The Brahmin, with his upper caste collaborators, doesn’t just control the state and the corridors of power, but also exercises monopolistic clout over the flow of capital in the country. As members in the boardrooms, along with the Banias, they direct over 90% of India’s capital. The key players in the nationalist project, the landowning castes and the mercantile castes from various nations now submerged in India, along with the Brahmins have expanded their economic power several times since independence.

Ambedkar was perhaps the last thinker to speak about its imprint, how the Brahmins have been a disaster for India as an ‘intellectual’ class, as a ‘governing class’. But what India’s social and political scientists have been doing, or not doing, for the last 70 years is very strange. You don’t find the academia or media or civil society talking about the Brahmin ever. It’s not that they don’t talk about caste, or dominant castes or upper castes in particular.

~ Can the term brahminical be applied to anyone but a Brahmin? The term rests on the presumption of knowledge of the essence of the Brahmin. If you know what it takes to be brahminical, can you become a Brahmin? You can become a Christian, a capitalist or a Marxist or an astrologer if you want, after gaining knowledge of what they are. But you can’t become a Brahmin even if you think you know all the answers to that.

~ In India caste is in class. The Mandal commission for Backward Classes also found convergence between caste and class. According to Indiaspend, the victims of lynching are almost entirely from poor families. Therefore, the 'Ansari' victims of mob lynching in Jharkhand are in all probability Pasmanda Muslims from the weaver community (poor and low caste). In a few instances the 'Ansari' surname is also used by upper caste Muslims.

~ Article 21 which mandates that ‘no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law’ is a great protection given not only to the citizens of this country, but to every person living in this country either temporarily or permanently. This right is as extensive and diverse as life is and covers all its facets. This is one of the branches of Constitutional law which was very widely expanded and is being expanded.

~ Unfortunately, this right to life is much abused and trampled upon by the State. Almost all actions of the police in depriving the people of life and personal liberty go unnoticed by the agency of law and unpunished by the courts. The violations of this fundamental right go on with impunity. In the name of curbing violent or extremist activity, several thousands of people in this country are shot dead in blatant violation of law.

there's very little reliable data on inter-caste marriages in india.. all kinds of anecdotal wisdom is thrown around as 'knowledge'.., according to the census 2011, the percentage of inter-caste marriages is 5.8% of all marriages.. even that can't be trusted as completely accurate, but that's a little more believable.. the census also says that the rate of inter-caste marriages is higher in rural areas than in the metros.. so there.. that challenges two popular myths -

Thongam Bipin ~ Phulo also observed that the lack of education and scientific knowledge were due to Hinduism. He was pained at the economic exploitation of Meeteis by Brahmins. He says, “Tengbangbana ‘logic logic’, ‘science science’ haiduna nongthangi firaan hairi” (Rest of the world are shouting and flying the success of logic and science while the Meeteis are possessed by Hindu rituals, songs and dance) (Phulo, 2010: 62). He blamed Hinduism for encouraging youths to take up Sankirtan8 at the cost of their education.

the brahmin institutions--the media, academia, 'civil' (read savarna society) make every crisis into an india thing.. 'the farmers hoisted this flag', 'that flag against india flag..' 'no they, didn't' 'they used violence..' 'the state used violence'.. it's led by secessionists', 'no, it's not'.. and so on.. please note, all the contradictory noises revolve around the india thing.. the point is, the unwritten contract between the punjabi farmers and the indian state (in which the latter got the license to loot and exploit the former) has ended..

every jati in the sub-continent has exercised 'disciplinary power' over its members for quite looong.. and every member of each jati has exercised 'bio-power' over himself--in order to strive to be a 'good' member of the jati--and over other members, watching their conduct, and taking part in punishing them if they stray from the jati's norms.. so every jati lived in its own 'panopticon'--always being watched and watching--which was enclosed within a bigger panopticon of the jati system (or caste system) as a whole.. and so on..

why have the brahmin-savarnas in academia taken up foucault so strongly.. the plainest reason is that he doesn't question their power, property or privilege.. if they wanted students to study the knowledge-power nexus, in the indian context, they could teach phule or ambedkar.. if they wanted to teach resistance to dominant discourses, they could refer to kabir, raidas, nanak or basava.. if they wanted students to learn the 'culture of the self' they could explore the buddha.. why foucault?

when the congress and bjp sponsored the kejriwal-prashant bhushan etc gang, they had two challenges: they had to reduce the potential of mandal 2 and the rise of behenji and other bahujan leaders in up/bihar.. the issue the gang raised, corruption among politicians and bureaucracy--it was so hypocritical.. their pretense that the political/babu class didn't majorly comprise of their own castes, their own kith and kin was so absurd..