Imported ideas are being weaponized to rip India’s delicate social fabric which has been decades in the making.
In recent years, India has found itself at the epicentre of an ideological battle that is less about genuine social justice and more about the imposition of an alien intellectual framework. At the heart of this conflict lies Critical Caste Theory (CCT), an ideological offshoot of Critical Race Theory (CRT) that originated in the United States. It purports to analyse caste as a systemic and structural force of oppression, mirroring how CRT dissects race relations in America. But this theory, with its roots in American academia, is a sinister Trojan horse which threatens to fracture India’s social fabric under the guise of progressive reform.
The emergence of CCT is not organic. It is driven by a network of foreign-funded civil society organizations, Western-influenced educational institutions and bureaucrats trained in elite American universities. India is now being subjected to a narrative that equates its struggles with America’s racial past - an analogy as flawed as it is dangerous.
To understand the perils of CCT, one must first understand its predecessor. CRT, conceived in American law schools in the late 20th century, argues that race is a social construct created to maintain white dominance over non-white populations. It challenges the notion of objectivity in legal and political institutions, arguing instead that systemic oppression is embedded in the very structures of governance. While CRT has remained controversial even in its country of origin, it has gained significant traction in academia, activism and policymaking.
CCT misapplies the American race framework to India, portraying caste as an entrenched system of oppression that demands radical upheaval. It claims that India’s governance, its economy and its meritocratic institutions serve only an upper-caste elite. But caste in India has evolved over centuries due to migration, education, economic shifts and affirmative action. CCT’s sweeping generalizations ignore this progress, reducing India to a static, oppressive society.
Harvardian Influence
A closer look at the intellectual underpinnings of CCT reveals a pattern: its champions are disproportionately Western-trained scholars, often affiliated with institutions like Harvard. These institutions, while positioning themselves as bastions of free thought, have taken an active role in shaping India’s social discourse in ways that align with their ideological leanings.
A significant concern is the systematic manner in which CRT was first introduced into Indian academic discussions, before morphing into a caste-centric variant. The same playbook that led to racial activism in America is now being applied to caste in India, often with foreign funding. The Pulitzer Center, among other entities, has played a role in amplifying this discourse, ensuring that it takes root in India’s academic and media circles.
CCT does not merely aim to address caste discrimination but seeks to redefine Indian society through a narrow, adversarial lens. Among the most alarming tenets of this framework are assertions that casteism is an inherent, immutable trait of Indian society and that meritocracy is a façade for privilege and systemic oppression. It posits that caste intersects with race, gender, and class, requiring an intersectional approach that mirrors American identity politics. Appallingly, it claims that the dismantling of traditional Indian institutions, including the family structure, is necessary for true social justice.
These ideas do not aim for reconciliation but seek to deepen divisions. Unlike the organic progress India has made through reservations, social mobility and grassroots empowerment, CCT operates on a destructive premise that caste, like race in America, must be deconstructed in an antagonistic, top-down manner.
Moreover, its real-world applications have been far from productive. In academic settings, it has led to the vilification of merit-based achievements. In public discourse, it has fostered a sense of perpetual grievance rather than constructive reform. And politically, it has provided ammunition for foreign actors eager to paint India as a nation incapable of self-governance.
India has spent decades forging its own unique approach to social justice. While caste remains a challenge, the nation has implemented one of the world’s most extensive affirmative action programs. Urbanization, economic liberalization and increasing access to education have all contributed to diminishing the rigid caste hierarchies of the past. But CCT threatens to undo these advancements by forcing India into an ideological framework that was never meant for it.
If left unchecked, the spread of CCT will erode India’s social cohesion, transforming natural debates about caste reform into an irreconcilable culture war. It will shift the focus away from pragmatic solutions like economic empowerment and localized affirmative action toward a narrative of perpetual victimhood and radical deconstruction.
As Carl Sagan once remarked, “That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.” The truth is that India does not need a borrowed, foreign model to navigate its social realities. It needs solutions rooted in its own history, its own struggles and its own aspirations. The Americanization of caste discourse serves no one but those who seek to divide and destabilize. And that, above all, is why it must be rejected.
(The author is a retired naval aviation officer and geopolitical analyst. Views personal).
Comments