Why the Subaltern?

In Why the Subaltern?, A. K. Ravindran challenges the dominant notions of hierarchy, progress, and civilization that define both caste and class society. He argues that the subaltern, the labouring, life-sustaining communities, are not inferior but embody the creative and reproductive essence of humanity itself. Through an incisive critique of the upper-caste and capitalist worldviews, Ravindran exposes how ideologies of development and superiority sustain exploitation by devaluing subaltern labour and knowledge. Reclaiming subaltern identity, he suggests, is not merely an act of resistance but a reaffirmation of life, nature, and true autonomy.

Cover: Lodha Tribe of Sundarbans

A K Ravindran, Panthi ||In traditional thought, the concepts of superiority and inferiority are often understood like the old heaven-and-hell paradigm. The subaltern is not simply the opposite of superiority or dominance. Like nature itself, the lower classes embody fertility, creativity, and self-reliance. The upper classes, unable to survive without the labor and life of the lower classes, exist only by dominating them through the exercise of power. Why should the subaltern be confined to the bottom of this metaphorical hell? Doesn’t everyone aspire to reach heaven? In a caste-based system, where the upper and lower castes are rigidly defined by birth, isn’t it only natural for the lower castes to seek upward mobility, even if only possible in a future life? Doesn’t this require willpower and effort?

Within both the heaven-and-hell framework and the caste system, those at the bottom are deemed sinners or wretched by karma and birth. Thus, escaping this lower status and reaching the heights of privilege becomes a paramount goal. However, a careful analysis reveals whose interests are truly served by these ideological constructs, structures meticulously crafted to sustain the dominance of the upper sections of society.

How can the subaltern cultivate self-respect? No one can develop self-respect while believing they are inferior, sinful, or inherently wretched. True self-respect arises when subaltern communities recognize that their existence and labor are not only valuable but essential for the survival of humanity.

However, upper-caste and upper-class society systematically suppresses this realization. Through various forms of power and psychological oppression, they ensure the subaltern remains subjugated, thereby consolidating their dominance. One of the primary mechanisms of this oppression is the devaluation of labor. The upper classes dismiss the work of the subaltern as primitive, inferior, or worthless, insisting that it is an obligation of birth rather than a task worthy of recognition or reward. Instead, they portray themselves as benevolent figures bestowing meager rewards out of generosity.

This hierarchical division of society is sustained through a linear, progressive conception of history and development. Within this framework, the upper echelons are seen as advanced and sophisticated, while the lower sections are portrayed as primitive and backward. Consequently, subaltern communities find themselves trapped in a vicious cycle, with no apparent path to liberation. In such a system, progress itself depends on the continued existence of underprivileged groups. Economic growth, for example, often results in a paradox where wage increases are neutralized by inflation, keeping the majority in perpetual economic struggle. Similarly, poverty reduction efforts frequently lead to the creation of new forms of deprivation. As a result, for the vast majority of people at the lower rungs of society, upward mobility remains an illusion.

However, rejecting this upper-class narrative of linear development opens the door for the subaltern to reclaim their true identity. Recognizing their intrinsic worth reveals that genuine self-governance (Swaraj of the subaltern) is possible only for those engaged in reproductively essential activities, tasks that sustain life itself. This is not the case for the upper classes, particularly those who have shaped capitalist modernity. Their very existence conflicts with their organic nature. It is the subaltern who holds the possibility of true autonomy.

Historically, foraging societies, nomadic groups, and agricultural communities engaged in sustainable, life-supporting activities. They maintained a balance with nature, taking only what was necessary and returning resources in proportion. Labor was centered on use value rather than profit, and production did not overshadow reproduction as it does today. In contrast, the upper castes and classes, through their relentless exploitation of nature, generate inorganic waste and destruction, ultimately inflicting mass harm on society. Their way of life is akin to that of a patriarch who, in an act of self-destruction, annihilates his own family. The extravagance of the elite is not just unsustainable, it is authoritarian and violent.

As far as we know, Earth is the only place in the universe that holds a dense reservoir of bioenergy. The value of human labor is traditionally measured by the average social time required for production. But if we factor in the cosmic time needed to form Earth’s bioenergy reserves, the true value of human activity becomes far more profound.

Where does this system of oppression ultimately lead? It results in the hypocrisy and brutality of modern monetary and valuation systems, which prioritise profit over life. However, it also points toward a necessary reckoning, the recognition of biological nature’s worth and the vital role of subaltern communities in sustaining it. If subaltern life is invaluable and inherently human, why should we doubt subaltern identity? Why should we internalise societal condemnation?

Is it not through embracing a subaltern identity that we reclaim our shared human identity? Instead of modifying the world to fit upper-class or upper-caste narratives, is it not the duty of contemporary thinkers to replace these constructs with a new consciousness, one rooted in subaltern self-awareness and the recognition of our fundamental biological existence?