Confronting Marginalisation, Civics, Class 8 -Test - Class 8 MCQ

Article 17 of the Constitution
- Article 17 of the Constitution of India deals with the abolition of untouchability.
- Untouchability refers to the practice where certain individuals or communities were considered "untouchable" and were subjected to social discrimination and exclusion.
- It was a prevalent social evil in India, especially among the lower castes, and was deeply rooted in the caste system.
- The framers of the Indian Constitution recognized the need to eliminate this discriminatory practice and ensure equality for all citizens.
- Article 17 declares that untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is prohibited.
- The article also makes it a punishable offense to enforce or promote untouchability.
- The Constitution guarantees the right to equality and prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
- Article 17 is a significant provision that aims to eradicate untouchability and promote social justice in the country.
- It reflects the commitment of the Indian Constitution to uphold the principles of equality, dignity, and fundamental rights for all citizens.
Conclusion:
- Article 17 of the Indian Constitution states that untouchability has been abolished and its practice is prohibited.
- This provision is a crucial step towards achieving social equality and justice in the country.

Reasons why Rathnam refused to perform the ritual:
- Lack of faith in the practice: Rathnam may have lost belief in the effectiveness or significance of the ritual, leading him to refuse to participate.
- Personal beliefs and values: Rathnam might have had personal convictions or religious beliefs that conflicted with the ritual, causing him to reject it.
- Philosophical or moral objections: Rathnam could have had philosophical or moral objections to the ritual, viewing it as unnecessary or even harmful.
- Change in profession: If Rathnam had become a big politician or a lawyer, he might have believed that his new role required him to distance himself from such traditional practices.
- Dislike for the priests: Rathnam may have had a negative opinion of the priests conducting the ritual, leading him to refuse their involvement in his life.
Overall, it is most likely that Rathnam's refusal to perform the ritual was due to a combination of factors such as loss of faith, personal beliefs, objections to the ritual itself, and possibly even a change in profession or dislike for the priests involved.

Answer:
Introduction:
C.K. Janu is a well-known figure who has made significant contributions in a particular field. Let's explore the options to determine what field she is associated with.
Options:
A:

An engineer

B:

A doctor

C:

An archaeologist

D:

An activist

Based on available information and her public profile, the most appropriate answer is D:

An activist

. Here's why:
1. C.K. Janu:
C.K. Janu is a specific individual, not a generic term. We are looking for the profession or field she is associated with.
2. Not an engineer:
There is no evidence or information suggesting that C.K. Janu is an engineer. No connection or achievements in the field of engineering have been attributed to her.
3. Not a doctor:
Similarly, there is no indication that C.K. Janu is a doctor. No medical qualifications or involvement in the healthcare industry have been mentioned.
4. Not an archaeologist:
Likewise, there is no mention of C.K. Janu being an archaeologist. No archaeological discoveries, studies, or research have been linked to her.
5. Activism:
C.K. Janu is widely recognized as an activist, particularly for the rights of tribal communities in India. She has been actively involved in advocating for land rights and social justice for marginalized groups, especially the Adivasi community.
Conclusion:
Based on the available information, C.K. Janu can be identified as an activist, focusing on tribal rights and social justice issues.

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

• Year of Establishment: 1989

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, also known as the SC/ST Act, was enacted in the year 1989 with the objective of preventing atrocities against members of the Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) in India. This Act was introduced to provide protection and support to these marginalized communities, who have historically faced discrimination and violence.

The Act includes various provisions to safeguard the rights and dignity of the SC and ST communities and ensure speedy justice for any offenses committed against them. Some key features of the Act include:

• Offenses: The Act defines specific offenses committed against members of SC and ST communities as atrocities. These include offenses such as caste-based discrimination, assault, sexual exploitation, and economic exploitation.


• Special Courts: Special courts were established under the Act to exclusively handle cases related to atrocities against SC and ST communities. These courts aim to ensure the speedy disposal of cases and provide justice to the victims.


• Presumption of Offense: The Act introduces a provision of "presumption of offense," where if the complainant belongs to the SC or ST community and alleges that an offense has been committed against them, the court shall presume that the offense was committed due to the victim's caste or tribe identity.


