Caste System - Based on Class Conscious British Society

Sephiroth

Caste By Birth and not by One's Guna (Attitude).

Hindu Society have been modelled in a way that each person in a Society had a role to play in the functioning of the Society in general.

The Priests have duty to the Gods and the Temples, Warriors did the Adminstrative duties and safeguarding the Nation, the Farmers attend to the food production and the Merchants ensure that Economy is in stable condition and the wealth of the nation have not diminished. In times of war, the other Classes do not interfere with the Warrior's duty and ensure that food production is sufficient and wealth to support the war is sufficient as well.

In times of draught and famine, the Merchants supported the nation with their wealth while the Warriors ensured that Law and Orders are maintained to ensure crime do not increase. Even in time of Peace, Warriors continued to do this in benefit of the Merchants.

This seems to be a perfect society, which its influence can trace to China and Japan till 1850s and early 1900s. So what has happened? What influence Hindu society to extend that they become Caste by Birth? :hmm:

barney50

Sephiroth,

You are talking about something that is impracticable to our world. That is what Muslims too are asking, to relive the 6th century in the 21st century. Why not go back to primitive life than? Can you see the problem they are facing? It now people's power and no more ruled by one class of morons who would supress the people's right to live and enjoy the freedom of being human. But that does not mean one should live a immoral life. There are rules and laws legislated to punish immoral activities and oter crimes. So, stop harping on vedic rule here.

Sephiroth

My theory (and opinion) is that British Occupations for the past 250 years had somehow brought their own influence and Class-Consciousness into Hindu Society.

British, up to 1900s were Class Conscious people (Yes, they are Christians). Titles such as Knights, Esquire, Squire etc were used to differentiate one Class to another.

Source : http://www.victorianweb.org/history/Class.html

[Qoute]

Early in the nineteenth century the labels "working classes" and "middle classes" were already coming into common usage. The old hereditary aristocracy, reinforced by the new gentry who owed their success to commerce, industry, and the professions, evolved into an "upper class" (its consciousness formed in large part by the Public Schools and Universities) which tenaciously maintained control over the political system, depriving not only the working classes but the middle classes of a voice in the political process. The increasingly powerful (and class conscious) middle classes, however, undertook organized agitation to remedy this situation: the passage of the Reform Act of 1832 and the abolition of the Corn Laws in 1846 were intimations of the extent to which they would ultimately be successful.

The working classes, however, remained shut out from the political process, and became increasingly hostile not only to the aristocracy but to the middle classes as well. As the Industrial Revolution progressed there was further social stratification. Capitalists, for example, employed industrial workers who were one component of the working classes (each class included a wide range of occupations of varying status and income; there was a large gap, for example, between skilled and unskilled labor), but beneath the industrial workers was a submerged "under class"-- contemporaries referred to them as the "sunken people"-- which lived in poverty. In mid-century skilled workers had acquired enough power to enable them to establish Trade Unions (Socialism became an increasingly important political force) which they used to further improve their status, while unskilled workers and the underclass beneath them remained much more susceptible to exploitation, and were therefore exploited.

This basic hierarchical structure (presented here in highly oversimplified form), comprising the "upper classes," the "middle classes," the "Working Classes" (with skilled laborers at one extreme and unskilled at the other), and the impoverished "Under Class," remained relatively stable despite periodic (and frequently violent) upheavals, and despite the Marxist view of the inevitability of class conflict, at least until the outbreak of World War I. A modified class structure clearly remains in existence today.


The influence of British and their Class-Consciousness mindset could be seen in two other colonies as well.

In Malaya, the three races in Malaya were separated according to the tasks acquired of them. Malaya are separated and allowed a little power as possible. Hindus were taken to Estate and had them work on rubber trees plantations and Chinese, natural-born merchants were given opportunists to control economic. All three races do not mingle with each other other than through their Master - the British. This ensured that unity is not achieved and their Masters are always needed to control the situation. This policy called "Divide and Conquer",

In South Africa, things were a bit difficult to control since there was only one race - Black. So Religion was used and reeducation of the natives by stating that White men are superior and that Black are inferior and therefore, needs to follow the guidance of the White men are established. It is called Apatheid and the attitude is called "White Men Supremacy" which exists to this day.

