The Caste Census Debate: A Dual Perspective on India's Future

Thu Nov 13 2025 06:05:44 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

As India prepares for its first caste count in nearly a century, opinions clash on its implications for social justice, affirmative action, and the deeply rooted caste system. This article explores the arguments for and against counting castes, highlighting diverse scholarly insights and advocacy efforts.

India's upcoming national census in 2027 will include caste for the first time in decades, sparking debate over its potential to either further entrench societal hierarchies or enhance social justice. While some scholars argue for the necessity of better data to inform affirmative action policies, others, including activist Anand Teltumbde, caution against the risks of perpetuating caste systems and emphasize the importance of dismantling rather than managing caste identities.

Counting castes in India has always been about more than numbers - it is about who gets a share of government benefits and who doesn't.

The country's next national census, scheduled for 2027, will - for the first time in nearly a century - count every caste. Like a social hierarchy that has long outlived kingdoms and empires, the caste count has finally been greenlit, following pressure from opposition parties and at least three states that have already conducted their own caste surveys.

A 2011 survey - neither run nor verified by census authorities - recorded an astonishing 4.6 million caste names. A full count of castes promises a sharper portrait of welfare distribution, allowing for more targeted social spending.

Advocates express that the data could recalibrate quotas and help identify true beneficiaries of affirmative action, thus adding efficiency to welfare programs.

However, in a provocative book, The Caste Con Census, scholar-activist Anand Teltumbde warns that this exercise may reinforce the caste system rather than dismantle it, arguing that castes are too pernicious to be managed for any progressive purpose. He critiques the historical context of caste counts initiated by British administrators from 1871 to 1931, asserting that each count not only recorded but also solidified caste identities.

Teltumbde's argument challenges the belief that better data leads to fairer policies, suggesting that counting simply bureaucratizes inequality. He believes the push for a caste census is fueled by an upwardly mobile minority, while a significant portion of the population remains deprived.

Contrastingly, many scholars assert that counting castes as part of the census is crucial for achieving social justice in a contemporary context. They argue that the lack of accurate data has led to policies that don't effectively address need-based disparities across caste lines.

Political scientist Sudha Pai states that a caste census should also capture income levels within each caste, which would enable more thoughtful policymaking to ensure the most disadvantaged individuals receive needed support.

Despite the ongoing debate, challenges remain regarding the classification of castes, data collection, and potential exploitation of the findings by political parties. Ultimately, the future of India's caste census remains a contentious intersection of data, policy, and social justice, where varying perspectives continue to spark vital discussions.