Sri Kancha Ilaiah Ji's Contention

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Folks,

I saw this:
The Hindu : Cities / Vijayawada : Ruckus at Kancha Ilaiah's book release function

But one comment he made got my attention:

He said the people, who belong to castes that were considered menial by Hinduism were the most productive, generating wealth for the nation.​

He made the same remarks in his famous book 'Why I am not a Hindu?'.
He accuses the roles all three Dwija Varnas as stealing the fruits of labor from both what he calla 'Dalitbahujans', - lumping together the fourth and fifth Varnas.

Since then I have been thinking about how wealth is made in a country, and especially in the Hindu tradition how it was made, controlled and distributed.

In this thread, I do not want to get in to the Varnas, Jathis, how they came about as well as about 'Brahminism' that Sri Kancha Ji hates so much.

I would like to discuss and my interest is who is responsible for the wealth of a nation in the modern society and how does this compare to our own history?

For this I would highly recommend you to read Sri Kancha's book, but it is not necessary though.

Regards,
KRS

 

[renuka]

Folks,

I saw this:
The Hindu : Cities / Vijayawada : Ruckus at Kancha Ilaiah's book release function

But one comment he made got my attention:


He made the same remarks in his famous book 'Why I am not a Hindu?'.
He accuses the roles all three Dwija Varnas as stealing the fruits of labor from both what he calla 'Dalitbahujans', - lumping together the fourth and fifth Varnas.

Since then I have been thinking about how wealth is made in a country, and especially in the Hindu tradition how it was made, controlled and distributed.

In this thread, I do not want to get in to the Varnas, Jathis, how they came about as well as about 'Brahminism' that Sri Kancha Ji hates so much.

I would like to discuss and my interest is who is responsible for the wealth of a nation in the modern society and how does this compare to our own history?

For this I would highly recommend you to read Sri Kancha's book, but it is not necessary though.

Regards,
KRS

I guess everyone is responsible for the wealth of nation but most important is paying income tax.
People who evade tax rob the nation of what its worth.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Dear Sri KRS,

Prof. Kancha Ilaiah is a regular contributor to "The Hindu" group of publications. Though I have not read the book quoted by you,I have read the articles of his. He used to blame Brahmins(ism) for every thing wrong in Society, nothing else. Even though the hold of Caste system is loosening up in the modern Hindu society, and lost its relevance, except for elections, people like Ilaiah were holding it tight, for reasons better known to them.
Today, in the competitive world of open economy, result oriented performance is the bench mark
for success. Nothing else will help.

Warm Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[KRS]

Srimathi Renuka Ji,

Yes, I agree.

But any tax comes after the productive contribution. Do you say then all people in a society have productive roles? What about a poet or an artist? Do they contribute as much to a society as a person who toils with manual labor?

Regards,
KRS

I guess everyone is responsible for the wealth of nation but most important is paying income tax.
People who evade tax rob the nation of what its worth.

 

[KRS]

Yes, I agree, Sri Brahmanyan Ji. My question is, in the Modern world whether there is any 'caste' system in terms of classifications and then associated 'class' system? And if there is such a system, how does it connect to our old Varna job classifications and the values given there of by our society.

We valued learning Vedas, Shatras etc. as the top of a society's productive effort, while relegating manual labor as not necessarily a valued effort. Is this statement correct? If so, how does our Modern life reflect or not reflect this value proposition?

Regards,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS,

Prof. Kancha Ilaiah is a regular contribter to "The Hindu" group of publications. Though I have not read the book quoted by you,I have read his articles of his. He used to blame Brahmins(ism) for every thing wrong in Society, nothing else. Even though the hold of Caste system is looseningup in the modern Hindu society, and lost its relevace, exept for elections, people like Ilaiah were holding it tight, for reasons better known to them.
Today, in the competitive world of open economy, result oriented performance is the bench mark
for success. Nothing else will help.

Warm Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[renuka]

Srimathi Renuka Ji,

Yes, I agree.

But any tax comes after the productive contribution. Do you say then all people in a society have productive roles? What about a poet or an artist? Do they contribute as much to a society as a person who toils with manual labor?

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS ji,

I am reminded of a scene from Vasool Raja MBBS where Kamal explains to a hospital cleaner the importance of his job of cleaning as to maintain a sterile atmosphere and to prevent diseases..in other words he also contributes to society as how a doctor cures diseases.

I feel everyone has a role to play in society..if we feel a farmer toils in the sun and feeds our stomachs..a poet and artist feeds our mind.

 

[sarang]

Ideally, only the producers - farmers and manufacturing sector generate wealth. The rest, consumers, only distribute the wealth. The middle sector - transport, distribution, retail etc only add to the costs, not value.
Mukesh ambani in one of his talks said - the farmer gets less than Rs 5 per kg for potato, whereas it sells for over Rs 50 per kg in europe. In a sense, he threatened the livelihood of all the intermediate cost adders, when he said that he wanted to reduce the gap between the origin price and final sales price. He did not say whether the potato will cost much less.
Perhaps only 20% are engaged in wealth generating sector (farmers, weavers, manufacturers etc.); 80% are consumers, perhaps they add to the quality of life.

Is addition of value wealth generation - e.g. cut vegetables in a plastic basket sealed with cling film selling for about rs. 100 per kg compared to same raw veg selling for rs 30 per kg?

