Caste conundrum
Kiran Yadav
Posted online: May 15, 2010 at 2319 hrs
What is your caste? Now that the government is pondering over the
inclusion of caste in the 2011 Census, how will you answer that
question? While you contemplate on that issue, the opinion seems to be
divided on the very rationale of a caste Census.
"Anthropologically, some of us have been arguing against including
caste in the Census, but my point is if you are taking into account
tribe, religion and gender, then why not caste. Caste is not the only
divisive force in the society. Wasn't there an uproar in Parliament
over 33% reservation for women?" asks social activist Kancha Ilaiah.
To him, one advantage of the caste Census lies in bringing forth
accurately the total population of each caste. "The Mandal Commission
recommended a 27% reservation in view of the fact that 54% of the
total population, according to the 1931 Census projections, belonged
to backward communities. The Supreme Court has been consistently
asking how that figure was arrived at," says Ilaiah, also a professor
at Osmania University, Hyderabad.
While academic stalwarts like MN Srinivas, Andre Beteille and Dipankar
Gupta are of the view that a caste Census will lead to greater caste
conflict, Ilaiah is quick to assert that "if we are avoiding caste
census on the basis of a presumable conflict, we'd rather resort to
counting only the number of people in India". There is a point—after
all, caste has not been enumerated for the past 80 years, but that
hasn't helped in eliminating it either. There is ample evidence that
discrimination on the basis of caste is still rampant. Consider, for
instance, a field experiment conducted by academics Sukhadeo Thorat
and Katherine Newman to estimate the relative performance of low and
high-caste candidates in the job market. Vacancy advertisements from
major English newspapers for entry-level white collar positions in
private sector firms were collected and responded to with three
artificial applications for each position. The educational
qualifications, academic performance, number of years of experience,
etc, were kept nearly identical, while each application was associated
with a stereotypically high-caste Hindu, Dalit or Muslim family name.
The study shows that owing to their identity, the Dalits and Muslim
applicants face significant discrimination in the white-collar job
market. The odds of a Dalit applicant receiving a call were 67% of a
high-caste Hindu applicant with the same set of CV characteristics.
Incidentally, call-back odds for Muslim applicants were 33% of
high-caste peers.
Eminent social scientist TK Oommen agrees. "Apart from getting the
numbers, we should also know the nature of deprivation this group is
suffering from, because there are multiple deprivations," he says,
further explaining how in the case of adivasis or STs, spatial
exclusion is an important deprivation since they largely stay in
forests and there is no infrastructure to reach them. But in case of
SCs, the fundamental basis of exclusion is untouchability. However, in
case of OBCs, he adds, the source of deprivation is a hazy area.
"Thanks to universal adult franchise, owing to their large demographic
composition, OBCs have been able to capture power at the grassroots
level. In terms of economic resources, they aren't as poor as SCs and
STs. They have benefited immensely first through land reforms and then
through the Green Revolution. However, they are not adequately
represented in top bureaucracy—this has led to 'status incongruence'.
This under-representation can only be gauged by a caste Census. Once
we know we can think of relevant measures."
Political scientist Ghanshyam Shah, however, is of the firm view that
the whole exercise of enumerating caste will not serve any purpose. He
points out at the practical and technical aspect of data collection.
"Caste is a subjective category. It's not an objective question such
as what is your gender or your language. Objective data is difficult
to come by due to the concept of caste changing according to the
context. A person will identify himself as belonging to Baria caste in
the village, as Koli at the district level and as a Kshatriya at the
state level. The enumerator may ask a person in the village to what
caste does he belong to, but the official at the district level may
not know which category to classify it under? Enumerators aren't
anthropologists. The exercise will only add to confusion instead of
bringing in any clarity." Shah would know. He happened to be a member
of People of India project launched by the Anthropological Survey of
India. The project, completed in the 1990s, identified 4,635 castes or
communities in India. "We couldn't make head or tail of the deluge of
data it revealed," he adds. He also fears that a caste Census would
intensify divisive caste identities and create sub-caste politics.
There is a corollary to that belief though. "Not including caste in
the census will further perpetuate the injustice of the caste system
because lack of data will only result in inefficient policy measures
for the marginalised, says Harish Wankhede, research scholar on social
justice at Jawaharlal Nehru University. He contends that caste has
been largely able to delineate itself from the concept of purity and
impurity, but caste prejudice now manifests itself in the form of
violence. He cites the recent Jat-Dalit clash in Mirchpur village in
Hisar district as an example. "Two Dalits were torched to death and 18
Dalit homes were gutted by Jats—for throwing a stone at a dog?" he
asks in disbelief, adding, "How else do you interpret the atrocities
meted out by the khap panchayats in the pretext of saving the honour
of their castes?"
