[sacw] SACW #2 (1Dec. 01)

Fri, 30 Nov 2001 21:47:26 +0100

South Asia Citizens Wire | Dispatch #2 1 December 2001

------------------------------------------

#1. The king of Greater Afghanistan (Tariq Ali)
#2. Census and the Construction of Communalism in India (R B Bhagat)

________________________

#1.

The Guardian (UK) November 30, 2001

The king of Greater Afghanistan
A German dispatch from 1940 shows Zahir Shah's true colours

by Tariq Ali

The Pandora's box of the American empire is still open, releasing its=20
monsters and fears on a world still not fully under its control. The=20
Northern Alliance is a confederation of monsters. Attaching=20
dissidents to the chains of a tank and crushing them, executing=20
defenceless prisoners, raping men and women, these are all in a day's=20
work for the guardians of the heroin trade. Blemishes of yesteryear?=20
No such luck. We've been spared pictures of many of these atrocities,=20
but Arab TV viewers knew what was going on long before the massacre=20
of Mazar-i-Sharif. The Geneva convention is being violated every=20
single day.
The facts are these: the situation in Afghanistan is inherently=20
unstable. Turf wars have already begun in "liberated" Kabul, though=20
open clashes have been avoided: the west is watching and money has=20
been promised. But the dam will burst sooner rather than later. Once=20
the marines depart, with or without the head of Bin Laden, the=20
alliance will discover that there is no money for anything except=20
waging war. Schools and hospitals and homes are not going to be=20
sprouting next spring or the one after in Afghanistan or Kosovo. And=20
if the 87-year-old King Zahir Shah is wheeled over from Rome, what=20
then?

Nothing much, thinks the west, except to convince the Pashtuns that=20
their interests are being safeguarded. But judging from past form,=20
Zahir Shah might not be satisfied with the status quo.

A document from the German Foreign Office, dated October 3 1940,=20
makes fascinating reading. It is from State Secretary Weizsacker to=20
the German legation in Kabul and is worth quoting in some detail:=20
"The Afghan minister called on me on September 30 and conveyed=20
greetings from his minister president, as well as their good wishes=20
for a favourable outcome of the war. He inquired whether German aims=20
in Asia coincided with Afghan hopes; he alluded to the oppression of=20
Arab countries and referred to the 15m Afghans [Pashtuns, mainly in=20
the North West Frontier province] who were forced to suffer on Indian=20
territory.
"My statement that Germany's goal was the liberation of the peoples=20
of the region referred to, who were under the British yoke... was=20
received with satisfaction by the Afghan minister. He stated that=20
justice for Afghanistan would be created only when the country's=20
frontier had been extended to the Indus; this would also apply if=20
India should secede from Britain... The Afghan remarked that=20
Afghanistan had given proof of her loyal attitude by vigorously=20
resisting English pressure to break off relations with Germany."

The king who had dispatched the minister to Berlin was the=20
26-year-old Zahir Shah. The minister-president was his uncle Sardar=20
Muhammad Hashim Khan.
What is interesting in the German dispatch is not so much the=20
evidence of the Afghan king's sympathy for the Nazi regime. It is the=20
desire for a Greater Afghanistan via the incorporation of what is now=20
Pakistan's North West Frontier province and its capital Peshawar.=20
Zahir Shah's return is being strongly resisted by Pakistan. They know=20
that the king never accepted the Durand Line, dividing Afghanistan=20
and Pakistan, not even as a temporary border. They are concerned that=20
he might encourage Pashtun nationalism.

Islamabad's decision to hurl the Taliban into battle and take Kabul=20
in 1996 was partially designed to solve the Pashtun question.=20
Religion might transcend ethnic nationalism. Instead the two=20
combined. A proto-Taliban group, Tehrik-e-Nifaz-i-Shariah-e-Mohammed=20
(TNSM) seized a large chunk of the Pakistan tourist resort of Swat=20
during Benazir Bhutto's government and imposed "Islamic punishments",=20
including amputations. She was helpless to act, but last week=20
Musharraf imprisoned the TNSM leader, Soofi Mohammed Saeed.

Not all the repercussions of this crude war of revenge are yet to the=20
fore, but the surface calm in Pakistan is deceptive. With armed=20
fundamentalists of the Lashkar-e-Taiba threatening to take on the=20
government if attempts are made to disarm them, the question of how=20
much support they enjoy within the military establishment becomes=20
critical. The inflow of US aid and the lifting of sanctions has=20
persuaded Musharraf's opponents within the army to leave him in=20
place, but for how long?

Add to that the appalling situation in Kashmir with a monthly=20
casualty rate higher than Palestine, where Indian soldiers and=20
Pakistani-infiltrated jihadis confront each other over the corpses of=20
Kashmiri innocents. If Delhi were to use the "war against terrorism"=20
as a precedent, the subcontinent could implode.

=B7 Tariq Ali's book, The Clash of Fundamentalisms, will be published=20
by Verso in March

_____

#2.

EPW Commentary 24 Nov 2001

Census and the Construction of Communalism in India

The article highlights the role of the census in the construction of=20
mutually exclusive religious communities and their particular=20
demographic and geographical features in furthering the communal=20
consciousness in colonial India through the policy of divide and=20
rule. The perpetuation of demographic religions continued in=20
independent India's categorisation census exercises where the=20
demographic anxieties are paramount and the planks of social justice=20
ignored.

R B Bhagat

I
Introduction
The census was started in several countries of Europe during the 18th=20
century.1 The reason that motivated this introduction of some type=20
of census of population was the concern over the extent of poverty=20
and resultant poor relief necessitated by it. This led to the=20
increasing debate on the impact of population growth on poverty. In=20
Great Britain, this debate led a member of parliament from Cornwall=20
called Potter to introduce in 1753 the first bill for a national=20
census. The bill suggested the collection of information on the size=20
of population, vita statistics, total number of poor receiving alms=20
from parishes. The bill was however defeated because it was perceived=20
as being potentially repressive measure.2 The debate however on=20
population and poverty got fresh momentum with the publication of 'An=20
Essay on Population' in 1798 by Thomas Malthus. Finally, the House of=20
Common passed the "Act for Taking Account of the Population of Great=20
Britain and the Increase or Decrease thereof" on December 3, 1800. As=20
a result, the first British census was conducted on March 10, 1801=20
and every 10 years thereafter.3 Economic issues were first=20
predominant in the start of census in Great Britain.

On the other hand, census taking in colonial India had a different=20
purpose altogether. The desire of the colonial government to learn=20
all it could about the people and land under its control was the=20
reason behind the census taking exercises during colonial India. Just=20
few years before the first census in colonial India in 1872, the work=20
on gazetteers was begun by W W Hunter, on the direction of Lord Mayo,=20
which culminated years later in several volumes of Imperial=20
Gazetteers of India. Both the gazetteers and census reports covered=20
large number of subjects dealing with land and people of the=20
different parts of India. As both gazetteers and census were=20
initiated under a foreign and authoritarian government, neither=20
public opinion nor the representative institutions existed to limit=20
the subjects investigated either in gazetteers or in the census=20
reports.4 As a result, the census had played a different role in the=20
social and political life of people in home and in the colonies. The=20
census was largely a secular institution in the collection and=20
presentation of data in Great Britain. The census exercise in Great=20
Britain exhibited either disinterest in religion or extreme=20
reluctance to explore this field. In several censuses, there was no=20
question on religion and wherever any question on religion was=20
included, it was done with great care and restraint. Not only this,=20
results were published separately from the census reports.5 The=20
question on ethnicity was for the first time introduced in 1991=20
Census and there was pressure to include religion in 2001 Census of=20
the Great Britain.6 American census also specifically=20
prevents collection of data on religion.7 On the other hand, in the=20
colonial census of India, the question on religion, caste and race=20
was introduced since the census began in 1872, and religion was used=20
as a fundamental category in census tabulations and data on this=20
published without any restraint. The use of religion was found in=20
other areas of discourse as well. This is evident from the=20
periodisation of Indian history in terms of Hindu and Muslim periods=20
unlike European history-ancient, medieval and modern.8 It seems that=20
the projection of cleavages within colonial society was essential for=20
sustaining colonial rule which used variety of texts, forms and=20
methods to continue and promote their rule even at the cost of=20
strained communal relationships in India.9 The likely impact of=20
colonial census on religion in communal relations and communal=20
politics in India has been little explored by researchers. This=20
article attempts to understand the role of census as one of the texts=20
in the construction of communalism in India.

II Construction of Religious Communities
A census is not a passive account of statistical tables, but also=20
engages in reshaping the world through categories and their=20
definitions. Categories necessitate definition and definitions impose=20
order. Once categories are chosen and definition fixed, only then can=20
counting begin. The definition adopted by census gives numerical=20
weight, so that defining is not merely a matter of providing labels=20
but also adding statistical content to a category. Thus the census=20
imposes an order of a statistical nature. The degree of impact of=20
census will be determined by the uses to which it is put both by the=20
government who created it and by their subject who reacted to it.10=20
The categories and their definition used in colonial census in India=20
were rooted in British perception of Indian society. Indian society=20
was looked upon as pre-capitalist entities largely constituting=20
primordial communities. This had also happened elsewhere. In colonial=20
Southern Rhodesia, the African community was defined by whites in=20
precisely the same way - as the opposite of capitalist social=20
relations. The African community was not examined as it actually was=20
but defined negatively by a set of assumed contrasts with=20
capitalism.11 They constructed the difference and categories and=20
ordered them into hierarchies according to their view of the world.=20
"The study of India was thus made part of a larger scholarly=20
enterprise in which the Victorians, as children of the Enlightenment,=20
sought rational principles that would provide a comprehensive and=20
comprehensible way of fitting every thing they saw in the world=20
around them into ordered hierarchies. The existence of empire by=20
imparting a sense of urgency to the process spurred on this creation=20
of knowledge and at the same time the unequal power relationships of=20
imperialism helped shape the categories within which that knowledge=20
was constructed".12 As a sequel, the construction of homogeneous=20
communities is the outcome of expanding nationalism based on capital=20
accumulation. During the early 18th century united into a single=20
state, the people of Great Britain began to construct a view of=20
themselves as an integral nation, joining English, Scots and Welsh=20
into one community set apart, as British, from others.13

