Page 124 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 7: Class

In the remainder of the paper, the class mobility recorded between 1980 and 1981 by respondents Notes
to the Labour Force Survey (OPCS 1983) will be examined for men and women separately. Because
previous work (Dale, Gilbert and Arber 1983) has shown that the labour market for women
working part-time differs greatly from that for full-time workers, separate analyses have also been
carried out for women working full-time and part-time. The flows between the full-time and part-
time labour markets for women are not considered here.

7.1 Concept of Class

Dube (1976) and Singh (1979) both realize that the concepts of caste and class have been basically
‘western’, and therefore, ignore the historicity of Indian society in their formulations. Indigenization
of social science paradigms would ensure a proper input of historical substance in the concepts
and theories related to Indian society. Both Marxist and non-Marxist scholars (Thorner, 1974;
Saran, 1962) have pleaded for the use of native concepts and categories, respectively. D.P. Mukerji
(1958) has argued vehemently for making the Indian tradition as the sole basis of analyzing social
change. Desai (1948) has strongly opposed to the application of the non-Marxist approaches.
Srinivas has been blamed for an inappropriate application of British structural-functionalism by
Mencher (1974) and Saberwal (1979).
Caste has been taken as synonym with the social formation of Indian society and therefore class
is treated as an alternate system to caste. However, the fact is that neither does caste refer to the
totality of social formations nor is class the polar opposite of caste. Studies such as caste and class
(D’Souza, 1967); caste, class and power (Beteille, 1965); caste, religion and power (Aggrawal,
1971); and caste, class and politics (Bhatt, 1975) do not provide a corrective to the ‘caste alone’
approach. These studies are rooted in the falsity of the western dichotomy of tradition and
modernity and the trio of ‘class, status and party’ (Weber, 1947). They do not in-corporate the
experience of Indian society into the concepts of caste, class and power, hence inadequate in
rescuing us from these alien concepts and theories.
It has been noted that there was never a perfect congruence between caste, class and power.
Mobility and migration were quite normal activities in ancient and medieval India. However,
Bailey, Beteille and Bhatt give the impression that a congruence prevailed between caste, class and
power in the pre-independent India, and land reforms and politicization have brought about
incongruities and caste-free areas.

Class in India has existed along with caste and power. Caste incorporates class and
class incorporates caste in the Indian context. Neither the ‘caste alone’ view nor the
‘class alone’ perspective can help in a proper and fuller understanding of Indian
society.

Historians of the Marxist disposition have realized that there is an intertwining of caste and class
in India, but they prefer to look at caste from a class point of view. Kosambi (1956) makes a class
analysis of the Aryans after the Rig Veda. Thapar (1974), Habib (1974:), and Desai (1948) have also
done a class analysis of Indian society. According to Desai, caste inheres in an underdeveloped
but potentially explosive class character. In another study, Desai (1975) has analyzed the Indian
State from a class (Marxist) point of view. But class does not necessarily mean openness, mobility
and a combination of certain attributes as generally perceived by western social scientists and
their followers in India. Castes have been functioning as classes for all practical considerations.
Class relations are as old as caste relations or even older than caste relations. Lamb (1975) reports
the prevalence of class relations as early as 600 B.C. in India. Material and cultural traditions

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 119