Dialectics of identity and development : A new outlook
- Part 2 -

Dr Longjam Krishnamangol *

But, the person will have only one identity of the Nation (ie the National identity). What is emphasised in our analysis is that apart from the "National identity" of a person, there may be different identities of the person, which may be called "plural identities" and these plural identities have different roles in promoting the society and economy of a Nation or country. Thus, in redefining the concept of "identity" , the person may be a member of "social identity" or "social group"/ social affiliation.

And non-member also can be identified to join the group in the relevant context of any programme or activities. Thus, in a particular context, they also join the social group or share the group for promoting socio-economic and other aspect of development. Likewise, a person can have the qualities of plural identities. And, in democratic societies, the door is also opened for them to participate in any programme/activities or event in different ways to live in a system of social harmony and avoid the clash of civilization.

In the final analysis of the concept of identities, it can be concluded that although there are different identities of a person in various forms or features, there is only one identity of a person which is called national identity. Likewise, there are different identities of different persons or citizens in different countries. Thus, there is the need to properly (i.e. legally) recognise the identity of any person under the existing rule to confirm him or her as the citizen of the country.

This requires proper political and "social caring " of the recognised citizens or of the people of the country.

And, this will also avoid the clash of civilizations or groups in order to move toward the goal of peaceful co-existence of different communities or social groups and also towards the goal of new international or new global order in various fields of development. Having analysed the various aspects of the concept of "identity" of a person and its relation with religion and culture, civilization or any other group, we may now seek to answer the question.

Whether Meitei/Meetei should be included in the Scheduled Tribe category or "status" under the Indian Constitution. In fact, it is now time to argue against the inclusion of Meitei or Meetei in the Scheduled Tribe list under the Constitution of India. Here, our answer or argument shall be very brief to make the point more precise and avoid fresh confusions.

In the first place, the confusion on the nomenclature of Meitei or Meetei needs to be resolved in order to avoid the double saying in the name of the community as Meitei or Meetei. It is observed that the civilization of the community long period of historical development has revealed that the community or is called known as Meitei and not as Meetei.

Some local historical (s) have called the community as Meetei due to lack of knowledge either from the records or from the saying of the ancestors or forefathers. The classical literature or the short play also used the name of the community as Meitei. The early Administration Report of Manipur also recognised the community as "Manipur Meitei".

Thus, until the difference in the nomenclature between Meitei is resolved, there will be two classes of the community, which will ultimately lead to clash of civilizations or groups. The clash of interest is also frequently reflected in the media. This is an unhealthy trend in our society. And, as a result, there is also social division due to the differences in the use of language.

Thus, it is now high time to resolve or address the differences in the use of the two words (ie between Meitei and Meetei) instead of demanding for claiming tribal identity. And, there should not be human rights violation in the demand made by a particular section of the society or a particular interest group which will be at the cost of the some other groups or some section of the same society.

Thus, the claim for tribal identity has to be immediately rejected as the tribal has also achieved yet another socio-economic development. And, it need not be supported or unduly encouraged by any unreasonable political praxis and pressure groups. In case of failing to do so, there will be social division, conflicts and tension in the society, which will affect socio-economic transformation and development in Manipur.

Next in importance, it can be pointed out that our views against the movement for the inclusion of Meitei/Meetei in the Scheduled Tribe list will not proceed in terms of chronological orders as there are different theories and practices in the field of socio-economic development.

And, the argument in favour of claiming for the tribal identity by the Meitei/Meetei is not relevant in the present context as there has been rapid socio-economic changes over the last few decades. Again, the argument that Meitei or Meetei was once a tribal community is not relevant now. How far it is true is questionable and without any foundation. Sometimes, the census data are fraud and subject to correction. The classifications and methodologies were also poor in determining the status of the communities in those days.

The enumerators might also apply wrong judgement and the field workers might fail to understand the characteristic features and history of the Meitei/Meetei population as the non-tribal community (presenting called the general population). And, the census data were not perfect in determining the tribal status of any community. Thus, there need not be vested interest group in the general movement for inclusion of Meitei/Meetei in the Scheduled Tribe list under the Indian Constitution.

Thus, it would not be wrong to say that there is now "fear factor" in the minds of a large section of the Meitei thinking that their identity may be changed without their consent and this would psychologically affect the aged old civilization of the Meitei population. We may now turn to the general psychology of the people of Manipur, particularly the Meitei Population on the inclusion of Meitei in the Scheduled Tribe list under the Indian Constitution.

Here by the term " psychology" we mean the state of mind of the peoples. To avoid the concept of the vagueness of the phrase "state of mind" it can be pointed out that psychology is the thought process of the individual or the person. Indeed, it indicates how the thought processes react and functions.