While numerous communities existed in India, these communities in=20
terms of castes, religions, and groups have existed as 'fuzzy'=20
communities from time immemorial, but their congealing into distinct,=20
discrete and mutually antagonistic communities was certainly aided to=20
a great extent by the counting of heads.14 The 'fuzzy' communities=20
were indistinct groups with neither internal cohesion nor well known=20
externalities and as such, were communities without overt=20
communication. The group did not know how far it extended and what=20
was its strength in numbers, therefore, had less accurate and less=20
aggressive self-awareness.15 The 'fuzzy' communities also did not=20
require any developed theory of 'otherness'.16

Colonialism changed this blissful state of social ignorance through=20
census. Enumeration and categorisation for reasons of state had a=20
deep social impact. It is in this context that the very concept of=20
majority and minority in religious terms is an outcome of a modern=20
consciousness of population numeracy, in particular of the census=20
exercises that were taken in the 19th century.17 Numbers became a=20
political tool as Hindus were told that they constituted a majority=20
and an effort was made to persuade them to act as a uniform community=20
regardless of sect, caste or class affiliation. Before head counts of=20
people were announced, it was neither possible nor necessary for=20
communities across the land to identify themselves with any degree of=20
preciseness and to seek similarities or differences with others=20
outside their immediate kin. There was, thus no general 'Hindu'=20
community and people defined themselves with reference to their=20
specific modes of worship as localised Shaivites (worshippers of=20
Shiva) or Shakts (Worshippers of the Mother Goddess) or Vaishnavas=20
(worshippers of various incarnations - Ram, Krishna, etc, of Vishnu )=20
and so on.

Indeed, in the pre-modern periods, it is doubtful if even the Muslim=20
'ummah' (global community) had any more than a symbolic meaning. The=20
censuses however, not only counted people but also pigeonholed them=20
and made it possible for them to seek self-definition in terms that=20
were set for them by external enumerations.18
There is a little historical evidence of sustained communal hatred=20
operating at the popular level prior to colonial rule.19 The 'fuzzy'=20
communities have been turned into enumerated communities and further=20
into political communities by the colonialists. Divide et impera was=20
the foundation of British rule suggested for adoption as early as=20
1821 and the application of this maxim was first tried out in the=20
reorganisation of the Indian army after the great revolt of 1857. At=20
this juncture of history, the census counts first tried out in 1872=20
aided in the articulation of the cleavages of majority and minority,=20
a handmaiden in creating communal consciousness in the early 20th=20
century.20

The census figures also provided the geographical distribution of=20
religious communities. Both size of religious communities and their=20
distribution was used to widen the rift between religious communities=20
particularly between Hindus and Muslims. Numerous such examples are=20
found with the intent to perpetuate divisions in Indian society along=20
caste, religion and linguistic lines.21 The division of Bengal based=20
on religion in 1905 was the most glaring example of fomenting=20
communalism by the British policy of divide and rule. A new province=20
of East Bengal and Assam was created with predominance of Muslims in=20
East Bengal in 1905. In Dacca in February 1904, Curzon spoke of=20
offering the East Bengal Muslims the prospect of unity which they=20
have not enjoyed since the days of the old Musalman viceroys and=20
kings.22 Therefore, the census exercise during colonial rule=20
instilled a geographical and demographic consciousness among=20
religious communities - an awareness of their geographical=20
concentration as well as their demographic strength. The new communal=20
consciousness was further perpetuated through the political=20
instrument of separate electorates wherein religious minorities were=20
given separate seats in the legislative bodies according to their=20
proportion of population in the provinces. Mushirul Hasan believes=20
that the roots of communal competition can be traced to the=20
Morley-Minto Reforms, which extended communal electorate to the local=20
bodies. Even the seats in government medical college Lahore was=20
distributed in the ratio of 40: 40: 20 amongst Hindus, Muslims and=20
Sikhs in Punjab.23 As a result communal antagonism in the country was=20
sharpened. Hindus and Muslims practically organised themselves=20
against each other in hostile camps. It exacerbated Hindu-Muslim=20
divisions and fostered the spirit of political exclusiveness. The=20
impact was particularly marked on Muslims who saw the advantage of=20
pressing for special safeguards and concessions in accordance with=20
numerical strength, social status, local influence and social=20
requirement of their community.24
Therefore, the Indian nationalism and Hindu and Muslim communalism=20
are in fact both essentially a modern phenomena as communal riots do=20
seem to have been significantly rare down to the 1880s.2 5