 

[subbudu1]

Truth of the matter is wealth is generated by those who responsibly manage the resources and work for the welfare of the people and ensure equitable distribution of work, responsibility and revenue. Anyone even working hard for purely selfish reasons does not really generate wealth even though it appears to be so.
I therefore think that it is the unselfish leaders who really generate wealth. It is neither the brahmin nor the dalit. But the one among them who is just and fair and a true leader of his people or community whatever that may be.

 

[guruvayurappan]

smt renuka !
everybody is contributing for the national prosperty and we can not judge whose role is superior toothers. you have given the correct example.i am also remembering the scene for the same context.
guruvayurappan

 

[sarma-61]

I think by wealth generation, in modern economics we refer to GNP which, according to wikipedia is —

"the market value of all products and services produced in one year by labor and property supplied by the residents of a country. Unlike Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which defines production based on the geographical location of production, GNP allocates production based on ownership. GNP does not distinguish between qualitative improvements in the state of the technical arts (e.g., increasing computer processing speeds), and quantitative increases in goods (e.g., number of computers produced), and considers both to be forms of "economic growth".[SUP][1][/SUP]" (Gross national product - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

But even the US shifted from GNP to GDP for its own reasons and so GDP is now considered more appropriate for measuring wealth, which can be roughly taken to mean the produce, in any given period, by the land and labour of any society. But not all items will qualify for wealth; for example new mantras formulated by some rishi will not, ipso facto, qualify for being considered as wealth unless it can be marketed and changed to the most visible and tradeable form, viz., cash or its equivalent.

Generally national wealth is produced by three sectors - the primary sector, i.e., agriculture and allied farmin activities, the secondary sector, viz., manufacturing or industry, and the tertiary or the services sector. In modern scenario the farmer is responsible for creating wealth in the primary sector, the capital (capitalist who provides the capital) and labour are jointly creating wealth in the secondary sector, and all those who provide some service which is marketable are producing wealth in the services sector.

In ancient India, I understand, land belonged to the community and on the death of a farmer his son/s or whoever had the right of inheritance, got the right to farm on that piece of land. So land could not be transferred for a consideration, that is land could not be sold at all. If a farmer died without anyone to inherit, then his land went back to the community which decided who will farm thereafter. In all these cases the tiller farmed the land, and there was no absentee farmer who had his land cultivated by another by proxy.

All this changed, according to one school of historians, during Mughal rule when land survey and assigining ownership of land was started. Large zamindaris came into being due to collusion of influential local chieftains with the ruling class, and since the poor tiller had never known land "ownership" he meekly continued to till the land, pay the levies and also give a share to the zamindar because, otherwise, the land will be taken away from him. This exploitative farming conditions continue in India today, but since many farmers are committing suicides and many others are seeking a new life in the services sector in urban areas we have unprecedented rural to urban migration. The share of agriculture in India's GDP decreased from 56.5% in 1950-51 to 19.55% in 2006-07 and further to 15.7% in 2009-10. Thus, agriculture in India is a "gone case". But since this sector also provides many raw materials to several industries, such industries also suffered but that will not be visible or detectable when we consider overall data.

The secondary sector's share of GDP has been stagnant for many years at around 25%. 35% of the mfg. sector comprises unregistered units.

It is the services sector with >55% of GDP which drives the indian economy today. (And, going by our indigenous hindu duty allocation, it is a predominantly "SUdra" nation ). Much of India's chest thumping in recent years as a world economic power is based on this growth of services sector only.

If we make a detailed and minute analysis, the indian economy consists of one class of the exploited and another of those who fatten themselves on the toils of the exploited category.

 

[kunjuppu]

Dear Sri KRS,

Prof. Kancha Ilaiah is a regular contributor to "The Hindu" group of publications. Though I have not read the book quoted by you,I have read the articles of his. He used to blame Brahmins(ism) for every thing wrong in Society, nothing else. Even though the hold of Caste system is loosening up in the modern Hindu society, and lost its relevance, except for elections, people like Ilaiah were holding it tight, for reasons better known to them.
Today, in the competitive world of open economy, result oriented performance is the bench mark
for success. Nothing else will help.

Warm Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

dear brahmanyan,

i have read various articles in dalit nation and other publications. offhand, kancha ilaiyah comes out hostile to hinduism, with a long dreaded memory of injustices to his forefathers. which i agree.

sir brahmanyan, the way to deal with folks like kancha, is not to ignore them, but to insist with arguements, facts, rhetoric, logic - re the current societal attitudes, the sea of change within india, respect for the aspirations of the dalits, a future which promises anyday brighter than even what the previous dalit generation had, and above all, the force of democracy, awareness and the power of the vote.

let us not ignore kancha, or bad mouth him in return. let us show the improvements, let us also tell him, that the current generation has a change of heart, if not willingly, atleast forced by the power of law, and if we are sick, we do not care what caste or religion the doctor belongs. it is his skillset that is important. also, all the affirmative action, acknowledges the huge handicaps the dalits face, and till they eventually reach the goal of full participation in society, to their weightage in numbers, we have distances to go.

the good thing is, that voices like kancha's are an important part of our indian mosaic, and i am confident, like periyar, whose once rage in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s could rally the masses, but who, with the success of the dravidian revolution is hardly read or celebrated these days, kancha too will be a bit player, a man of current times, whose views will be passe with the next generation. hopefully so.

thank you.

ps..the latest angst to further split the DK is veeramani's intent to promote his son to succeed him as the head of DK. nothing like nepotism to disgust the chelas. a lot of periyar's money is the pot of honey, i hear, is the issue.