Politics of othering and positive discrimination

Keithellakpam Johnson *

There is an inherent tendency in man's mental set up for the expositions and understanding of nature to intelligently discriminate the differences and regularity in nature. Knowledge is gained through such faculty of our instinctive mind.

From the smallest to the greatest human groups, the practice of othering and classification is an ongoing process as well as a great source of enriching our collective community's bound of knowledge.

With this little explanation of this basic instinct of the human kind propensity to othering, let us straight away come to the politics behind othering. This is to explain that when a dominant group exercises this faculty, it is in most of the cases that the knowledge gained and the exposition put forth got more universal acceptance than it is done by a weaker group is an universal fact.

There is an interesting dynamic regarding the politics of othering and the politics of acceptance and imposition though it is beyond the scope of this write up. To be brief regarding this important dimension, two social processes play an important role. That is the process of stereotyping by a superior group and the internalization by a lesser group.

Negative ways and behavior which are actually not of the weaker group becomes internalized and universally exhibited by such groups through powerful resources of the dominant group in question.

In the course of colonial era, many concepts have been used to classify and register human groups through this special faculty of othering. Relevant to this article, there are such terms/concepts, for instance, primitive people, aboriginal people, native people.

These terms were used by the colonialists for identification and classification of other alien groups whom they encountered and considered inferior to them by dint of their ability to conquer and colonize them.

As a colonial legacy, these terms are still in vogue in the present day world. In America, indigenous people are a widely used term. Likewise, aboriginal people are used in Australia. In India, tribal is still used.

Here it is to be noted that the author never intends only to highlight the negative connotations of the mentioned terms/concepts. It is just an attempt to analyze the etymology of the concepts. And to clarify further, these concepts have undergone a sea change in its meanings.

In the present forms, these terms have been used to identify and classify backward, endangered, vulnerable human groups for an exceptional treatment to these groups in the form of positive discrimination beyond the conventional principle of liberty and equality.

In India, this policy of positive discrimination is done by identifying and scheduling groups as Scheduled tribes, Scheduled castes and Other backward class.

With this analysis, it is the author's intention to generate a public opinion regarding our homeland Manipur and particularly its inhabitants, the Meiteis/Meeteis among various groups residing in Manipur by concluding with some questions which needs to be analyzed and answered by all of us:
What kind of policy framework do we aspire for the historical state Manipur to be protected and for its alleviation?
Will the specific policy of positive discrimination ensures Manipur's safety and well-being in the long run?
If it is, then which one of scheduling is more appropriate for us?
If we think against positive discrimination, what are the alternatives remained for our safety and well-being in the present and the near future?