III
On Defining the Religious Communities
The British census officials on the basis being aware of the=20
resistance put up by Indian people defended the inclusion on the=20
basis of religion in latter censuses. The census commissioner of 1931=20
census wrote the following:

India is the most religious country in the world, and must be=20
regarded as the justification for the importance attached to religion=20
in census of India as compared for example with that of US of=20
Americas where culture is comparatively independent of religion.26

This statement glosses over the fact that religion is even a too=20
controversial subject to be incorporated in the census of the western=20
world marked by history of religious conflicts. The census=20
commissioner of 1931 Census was also aware about the role of census=20
statistics on religion flaring up communal divisions in the country.=20
Thus, he wrote, "It has been argued that the census statistics of=20
religion tend to perpetuate communal divisions: the census can not,=20
however, hide its head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich but=20
must record as accurately as possible facts as they exist and there=20
is no question of the existence of communal differences which are=20
reflected at present in political constituencies.27

The above justification, however did not conform to the social=20
reality of India that existed during colonial time. The comments of=20
the census commissioner of 1911 census are very pertinent.

In India the line of cleavage is social rather than religious, and=20
tendency of the people themselves is to classify their neighbours,=20
not according to their beliefs, but according to their social status=20
and manner of living. No one is interested in what his neighbour=20
believes, but he is very much interested in knowing whether he can=20
eat with or take water from his hands.28
Since racism dominated the mind of colonialists, it was used as first=20
order classification of Indian population followed by religion and=20
caste/sects. The following is the scheme of classification adopted in=20
Indian censuses during the colonial rule.

I Indo-Aryan

A Hindu: (a) Hindu Brahmanic, (b) Hindu ( Arya-Vedic Theists), and=20
(c) Hindu (Brahmo-Eclectic Theists) B Sikh
C Jain
D Buddhist
II Iranian
A Zorosastrian (Parsi)
III Semitic
A Musalman
B Christians
C Jews
IV Primitive
A Animistic
V Miscellaneous
In spite of several difficulties, census officials took great pains=20
to classify the Indian population in terms of homogeneous and=20
mutually exclusive religious communities. In each of the=20
classification mentioned above, census officials encountered enormous=20
difficulties. The census reports of each of the provinces as well as=20
the all-India report mention a plethora of such instances where the=20
scheme of census classification could not be applied due to the=20
interwoven nature of social structure. The Hindus were defined as, "a=20
native of India who is not of European, Armenian, Moghul, Persian or=20
other foreign descent, who is a member of a recognised caste, who=20
acknowledges the spiritual authority of brahmans, who venerates or at=20
least refuses to kill or harm kine, and does not profess any creed or=20
religion which the brahman forbids him to profess.2 9 Further, Hindus=20
have been defined in relation to Muslims. Quoting George Grierson,=20
the census superintendent of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh=20
mentions that 'Hindi means any native of India, whilst Hindu means a=20
non-Musalman native of India'.30 The census had not only tried to=20
define Hindus but it had gone further to identify 'genuine Hindus'.=20
In the census of 1911, the provincial superintendents were asked to=20
enumerate the caste and tribe returned or classed as Hindu separately=20
who did not conform to the following criteria: (i) deny the supremacy=20
of the brahmans; (ii) do not receive the mantra from a brahmans or=20
other recognised Hindu guru; (iii) deny the authority of the Vedas;=20
(iv) do not worship the great Hindu gods; (v) are not served by good=20
Brahmans as family priests; (vi) have no Brahman priests at all;=20
(vii) are denied access to the interior of ordinary Hindu temples;=20
(viii) cause pollution by (a) by touch (b) within certain distance;=20
(ix) bury their dead; and (x) eat beef and do not revere the cow

The extent to which these qualifications are satisfied varies in=20
different parts of India. In the Central Provinces and Berar, a=20
quarter of the persons classed as Hindus denied the supremacy of the=20
brahmans and the authority of the Vedas; more than half did not=20
receive the mantras from a recognised Hindu guru, a quarter did not=20
worship the great Hindu gods, and were not served by good Brahmans=20
priests; a third were denied access to temple; a quarter caused=20
pollution by touch, a seventh always buried their dead, while a half=20
did not regard cremation as obligatory and two-fifths ate beef.31 In=20
Bengal and Bihar and Orissa, there were 59 castes including seven=20
with a strength of a million and upwards who did not conform to some=20
of the 10 tests and there were 14 beef eating castes all of whom were=20
denied access to temple.32 These groups were called not genuine=20
Hindus or partly assimilated Hindus. This shows that the so-called=20
Hindus were not homogeneous groups and among them variety of=20
practices existed. The census superintendent of Madras census 1881,=20
thus rightly objected to the use of word Hindus as a religious=20
category for the population of southern India.33