However, in India, the effect is worsen because British can manipulate the already existen Caste System to their advantage.

Taking control of the Administrators away from the Kyastrias, British put their own rules in them. The kings were given special treatment and wealth and allowed to indulge themselves on the back of their people. Rules of Moghul monarch in the North further weakened the Hindus. Even so, a few did rised up against the British but they were crushed quickly.

The Brahmins who were in charged of educating the masses were segregated to a point that they have no contacts with other races. Young Brahmins and Kyastrians were taken and allowed to enter special schools which do not promote India culture and heritage but Western logics, Science and beliefs. From here, you have a new class of people who considered being born a Brahmin and Kyastrian means he is a Brahmin and Kyastrian without performing any of the duties required.

The Farmers continued to be pressured by land owners, Administrators and British into being slaves in their own lands and the Economy is controlled tightly by the British. Indians were not allowed own their own businesses.

Sephiroth

Reading Source :

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_class

[Qoute]
In many countries the term "upper class" was intimately associated with hereditary land ownership and titles. Political power was often in the hands of the landowners in many pre-Industrial societies (which was one of the causes of the French Revolution), despite there being no legal barriers to land ownership for other social classes. Power began to shift from upper class landed families to the general population in the early modern age, leading to marital alliances amongst the two groups providing the foundation for the modern upper classes in the West. Upper class landowners in Europe were often also members of the titled nobility, though not necessarily: the prevalence of titles of nobility varied widely from country to country. Some upper classes (or noble classes) were almost entirely untitled, for example, the szlachta of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.


Source : http://countrystudies.us/india/89.htm

I think this is what happened with Caste-Bloom after Independence of India in 1948. When Political powers switched hand from British to the locals, many of them became a new "landowner" and thus established their own Caste which never heard of before. They strenghten their own Caste to split themselves from lower caste and establish their own independant "kingdom". :hmm:

As you can see in the source above, Caste Discrimination by high-class landowners still continues to this day.
Rich people continues to become richer and separate themselves away from poor and general society, and this too a form of Caste-Consciousness.

One solution could be to invited back Buddhism into India. Buddhism brings in a Caste-less Society with one "group" over everyone else - the Buddhist Sanghas. This Buddhism Monks who denounce the World act as Spiritual Advisors and Well-wishers to the society and continued to do what Brahmins failed to do today - lead Spiritual Progress in Hindusm.

This is my opinion anyway.

Sephiroth

Did Social Stratification and Class Consciousness existed in Britain?

Answer can be found in some books written during that time which clearly shows Britons mind-set toward their fellow countrymen and surprisingly, you could actually link it to India's present day Caste System. :hmmm:

Source : http://www.jimandellen.org/gmuhome/Stevenson.Frears.html

[Qoute]

During the 19th century the British had a very rigid social stratification. At this time in their history the class structure didn't allow for much mobility between the ranks of the lower class, middle class, and upper class. What level of income and power you were bom into, you stayed in. Thus, if you were born into a lower class family, you would be a lower class citizen, doing menial blue-collar labor for the rest of your life and you would receive little to no education. If you were bom to an upper class family, you would receive the finest education, live a posh lifestyle, and never truly associate with anyone outside your social strata.

This social stratification in turn led to class-consciousness, which refers to a condition where people perceive themselves in terms of their class and act accordingly.

The attitudes of social stratification and class-consciousness of the time are reflected in Robert Louis Stevenson's novel, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. These attitudes are depicted by not so much of what is written, but by what is not written. The main characters of Stevenson's novel are all upper class citizens, not one lower class person has a major part. The only person of the lower class who is even mentioned on a consistent basis is Poole, Dr. Jekyll's manservant. Otherwise, any other common folk are not worth mentioning or worthy of attention. Poole himself is barely touched upon as a person. All the other characters in the book have lengthy descriptions about their persons. Dr. Lanyon, Mr. Uttterson, Dr. Jekyll, and even the notorious Mr. Hyde have sentence after sentence describing them, their habits, their attire, and especially their personalities. Poole is simply and plainly described as Dr. Jekyll's manservant.
[/Qoute]

Source : http://india_resource.tripod.com/britishedu.htm

[Qoute]

In 1835, Thomas Macaulay articulated the goals of British colonial imperialism most succinctly: "We must do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, words and intellect." As the architect of Colonial Britain's Educational Policy in India, Thomas Macaulay was to set the tone for what educated Indians were going to learn about themselves, their civilization, and their view of Britain and the world around them. An arch-racist, Thomas Macaulay had nothing but scornful disdain for Indian history and civilization. In his infamous minute of 1835, he wrote that he had "never found one among them (speaking of Orientalists, an opposing political faction) who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia". "It is, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in Sanskrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England".

