Caste Census: To Conquer Or Conserve?|MarginSpeak

Weaponising Social Justice

Politicians have often simplified the complex issue of caste by conflating it with social justice. After effectively using caste-based reservations as a political tool, they now seek to forge new weapons out of caste resources such as sub-categorisation. Caste census also is one such stratagem. This approach is partly a consequence of India’s first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system, which amplifies small vote segments and influences election outcomes. Sub-categorisation stands already validated by the Supreme Court although some sections of Dalits are up in arms against it. They have already observed a Bharat Bandh to protest against the verdict and filed at least one review petition against it. In all likelihood, the sub-categorisation will be implemented by the political vested interests and when the review petition comes up for hearing, the Supreme Court, with new jurisprudence it has evolved of late, may say that it is a fait accompli and it would not like to turn back the hands of the clock.

The underlying logic of both sub-categorisation and caste census is the same: to direct social justice measures towards the castes that have been left out of the present net. Rahul Gandhi spelt it out succinctly that 90 per cent of the people are excluded from the ‘‘system’’. He bemoaned the lack of representation of Dalits, tribals, Other Backward Castes (OBCs), and minorities in the media, the judiciary, ministries, etc. No politician except for Kanshi Ram spoke about representation of castes in such clear terms. What Gandhi speaks of is the slogan coined by Kanshi Ram, “jiski jitni sankhya bhari, utni unki bhagidari” (the representation of people should be in proportion to their numbers). The only problem with this dictum is that people are reckoned by castes, ignoring the fact that no caste is homogenous and would entail the fallacy of statistical averages even if they were given equal representation vis-à-vis people.

Whither the Decadal Census?

While the caste census generates heated debate, there is surprisingly little discussion about the BJP’s disruption of a 152-year tradition of conducting a decadal census, which has remained consistent except for disruptions during major wars (World War II, the 1961 China War and the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War). The government had deferred its 2019 plan to conduct a census for 2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic, but after 2021 there has been no compelling reason for its continued delay.

The general census is essential for gathering population data crucial for welfare planning and arguably holds greater importance than the caste census. Welfare programmes like the Public Distribution System (PDS), which provides subsidised food to low-income families, still operate based on outdated 2011 census data. The cap on ration cards, set according to 2011 figures, has excluded many eligible families, even during the pandemic, exacerbating the impact of job losses following the 2016 demonetisation and the Covid-19 pandemic. As a result, India’s Global Hunger Index ranking dropped from 99th in 2014 to 107th in 2022, driven by worsening child malnutrition. Over 80 per cent of low-income individuals in India belong to SC, ST, or OBC households, many of whom are excluded from the PDS due to outdated census data, perpetuating cycles of poverty and poor health.

Apathy Towards Universal Solutions

The lack of up-to-date census data hampers understanding of population distribution, income levels, employment trends and migration patterns, which can severely affect resource allocation.

Despite the critical need for updated census data to inform resource allocation, there has been little outcry from opposition parties for a decadal census. This apathy stems from a general disinterest among political parties in universal solutions. While the general census benefits all, its universal nature does not serve immediate political goals as effectively as targeted caste data. This is why politicians shun speaking of the universal. Have they ever demanded a universal provision of equal quality education to all through neighbourhood schools, a veritable formula for advancement, or a universal healthcare system? They do not because it does not serve their electoral goal as much as their caste concerns. They would not speak of justice; they would instead cry hoarse over social justice. They do not speak of representation to all through the Proportional Representation system; they will design their games only within the frame of the FPTP system. The people also deeply entrenched in the caste-community identity quagmire are blind to these political manoeuvres.

Underlying Realpolitik

Discussing the ideology of the BJP or its parent organisation, the RSS, to understand their stance on contemporary issues is often unproductive. The RSS, on the one hand, extols the caste system as a safeguard of Hindu society’s unity, while on the other, it positions itself as a fierce advocate for the annihilation of caste, at times appearing to rival even B R Ambedkar’s stance. For instance, while the RSS’s publication Panchjanya (August 5, 2024) praises the caste system, the RSS chief, Mohan Bhagwat, has simultaneously called for discarding both the varna and the caste systems. This contradictory messaging serves to obscure the organisation’s underlying agendas. Over the years, the RSS and the BJP have fluidly shifted their positions on critical issues like the Constitution, national anthem, flag and reservations. The BJP’s only consistent ideology seems to be the pursuit of power to achieve its ultimate goal of establishing a Hindu Rashtra. Therefore, its opposition to a caste census is pragmatic, driven by a chronic aversion to data and fear of the potential backlash from its growing OBC support base.

The BJP’s resistance to a caste census is rooted in its strategy of promoting Hindu unity, which it believes provides the largest possible voter base. The party fears that a caste census could fracture this narrative by highlighting internal divisions. The BJP’s success has been largely due to its ability to appeal to both upper and lower OBCs through its Hindutva ideology. In elections, its vote share among upper OBCs rose from 22 per cent in 2009 to 30 per cent in 2014, and to 41 per cent in 2019. Among lower OBCs, the figures were 22 per cent, 42 per cent and 47 per cent, respectively (Centre for the Study of Developing Societies data). A caste census could disrupt this support by making these communities more aware of their socio-political realities, challenging their alignment with Hindutva. Additionally, the BJP’s reluctance towards data collection is due to its tendency to undermine its carefully constructed narrative based on politicised data. Under its governance, India’s reputation for data reliability has suffered internationally, with even Gross Domestic Product (GDP) figures being questioned by experts like Pronab Sen.

Only when the BJP and the RSS recognised the political risk of their silence on the caste census—amidst growing opposition unity on the issue and demands from their own allies like the Janata Dal United and the Lok Janshakti Party (RVP)—did they assert that they were never against it. However, it is important to note that in 2021, the BJP government rejected the idea of conducting even a Socio-Economic Caste Census (SECC).

The opposition parties’ support for the caste census is similarly politically motivated, aiming to reclaim OBCs who have increasingly drifted away from them. They hope that a caste census will expose how OBCs were co-opted by upper-caste forces as mere foot soldiers for Hindutva and convince them to return to parties that genuinely protect their rights. This strategy is vital for their survival, as they believe that only by making OBCs confront their marginalised status can they draw them away from Hindutva’s influence.

The Million-Dollar Question

Even the most ardent proponents of the caste census struggle to articulate a clear plan for how they would use the resulting data, beyond the familiar rhetoric of ensuring fair representation for all castes. Do they truly understand how many castes exist and what it would mean to provide each with its “due share” of representation? They fail to acknowledge that the pursuit of social justice is only meaningful when there is universal provision for the basic empowerment of all. The social justice in terms of caste-based representation, moreover, would only entail the problem of sub-categorisation, as has happened with existing reservation policies. Critics are right to worry about the caste census leading to deepening of caste identities. But aren’t they already at their zenith? At least new data gathered from such an exercise can potentially offer us the possibility of gaining fresh insights into the problem.

Therefore, there is no harm in conducting a caste census. The data, if read objectively, may challenge our notion: whether focusing on caste is a solution or perpetuation of the problem. If there is genuine political will, this exercise can lead us to the realisation that the solution lies in conquering the castes, not conserving them.

(Views expressed are personal)

Anand Teltumbde is an Indian scholar, writer, and human rights activist

(This appeared in the print as 'Caste Census: To Conquer Or Conserve?')