In India social and cultural practices of Hindus and Muslims are=20
inseparable. There are many so called Hindus whose religion has a=20
strong Muhammadan flavour. Notable amongst these are the followers of=20
strange 'panchpiriya' cult, who worship five Mohammadan saints of=20
uncertain name and identity and sacrifice poultry in their honour and=20
employ for the purpose as their priest - a Muhammadan 'dafali=20
fakir'.34 In Gujarat there are several similar communities such as=20
'matia kunbis' who call in brahmans for their chief ceremonies, but=20
are followers of the Pirana saint Imam Shah and his successors, and=20
bury their dead as do the Muhammadans, the 'Sheikhadas', who at their=20
wedding employ both a Hindu and a Muhammadan priest, and the 'Momnas'=20
who practice circumcision, bury their dead and read Gujarati Koran,=20
but in other respects follow Hindu customs and ceremonial. The=20
boundary line between Hindus on the one hand and Sikhs and Jains on=20
the other is even more indeterminate. Even the census commissioner=20
had reiterated 'religions of India as we have already seen are by no=20
means mutually exclusive.35 However, the practical difficulty in=20
classifying the Indian population in terms of religious categories=20
was solved by the census officials in their own way. The enumerators=20
were asked to record all persons who said they were Hindus, Musalman=20
or Christians, etc, and those who did not profess to belong to any=20
recognised religion were entered under the name of their caste or=20
tribe. In the course of tabulation all such persons were treated as=20
Hindu if they belonged to a recognised Hindu caste however low it=20
might be.36

Thus it is clear that the census made all efforts to reconstruct=20
religious categories designed according to the notion of race and=20
religion of the colonialists. The reconstruction of homogeneous and=20
mutually exclusive communities was the main clutch through which=20
divide and rule was possible. This was necessary for the sustenance=20
of colonialism in India.
Census
Demographic Data

Socio-economic Data

Year Size and Growth Fertility Education Occupation
2001** Size by sex, rural urban, marital status and five-year age=20
group Number of births during last one year to currently married=20
women and children ever born and surviving related to ever married=20
women Level of education Workers/Non-workers
1991 Size by sex and rural/urban Number of births during last=20
one year to currently married women and children ever born and=20
surviving related to ever married women __ __
1981 Size by sex and rural/urban Number of births during last=20
one year to currently married women and children ever born and=20
surviving related to ever married women. __ __
1971 Size by sex and rural/urban Number of births during last=20
one year to currently married women. __ __
1961 Size by sex and rural/urban __ __ __
1951 Size by sex __ __ __
1941* __ __ __ __
1931 Size by sex, age, civil condition and population of towns by=20
religion Average size of family Literacy by age and religion=20
Occupation of selected castes, tribes and races
1921 Size by sex, age, civil condition and population of towns by=20
religion __ Literacy by age and religion Occupation of=20
selected castes, tribes and races
1911 Size by sex, age, cilvil condition and population of towns by=20
religion __ Education by selected castes, tribes or race=20
Occupation by tribes and religion
1901 Size by age, sex, and civil condition __ Education by=20
selected castes, tribes or race Castes, tribes and race by tradition=20
and actual occupation
Notes: * Data could not be published due to Britain's involvement in=20
Second World War.
**Census 2001 has not published data on religion and related aspects=20
as yet. This is based on draft tabulation plan.
Source: Compiled from different census reports and tables. See also S=20
c Srivastava (1983), Indian Census in Perspective, Monograph No 1,=20
Office of Register General India, New Delhi.

IV Demographic Basis of Communal Consciousness
The census data on religion not only brought to the fore the=20
majority-minority cleavage, but also sparked off a communal debate on=20
the size and growth of population of different religious communities.=20
In 1909, U N Mukherji of Calcutta published a series of articles in=20
the 'Bengalee', which was later published as a pamphlet, Hindus: A=20
Dying Race. On the basis of census figures of 1901 Census. Mukherji=20
drew attention towards the declining proportion of Hindus in the=20
total population.37 In 1912 he also raised the phobia of Hindus being=20
swallowed up in next 420 years in a personal meeting with Swami=20
Shradhanand who became convinced enough to begin the work of=20
reconversion of Hindus from Mohammedan and Christianity. Swami=20
Shradhanand wrote an influential book entitled, Hindu Sangsthan:=20
Saviour of Dying Race in 1926.38 As such, the idea of demographic=20
decline became entrenched as a core feature of Hindu communalism. The=20
colonialists left no stone unturned to exploit the situation arising=20
in the wake of new demographic scenario. H H Risley, a powerful=20
British official who also proposed the partition of Bengal declared,=20
"can the figures of the last census (1901) be regarded in any sense=20
the forerunner of an Islamic or Christian revival which will threaten=20
the citadel of Hinduism or will Hinduism hold its own in the future=20
as it has done through the long ages of the past".39These assertions=20
were made knowing the fact that these could arouse tremendous=20
communal antagonism. This raises the question of responsibility of=20
colonial census in India.40