• Enhanced Punishments: The Act provides for enhanced punishments for offenses committed against SC and ST community members compared to similar offenses committed against other individuals.


• Preventive Measures: The Act also includes provisions for preventive measures such as the establishment of special courts, the appointment of special public prosecutors, and the provision of relief and rehabilitation measures for the victims.

The SC/ST Act plays a crucial role in upholding the rights and dignity of the marginalized SC and ST communities in India and ensuring justice for any atrocities committed against them. It is an essential tool in the fight against caste-based discrimination and violence.

Who cannot avail reservations?

• Brahmans


• Dalits


• Adivasis


• Backward and most backward castes

In the given options, the correct answer is A: Brahmans.

Explanation:

Reservations are a form of affirmative action in India that aim to provide opportunities and representation to historically disadvantaged and marginalized groups. These reservations are primarily based on caste, and certain castes are eligible to avail of these benefits. Let's examine each option to understand who can and cannot avail reservations:

• Brahmans: Brahmins, being an upper caste, do not fall under the category of historically disadvantaged or marginalized groups. Therefore, they cannot avail reservations.


• Dalits: Dalits, also known as Scheduled Castes, are eligible for reservations as they have historically faced discrimination and social exclusion.


• Adivasis: Adivasis, also known as Scheduled Tribes, are eligible for reservations as they have faced historical oppression and marginalization.


• Backward and most backward castes: Backward and most backward castes are eligible for reservations as they have also experienced social and educational disadvantages.

It is important to note that the reservation system in India is designed to provide opportunities for social upliftment and equal representation to historically disadvantaged groups. The specific castes and communities eligible for reservations may vary based on the state and central government policies.

The given statement states that Rathnam, along with other Dalit families, resisted the powerful castes. We need to determine whether this statement is true or false.
Explanation:
To understand whether the statement is true or false, we need to analyze the given information.
- Rathnam: The statement mentions Rathnam as a key figure in the resistance.
- Other Dalit families: It states that there were other Dalit families who supported Rathnam in this resistance.
- Resisted the powerful castes: The statement indicates that Rathnam and the other Dalit families opposed the powerful castes.
Based on this analysis, we can conclude the following:
- Rathnam and other Dalit families engaged in resistance against the powerful castes.
- Their resistance may have involved challenging the social hierarchy and fighting against caste-based discrimination.
Therefore, the given statement is True.
Summary:
Rathnam, supported by other Dalit families, resisted the powerful castes. Their resistance likely involved challenging the social hierarchy and combating caste-based discrimination.

Manual scavengers in different parts of the country, the Bhangis in Gujarat, Pakhis in Andhra Pradesh and the Sikhaliars in Tamil Nadu, continue to be considered untouchable.

Answer: True

Explanation:

• Manual scavengers in different parts of the country, including the Bhangis in Gujarat, Pakhis in Andhra Pradesh, and the Sikhaliars in Tamil Nadu, are considered untouchable.


• This practice of considering manual scavengers untouchable is deeply rooted in the caste system of India.


• Manual scavenging is a form of caste-based occupation where individuals, often belonging to the lower castes, are forced to manually clean and handle human excreta and other waste.


• Despite the prohibition of manual scavenging by the Indian government and various efforts to eradicate the practice, it still persists in many parts of the country.


• The discrimination and stigma associated with manual scavenging contribute to the untouchability status of these individuals.


• Untouchability is a social practice where certain individuals or groups are considered impure and are excluded from social interactions and privileges.


• Untouchables face various forms of discrimination, including restricted access to public spaces, denial of basic human rights, and limited opportunities for education and employment.


• The continued existence of manual scavengers being considered untouchable reflects the deep-rooted social inequalities and caste-based discrimination prevalent in Indian society.

Overall, manual scavengers in different parts of the country, including the Bhangis in Gujarat, Pakhis in Andhra Pradesh, and the Sikhaliars in Tamil Nadu, continue to be considered untouchable, highlighting the persistence of caste-based discrimination and the need for further efforts to eliminate manual scavenging and uplift the marginalized communities involved in this degrading occupation.

