Dalit-Muslim segregation in Gujarat 'more complex than it appears'

 

By Rajiv Shah 

This blog is in continuation of one of my previous blogs, in which I quoted a retired Gujarat cadre IAS bureaucrat telling me that I ought to stop using the word “Dalit” because it is “derogatory.” He advised me instead to use the “constitutional term, Scheduled Caste (SC).” This was in reference to my earlier story, on how India's Muslims' and Dalits' segregation levels are almost similar to the US Black-White segregation, based on a Chicago study.

However, this was not the only observation the retired bureaucrat made while commenting on my story. Referring specifically to Gujarat, whose ground realities he says he knows well, he argued that the issue of segregation is “complex and cannot be explained in simplistic terms.”

The former official agrees that the broad conclusion of the Chicago paper regarding segregation is largely true because, “in many Indian cities, including Ahmedabad, Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Muslims often live in adjoining neighbourhoods and, at times, have also been affected by communal tensions and riots.”

“However,” he insists, “these conflicts are shaped more by socio-economic vulnerability and political mobilisation than by any inherent hostility between communities.”

While pointing out that “historically, SC communities have faced exclusion and discrimination from dominant caste groups within the Hindu social order,” the former official added: “At the same time, many among them remain deeply attached to local Hindu traditions and practices, which can sometimes make sections vulnerable to communal mobilisation during periods of political polarisation.”

Referring to anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat, he observed: “The communal violence witnessed in Ahmedabad over different decades is often cited as an example of how economically vulnerable communities can become both participants and victims in communal conflicts.”

At the same time, the former official offered several reasons why Dalits and Muslims often face segregation in cities:

1. Social interaction and caste barriers: Since a large section of Indian Muslims historically emerged through conversions from lower and backward caste communities, SCs generally face fewer issues of untouchability or social distancing in their interactions with Muslims compared to upper-caste Hindu groups.

2. Poverty and housing patterns: Poverty pushes both communities towards areas where the cost of living, housing, or rental accommodation is comparatively cheaper, often resulting in dense settlements or slum clusters.

3. Food habits and occupations: In some regions, both communities consume beef as an affordable source of protein. Certain occupations linked to informal labour and petty trade have historically brought sections of both communities into similar economic spaces. Muslims also provide several informal-sector services at affordable rates.

4. Alcohol trade: In certain urban areas, informal or illegal alcohol supply chains create economic linkages between sections of both communities, where one may act as supplier and another as consumer.

Another reason for segregation, he believes, is that “the population density” in areas where Muslims and Dalits live “is often among the highest in cities and towns.”

“As a result,” he says, “civic bodies frequently struggle to provide adequate drinking water, drainage, sanitation, healthcare, and educational services. Although many urban local bodies have improved last-mile delivery with increased resources and welfare schemes, a significant gap between demand and quality public services still remains in many such neighbourhoods.”