Quotessence
Home / Topics / Caste Quotes

Caste Quotes

Browse 95 quotes about Caste.

Caste Quotes

“I was actually permitting myself to experience a sickening sense of disappointment: but rallying my wits, and recollecting my principles, I at once called my sensations to order; and it was wonderful how I got over the temporary blunder--how I cleared up the mistake of supposing Mr. Rochester's movements a matter in which I had any cause to take vital interest. Not that I humbled myself by a slavish notion of inferiority: on the contrary, I just said-- "You have nothing to do with the master of Thornfield further than to receive the salary he gives you for teaching his protegee and to be grateful for such respectful and kind treatment as, if you do your duty, you have a right to expect at his hands. Be sure that is the only tie he seriously acknowledges between you and him, so don't make him the object of your fine feelings, your raptures, agonies, and so forth. He is not of your order: keep to your caste; and be too self-respecting to lavish the love of the whole heart, soul, and strength, where such a gift is not wanted and would be despised.”

“Indian poverty is more dehumanizing than any machine; and, more than in any machine civilization, men in India are units, locked up in the straitest obedience by their idea of their dharma. The scientist returning to India sheds the individuality he acquired during his time abroad; he regains the security of his caste identity, and the world is once more simplified. There are minute rules, as comforting as bandages; individual perception and judgement, which once called forth his creativity, are relinquished as burdens, and the man is once more a unit in his herd, his science reduced to a skill. The blight of caste is not only untouchability and the consequent deification in India of filth; the blight, in India that tries to grow, is also the over-all obedience it imposes, its ready-made satisfactions, the diminishing of adventurousness, the pushing away of men of individuality and the possibility of excellence.”

“Yes, we have to seek redemption! Redemption from the divisive politics based on caste and religion, redemption from the corruption which is eating our lives like termites, redemption from misery of poverty, redemption from the sins of our venal politicians. We need good governance and accountability. An individual has to fight for the things he rightfully deserves. People do not need crutches of any kind if the basic conditions of nation are conducive to their growth. It’s ridiculous; people are first deprived of basic amenities, denied their dues and then offered carrots to benefit the vote bank politics.”

“Fate determines your caste. You must accept it and live according to the rules." You can't really believe that!" I do believe it. That man's misfortune is that he cannot accept his caste, his fate." I know that the Indians wear their caste as a mark upon their foreheads for all to see. I know that in England, we have our own unacknowledged caste system. A laborer will never hold a seat in Parliament. Neither will a woman. I don't think I've ever questioned such things until this moment. But what about will and desire? What if someone wants to change things." Kartik keeps his eyes on the room "You cannot change your caste. You cannot go against fate." That means there is no hope of a better life. It is a trap." That is how you see it," he says softly. What do you mean?" It can be a relief to follow the path that has been laid oud for you, to know your course and play your part in it." But how can you be sure that you are following the right course? What if there is no such thing as destiny, only choice?" Then I do not choose to live without destiny," he says with a slight smile.”

“We aren't human." "Yes. We. Are." His voice turns fierce. "I don't give a shit what the something-somethingth council of big important farts decreed, or how the geomests classify things, or any of that. That we're not human is just the lie they tell themselves so they don't have to feel bad about how they treat us.”

“Theosophists for instance will preach an obviously attractive idea like re-incarnation; but if we wait for its logical results, they are spiritual superciliousness and the cruelty of caste. For if a man is a beggar by his own pre-natal sins, people will tend to despise the beggar. But Christianity preaches an obviously unattractive idea, such as original sin; but when we wait for its results, they are pathos and brotherhood, and a thunder of laughter and pity; for only with original sin we can at once pity the beggar and distrust the king.”

“She's on the stairs, ma'am, getting her breath,' said the young servant, who had not been long up from the country, where my mother had the excellent habit of getting all her servants. Often she had seen them born. That's the only way to get really good ones. And they're the rarest of luxuries.”

“What is key to America’s understanding of class is the persistent belief — despite all evidence to the contrary — that anyone, with the proper discipline and drive, can move from a lower class to a higher class. We recognize that mobility may be difficult, but the key to our collective self-image is the assumption that mobility is always possible, so failure to move up reflects on one’s character. By extension, the failure of a race or ethnic group to move up reflects very poorly on the group as a whole.”