Within a matter of years, J.N Farquhar (a contemporary of Macaulay) was to write: "The new educational policy of the Government created during these years the modern educated class of India. These are men who think and speak in English habitually, who are proud of their citizenship in the British Empire, who are devoted to English literature, and whose intellectual life has been almost entirely formed by the thought of the West, large numbers of them enter government services, while the rest practice law, medicine or teaching, or take to journalism or business."

Sufficient enough, One can say that the British wanted to create a NEW RACE of Hindus who are "puppets" for them to manipulate and use to control India. Sadly, they succeeded.

To this day, India and Indians in general continued to look highly toward Westerners in a narrow mindset as if they were civilised people, above Indians. India continued to close its doors toward Trade and Social Interactions with other Asian countries, which have succeeded to become equal IF not above Europeans in many way.

Singapore and Hong Kong is no. 1 ports in the World, Malaysia quickly become a growing force in Asia and many Hindus in Malaysia progressing forward, Japan and Korea is only 2nd and 3rd to USA in term of Economy, Science and Technology yet India continued to split itself from Asia and looked toward Europe and America.

Hmph ... even in Tamil and Hindi movies, you can find downgrading scenes where a father of a daughter could say something like "I found a American Mappilai for my daughter" as if being born in America automatically makes a person superior. YET the same people acts that their daughters should be chastice and wants "Sitaa-like daughter-in-laws". Does Indians knows that 80% of teenagars in America at age of 19 already LOST their virginity? ;)

yusmar

therefore...what you are trying to say here is that...in reality...there is no caste system  la in the hindu society ? The actual caste system is actually....if it is Malaysia...racial segregation is it ?

Sephiroth

by yusmar   

therefore...what you are trying to say here is that...in reality...there is no caste system  la in the hindu society ? The actual caste system is actually....if it is Malaysia...racial segregation is it ?

Caste System which exists today in India is actually Racial Segregation based on British Class Consciousness. The British wanted to create a new race - an Indian race who are Westernized with Western Education, Culture and Attitude - to help them rule India, sort of Puppets which is suitable to be manipulated.

And when they leave India in 1948, they left behind this "puppets" who took over, continued to implement what the British had taught them and created what we know today of the Racial Segregation in India.

The true Caste System in India according to Hindusm is RESPONSIBILITY SEGREGATION. Each person born with different qualities in them and  Hindusm was one of the most advance Religion in the World to take advance of this Quality by identifying and giving responsibility to each and every individual in a Society so it could function as One Individual (thus comes the concept of the four Caste which was born from different part of Brahman).

hamizao

Gee, Sephi, you opened up a new thread on this! :nerd:

My theory (and opinion) is that British Occupations for the past 250 years had somehow brought their own influence and Class-Consciousness into Hindu Society.

I can't help thinking that you'd prefer to blame others for whatever ills (if I may ) that befall the Hindu society. But then it is your opinion and I respect it.

I would not want to say much about the so called Br class system here.....but rather focus on the Hindu one and for that matter, in the light of what I have come across in some of my readings. So, anyone is welcome to comment or correct me.

While in another thread I have admitted to some fluidity in inter-caste movement, I believe I had also mentioned that as the Aryan's religion spread  and others were accepted into their social system, there were also many clans that lived quite isolated such that communication was a problem.

I see the main problem as being the Brahmins themselves. Hinduism of those days was a far cry from that of later days. Traditional interpretation of the Vedas was passed down from generation to generation by heart and in most instances with extraordinary accuracy.....study of the language became compulsory for every Brahmin priest such that study stopped short of inquiry (so it has been said). The tedium of it all , the continuous absorption of minor deities, treatment of girls/women  etc and above all , the fact that the whole social fabric being in the hands of the Brahmins, took it's toll. Jainism and then Buddhism are regarded as reformations to Hinduism.