In the wake of communal polarisation, the scientific explanations of=20
higher population growth among Muslims could find little space.=20
Census reports mentioned reasons of higher population growth among=20
Muslims. These include their nourishing diet, fewer marriage=20
restrictions, widow remarriage and uncommon early marriages among=20
them. But these scientific explanations were overshadowed by popular,=20
stereotype explanations of higher Muslim fertility as Muslims could=20
marry four times and there is a religious proclivity to reproduce=20
more number of children. It was reported in 1911 Census report that a=20
Muhammadan may have four wives but he also in practice is generally=20
monogamous.41 A study (1971) shows that percentage incidence of=20
polygynous marriages (where a man has more than one wife) is 5.80 per=20
cent among Hindus. The incidence among Muslim is in fact slightly=20
lower at 5.73 per cent. The incidence of polygynous marriages is=20
highest among certain tribes (15.25 per cent) followed by Buddhists=20
(7.97) and Jain (6.72 per cent).42 Moreover, polygyny cannot lead to=20
higher fertility as more than one female marrying one male is not=20
likely to increase fertility; on the contrary, it is likely to=20
decrease the fertility. Similarly, there is no truth in the assertion=20
that Islam forbids the acceptance of family planning. It is mentioned=20
that Koran does not forbid family planning. What Islam forbids is=20
abortion and even this is permitted on health grounds.43 The growth=20
of population results not only from fertility but mortality also.=20
Among the Muslims survivals have been better than Hindus.44 This is=20
also evident in lower infant and child mortality in recent times.45=20
In a situation of communal antagonism these facts are glossed over to=20
popular communal discourses. The responsibility of population=20
scientists lies in exposing them and in constructing a human=20
relationship based on scientific facts.

V Census in Independent India and Communalism
The demographic communalism aided by instruments of census and=20
perpetuated through the policy of divide and rule was perpetuated in=20
independent India. Census exercises that rather publish only=20
demographic data by religioned and withheld publication of=20
educational and employment data until 1991 Census (table) helped in=20
the promotion of stereotype explanations with regard to Hindu-Muslim=20
population growth and fertility differentials in the country. The=20
demographic anxiety of Hindus being outnumbered continued in=20
Independent India.46 Such anxiety was expressed more in view of the=20
nature of electoral politics in the country.47 For a layman this=20
could be a serious concern, whereas some rational men could think=20
about the role of educational and socio-economic deprivations=20
affecting population growth and fertility differentials among Hindus=20
and Muslims.48 Then, the question is raised (i) why the census in=20
independent India continued the inclusion of categorisation on the=20
basis as to on religion in the census and, (ii) published only=20
demographic data of size and growth of religious communities?

There are justifications for the first question, whereas there is=20
hardly any justification for the second one. Independent India has=20
adopted a constitution based on the principles of secularism and=20
democracy. Considering the spirit of constitution, the government of=20
India in view of the first census after independence in 1951 decided=20
as a matter of policy that census should not record any person's=20
caste or race except to the extent necessary for providing=20
information relating to certain disadvantaged groups referred to in=20
the constitution such as the scheduled castes and the scheduled=20
tribes.49 As the constitution enjoins that no person professing a=20
religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism shall be deemed a=20
member of scheduled caste, it was imperative on the part of the=20
census to ask a question on religion in order to determine the=20
scheduled caste status of a person. Therefore, the census has the=20
pretext for including a question on religion in the name of social=20
justice. But the delivery of social justice has been denied insofar=20
as the religious groups are concerned. Independent India thus has=20
very narrow concept of social justice based on caste within the frame=20
of Hinduism. The availability of socio-economic information is very=20
vital for planning and implementation of the goals of social justice.=20
There is also no alternative to a census exercise as it covers the=20
complete enumeration of population and does not suffer from the=20
shortcomings of sample surveys. Census operations by not publishing=20
the socio-economic data on religion for the last five censuses and=20
publishing the demographic data on the other hand has helped in=20
perpetuating the British legacy of demographic communalism. Censuses=20
since 1971 has further expanded the volume of demographic data by=20
including a question on fertility by religion. A number of fertility=20
tables have been published since 1971 Census. Systematic efforts are=20
also being made through census enumeration and publication of data to=20
project homogeneity of the religious communities. The publication of=20
data on smaller religious groups like Parsis, Jews and other tribal=20
religions have been discontinued since 1961 Census.50 Through census=20
India is projected as a country of six major religious groups, viz,=20
Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists concealing=20
the fact that diversity of faiths and practices exist within each of=20
the religious groups of India.51 Therefore, the process of=20
homogenisation of religious communities and religious consolidation=20
continues subtly in independent India. The president of India himself=20
has to confront this process in the just concluded Census of 2001.=20
The president could not be recorded as scheduled caste although he=20
belonged to it because enumerators had to record the scheduled caste=20
status of person according to the list supplied to them, which=20
differs from state to state.52 The president is a scheduled caste in=20
Kerala, but he is not a scheduled caste in Delhi. But, he could be=20
recorded as Hindu in Kerala and also a Hindu in Delhi. This process=20
of homogenisation is happening in respect with large number of=20
migrants belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes who could=20
be deprived of the benefits guaranteed in the constitution in the=20
wake of their migration from their home areas.