The last caste Census, conducted in 1931, is a case in point for
Shah's argument. In the 1931 Census report, John Henry Hutton, then
Census Commissioner of India, laments, "Every Census gives rise to
pestiferous deluge of representations, accompanied by highly
problematic histories, asking for recognition of some alleged fact or
hypothesis of which the Census as a department is not legally
competent to judge. And of which its recognition, if accorded, would
be socially valueless." After the 1931 Census, 175 of such claims were
registered, of which 80 were to Kshatriya status, 33 to Brahmin and 15
to Vaishya in the four census regions! The tables seem to have
completely turned now, given the benefits of caste reservation in the
legislatures, government jobs and for admission to educational
institutions, the battle for getting a BC tag is only intensifying.
Interestingly, in 1931, as Hutton mentions, a definite return of nil
was accepted for castes as distinct from the individuals, who, on
account of ignorance or accident, failed to state any caste at all.
Also, no return of caste was demanded from Arya or Brahmo Hindus or
from Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Muslims or Christians unwilling to make
one. The returns of 'caste nil' totalled 18,83,464 for India, 98% of
which came from Bengal. Additionally, there were 60,715 Hindus for
whom no return of caste was obtained! The 1931 census report also
documents at the difficulty of stating a caste in the case of
inter-caste marriages. It also indicates instances of wrong returns:
"Even castes of chamars in the United Provinces dropped their
characteristic nomenclature and at this Census returned themselves as
sun-moon-descended Rajputs…. It is obviously impossible for the Census
authorities to do anything other than accept the nomenclature of the
individuals making that return, since to discriminate and to allot to
different groups would involve entering into discussion on the basis
of largely hypothetical data."
Given that the caste complexity has grown over the years, how the 2010
Census tackles these issues is yet to be seen. "We are yet to receive
any instructions for the caste census. It will be part of the second
phase of the census exercise and the enumerators will be adequately
trained for it," says Varsha Joshi, Director of Census Operations,
Delhi. Even as the census department gears up for the volatile
exercise, there is no denying that much would have changed on the
caste front in the last 80 years. The data thus extrapolated will
throw up more than a few surprises.
COUNTING CASTE
* The primary principle of classification used in 1872 and also in
1881 was that of varna. The number of castes went up from 3,208 in
1871 to 19,044 in 1881. The variation was largely due to the
difference in the methodology, rather than the growth in the number of
castes.
* The 1891 census abandoned varna in favour of occupational criteria
for enumeration, based in large part on the models established by
Nesfield's and Ibbetson's classification of caste groups in the
Punjab, the north-west and Awadh. 60 subgroups were broken into six
broad categories: agricultural and pastoral, professional, commercial,
artisans and village menials, vagrants and other races and indefinite
titles.
* The census commissioner for 1911 reported that hundreds of petitions
were received from different caste organisations, their weight alone
amounting to 120 pounds, claiming changes in nomenclature, demanding a
higher place in order of precedence, and emphasising affiliation to
one of the three twice-born varnas.
* The number of castes identified in the 1901 census was 1,646, which
increased to 4,147 in the 1931 census.
* JH Hutton, Commissioner of Census, 1931, pleaded for the abandonment
of the return of caste as it cast an avoidable burden on the census
administration. This was done 20 years later in 1951. The Constitution
of India forbade discrimination on the ground of caste and enumeration
of caste, except that of social categories such as the SC and STs, was
therefore discontinued.
------------------------------------
----
INFORMATION OVERLOAD?
Get all ZESTCaste mails sent out in a span of 24 hours in a single mail. Subscribe to the daily digest version by sending a blank mail to ZESTMedia-digest@yahoogroups.com, OR, if you have a Yahoo! Id, change your settings at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/join/
PARTICIPATE:-
On this list you can share caste news, discuss caste issues and network with like-minded anti-caste people from across India and the world. Just write to zestcaste@yahoogroups.com
TELL FRIENDS TO SIGN UP:-
If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTCaste by sending a blank mail to ZESTCaste-subscribe@yahoogroups.com OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join/
Also have a look at our sister list, ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
ZESTCaste-digest@yahoogroups.com
ZESTCaste-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ZESTCaste-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment