India is scheduled to include a caste count in its next national census, expected by 2027. This marks the first such comprehensive enumeration in nearly a century, following the last full caste census conducted in 1931. The decision was made amid pressure from various opposition parties and several states that had already initiated their own caste surveys. A prior, unreleased survey from 2011, which was not verified by census authorities, indicated approximately 4.6 million caste names.
Arguments Supporting a Caste Census
Advocates for the caste census assert that it will provide a more accurate understanding of who benefits from affirmative action policies and who remains underserved. This improved data could enable more targeted welfare spending and potentially lead to adjustments in reservation quotas for government jobs and educational institutions based on contemporary evidence.
Sociologists and economists, such as Satish Deshpande and Mary E. John, have identified the omission of caste counting in independent India as a significant policy gap. They argue that a complete and inclusive picture, requiring all citizens to declare their caste, is necessary. This approach is presented not as an endorsement of an unequal system, but as a recognition that disadvantage based on caste is inextricably linked to corresponding advantages for other castes. Sociologist Sonalde Desai further noted that without current caste data, existing affirmative action policies operate without sufficient information, relying on outdated colonial records.
Arguments Against a Caste Census
Scholar-activist Anand Teltumbde, in his book The Caste Con Census, argues that enumerating castes could reinforce the caste system rather than contribute to its dismantling. Teltumbde posits that caste fundamentally represents a hierarchy-seeking impulse that resists measurement for progressive objectives.
He draws parallels to British colonial administration, which conducted six caste censuses between 1871 and 1931. Teltumbde suggests these colonial efforts not only recorded caste but also formalized and solidified its structure. From his perspective, independent India maintained aspects of this system under the guise of social justice, potentially diverting focus from broader capacity-building initiatives for all citizens. Teltumbde contends that focusing on caste counting formalizes inequality and shifts political discourse towards the arithmetic of entitlements rather than addressing systemic social injustices. He attributes the demand for a caste census to a push for increased reservations, potentially driven by an upwardly mobile segment, while noting that a significant portion of the population relies on state assistance.
Teltumbde's primary concern is that official enumeration could legitimize the caste system. He cautions that political parties might utilize the data to modify reservation policies or to leverage caste-based sentiments for electoral advantage. Aligning with B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of India's constitution, Teltumbde advocates for the "annihilation of caste" rather than its administrative management.
Conclusion
The upcoming caste census is a subject of ongoing debate. Proponents view it as a crucial instrument for promoting social justice through evidence-based policymaking, while critics fear it may inadvertently strengthen existing social hierarchies and divisions within Indian society.