The caste system became more harden and hereditory since the Mauryan Empire (300 ish BC). Even Buddhism couldn't stop the spread of the caste system at that time. My opinion is that this system had become so embeded such that even after Asoka's death Hinduism raised again and continued to exist with traditional superstitions even after the people converted to Islam as the result of the Muslim conquest.

Hinduism lived on in places. When the Britts came scholarship amongst the Hindus had sunk low, ritualism was the rule and above all immolition of widows  were common ......generally described as a very different form from what it used to be.:hmm::hmm: I would not hesitate to admit that from records the quality of the average Englishmen in India in the 17th centuary does not reveal that they were of high class character nor mental attainment. They also provide very little pay to the locals (by order of the power of the day) but allowed private enterprise which in the long run encouraged many negative effects  on  the servants, the natives. But then the Britts acquired knowledge of the natives, their habits,religions, customs and above all their history, though may not be accurate, was much to their credit I would say, this they did where ever they went or colonise..............even Malaysia. How else would one rule a foreign people without learning about them and find out their strength,if any, and weaknesses, many, many!!!!:geram::geram: I am therefore not convinced that the Britts could induce that great a change to the Hindu society on somthing that had evolved and been deeply rooted for centuries all within a space of 200 odd years. It is more likely to be taken advantage of ......

So, what is the Indian government doing about it?:hmm:

[ Last edited by  hamizao at 1-9-2006 12:16 AM ]

thamrong

In India it is quite common for the bloody Indians to  blame the Englishman for every misery including the bloody pimples on their bloody butt.:hmm::hmm:

Sephiroth

by thamrong   

In India it is quite common for the bloody Indians to  blame the Englishman for every misery including the bloody pimples on their bloody butt.  

I'm not an Indian, I'm a Malaysian. And this is NOT putting blame on anyone, it is FACT SHOWING. ff:

Fact :- Racial Systems exists today in India comes from British Society and their Class-Consciousness.

In South Africa, it is called Apatheid.
In America, it is known as Whitemen Supremacy.
[Both which, you can find information on the Internet, if you care to do so.]

And in Malaya - it was called Divide and Conquer Rule (Prinsip Pecah dan Perintah). ALL Malays, Chinese and Indians in Malaya knows this as they were ruled in such method over 70 years ago.

Only difference is, in India, Indians still living in their Slave Mentality - belittling themselves and putting West on their heads and parading around.

thamrong

The Slave Mentality is a product  of the Bhramic Tentacles which shaped the Indian Society. I can say that the impact can be strongly felt until today. I discovered this while observing 2 Indian nationals working in our office in Munich. They are peers but I noticed that one is obeisance to the other because he is Brahmin by birth.:hmm::hmm:

Sephiroth

by thamrong   

The Slave Mentality is a product  of the Bhramic Tentacles which shaped the Indian Society. I can say that the impact can be strongly felt until today. I discovered this while observing 2 Indian nationals working in our office in Munich. They are peers but I noticed that one is obeisance to the other because he is Brahmin by birth.  

Who gives a damn what you (allegedly) observed? ;)
Do you have facts? Don't have, don't talk. :no:

Slave Mentality exists, NOT in India alone but almost everywhere in the World. Only difference in India is - in India, it took the form of Caste and become enrooted into the society by corrupting the meaning and purpose of this Caste.

Here's some articles (not my mere words) on Slave Mentality, may Indians especially wake up to their own mental state ( :pray: ) :

http://www.rense.com/general67/slave.htm
http://www.afromerica.com/knowle ... tity/commentary.php
http://www.outcrybookreview.com/MindSlave.htm
http://www.vbm-torah.org/pesach/ai-slave.htm

Class Consciousness as it was known to British during their occupation was a way to control the masses in an effective way by dividing and conquering them separately.

As long as the Brahmins do not educate the masses, the populations will not be educated. Nowadays, general public in India continued to blame Brahmins for this, not knowing that it was British who tied their hands.

