Gyan Pathak
The first caste census in India was done with the first ever census conducted in 1901 under Lord Risley as the Commissioner of Census of India which was discontinued after the Census 1931 due to opposition of the leaders of the Freedom Movement of India, triggered especially after Dr B R Ambedkar exposed the falsity of the very basis on which castes were enumerated. How it comes now that large number of our politicians are finding caste census beneficial for the country which was found harmful by the founding forefathers of the Independent India?
Dr Ambedkar, considered an architect of the Constitution of India, also a great historian and scholar of ancient Indian society, had studied the voluminous Nasal Index data of various castes across India and came to the conclusion using Sir Herbert Hope Risley’s own data to disprove his thesis about castes in India, which formed the basis of the Caste Censuses of 1901 – 1931, after which the caste census was altogether discontinued due to the falsity he had exposed.
He wrote: “The measurement established that the Brahmin and the Untouchables belong to the same race. From this it follows that if the Brahmins are Aryans, the Untouchable are also Aryans. If the Brahmins are Dravidians the Untouchable are also Dravidians. If the Brahmins are Nagas, the Untouchables are also Nagas. Such being the facts, the theory … must be said to be based on a false foundation.”
Our founding forefathers of the Independent India vehemently opposed the caste census which was entrenched on false basis of the Caste Censuses in the institutional machinery and eventually in the collective imagination of the people in general, had become tools for all sorts of exploitation by the Britishers, who used caste and religion as nations within the nation. As the Commissioner of Census 1901, which was published in the Imperial Gazetteer of India, Lord Risley himself wrote the section on caste, though exposed for its falsity, remained basis of studies and administration, precipitating this ‘false caste system’ and its abuses and remained in legal use in government records. He had decided that Indians consisted of 2,378 castes and tribes (with sub-castes), and 43 races. He constructed his hierarchy of castes, and the British made it official.
It was from this official list, people were required to choose their castes while filling out official government forms. It should also be noted that Lord Risley himself had acknowledged the ‘administrative sources of error’ in the data gathering. After his list and the structure of the caste hierarchy was established, he even tried to distance himself from it by blaming the Indians for lacking the intellect to apply it.
Nevertheless, his efforts bore fruit at last. The Indian mindset, both official and public’ could not abandon the list primarily for politics. No one seemed giving it a thought as to how much the debunked caste census results published during the British Raj had adversely impacted the Indians. It is this list everyone picked up, for study and administration. By 1970s, when caste politics became prominent, it is this list which became handy for every political party. Mandal Commission studied this list and made its recommendations, which became further basis of politics and administration, particularly for OBC politics and reservation.
The temptation of the power is great. The present Prime Minister Narendra Modi is beneficiary of both the Kamandal and Mandal politics. Earlier, he played the Kamandal politics very well and come to power in 2014. In the 2019 election, the essential elements of Mandal politics was introduced, and he returned to power with even greater majority.
However, there are other political forces in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh who are also champions of the OBC politics, perhaps stronger in their political forte than Modi. Seeing Modi’s recent political moves to capture the OBC politics, Nitish Kumar, the Chief Minister of Bihar is incensed the most because his JD(U) is BJP’s ally in Bihar, and any shift in OBC votes towards BJP may harm his prospects. That is why Nitish Kumar, in a bid to raise his states over BJP politics demanded for caste census, for which BJP was initially not ready, but has now signaled that it is open to the idea of a caste census, though it has not given any specific about the timeline.
A total of 11 leaders of political parties from Bihar have met our Prime Minister Narendra Modi on August 24, which not only included Nitish Kumar but also the leader of the opposition and RJD leader Tejaswi Yadav, and leaders of the state BJP. Both are beneficiary of OBC politics and have great political stakesin the state. The leaders demanded Caste Census, their logic is that OBCs must be given more than 27 per cent reservation keeping in view their number in the total population. They believe that the caste count may enable them to have a larger slice of reservation quota. Nitish Kumar has announced to conduct caste census in Bihar, which obviously will need Centre’s approval, because census is done presently by the Census of India, a Central entity.
For the BJP, the immediate stake in Uttar Pradesh where it is trying to get benefit from both the Mandal and the Kamandal forces, ie in simple terms, the OBCs and the caste Hindus. It is important for the party in Uttar Pradesh at this juncture because the state is going to have Vidhan Sabha elections early next year. At this moment of time when the process of Census 2021 is at advanced stage, it is not possible for change it for a caste census. Thus the BJP’s statement that it has open mind on caste census has no meaning for Census 2021. If anything at all is possible, it can be considered for post regular census era. It is perhaps due to this reason, Nitish Kumar after Bihar leaders met PM has said that final decision lies with PM Modi.
Coming out of the meeting, Bihar CM Nitish Kumar said, “People in Bihar and the entire country are of the same opinion on this issue.” RJD leader Tejaswi Yadav said, “In the interest of the nation, it will be a historical step, all the poor will benefit”, adding that “When animals and trees are counted, they why not castes. When the government has no scientific data on the population, how can it make welfare policies?” These logics may attract many, but there is still room for a threadbare discussion about the benefits and pitfalls of the caste census, and if we decide to have it what should be the modalities? Should we base our castes and their counts on the fraudulent original list prepared and institutionalized after Lord Risley, or start a fresh? Is it at all desirable in the context of fragmentisation of the society, and making nations within the nation? Is fragmentisation necessary to help the deprived sections of our society? Should it be a simple executive decision, or should it be brought after comprehensive debate in the Legislature? How the caste census will help in removing the bane of India that we call caste system, especially when we go on institutionalizing the castes in one or the other pretext? There are much more question than we can imagine, and they must be answered before any decision. (IPA)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
