Casteists Parading as Social Scientists
This is with reference to your DV edit. (March 16) “Searching a backcat.” Social science is a profession. The appraisal of social reality is one of the prime concerns of social scientists. Large bodies like the University Grants Commission, Indian Council for Social Science Research and many of their allied concerns sponsor the ‘social science enterprise’. But ultimately the ‘enterprise’ is responsible to the taxpayers. He has a right to know how his money is being spent. It is no exaggeration to say if one were to suggest that social science is an ‘elitist profession’. It must become imperative on the part of the establishment to disclose the class and caste affiliations of the social scientists. That would help know the real motives of this brand of knowledge industry. Knowledge is not created in a vacuum. The caste of the social scientists are reflected in their thought patterns. In fact, even the labelling of a popular corncept put forward by “an eminent sociologist” bears this stigma. Scholars of the “Marxist” variety are engaged for years in finding a cogent fit between the theoretical scheme and the existential reality. They have remained indifferent to the question of ‘Praxis’. Mind you, they owe no allegiance to the ideology perse. They are only applying a particular mode of enquiry in a detached, impersonal and scientific manner. Some heat has been generated regarding the ‘perceptual bias’ of the researchers. Proponents of the ‘Sub altern school of history’ have denounced the existing tradition as ‘elitist perspective’. Abortive attempts have been made by scholars to examine reality from the bottom of the social space. Can a Dominique Lapierre (City of Joy) capture the reality of Calcutta by dwelling in one of the ghettos? Such are the efforts of our social scientists. The former is an ‘imperialist elite’ and the latter a ‘populist elite’. A serious discipline like ‘psychology’ has been stagnating for a number of decades. Indian psychologists have remained relatively indifferent to the country’s problems. Their research priorities have no reference to the existing socio-economic-political realities. It has been reduced to a status-quoist discipline. It cannot even boast of a veneer of social and public accountability. This decadence can be partly attributed to the class/caste character of our psyhologists. Sociologists are more sensitive to this issue. But sadly, their existential concerns are incompatible with their intellectual demands. The ‘State’ has a stake in the knowledge industry. Most of the research institutions are run by the ‘State’ viz UGC,ICSSR etc. Often, there is a happy collusion between the sponsors and the researchers. Consequently, our social science academia has developed this wounderful capacity of elevating ‘basic human issues’ to the status of value neutrality. They have become desensitized, kind of emotional morons.
