“Those Whose Caste Is Unknown…”: Anurag Thakur vs Rahul Gandhi on Census – A Battle for Data and Representation

The 2021 Census, India’s once-in-a-decade exercise of population enumeration, has sparked a heated debate, pitting the ruling BJP against the opposition Congress, with both sides claiming the moral high ground. At the heart of this tussle lies the question of caste, specifically the controversial inclusion of a column for “caste” in the Census, which the BJP government has resisted.

The controversy erupted in 2020 when the Congress, led by Rahul Gandhi, demanded the inclusion of a separate column for caste in the upcoming Census. This demand stemmed from their belief that such data is essential for accurate policymaking, particularly in ensuring social justice and economic upliftment for marginalized communities. They argued that the existing “Scheduled Caste” and “Scheduled Tribe” categories were insufficient to capture the diverse and complex realities of caste in India.

Anurag Thakur, the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, countered the Congress’s claims, stating that a separate caste column would lead to “caste-based discrimination” and “divisive politics.” He asserted that the existing system, with its focus on SCs and STs, was sufficient for addressing social inequalities and that including a separate caste column would only serve to further exacerbate existing divisions.

The Argument for Inclusion

The Congress’s push for a separate caste column rests on a number of key arguments:

• Accurate Representation: Proponents argue that a dedicated caste column would provide a more accurate picture of the caste composition of India, allowing for the development of targeted policies and programs to address specific challenges faced by different caste groups. This data could help identify areas where specific groups are lagging behind in access to education, healthcare, employment, and other social and economic indicators.

• Addressing Social Inequalities: Collecting caste data is crucial for understanding the extent of social inequalities and for developing effective interventions to tackle them. Without accurate data, it becomes challenging to effectively implement affirmative action policies and to ensure that benefits reach the intended beneficiaries.

• Empowering Marginalized Communities: The inclusion of a separate caste column could empower marginalized communities by giving them a voice and allowing them to advocate for their rights and needs. It could also help in monitoring the progress of various welfare schemes aimed at uplifting these communities.

The Argument for Exclusion

The BJP government’s stance against a separate caste column is primarily driven by the following concerns:

• Promoting Caste-Based Discrimination: The government fears that collecting caste data could lead to discrimination against certain communities and exacerbate existing social divisions. They argue that the focus should be on promoting a casteless society, rather than emphasizing caste distinctions.

• Administrative Burden: Collecting and analyzing caste data would require significant resources and manpower. The government argues that these resources could be better utilized in other areas, such as improving infrastructure and education.

• Potential for Misuse: There are concerns that caste data could be misused for political purposes, leading to vote bank politics and manipulation of public policy. The government believes that the current system, with its focus on SCs and STs, is sufficient for addressing social inequalities.

The Case Study: Census 2011

The 2011 Census provides valuable insights into the existing data on caste. While it included information on Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), it did not collect data on other caste groups. The lack of comprehensive caste data has made it difficult to accurately assess the socio-economic conditions of various caste groups, hindering the development of effective policies for their upliftment.

Data Speaks:

• The 2011 Census revealed that SCs constituted 16.6% of the Indian population, while STs accounted for 8.6%. This data highlights the significant presence of these communities in India. However, it fails to provide a complete picture of the caste landscape, as it does not include data on other caste groups.

• Studies conducted by independent researchers suggest that the socio-economic disparities between different caste groups are significant. This underscores the need for comprehensive caste data to enable targeted interventions to address these inequalities.

The Way Forward

The ongoing debate on the inclusion of a separate caste column in the Census underscores the complex and sensitive nature of caste in India. While the BJP government’s concerns about discrimination and political misuse are valid, the Congress’s arguments for accurate representation and social justice are equally compelling.

A balanced approach is needed, where data is collected in a sensitive and responsible manner, without fueling societal divisions. This can be achieved through:

• Anonymized Data Collection: Collecting caste data anonymously can minimize the risks of discrimination and misuse.

• Clear Guidelines and Protocols: Establishing clear guidelines and protocols for the collection, analysis, and use of caste data is crucial to ensure its responsible and ethical application.

• Focus on Social Justice: The primary objective of collecting caste data should be to promote social justice and address inequalities.

The 2021 Census presents a critical opportunity to gather accurate and comprehensive data on caste, which can be instrumental in furthering the cause of social justice and economic upliftment for marginalized communities in India. The debate must move beyond partisan politics and focus on finding a solution that serves the best interests of all citizens.