Anthropological understanding of communalism.

Anthropological Foundations of Communalism

Anthropology views communalism not merely as a political phenomenon but as a product of cultural processes. Several key anthropological concepts help explain its emergence:

• Cultural Construction of Identity: Identities, including religious and caste identities, are not primordial but are socially and culturally constructed. Anthropologists like Clifford Geertz emphasize that culture provides the ‘tool kit’ of symbols and meanings people use to define themselves and others. Communal ideologies actively construct and reinforce these identities, often through selective interpretations of history and tradition.
• Boundary Maintenance: Fredrik Barth’s work on ethnic boundaries highlights that it’s not the content of cultural differences, but the maintenance of boundaries *between* groups that is crucial. Communalism thrives on emphasizing and exaggerating these boundaries, creating ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentalities. Rituals, festivals, and even everyday practices can serve to reinforce these boundaries.
• Symbolic Systems and Rituals: Symbols and rituals play a powerful role in creating and reinforcing communal identities. For example, the appropriation of religious symbols for political purposes, or the performance of communal rituals that emphasize group solidarity, can contribute to communal polarization. Victor Turner’s work on liminality and ritual processes is relevant here.
• Kinship and Social Networks: Communal identities are often reinforced through kinship and social networks. Endogamy (marriage within the group) and preferential association with co-religionists strengthen communal bonds and limit interaction with other groups.

The Role of Colonialism

Colonial policies significantly exacerbated communal tensions in India. The British employed a ‘divide and rule’ strategy, often favoring certain communities over others, and introducing policies that reinforced communal identities.

• Census Operations: The British census, starting in 1871, categorized Indians based on religion, solidifying religious identities as fixed and politically relevant categories. This categorization had no precedent in pre-colonial India.
• Separate Electorates: The introduction of separate electorates for Muslims in 1909 (Minto-Morley Reforms) further institutionalized communal divisions and encouraged political mobilization along religious lines.
• Orientalist Scholarship: British scholars’ interpretations of Indian history and culture often emphasized religious differences, contributing to a narrative of inherent communal conflict.

Anthropological Studies of Communal Conflict

Anthropological fieldwork has provided valuable insights into the dynamics of communal conflict at the local level.

• Veena Das’s work on violence in Delhi (1984 anti-Sikh riots): Das highlighted the role of rumor, fear, and the breakdown of social trust in fueling communal violence. She emphasized the importance of understanding the lived experiences of victims and perpetrators.
• M.N. Srinivas’s concept of ‘Sanskritization’ and its impact on caste dynamics: While not directly about communalism, Srinivas’s work demonstrates how social hierarchies and cultural practices can contribute to social tensions and inequalities that can be exploited by communal forces.

Beyond Essentialism: Fluidity and Hybridity

It’s crucial to avoid essentializing communal identities. Anthropological research demonstrates that identities are often fluid and hybrid, and that individuals may hold multiple, overlapping identities. Communal ideologies attempt to impose a rigid and exclusive definition of identity, but this often clashes with the lived realities of people on the ground.