vantage point of caste, but a form ofjustice in observance of a wholly different set of laws.E. COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUSNESSAtrocities of the nature outlined above do not find a home in thecollective conscience of the nation. Though the state may respond withthe pro forma setting up of commissions to investigate particularatrocities, or with administrative agencies mandated to address the lackof justice to Dalit victims, the outcry from the general public isdeafeningly silent. This of course begs the question, “Why?” Some mayposit that such cases, by the sheer force of their volume turn outrage intoapathy, compassion into fatigue, and normalize that which should beAug. 16, 2008). When Dalit agrarian labor activist Bant Singh, whose daughter was gang-rapedin 2002, defied landlords’ threats and local “upper-caste” leaders in seeking prosecution againstthose who gang-raped his daughter, the landlords retaliated by violently attacking him, beatinghim so badly that both his arms and one of his legs had to be amputated; the remaining leg waspermanently disabled. Amit Sengupta, Bant Singh Can Still Sing, TEHELKA.COM, Feb. 4, 2006,http://www.tehelka.com/story_main16.asp?filename=Cr020406do_bigha.asp (last visited Aug.16, 2008).307 In June 2006, for instance, when a Dalit argued with an “upper-caste” farmer in Kothapallyvillage in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh, the “upper-caste” villagers attacked eighty Dalitfamilies in retaliation. When the same Dalit man then went to the police to report the incident, asocial boycott was imposed on all of the Dalits from Kothapally; they were thrown out of theirvillage and denied any opportunity to earn their livelihood. Tejeshwi Pratima, Dalits ThrownOut of Their Village For Raising Their Voice, INDIANCHRISTIANNEWS.COM, June 29, 2006,http://indianchristians.in/news/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=449&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=44 (last visited Aug. 16, 2008).308 AMBEDKAR THOUGHT, supra note 19, at 31.