The Fallacy of Anxiety

Arguably, some observers are likely to consider anxiety as not so favourite a vocabulary for comprehending the social and political responses and reactions of the people. This is perhaps because such a category does spring from the logic of structures that produce and shape political dynamics. It is true that anxiety, which is coupled with elements such as apprehension, suspicion, and fear, seeks to characterise the nature of consciousness that has a bearing on people’s responses and reactions. Thus, for understanding this nature, it is necessary to take into consideration the attitudinal functions that the category of anxiety performs. It could be argued that, generally speaking, anxiety is dysfunctional in one particular context and ineffective in another. It expresses itself with careful subtleness that one could find in the so-called “developmentalist consciousness” of the modernist elites with respect to the process of policymaking. Such elites, thus, find contradiction between caste and development, which is why they have developed a heightened anxiety over the demand for the caste-based census becoming an operational reality. The modernist elite’s scepticism regarding conducting the caste census involves an element of anxiety, in the sense that if this census is allowed, it would essentially perpetuate casteism and hence stall development. It is in this sense that such an anxiety is dysfunctional as it sees negativity in the caste census.

At the other end of the spectrum of anxiety, the tacit supporters of the caste system do suffer from anxiety on the grounds of how a public discussion of caste is likely to cause an embarrassment to those who accept the caste system, but for political reasons, find it risky to acknowledge it openly. The anxiety of caste hierarchy being discussed publicly could possibly explain why the current central government and those in the past have not been in favour of conducting the caste census. The anxiety of embarrassment is so acute that the defenders of casteism may not allow public talks even around B R Ambedkar and Jotirao Phule’s ideas that may not have a direct reference to the caste system. Such defenders who find “lifetime” value in the caste system as a mechanism to sustain social dominance are always anxious about the possibility of public institutions being made available for speakers who may talk against caste hierarchy. But in the social life of caste, there is no place for anxiety; hence, it is deemed ineffective.