“P. Sainath says, 'What we need to do is not just destroy the caste hierarchy but simultaneously create respect for the work and labour that people do, for what they produce. I have always maintained that untouchability is not just a social evil. It’s more than that. It’s an extremely cruel, vicious but sophisticated form of exploitation by which we keep a large labour force permanently demoralised, humiliated and dependent. So we need to destroy the feudal relations of production completely; we need to accept that if a son or daughter of a potter, weaver or leather worker do not want to be in that field, it’s a perfectly legitimate need of theirs and they cannot under any circumstance be compelled. You need to break down the caste hierarchy and when you bring respect and economic returns for that skill, who knows—many other children in the village might want to do it. Look at the way we’ve destroyed weaving. Several weavers, who for countless years made the famous Kanjeevaram saree, are driving autorickshaws in Kanchi and Chennai, and this is called reskilling. These individuals hold within them cumulatively thousands of years of skill, knowledge and experience. We simply do not respect labour, we don’t give dignity to those who do this beautiful work. However, there are also professions and occupations that you want to see dead. I don’t want to see anybody take up or inherit manual scavenging. It is the greatest assault on human dignity that you can think of in a structured way. And it is perpetrated because we are somehow very comfortable with the idea of using the children of our poor to do the dirty work for us. So there are professions that have to be completely destroyed. And there are professions, occupations and livelihoods that have to be preserved. But not as they were in their old context but recreated in a new one.”

“It was Gandhi who gave the Congress Party a mass base, a rural base. Four out of five Indians live in villages; and the Congress remains the only party in India (except for certain regional parties) which has a rural organization; it cannot lose. The opposition parties, even a revivalist Hindu party like the Jan Sangh, the National Party, are city parties. In the villages, the Congress is still Gandhi's party; and the village tyrannies that have been established through nearly thirty years of unbroken Congress rule cannot now be easily removed. In the countryside, the men to watch for are the men in white Gandhian homespun. They are the men of power, the politicians; their authority, rooted in antique reverences of caste and clan, has been emboldened by Independence and democracy.”

“To make democracy work, Jayaprakash Narayan suggests, to undo tyranny, it is only necessary for India to return truly to itself. The Ramraj that Gandhi offered is no longer simply Independence, India without the British; it is people's government, the reestablishment of the ancient Indian village republic, a turning away from the secretariats of Delhi and the state capitals. But this is saying nothing; this is to leave India where it is. What looks like a political programme is only clamour and religious excitation. People's government and the idea of the ancient village republic (which may be a fanciful idea, a nationalist myth surviving from the days of the Independence struggle) are not the same thing. Old India has its special cruelties; not all the people are people.”

“Though our castes and institutions are apparently linked with our religion, they are not so. These institutions have been necessary to protect us as a nation, and when this necessity for self-preservation will no more exist, they will die a natural death. But the older I grow, the better I seem to think of these time-honored institutions of India. There was a time when I used to think that many of them were useless and worthless; but the older I grew, the more I seem to feel a diffidence in cursing any one of them, for each one of them is the embodiment of the experience of centuries. A child of but yesterday, destined to die the day after tomorrow, comes to me and asks me to change all my plans; and if I hear the advice of that baby and change all my surroundings according to his ideas, I myself should be a fool, and no one else. Much of the advice that is coming to us from different countries is similar to this. Tell these wiseacres: "I will hear you when you have made a society yourselves. You cannot hold on to one idea for two days, you quarrel and fail; you are born like moths in the spring and die like them in five minutes. You come up like bubbles and burst like bubbles too. First form a stable society like ours. First make laws and institutions that remain undiminished in their power through scores of centuries. Then will be the time to talk on the subject with you, but till then, my friend, you are only a giddy child.”

“There is a trend going on in world these days for when people see they can't achieve something or reach somewhere, they start blaming their race, color or religion for it. They give examples or learn from those 99% who could't achieve something, ignoring those 1% who are already there regardless of their color, caste or religion. Only difference between these 99% and those 1% is, they were working hard, trying to break the myths and barriers when other 99% were just sitting at home in the comfort of their couches and crying for their failures, blaming it either on their race or color.Celebrating your races or religions and crying blaming it for your failure everyday, won't take anyone anywhere. Go out, move your feet and work.”

“During your struggle society is not a bunch of flowers, it is a bunch of cactus.”

“बर्दाश्त कर लेने का इतना हौसला था कि आज मैं सोचता हूँ तो हैरान रह जाता हूँ। कितना कुछ छीन लिया है मुझसे इस बर्दाश्त कर लेने की आदत ने!”

“साहित्य में नरक की सिर्फ कल्पना है। हमारे लिए बरसात के दिन किसी नारकीय जीवन से कम न थे। हमने इसे साकार रूप में जीते–जी भोगा है। ग्राम्य जीवन की यह दारुण व्यथा हिन्दी के महाकवियों को छू भी नहीं सकी। कितनी बीभत्स सच्चाई है यह!”

