From US midterms to continuing Bihar political churn -- an identity question, and no easy answers

What do the US midterms say about diversity, identity and representative politics -- beyond America? By appealing to Brahmin, "upper" caste identity, while asking the community to build social-political alliances, is Prashant Kishor's message progressive or reinforcing hierarchies?

Since the United States midterm election results a fortnight ago, there have been several attempts to draw broader lessons from the Democratic win in House and Senate. America's legislature and its provincial governments are set to be at their most diverse: Abdul El-Sayed, Peggy Flanagan, Nithya Raman, Scott Colom -- the US is set to have a Muslim senator as well as a Native American one for the first time, another South Asian mayor and, in Mississippi, the first Black Senator since the 19th-century Reconstruction era. This along with more women, African Americans and people from across sexual orientations and cultural histories in governor offices and the House of Representatives. That minority candidates appealed to a broad swathe of the electorate, not merely through their identity but their ideas, is certainly of note.

A world away from Washington, in Mahinam village in Darbhanga, Jan Suraaj founder and Bankipur MLA Prashant Kishor addressed a gathering of Brahmins last week. Kishor said that having a Brahmin MLA and MP was clearly no panacea for voters of the community. Moreover, being swayed by the BJP's "divisive" politics had led to a loss of support from the Muslim community: "You separated from yourself those who were calling you 'guruji' and putting you in office with their votes, by abusing them on Facebook and calling them Pakistani." He argued that Brahmins, as "people of Saraswati", should focus on learning and education.

What do the US midterms say about diversity, identity and representative politics -- particularly given the context of Donald Trump's nativist politics and barely concealed sexism and racism -- beyond America? And, by appealing to Brahmin "upper" caste identity, while at the same time asking the community to build social-political alliances with other groups, like Extremely Backward Castes (EBCs) and Muslims, is the Bihar politician's message progressive, or reinforcing the hierarchies and identities that have been the axes of discrimination in the Indian Subcontinent?

Various ideologies -- communists and liberals, socialists and internationalists, globalisers and nationalists -- have tried to flatten or subsume what they saw as regressive/divisive identities. In France, this meant the creation of uniform language and culture, eviscerating the many local worlds that existed before the Republic. In England, Protestantism and the Anglican Church were forced on many, and the "troubles" in Ireland went on till just a few years ago. Before the fall of the Soviet Union, there was, at least on paper, the universalism of Marxism and in the now-soured romance with globalisation, there was much celebration of the global citizen and the borderless nature of financial markets. Nationalisms of many stripes, including in India recently, have sought to privilege one religion or worldview as the dominant one.

Each of these universalising trends, though, has come up against what have been called, often unfairly, primordial loyalties -- religion, region, language, caste, nation. Constitutional democracies in particular can find themselves, sometimes within just a few poll cycles, swinging between too much identity politics or too little.

In the US, the melting pot gave way to the salad bowl, and eventually, liberal politics -- especially among a dominant section of Democrats -- became about adding up social groups rather than ideas: Racial minorities, urban liberals and women, for example, formed the Obama coalition, arguably without a substantive economic and political vision to bind them. Trump succeeded in large part, including and especially among minority men, because he managed to paint such a liberal politics as mere pandering and appeasement at the cost of working-class men. The midterm results are certainly a repudiation of Trumpism, his wars and corruption. But they aren't a return to the status quo ante.

The diverse candidates were not "diversity candidates" -- each, whether as a socialist or simply a liberal progressive, stuck to issues and ideas. In a sense, they seemed, through their campaigns and actions, to be agreeing with Prashant Kishor: Identity politics in the crassest sense did not help the American male, or White male. Candidates like Raman and El Sayed are minorities -- but they spoke to issues that cut across class and identity.

In the Indian context, though, especially among the so-called forward castes, Kishor's prescription may be less apposite.

Caste is a hydra-headed social practice that is at once the basis of economic exploitation, social hierarchy and cultural and ritual identity. The celebration of Dalit, backward or even minority cultures is an assertion of those who have not had a voice; an antidote to the claims of the historically privileged to being "caste blind". Hailing Brahmins as the "people of Saraswati" and knowledge, while likely rhetorical and even good political strategy, cannot be progressive. At the same time, Kishor seems to realise the inevitability of caste in politics, and perhaps his exhortation to look beyond communities for leaders is a logical way forward.

Perhaps the answer lies not in forgetting identities, or placing them in a hierarchy, but transcending them.

In his 1944 historical fiction novel Freedom Road, American writer Howard Fast revisited the Reconstruction era in South Carolina, a state that before the American Civil War (1863-65) was a major slave-run plantation economy. The main character, Gideon Jackson, a former slave and Union Army soldier, educates himself and becomes a Congressman. His political achievement, though, is not merely in his personal story or even in building a coalition of poor White farmers and former slaves. Rather, before his tragic end, Jackson ensures that those inherited identities become cultural ones, without an economic basis. Together, the Black and White agriculturists purchase large parcels of land and farm them. Their differences, in terms of history and habits, do not change. But they come together as equals.

The reality of Bihar in 2026 is not the same as fiction set in South Carolina in 1866. But there are some utopias that are realistic enough to aspire to.

Till next time. Aakash Recommended Reading - Pratap Bhanu Mehta writes: The better angels of democracy have asserted themselves in America - Express View: Retrieving common ground in the United States - Thomas Mathew writes: After the midterm defeat, is the era of unrestrained Trumpism over? - Shazia Ilmi writes: Why I envy Abdul El-Sayed and his freedom to be himself