The varna/caste system in India is founded on structured inequalities in which the ideology of exclusion permeates all facets of socioeconomic and political life. Exclusion of some castes from the rights and privileges enjoyed by others is enforced by several instruments of social ostracism. This systemic exclusion, the manifestation of which could also be found in gender, class and other areas, is basically conceived by the Brahminical ideology and its rationalization is being drawn from the concept of natural inequality. Those who still act as conduits of all forms of knowledge direct and use it to maintain their control over the system by mediating discourses. Following Michel Foucault, it could be inferred that this kind of cultural hegemony draws support from the power over discourse, the power through discourse and the power of discourse. Persistence of this structured exclusion is rooted in the colonization of minds made possible by the cultural politics aimed at capturing and controlling the social order. Obviously, this ideology of exclusion is incompatible with the ideology of equality and inclusion enshrined in the Constitution of India. So long as this system is operated on such ideologies of inequality and exclusion, it becomes difficult to establish a democratic society. This paper employs the exclusivist approach to highlight the varied forms, levels and manifestations of exclusion inherent in Indian society based on the ideological foundations and argues that methods to tackle such exclusion requires efforts equal to the task.

Of late, the concept of social exclusion has made a rapid ascent on to central debates on deprivation when the emphasis began to shift from the analysis of income poverty to broader multidimensional aspects of exclusion, looking not just at a number of dimensions individually, but at the links between them.1 The concept’s advantage, it is argued, is that it focuses attention on crucial aspects of deprivation, as the consequence of unequal social relations, providing a holistic understanding of society and deprivation and has clear implication for policies.

Caste-based exclusion in India resulted in the most severe and intensely discriminative form of deprivation. The varna/caste system, also known as the Brahminical system, has regulated the life of the people over centuries in which the organizational scheme is based on the division of people into endogamous caste groups and the civil, economic, political and religious rights of each individual caste are ascribed unequally by birth and made hereditary. The system implies forced exclusion of one caste from the rights of other castes in all spheres of life and a regulatory mechanism to enforce several instruments of social ostracism is built in.3 It forms a majority exclusion wherein a few privileged castes enjoy absolute rights and majority castes are denied equal privileges and basic human rights.

Brahminical system is a group-based exclusion; the focus of exclusion is the social group, and not the individual. Caste system does not recognize the individual and his/her distinctiveness as the center of social purpose. For the purpose of rights and duties, even the family is not regarded as a unit in this society, except for purposes of marriage and inheritance. The primary unit is caste and hence the rights and privileges or lack of them for an individual flow from the membership of a particular caste.

In the conceptual spectrum of injustice provided by Fraser5 stretching from primarily economic forms at one end to primarily cultural forms at the other, caste in the Indian context becomes a ‘bivalent collectivity’.6 The economic disadvantage in the caste system is rooted in the religiously sanctioned segregation and ordering of occupations, with the lowest castes associated with the most stigmatized occupations. In addition, caste also embodies various forms of symbolic devaluation “which serve to define lowest castes as a despised category or having no caste at all and to legitimate various forms of injustice, including physical harm.

Understanding deprivation from the exclusionary perspective, the aspects of social institutions, processes, relations of power and ideology assume importance:

Beall and Piron8 define social exclusion as a systemic disadvantage and “is founded on social relations. It is concerned with the excluded as well as with the excluder, thereby putting power at the center of analysis. It is a feature of social structure of societies in which recurrent patterns of social relationships deny individuals and groups access to goods, services, activities and resources which are associated with citizenship.”

Estivill9 presents social exclusion as “an accumulation of confluent processes with successive ruptures arising from the heart of economy, politics and society; gradually distances and places persons, groups, communities and territories in positions of inferiority in relation to centre powers, resources and prevailing values.”

Social exclusion is explained by many as “a process and a state that prevents individuals or groups from full participation in social, economic and political life and from asserting their rights. It derives from exclusionary relationships based on power.”

History and Culture Journal, Anti-Ahmadiya Sectarian Riots, Ahmadiya Movement, Muslim League Party, Muslim Community, Christian Missionaries, Government Documents, Religious Communities, Ahmadiya Leadership, Sectarian Organization, Government Services, Nazimuddin Government, Anti-government Campaign.