As long as the Kyastrias do not rise and fight, the populations will not fight against the British.
As long as the merchants continued to be controlled by British in term of economic, the merchants will remain in control and finally, the farmers and the regular people will have no choice but to work for British.

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by thamrong at 31/8/2006 23:59
In India it is quite common for the bloody Indians to  blame the Englishman for every misery including the bloody pimples on their bloody butt.:hmm::hmm:

It is a fact that most problems the world is currently facing is due to Englishmen colonialism, and the way these Englishmen (then, now, generally not) discriminate and abuse the people, physically, and mentally. Issues such as Palestine, India and Pakistan, and even in Australia, a land previously used by the Englishmen to throw their convicts, who later bullied the aborigins. So don't give me the crap that people blame Englishmen for their misery because, the fact is, they started it during the colonial eras, and Sephiroth, Englishmen were never our Masters, be it in India, in malaysia or whatsoever. They came here and colonialised us, without the mandate of the local people, and with great resistance, such as by Gandhi, by Mat Salleh, Tok Janggut, to Jaafar Onn etc.

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 6-9-2006 09:54 AM ]

ariyamusafir

Though I am against slavery but I am going to state facts here. In the east such as in Tanah Melayu, China itself. There were slaves, but a lot of these slaves were not very harshly abused the way those Americans did to then those black slaves, who were not slaves by birth but, taken as such by the Europeans then from their homeland. In the east, it is a must for the slaves to work for their masters and in places such as china, slaves are hard labourers, forced to work, but not really treated like the whites do towards the blacks then, especially the terrorism commited by the Ku Klux Klan.

and for your information, the Indians here in Malaysia are treated equally. Even till date, there are still people who treat the Whites higher then them. Even till date, America still tries to project an image of Americans are better then the rest of the world. America is always good and those of their enemies are evil. America is the superior race. These are the image which I will NEVER except but is being projected. These are the images which I will fight.

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 6-9-2006 09:40 AM ]

ariyamusafir

Just additional info, who started World War 1??? How it started? Who started World War 2??? How it started??? Who justified the messacre of innocent Japanese civillians (normal people who weren't involve in the war and not soldiers) with their atomic bomb??? Who used Nuclear weapons which was actually meant as a test, though with the then current outcome of war, the Japanese are losing their territories in their own land where the Americans had invaded and captured many stratergic locations???? go ask those English professors and lecturers in UK's University and you would be surprise that even they doubted the use of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Sephiroth

Ahem ... this thread is not about which religion is better, it is about Class Consciousness. And must say, many of the information given by Ariya is a valid and truthful one. :hmm:

History can show that Western Society (whether it is USA or Britian) had for ages revolved around Supremacy concept, fueled by Christianity. They came to believe that, being Christian means that they are sinless, the kingdom are God's kingdom and that they have been chosen to lead the rest of the World toward God.

However, the whitemen who came to Asia, even so they are from the same country, had different goal in their venture.

Britions who came to India had purpose of "Westernizing" Indians to become more "civilised". In thier mind, Indians - with their simple clothes and idol worshipping ways - were corrupted and in need of guidance. So they set themselves to reeducating this people.

However, Britons who went to China and Japan (even Malaya) were different. They were from East India Company and their goals were more toward merchant and money. Unfortunately, their methods were more ... brutal than religious-minded Britons.

For sake of monetary contributions, this people have enslaved China to the point that it had rejected all religions and become atheism. Japan however managed to kick their influences out in time. In South Africa, this same people established Apatheid.

In Australia, they have brought convicts to the land and left them there, and in the end, this convicts had taken over the nation to the point that Aborigines have no rights in their own land, even to this day (much like what B.N doing in Sabah and Sarawak <_< ).

As for Ariya's statement that we're were NEVER slaves, I disagree. There is two sort of Slavery - Slavery of the Mind and Slavery of the Body.

Slavery of the Body is when a person overpowers you, usually with Brute force and force you to do some tasks against your rights and free will.

Slavery of the Mind is when a person overpowers you, with all sort of ideology, rewards and even brute force, and make you believe in the same thing they believe.

So, sit down and think whether we were ever free for the past 250 years.