A recent thread of emails exchanged between a group of senior citizens, most of whom are established professionals from a particular ethnic community, which is also being CC’d to me for some unexplained reason, has accusations being hurled at one another for betraying tradition, culture, language and even goes on to the extent of calling each other senile. It began to make me wonder if these senior citizen’s were just using modern technology to settle old scores, or actually believed they were indulging in some serious intellectual debate on their cultural/ethnic identity and strategies to meet the dangers of its extinction, as a result of the cultural hegemony imposed by the then “kingdom” of Nepal in the name of nationalism, which they obviously oppose.

As Nepali society emerges from an age of feudalism and the rule of partial theocracy, into the globalized world of today, the many culturally distinct ethnic communities are facing the challenge of keeping their traditional identity alive. The challenge of“preserving” their age old customs faced by culturally distinct communities, is however not unique to Nepal with “indigenous” peoples the world over striving to overcome the onslaught of modernity and globalization. Cultural transformation, whether imposed by victorious armies or occurring as a result of harmonious acceptance, however is a natural process in the history of the human civilization with every society and therefore its individual members striving to reach a higher state of being. There are plenty of examples in history, everywhere in the world, of how people have accepted new ideas and created new traditions, cultures and identities, even in Nepal.

There was a time, not so long ago, when some prominent members of minority communities were in the process of converting their distinct culture into the “majority” Hindu identity to perhaps “progress” up the social ladder by adopting the culture, language, tradition and ultimately the religion of the ruling class. While there is no doubt that in the name of  national unity, the then “Kingdom” of Nepal, attempted the homogenization of a multi-cultural, multi-lingual, multi–religious, and multi-ethnic society depriving the various indigenous communities of their right to assert their own identity, marginalizing them and ultimately pushing them towards economic failure, those involved in identity activism or the “janajaati aandolan” need to rethink their strategy of vilifying the ruling class, and this includes more than the usual Brahamin Chettri castes, as the oppressors, and also evaluate where they as individuals have failed.

The purpose of correcting historical grievances is not to create new spaces for future wrongs but to ensure that the coming generation need not suffer the same fate.

The email thread discusses how a qualified “janajaati” candidate was deprived of a scholarship, which went to another “non-janjati” who not only faked his “janajaati-ness” but also paid a tidy sum as a bribe to ensure he got the scholarship. The “janajati” candidate who did not get the scholarship therefore felt that his right had been violated because here was a “non-janajaati” by popular definition, who took away a seat reserved for a “janajaati”. The unfortunate “janajaati” candidate who did not get the scholarship was not protesting against the act of bribing but that the “non-janajaati”  had managed to convince the board that he was a “janajaati”.

This led on to the discussion of the origin of the particular caste where one of the email recipients attempted to explain history and justify that the current population of people from that particular (and historically martial) race, was a janajaati in historical times.

This leads us to the question of who is a “janajaati”. Literally, the word “Janajaati” should be understood as “one of the many culturally/ethnically/traditionally distinct” communities that are present as a minority, solely because the majority of the population come from a Hindu caste system. It was due to the latter, that the state was ruled by high caste Hindu’s whose cultural imposition subsequently leading to the “Hindu” population being in majority, that the term Janajaati is applied to only those who have indigenous cultures and traditions which are non Hindu.

Because of the history of cultural imposition by the state, in the form of the acceptance of a state religion, those from the indigenous communities were deprived of their cultural, social, economic and political rights, which naturally created space for aggressiveness towards the ruling class. This aggressive opposition of all Hindus in the name of correcting historical wrongs, will not only be detrimental to those targeted but also the state and its existence as one country.

The Nobel Laureate Prof. Amartya Sen in his “Identity and Violence The Illusion of Destiny” states “Violence is fomented by the imposition of singular and belligerent identities on gullible people, championed by proficient artisans of terror.” While the self recognition and assertion of ones ethnic identity is not in itself wrong, if emphasized overtly can also lead to people from other communities to feel threatened, causing possibilities of a domino effect.

The discrimination or mocking of people from other communities and their cultures directly is an example of how identity politics can lead to wrong turns. Had not the “pahadi” or people from the hills not addressed the Madhesi in what the Madhesi may have felt as a derogatory manner, perhaps the Madhesi people today would not have talked about the “centuries of discrimination” by the state.

The argument can also be that had southern socio-politics not influenced domestic politics and society so much, perhaps the people from the hills in Nepal, would probably not have mocked the Madhesi so much.

The problem with the Janajaati movement in Nepal and discourses related to it is that they all attempt justify the need for positive discrimination in the name of correcting historical wrongs. While strategies such as positive discrimination, reservation and quota systems may look effective on the surface, there is also no dearth of problems it can potentially cause in the future.

If the basis of the bond between the state and its citizens is the state’s willingness to treat all as equals and ensure that every citizen is guaranteed that h/she shall be treated equally in the eyes of the law of the land, and the citizen guaranteeing to work and live in a manner that does not harm the collective, granting special rights and privileges to one particular group or community immediately plants the seeds of discord among those who do not receive the same privilege. Why else would the Khas-Chettri Samaj want recognition as a Janjaati community?

The beauty of a multi-cultural society can never be over emphasized as it is what leads to prosperous societies. Mono-cultural closed societies will always have more problems than they can handle, especially in this technologically advanced world of today. Even the most radically puritanical societies must face the challenge of transformation. It is only matter of time before change comes.Champions of identity politics better face the changing times and the challenges it brings and recognize that as individual communities we might have different cultures and traditions, but as humans we all have the same needs, and what’s more we all live together in this same one earth. No wonder the ancient sages proclaimed, “vasudeva kutumba” the whole universe is my family.

Kaziba is a Nepali who dreams of conquering the world every night, but ends up waking every morning in the same prison.