Conclusion
The census exercise in colonial India introduced the concepts and=20
categories of religion according to colonial perception of Indian=20
society as primordial pre-capitalist entities. The boundary line=20
between different communities in India was obscure and communal=20
consciousness lacking. These were called as 'fuzzy' communities. The=20
'fuzzy' communities were turned into enumerated communities through=20
census and later into political communities by the instruments and=20
mechanism of colonial policy of divide and rule. As such the=20
demographic divide was brought to the centre stage of communal=20
politics. Independent India has inherited this legacy and to a large=20
extent continued the agenda of the construction of religious=20
communities and the consolidation of demographic communalism. The=20
census of independent India until 1991 Census hides more than it=20
reveals. It is now obvious that the Census of 2001 is more conscious=20
of this fact and intends to publish the socio-economic data along=20
with demographic data on religion. This will certainly weaken the=20
force of demographic communalism in the country in the long run.

Notes
[The author would like to thank the anonymous referee for his=20
suggestions and his colleague Bhupinder Yadav for his help and=20
encouragement. Thanks are also due to Suraj Bhan and Sayeed Unisa for=20
their critical comments on the paper. However, the author alone is=20
responsible for the ideas and thoughts of the paper.]
1 In Europe the first modern census was conducted in Iceland in=20
1703, followed by Sweden in 1750, Great Britain in 1801, Norway=20
in 1815, Austria in 1818, Greece in 1826, and Italy in 1861. The=20
census in United States was held earlier in 1790. See Encyclopaedia=20
Americana, American Corporation, New York, 1829.
2 Jones, K W (1981), 'Religious Identity and Indian Census'in N G=20
Barrier (ed), The Census in British India: New Perspectives, Manohar,=20
New Delhi, p 76.
3 Ibid, p 77.
4 Ibid, p 77.
5 Ibid, pp 76-77.
6 Peach, C (1999) 'Social Geography', Progress in Human Geography,=20
Vol 32, No 2, p 284.
7 Preach, C (2000) 'Discovering White Ethnicity and Parachuted=20
Plurality', Progress in Human Geography, Vol 24, no 4, p 623.
8 Pandey, G (1989) 'The Colonial Construction of Communalism:=20
British Writings on Banaras in the 19th Century' in Ranjit Guha (ed),=20
Subaltern Studies VI: Writings on South Asian History and Society,=20
Oxford University Press, Delhi, p 132.
9 Datta, P K (1993) 'Dying Hindus: Production of Hindu Communal=20
Common Sense in Early 20th Century Bengal ', Economic and Political=20
Weekly, June 19, pp 1305-19; See also, G Pandey (1989 ) op cit and G=20
Pandey (1990), The Construction of Communalism in Colonial India,=20
Oxford University Press, Delhi.
10 Jones, K W, op cit, pp 74-75.
11 Ranger, T (1993) 'Power, Religion and Community: The Matobo Case'=20
in Partha Chatterjee and G Pandey (eds), Subaltern Studies VII,=20
Writings on South Asian History and Society, Oxford University Press,=20
Delhi, pp 221-40.
12 Metcalf, T R (1998) The New Cambridge History of India III.4,=20
Ideologies of the Raj, Cambridge University Press, New Delhi, p 67.
13 Ibid, p 3.
14 Das, Arvind, N (1994) India Invented: A Nation in the Making,=20
Manohar, New Delhi, p 201.
15 Ibid, pp 8-9.
16 Kaviraj, S (1993) 'The Imaginary Institution of India' in Partha=20
Chatterjee and G Pandey (1993) op cit, p 20.
17 Das, Arvind, N (1994) op cit, p 114.
18 Ibid, pp 114-15.
19 Ibid, p 117.
20 Ibid, pp 114-17.
21 Sarkar, S (1973) The Swadeshi Movement in Bengal 1903-1908,=20
Peoples Publishing House, New Delhi, pp 15-20.
22 Sarkar, S (1983) Modern India 1885-1947, MacMillan India, p 106.
23 Hasan, Mushirul (1980) 'Communalisation in the Provinces: A Case=20