And, it also reflects the attitude and behaviour of the person. Thus, without going into the various definitions of psychology, which is also not attempted here, it can be pointed out that there is now increasing trend of strong motivation from the side of demand group among towards the large section of the Meitei/Meetei populace to choose for tribal identity. Of course, tribal have rich cultural heritages and there are evidence that most of them have also reached advanced stage of civilization in the present context.

And even the President of India is now from the tribal community. And, there is now rising claim that tribal are not the mere beneficiaries, but they are also contributing to or participating in the Nation building development. Indeed, this is a great achievement of the Central and State Government. The time is therefore, ripe for abolition of the concept of tribals in India by a new Parliamentary and State legislation.

The Latin American concept of the tribes or the tribals need not be applied in India now. Instead, the concept of "clans" of the tribes or the tribals as used in the evolution of the human society or civilization (i.e. original concept, "clans" that is available in the socialist literature) need to be used.

As already not, it is now the time to abolish or remove the concept or the term "tribe" (earlier concept) or the tribals (modern concept) with a view to removing class contradictions and bring about total or full social justice. At this stage of analysis, it can be pointed out that only the "economically weaker section" /individuals or economically backward persons of the community (i.e. non-income youths or non income educated youths (i.e. the educated unemployed youths). need to be protected in terms of government benefits of job reservation at the level.

And the creamy layer categories or the upper income groups/individuals along with the general mass population need to be provided with all benefits of the overall development process irrespective of caste, creed and other criteria. It is therefore necessary to recast the present job reservation policy of the centre and the states.

And along with the job reservation for the educated youths/the educated unemployed youths belonging to the economically and financially weaker sections of the society, it is necessary to frame economic policy for generation of adequate and sustaining employment opportunities for the growing labour force (i.e. particularly for the unemployed persons and those who fail to get income generating economic activities).

In the above new model of development, we can think of the same identity of the people of India (i.e. in terms of national identity). In fact, if we think in terms of national identity, there is no question of tribals, non-tribals or any other community. Thus, we have the same identity (i.e. national identity). Again, if we apply the concept of "social identity", there is no difference between the identity of a person and that of another person.

As already noted, this is a concept of "shared identity" or the same identity. However, if we think in terms of " Plural identities " or varied identities of different persons, we have different identities in terms of skills, professions, knowledge, status, classes etc. and they are the different qualities /attributes or characteristic features of the persons.

But, in spite of the difference in the identity of the persons, we have the same "identity" known as national identity. Thus, there need not be conflicts in the identity of different persons or different groups in our society or in the country including Manipur.

In what follows, it can be pointed out that the history of Meitei or Meetei is well known and that it needs no repetition here. And, there seems to be different theories of the history of Manipur. But, the generally accepted "theory and practice" (i.e. the historical records and the evidence/experiences available in various authentic sources) is the history of Manipur.

And, the scope and freedom of history research need not be underly restricted in order to expand our understanding of the history of Manipur and the reality of the history of the state. In fact, given the history of Manipur, it can be pointed out that "Manipur was a princely State of a different kind" In fact, it was an independent kingdom or an independent country.

What is emphasised here is that there was historical evidence, which proved that the tribals were brought into the mainstream in most of the European countries in ancient times (eg. in Rome). And, it is well known that in some advanced countries, there are no tribals now. Thus, the conclusion is obvious that there is no difference between tribals and non-tribals.

And, whatever tribal class existed in many advanced nations are now subsumed as the general population or in the citizens of the country without any class differences. And in a princely state (with monarchy in the nation state) or in the erstwhile independence kingdom of Manipur the Meitei whose historical development is well known was never a tribal community.

In fact, the historical development of Manipur cannot be twisted by a piece of information available from the earlier census and other sources. Thus, the current "demand" that the Meitei/Meetei be included in the scheduled tribe list under the Indian Constitution has no reality.

To conclude, it would not be a rational decision to demand for inclusion of the Meitei or the Meetei in the Scheduled Tribe list under the Indian Constitution. In fact, it is now widely agreed that the new political economy of development or globalisation seeks to bring about changes and transformation in the "old mode of production" in order to promote faster social and economic development in different parts of the world.

Again, the system which was dead in one historical context has been replaced by a new system of development. And, it is now commonly agreed that the concept," development" includes all-round or all-embracing aspects of changes and development. And the changes and development cannot be interpreted in terms of primitive society and retrogradation. However, the ideas dead in one historical context may reappear in another context.

As Key stated in his general theory : "But soon or late. It is ideas, not vested interest, which are dangerous for good or evil "(p.384). Thus, there is the need for developing new theories and policies for "maximum development" in terms of modern concept of development economics .

This requires heavy investment in different sectors of the economy of Manipur in order to move towards the goal of new full employment level for the educated unemployed youths and the growing labour force in the state. In fact, the demand for tribal is not the solution to save Manipur, which is already protected under the Indian constitution and the existing laws of the State.

concluded....