Sociology · Ch 4 — Patterns of Social Inequality and Exclusion
The Caste System as a Discriminatory System
The Caste System as a Discriminatory System
The caste system is not just a system of social stratification — it is a system that actively legitimises and enforces discrimination against people born into particular castes. The discrimination it produces is humiliating, exclusionary, and exploitative. To understand how it works, you need to see how it classifies people, how it ties them to occupations, and how it places them in a rigid hierarchy.
Historically, every caste was associated with a specific occupation. This meant that a person born into a particular caste was also, in effect, born into that caste's occupation — there was no choice. A child of a potter was expected to be a potter; a child of a priest was expected to be a priest. This occupational linkage was not just a matter of tradition — it was enforced by social and religious sanctions.
Beyond occupation, each caste had a specific place in the hierarchy of social status. Roughly speaking, occupational categories themselves were ranked by social status, and within each broad occupational category there could be further ranking. For example, among artisan castes, some were considered ritually higher than others.
In strict scriptural terms, social and economic status were supposed to be sharply separated. The ritually highest caste — the Brahmins — were not supposed to amass wealth, and were subordinated to the secular power of kings and rulers belonging to the Kshatriya castes. Conversely, despite having the highest secular status and power, the king was subordinated to the Brahmin in the ritual-religious sphere. This was a deliberate separation of ritual and secular authority.
However, in actual historical practice, economic and social status tended to coincide. There was a fairly close correlation between caste status and economic status: the 'high' castes were almost invariably of high economic status, while the 'low' castes were almost always of low economic status.
In modern times, and particularly since the nineteenth century, the link between caste and occupation has become much less rigid. Ritual-religious prohibitions on occupational change are not easily imposed today, and it is easier than before to change one's occupation. Moreover, compared to a hundred or fifty years ago, the correlation between caste and economic status is also weaker — rich and poor people are to be found in every caste.
But — and this is the key point — the caste-class correlation is still remarkably stable at the macro level. As the system has become less rigid, the distinctions between castes of broadly similar social and economic status have weakened. Yet, between different socio-economic groupings, the distinctions continue to be maintained.
Although things have certainly changed, they have not changed much at the macro level. It is still true that the privileged (and high economic status) sections of society tend to be overwhelmingly 'upper' caste, while the disadvantaged (and low economic status) sections are dominated by the so-called 'lower' castes. Moreover, the proportion of population that lives in poverty or affluence differs greatly across caste groups.
In short, even though there have been major changes brought about by social movements over more than a century, and despite changed modes of production as well as concerted attempts by the state to suppress its public role in independent India, caste continues to affect the life chances of Indians in the twenty-first century.
Key points to remember:
- The caste system is a distinct Indian social institution that legitimises and enforces discrimination.
- Historically, caste was linked to occupation — people were born into both their caste and its associated occupation, with no choice. …