Senior Reporter
otto.carrington@cnc3.co.tt
The word “c****e” has moved through history over the centuries, from colonial records describing Indian indentured labourers to a term that today can carry deep racial and social offence in Trinidad and Tobago.
In the recent leak of an audio recording allegedly between businesswoman Star Sabga and Genevieve Hadeed, the word was heard repeatedly in reference to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
The Prime Minister has said she was deeply hurt by the word being used to describe her.
The use of the term triggered public discussion over whether it represented a historical description or a racial insult.
Historian and educator Dr Jerome Teelucksingh explained that the debate surrounding the word requires an understanding of its historical use, colonial context and the circumstances in which it is spoken.
He explained that during the period of Indian indentureship, the word appeared widely in official documents, plantation records, shipping records and colonial correspondence.
“In the 19th century and 20th century during the indentureship time, it was not used in a derogatory way when they were transporting Indians,” Teelucksingh said.
Historical archives confirm that colonial administrations used the term “c****e” in records relating to Indian indentured labour migration. The United Kingdom’s National Archives show that colonial records contain references to “c****e” as labourers and that such terminology reflected the language of the period.
The origins of the word remain debated among historians and linguists. Some scholars link it to South Asian words associated with labour or wages, while others point to regional origins in India, including Tamil and Gujarati. The Tamil word kūli meant wages, hire or payment for labour. A kūli worker was someone who worked for daily wages.
The Gujarati word kuli similarly referred to a hired labourer or porter.
European traders, particularly the Portuguese and later the British, adopted the term during the 16th and 17th centuries. By the 18th century, “c****e” had become the English word used to describe unskilled labourers hired for manual work.
During British colonial expansion, the term became attached internationally to manual workers, especially Indian and Chinese labourers transported across the world.
After the abolition of slavery, thousands of Indians were brought under the indentureship system to work on plantations throughout the Caribbean, including Trinidad, as well as in Fiji, Mauritius and other British colonies.
Historian Dr Brinsley Samaroo, in his research on Indian indentureship and colonial Trinidad, documented how Indian migrants were often viewed through the lens of their economic role within the plantation system. The classification of Indians as “c****e labour” reflected a colonial structure in which people were often reduced to their labour value rather than recognised as individuals with cultural identities.
The term therefore became associated not only with work but also with the unequal power relationship between colonial authorities, plantation owners and indentured workers.
Racist connotation
Teelucksingh said the word’s meaning evolved as societies changed.
“Terms change over time. It evolves as part of linguistics and language.”
He explained that words can move from being commonly used descriptions to becoming offensive when linked with discrimination or used in an attempt to humiliate.
The historian compared the evolution of “c****e” with racial terminology in the United States, where words used during slavery and segregation later became recognised as deeply offensive.
“It depends on who is using the term. It is not just looking at our era or the 18th century era, but it depends on who is using the term and if they use it as a joke or if they use it with anger, if they use it to humiliate somebody.”
Teelucksingh argued that the context of the recent statement is critical.
“When Sabga used it, it was used in a humiliating, derogatory way.”
He said the issue was not simply the word itself, but the intention behind it.
“It was not just a race thing again, but it could also be about somebody being seen as low class.”
The historian suggested that in that context, the term carried implications about status and social standing, making it different from academic discussions of indentureship or historical references.
However, he said language can also be reclaimed by communities.
He pointed to examples where groups have taken historically negative words and used them within their own communities in different ways.
“If somebody refers to themselves as that, there is a different context.”
Modern day use in India
In India today, the word “c*****” is still used although it is largely seen as outdated or derogatory depending on the context.
Railway porters
For more than a century, licensed porters at Indian railway stations were officially known as “c******”. They wore red uniforms and metal badges bearing their licence numbers, and travellers commonly called them “c******”. In 2020, Indian Railways sought to replace the term with “porter” or “sahayak” (assistant) because of the word’s colonial and demeaning connotations. However, many people still use “c*****” colloquially.
Manual labourers
In many Indian languages, the word is still used to refer to an unskilled labourer or someone who carries heavy loads. It may appear in everyday speech without racial intent, although it can be perceived as insulting because it implies low social status.
For historians, the word is evidence of the indentureship era and the movement of Indian communities across the world.
For many descendants of those communities, however, the word also carries memories of a colonial system that ranked people according to race and labour.
Teelucksingh said the way forward is not to ignore history, but to understand it.
“We have to look at the word from that angle: who is using it, why they are using it and what meaning they intend.”