“भारतीय समाज की क्रूर–व्यवस्था व्यक्ति की योग्यता को नकार रही थी। उनकी दृष्टि में डॉ. अम्बेडकर जन्मना महार थे। भले ही उनकी विद्वत्ता आकाश जितनी ऊँचाई पा जाए।”

“Definition of Dalits? Many people mistakenly perceive the term Dalit as merely another caste label. In truth, it is a profoundly political and ideological identity—an umbrella term that encompasses historically marginalized and oppressed communities. To truly understand Dalit, we must recognize that language operates on two intertwined levels: the textual and the contextual. Textually, every word carries both denotation—the literal, dictionary meaning—and connotation—the emotional, cultural, or symbolic resonance. For example, lily denotes a particular white flower, yet it connotes purity and fragrance. Similarly, rose refers to a specific botanical entity, while also symbolizing love and beauty. However, certain terms—like Purohita (Hindu priest)—cannot be fully grasped through textual analysis alone. Their meanings are shaped by the historical, religious, and cultural frameworks in which they function. A Purohita is not just a religious figure; he embodies the ritual authority, social hierarchy, and Brahminical dominance inherent in Hindu society. Likewise, Dalit is not just a lexical item—it is a historically charged identity rooted in centuries of caste-based exclusion, violence, and resistance. It embodies the collective struggle against structural oppression and signals a radical assertion of dignity and justice. To engage with the term Dalit is to confront the lived realities of caste discrimination and to recognize its role as a political and cultural counter-narrative. Hence, Dalit must be understood not just linguistically, but through a deep sociopolitical lens that attends to the histories, struggles, and aspirations it signifies.”

“Why do we need reservation in Private sectors? Private sector reservation is not just a matter of employment—it is a matter of democratic justice and representation in a society where caste continues to determine who gets hired, promoted, funded, and heard. Without reservation, Dalits remain invisible in boardrooms, media, law firms, tech companies, and startups. As Suraj Yengde points out in Caste Matters (2019), “In India's new economy, Dalits are the untouchables of the digital age. There is no Ambedkar in Silicon Valley.” Additionally, global capitalism in India benefits from caste-based cheap labor, while resisting caste-based equity, thus reproducing old hierarchies in new forms.”

“What is the Third-Class Degree and the Colonial Education Dilemma The introduction of Macaulay’s Minute on Education in 1835, followed by Wood’s Despatch in 1854, laid the foundation for a British-style education system in colonial India. Designed to produce a class of Indians who were “Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect,” this system emphasized English-language education, liberal arts, and European epistemology, effectively displacing indigenous systems of learning rooted in Sanskrit, Persian, and Tamil traditions. Initially, Indian universities (established in Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras in 1857) adopted a rigid system of academic classification, with students qualifying for a first class at 60%, and second class at 45%. This system quickly exposed disparities in performance, particularly among students from varied caste backgrounds. While upper-caste Brahmin communities had long-standing access to education—especially in Sanskritic traditions—they struggled with the new colonial syllabus and pedagogy, which emphasized logic, Western literature, and sciences. By the late 19th century, British educators were alarmed by the high failure rates among Indian students, especially in South India, where Tamil Brahmins—despite their traditional academic roles—were not performing well under the British evaluative framework. In an effort to boost the number of graduates and maintain a steady supply of clerks and civil servants, British officials proposed the creation of a “third class” degree with a pass mark of 33%. This move was formalized in the Indian Universities Commission Report of 1902. What is notable—but often underemphasized—is how upper-caste Hindus, especially the Dwija castes (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas), rallied behind the idea of introducing this lower threshold. Many of these groups, who had historically benefited from hereditary access to religious and scriptural education, were now struggling to adapt to modern, secular, and English-language education. The third-class degree became a lifeline—ironically endorsed by the very castes that later would oppose caste-based affirmative action, arguing for "merit" as the only valid criterion. The creation of a third-class degree, thus, serves as an early historical example of structural adjustment to accommodate dominant castes—a form of affirmative accommodation before the term “reservation” even entered Indian political discourse. While it was framed as a meritocratic concession to help Indian students succeed, it was in fact a policy born of practical necessity and caste-based pressure, aiming to preserve the hegemony of upper castes in the emerging modern bureaucracy. This irony becomes even more stark when viewed against the later history of Dalit and Bahujan struggles for access to education, especially in the 20th century. Leaders like Jyotirao Phule, Periyar, and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar would go on to expose how education remained deeply caste-coded. For centuries, the Dalits (Scheduled Castes) and Shudras had been denied access to learning altogether. When reservations were introduced to level the field post-Independence, these very upper-caste communities began to resist them, invoking the rhetoric of "merit"—a notion that was conveniently malleable when they needed the third class to survive colonial assessments. Thus, the colonial education system did not eliminate caste—it subtly reinforced it by repackaging privilege under new labels. The introduction of the third-class degree exemplifies how colonial policy was not caste-neutral but often aligned with the interests of dominant castes. It laid the groundwork for ongoing debates around meritocracy, reservation, and educational justice in India—a legacy that continues to shape the nation's politics and social dynamics well into the 21st century.”

