To some extent political theorists too are a party to creation of neo-social group identities. In one interview, commenting on pre-poll politics in Maharashtra, Gail Omvedt (2009) said that the people’s issues in India are same everywhere and they are: inclusive development, support for farmers, and provision of education, especially primary education. Yet, during the interview she advocated that there is need to fight caste and caste discrimination among the elite, not among the subaltern. It is not clear to me how the elite can ignore caste if subaltern too carry caste consciousness. Subaltern classes, i.e., landless laborers, poor peasants, and artisans have not been free from caste and caste identity and the government programmes have further enforced the caste/community consciousness among them. Also it is not clear how caste consciousness and caste conflicts can ever produce a casteless society. It’s like saying that increasing assertion of Muslims is necessary for building a secular society. This is a politically reflexive risk India is afflicted with.
Ironically, along with rapid economic integration of the country a process of vertical split is on. To quote Nilekani (2009):
|
These appeals to caste and the politics of identity have also hardened people’s opinions, with their you’re-either-with-us-or-against-us approach. Both within the government and in our advisory committees and task forces, there is now little more than sharp partisanship. |
| 
