Internal disparities in neo-social groups and radical politics

Those who are left behind despite social group approach, who see only “gloom and darkness and despair” (Freiedman, 2006) may be drawn towards extremist ideology. In the twenty-first century some of them may opt to use all means to terrorize the world by acting in irrational manner against the wish to life. Even when a small number of people belonging to one group enjoy benefit of development the majority may remain poor and backward. For example, the data produced by Eleventh Five Year Plan shows that as far as participation in the government jobs is concerned, SCs have greater share in jobs than in the general population (even in Group A jobs their proportion is getting closer to their share in the population) but it has not produced an all round development in condition of all SCs. Their HDI is lower than for the whole India. Why should those SCs and STs left behind not be drawn by the ideology of extremism? The particularistic construction of history would act as a catalyst.

Undoubtedly, under the aegis of neo-social groups rights and capacities of individuals as individuals suffer. But in the model of development that helps only a few elite (capitalists, top bureaucrats, politicians, professionals, educationists and defense personnel) there does not seem to be any alternative to cooption of the elite from various groups irrespective of the immense harm it does to human rights.