“The abolition of caste in India is impossible without dismantling the entrenched economic and land-based power structures that uphold it. As Dr. B.R. Ambedkar forcefully argued, caste is not merely a division of labor, but "a division of labourers" (Annihilation of Caste 17), where the hierarchical allocation of work is inherited and enforced through socio-economic mechanisms. Historically, caste has operated as a system of economic exploitation, wherein dominant castes consolidated power through control over land, knowledge, and religious institutions, relegating Dalits and other oppressed groups to landless labor and degrading occupations. Ambedkar contended that “caste is not just a social institution, it is also an economic one” and warned that “you cannot build anything on the foundations of caste. You have to blow it up” (Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Ancient India 23).”

“How next generation can become casteless? Educating the next generation for a caste-free society requires more than tokenistic inclusion; it demands a pedagogical revolution rooted in equality, empathy, critical thinking, and epistemic justice. The present educational system, as Ambedkar noted in Annihilation of Caste, is complicit in “manufacturing obedient caste minds” that naturalize hierarchy rather than challenge it. Therefore, education must first deconstruct the hidden curriculum of caste—the ways in which textbooks, classroom practices, language, and institutional norms reinforce dominant caste narratives while marginalizing Dalit-Bahujan voices. Schools must be restructured as spaces of liberation, not discipline, by incorporating the writings, histories, and philosophies of Ambedkar, Savitribai Phule, Ayyankali, Periyar, and other anti-caste thinkers into core curricula, not just as electives or afterthoughts. Pedagogy must shift from rote memorization to dialogic, experiential learning that cultivates empathy and reflexivity in students. Teachers themselves must be sensitized through anti-caste training, and diversity in teaching staff—especially Dalit and Adivasi educators—must be actively pursued through affirmative hiring. Importantly, education should challenge caste not only intellectually but institutionally, through caste-free hostels, fair admissions, and safe grievance mechanisms. As Paulo Freire argued in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, “education is either a practice of freedom or a practice of domination”—and in caste society, it has largely been the latter. The next generation must be trained not just to understand caste, but to actively dismantle it, through critical consciousness, solidarity practices, and ethical citizenship. Only when children are taught that caste is not cultural heritage but a violation of human dignity—and are given the tools to resist it—can education become the foundation of a truly egalitarian India.”

“The Classic Question: The Paradox of The Majority or Bahujen. The term Bahujan refers to India’s demographic majority—Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes—constituting nearly 70% of the population. Yet this numerical strength has not translated into structural empowerment, giving rise to what scholars call the Bahujan paradox: the tension between political visibility and persistent social marginality. Historically, caste society imposed graded inequality (Ambedkar), ensuring that even among oppressed groups, internal hierarchies prevented unity. Despite the promise of democracy, land ownership, wealth, education, and cultural capital remain concentrated in upper-caste hands. This creates the first axis of the paradox: majority in numbers, minority in power. The second dimension lies in politics versus structure. From the 1980s, the rise of the BSP, SP, RJD, DMK, and others marked a political awakening. Bahujan leaders captured state power in several regions, but institutions like the bureaucracy, judiciary, and media remained dominated by elites. Electoral success has thus not dismantled systemic dominance. Third is the tension between unity and fragmentation. Kanshi Ram envisioned solidarity across SCs, STs, and OBCs, yet rivalries and caste sub-identities often splinter this bloc, weakening collective bargaining. Fourth, policy gains contrast with social realities. Reservations and welfare have created upward mobility for a small segment, but caste violence, everyday discrimination, and failed land reforms persist. Finally, there is empowerment without emancipation. Leaders once rooted in radical anti-caste thought often compromise with dominant caste and capitalist frameworks. Cultural icons like Ambedkar and Phule are celebrated, but frequently co-opted by parties unwilling to confront caste hierarchies. In essence, the Bahujan paradox reveals a striking contradiction: India’s majority commands votes but not full dignity, wielding political clout without achieving structural transformation.”

“Caste is a very important element of Indian society. As soon as a person is born, caste determines his or her destiny. Being born is not in the control of a person. If it were in one’s control, then why would I have been born in a Bhangi household? Those who call themselves the standard-bearers of this country’s great cultural heritage, did they decide which homes they would be born into? Of course, they turn to scriptures to justify their position, the scriptures that establish feudal values instead of promoting equality and freedom.”

“सदियों से चली आ रही इस प्रथा के पार्श्व में जातीय अहम की पराकाष्ठा है। समाज में जो गहरी खाई है उसे प्रथा और गहरा बनाती है। एक साजिश है हीनता के भँवर में फँसा देने की। Caste pride is behind this centuries-old custom. The deep chasm that divides the society is made even deeper by this custom, a conspiracy to trap us in the whirlpool of inferiority.”