Reservation Policy and Dalits:
The statement mentioned in the question is false. The reservation policy of the government is not meant only for the Dalits. Here is a detailed explanation:
1. Reservation Policy:
- The reservation policy is a system in India that reserves a certain percentage of seats or vacancies in government jobs, educational institutions, and legislatures for individuals from socially and educationally disadvantaged communities.
- The policy aims to provide equal opportunities and uplift the marginalized sections of society who have historically faced discrimination and oppression.
2. Beneficiaries of Reservation:
- The reservation policy is not exclusive to Dalits (Scheduled Castes) only. It covers several other categories as well, including Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), and economically weaker sections (EWS).
- Each of these categories has a specific percentage of reservation allocated to them based on their socio-economic conditions and representation in society.
3. Dalits and Reservation:
- Dalits, also known as Scheduled Castes (SC), are indeed one of the beneficiary groups under the reservation policy.
- However, it is important to note that reservation is not limited to Dalits alone. Other marginalized communities, as mentioned above, also receive reservation benefits.
- The reservation policy recognizes that various communities face different forms of social and economic disadvantages and aims to address those disparities.
4. Purpose of Reservation:
- The purpose of the reservation policy is to promote social justice, inclusivity, and equal opportunities for all sections of society.
- It seeks to bridge the gap between privileged and marginalized communities by providing reservation in education, employment, and political representation.
Conclusion:
The reservation policy of the government is not meant only for Dalits. It encompasses several other categories such as Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, and economically weaker sections. The policy aims to uplift and provide equal opportunities to all marginalized communities in India.

Manual Scavengers get low wages for the work they perform.

True

Explanation:
Manual scavenging refers to the practice of manually cleaning, handling, and disposing of human excrement and other waste materials. This hazardous and degrading work is typically performed by individuals from marginalized communities who are forced into this occupation due to social and economic factors. Unfortunately, manual scavengers often receive low wages for the work they perform, reflecting the exploitative nature of the job.
Here are some key points to consider:
- Manual scavengers are often paid meager wages that do not commensurate with the level of risk and hardship involved in their work.
- The low wages received by manual scavengers further perpetuate their cycle of poverty and exploitation.
- Many manual scavengers lack access to basic employment rights and benefits, such as minimum wage laws, social security, and healthcare.
- The hazardous nature of manual scavenging, including exposure to toxic gases, pathogens, and physical injuries, demands fair and just compensation for the workers.
- Efforts to eradicate manual scavenging and provide alternative livelihood options for those involved should include fair and equitable wages for dignified work.
In conclusion, it is true that manual scavengers often receive low wages for the work they perform, highlighting the need for comprehensive efforts to address this issue and uplift the lives of these marginalized workers.

The Supreme Court of India and the Practice of Manual Scavenging:

Manual scavenging refers to the practice of manually cleaning, handling, and disposing of human excrement and other waste materials. This practice is considered to be inhumane, degrading, and a violation of human rights. Despite efforts to eradicate manual scavenging, it still persists in some parts of India.

Supreme Court's Role:

The Supreme Court of India has been actively involved in addressing the issue of manual scavenging and taking steps to ban this practice. However, it has faced several challenges and limitations in completely eradicating manual scavenging. Here are the reasons why the Supreme Court could not do anything to ban the practice:

• The practice of manual scavenging is deeply entrenched in societal norms and prejudices, making it difficult to eliminate.


• Effective implementation of laws and regulations related to manual scavenging has been a challenge.


• Lack of proper monitoring and enforcement mechanisms has hindered the Supreme Court's efforts to eradicate manual scavenging.


• Insufficient awareness and sensitization among the general public about the issue has also contributed to the persistence of manual scavenging.


• Political and bureaucratic apathy towards the issue has hampered progress in banning manual scavenging.

Despite these challenges, it is important to note that the Supreme Court has been actively addressing the issue and has issued various directives and guidelines to combat manual scavenging. It has directed the government to take proactive measures, provide rehabilitation and alternative livelihood options to manual scavengers, and ensure the strict implementation of laws related to the prohibition of manual scavenging.

While the Supreme Court's efforts have not completely eradicated manual scavenging, they have played a significant role in creating awareness, pushing for legislative changes, and holding the authorities accountable. The fight against manual scavenging requires collective efforts from the government, civil society organizations, and the public to bring about lasting change.