Concept of 'Dominant' caste

Defining Dominance: Srinivas’s Framework

M.N. Srinivas identified six criteria for determining caste dominance:

• Numerical Strength: A substantial population size.
• Economic Advancement: Control over land and other economic resources.
• Political Influence: Ability to influence local political decisions.
• Social Status: Generally high, though not necessarily Brahmanical.
• Ritual Purity: Often, but not always, associated with notions of ritual purity.
• Occupation: Dominant castes often engage in occupations that confer power and prestige.

Srinivas argued that dominance is relative and situational, varying from village to village. He observed that dominant castes often mimic the customs and practices of the higher castes (Sanskritization) to legitimize their position.

Factors Contributing to Caste Dominance

Several historical and socio-economic factors contribute to the emergence of dominant castes:

• Land Ownership: Historically, land ownership has been a primary determinant of dominance. The Zamindari system and subsequent land reforms significantly impacted caste dynamics.
• State Patronage: Government policies, including reservation and political representation, can reinforce or challenge caste dominance.
• Social Capital: Strong social networks and collective action within a caste group enhance its ability to mobilize resources and exert influence.
• Education: Access to education provides opportunities for social mobility and strengthens a caste’s position.

Manifestations of Caste Dominance

Caste dominance manifests in various ways:

• Social Control: Dominant castes often enforce social norms and customs, sometimes through coercive means.
• Economic Exploitation: They may control access to employment, credit, and other economic opportunities, leading to exploitation of lower castes.
• Political Representation: Dominant castes often dominate local political institutions, influencing policy decisions and resource allocation.
• Violence and Discrimination: In extreme cases, dominance can lead to violence and discrimination against marginalized groups.

Example: The Jat community in Western Uttar Pradesh and Haryana historically held significant land ownership and political influence, demonstrating dominance through control over agricultural resources and local governance.

Critiques and Evolving Dynamics

The concept of dominant caste has faced several critiques:

• Oversimplification: Critics argue that it oversimplifies the complexities of caste relations and ignores internal divisions within castes.
• Ignoring Gender: The framework often overlooks the role of gender in shaping caste dynamics.
• Changing Social Landscape: With urbanization, globalization, and the rise of identity politics, the traditional notion of a dominant caste is becoming increasingly fragmented.

The rise of backward class movements and affirmative action policies have challenged the dominance of upper castes in many regions. However, intermediate castes have also emerged as dominant forces in their respective areas.

Dominance in the 21st Century

While traditional forms of dominance are waning, new forms are emerging, often intertwined with economic liberalization and political mobilization. The influence of caste in electoral politics remains significant, with political parties often appealing to caste identities to secure votes.