STRUCTURE OF (NON)SOCIETY

B.R. Ambedkar

- Analysed the mechanism, genesis and development of ‘Castes in India’ (1916). Sociologist Gabriel Tarde hypothesized that the fundamental psychological forces operating in society are ‘imitation’ and ‘innovation’.

In India Ambedkar adds the force of castes is both psychological and mechanical Even for those who don’t psychologically imitate, they find themselves claustrophobically “closed in” to a caste. He also added a 3rd term ‘excommunication’ to bring out the peculiar mechanism of castes. (Excommunication “ is essentially an exclusion from what, modern terminology would call, “free speech” (Choudhury 2018)).

- “Unity of culture” is not enough to make a society however. In ‘Annihilation of Caste’ (1936) he theorized that “Men do not become a society by living in physical proximity ... [and acquiring] similarity in habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts ... the only way by which men can come to possess things in common with one another is by being in communication with one another. This is merely another way of saying that Society continues to exist by communication indeed in communication.”

So there are, then, many of what is called samaj . (Jaaware 2019. Read p.49)

Deleuze, Gilles. How Do we Recognize Structuralism?

Caste cannot be understood like race. In America racial segregation created separate cultures and endogamy did not form castes out of the races. Division of labour is not the caste system’s essence, as DoL is present without castes in other societies. Its uniqueness lies in that blocs of the population were artificially chopped off and circumscribed in circles “outside which people should not contract marriages.” Caste is about control of who women marry.

“Every ructure psychosomatic ... Every ructure an fra ructure ,,, a virtuality of co-ex tence” which “nonsense ... produces sense ... produces it by circulat g the ructure” Social ructure not architectural or biological. It like a lliv g grammar.

In this segmented social structure there is no common humanity. Only “a graded system of sovereignties ... which are jealous of their status.” All hearts are codified against innovation or “conceptual interruption that, in a sense, disturbs given philosophies of history.”

One cannot change hearts without a change of structure. This requires conversion to a new principle.

1. Non-Violent direct action is perceived as violence by those who identify with ‘the naturalness of’ their place in the structure.

2. They see in the direct action only a willingness to break laws. But “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust?”

3. If one waits for the right time, one will be stuck in the waiting room that is their history