Census going Backwards
HOW just some vocal members can compel the government to change its policies became evident once again on May 7, when OBC members of Lok Sabha compelled the government to include caste as a column in the ongoing Census survey - something that was abandoned after 1931 Census because "Every Census gives rise to a 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 valueless.....For these reasons an abandonment of the return of caste would be viewed with relief by Census officers" (Census of India Report, 1931)
BY doing so the Government has lost an opportunity to redefine OBCs (The present category of OBCs is unconstitutional as it equates caste with class. It could be true in 1931 but is definitely not in 2010). The inclusion of parameters like house (kuchcha or pukka), toilet, drinking water, vehicles etc. etc. could have been used to identify real backward classes but that was not to be.
THE Census of 1931 showed that, compared to 1921 many lower castes had upgraded their status themselves, something termed sanskritisation by famous anthropologist-turned sociologist late Prof. M. N. Srinivas. Considering the present ground realities the reverse of sanskritisation (desanskritisation) is likely to largely inflate the figures for OBCs, making the exercise redundant.
Nobody can deny the importance of caste in India, so much so that, the equalitarian religions like Christianity and Islam too practice it as much as Hindus do. Yet in our secular polity there should be no place for caste. But politics in India has been caste based. If votaries of caste census love caste so much, then they should accept caste system with all its vices and virtues. Why don't they accept traditional panchayats' decisions? Why they criticise Khaps?
ANTHROPOLOGICAL Survey of India has through Peoples' of India Project, has identified more than 6,000 castes and sub-castes including OBCs but the Centre and states have their own lists of OBCs which are at variance with each other. Besides, identifying OBCs in other religions is definitely going to be problematic. 2.7 million enumerators, with just three days of training, can not be expected to do the desired as "There is an increasing tendency to adopt and devise caste names that catch their fancy. Several of them manufacture cacophonous combinations"(Census Report, 1931).
THE Census Survey on caste basis is going to touch a hornet's nest and the impact will be seen only after five years or so when the results of this Census are revealed.
BY doing so the Government has lost an opportunity to redefine OBCs (The present category of OBCs is unconstitutional as it equates caste with class. It could be true in 1931 but is definitely not in 2010). The inclusion of parameters like house (kuchcha or pukka), toilet, drinking water, vehicles etc. etc. could have been used to identify real backward classes but that was not to be.
THE Census of 1931 showed that, compared to 1921 many lower castes had upgraded their status themselves, something termed sanskritisation by famous anthropologist-turned sociologist late Prof. M. N. Srinivas. Considering the present ground realities the reverse of sanskritisation (desanskritisation) is likely to largely inflate the figures for OBCs, making the exercise redundant.
Nobody can deny the importance of caste in India, so much so that, the equalitarian religions like Christianity and Islam too practice it as much as Hindus do. Yet in our secular polity there should be no place for caste. But politics in India has been caste based. If votaries of caste census love caste so much, then they should accept caste system with all its vices and virtues. Why don't they accept traditional panchayats' decisions? Why they criticise Khaps?
ANTHROPOLOGICAL Survey of India has through Peoples' of India Project, has identified more than 6,000 castes and sub-castes including OBCs but the Centre and states have their own lists of OBCs which are at variance with each other. Besides, identifying OBCs in other religions is definitely going to be problematic. 2.7 million enumerators, with just three days of training, can not be expected to do the desired as "There is an increasing tendency to adopt and devise caste names that catch their fancy. Several of them manufacture cacophonous combinations"(Census Report, 1931).
THE Census Survey on caste basis is going to touch a hornet's nest and the impact will be seen only after five years or so when the results of this Census are revealed.
Comments
Post a Comment