Ask Onix
India's 2027 census to count castes for first time in nearly a century
India will enumerate caste identities in its 2027 national census-the first such count since 1931-marking a historic shift in how the country measures social inequality. The decision follows sustained pressure from opposition parties and regional governments, including three states that conducted independent caste surveys. Advocates argue the data will refine affirmative action policies, while critics warn it risks solidifying caste divisions rather than dismantling them.
Political push and colonial legacy
The move ends decades of government reluctance. A contested 2011 survey-unverified by census authorities and never officially released-claimed to document 4.6 million distinct caste names, underscoring the system's complexity. British colonial administrators first introduced caste enumeration in 1871, conducting six such censuses through 1931. Scholar Anand Teltumbde, in his book The Caste Con Census, argues these counts were tools of imperial control, designed to fracture post-1857 Indian unity by formalizing caste hierarchies.
Teltumbde contends that independent India perpetuated this framework under the guise of social justice, reducing equity to a "ledger of entitlements" while avoiding systemic reform. "Caste is a hierarchy-seeking impulse that defies measurement," he writes, warning that enumeration risks bureaucratizing inequality rather than addressing its architectural roots.
Quotas, resentment, and the 'upwardly mobile minority'
India's affirmative action system originally targeted Dalits (formerly "untouchables") and Adivasis (tribal communities), its most marginalized groups. Over time, less disadvantaged "Other Backward Classes" (OBCs) demanded inclusion, sparking political battles over quota expansion. Teltumbde frames the census push as driven by an "upwardly mobile minority" seeking larger shares of state benefits, while nearly 800 million Indians-over half the population-now depend on free food rations.
He cautions that caste data will become electoral fodder, with parties exploiting grievances to redraw quotas. "The only rational politics is one of annihilation of caste," he argues, echoing B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of India's constitution, who insisted caste "must be destroyed," not managed. Yet Teltumbde admits this goal feels utopian in a society where even victims "see value in its preservation."
"Supplies of caste-based benefits have stabilized, but the system's architecture remains intact. Counting won't expose inequality-it will entrench it."
Anand Teltumbde, The Caste Con Census (2025)
Scholars divide: Tool for justice or colonial relic?
Sociologists Satish Deshpande and Mary E. John counter that not counting castes was "one of independent India's biggest mistakes." They argue the absence of data obscures both caste privilege and deprivation, framing caste as solely the burden of Dalits and Adivasis, who must continually prove their identity. "There is no caste disprivilege without corresponding privilege," they write, advocating a census to expose these dynamics.
Demographer Sonalde Desai dismisses claims that enumeration alone shapes reality. "If censuses could eliminate caste, we'd have no caste equations today," she notes, pointing to the 90-year gap since the last count. Without updated data, she argues, affirmative action operates "blindly," relying on colonial-era statistics that fail to reflect modern inequalities.
Income-linked data: A middle path?
Political scientist Sudha Pai acknowledges Teltumbde's critique-that counting may solidify identities-but calls the census "inevitable" given caste's politicization. She proposes linking caste data to income and education metrics to target benefits more precisely. "This could shift India from caste-based to rights-based welfare," Pai says, though she warns implementation will require navigating sub-caste complexities and evolving vulnerabilities.
Practical hurdles: Classification and sub-caste chaos
Experts highlight logistical challenges. Castes comprise myriad subgroups, complicating classification. "What level of aggregation should be used? How will respondents answer?," asks Desai, stressing the need for pilot studies. Sub-categorization-splitting broad caste groups to ensure the most disadvantaged access benefits-remains contentious. Teltumbde, however, rejects the premise: "You'll count all your life and still not solve the caste problem."
With the census two years away, the debate hinges on whether data can dismantle hierarchy-or whether, as Teltumbde warns, it will merely "bureaucratize inequality," reducing justice to arithmetic while leaving the system's core untouched.