Study of Bengal and Punjab, 1922-26, Economic and Political Weekly,=20
August 16, pp 1395-1407.
24 Ibid, p 1396.
25 Sarkar, S (1983) op cit, p 59.
26 Census of India 1931, Vol I, India, Report, (with complete survey=20
of tribal life and system) by J H Hutton (reprinted by Gian=20
Publishing House, Delhi, 1989), p 379.
27 Ibid, p 379.
28 Census of India 1911, Vol 1, India, Report, by E A Gait,=20
Superintendent Government Printing India, Calcutta (reprinted by=20
Usha, Delhi, 1987).
29 Census of India 1911, Vol XV, United Provinces of Agra and Oudh,=20
Report by E A H Blunt, Government Press, Allahabad (reprinted by Usha=20
Publication, New Delhi, 1987), p 119.
30 Ibid, p 280.
31 Census of India 1911, Vol X, Central Provinces and Berar, Part 1,=20
Report, Superintendent Government Printing, Calcutta.
32 Census of India 1911, Vol 1, op cit, p 116.
33 Ibid, p 114.
34 Ibid, p 118.
35 Ibid, p 129.
36 Census of India 1911, Vol 1, India, Part II, Tables (By E A Gait,=20
Superintendent Goernment Printing, India, Calcutta, reprinted by Usha=20
Publication, Delhi).
37 U N Mukherji (1909) Hindus - A Dying Race, M Bannerjee, Calcutta.=20
See P K Datta (1993) op cit, p1303.
38 Shradhranand, S (1926) Hindu Sangsthan: Saviour of the Dying Race,=20
Arjun Press, and Delhi. See also J Zavos (2000) Emergence of Hindu=20
Nationalism in India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, p 109.
39 Datta, P K (1993) op cit, p 1306.
40 Ibid, p 1306.
41 Census of India 1911, Vol 1, op cit, p 246.
42 Census of India 1971, 'Polygynous Marriages in India - A Survey',=20
Miscellaneous Studies, Monograph No 4, Registrar General and Census=20
Commissioner, New Delhi.
43 Khan, M E (1978) Birth Control Amongst Muslims in India, Manohar=20
Publications, New Delhi. Further some past and recent jurists=20
('Faqihs') have mentioned some of the reasons that permit married=20
couples to plan their families. These include to keep away from=20
illegal income, protecting the health of wife and to provide children=20
all material and spiritual needs. There is a Hadith which says that=20
it is better to leave your children rich than leave them poor like=20
beggars, see M S Tantawai (1988) 'Birth Planning and Religious Point=20
of View", Population Science, Vol 8, 1-14.
44 Census of India 1911, Vol XV, op cit, p 109.
45 Rajan, I and Mohanachandran (2000) 'Infant and Child Mortality=20
Estimates from 1991 Census by Religion, Occupation and Level of=20
Education', Economic and Political Weekly, December 16-22, pp 4541-88.
46 Prakash, Indu (1979) They Count their Gains- We Calculate Our=20
Losses, Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, New Delhi.
47 Panandiker, V A P and P K Umashankere (1994) 'Fertility Control=20
and Politics in India', Population and Development Review, a=20
supplement to Vol 29, pp 89-104.
48 Mahmood, A (1998) 'Fertility and Mortality Differentials Among=20
Hindus and Muslims in India' in M H Qureshi (ed), Muslims in India=20
since Independence: A Regional Perspective, Institute of Objective=20
Studies, New Delhi, p 61.
49 Mahatme, A (1985) Concepts and Procedures in Indian Census: A=20
Reappraisal, Criteria, and New Delhi.
50 Kanitkar, T (1998) 'Minority Religious Communities in India' in M=20
H Qureshi (ed), op cit, p 10.
51 The largest religious group after Hindus, the Muslims are divided=20
into Asrafs and Ajlafs. Asrafs are the noble sections who trace their=20
origin from foreign immigrants consist of Sayyad, Shaik, Moghul and=20
Pathan. The Ajlaf groups are mainly the converts constitute several=20
occupation groups and untouchables - like Julaha (weaver), Darzi=20
(tailor) Quassab (butcher), Nai or Hajjam (barber) Mirasi (musician)=20
and Bhangi (sweeper), etc, see Ansari, Ghaus (1959) Muslims Caste in=20
Uttar Pradesh, An Ethnographic and Folk Culture Publication, Lucknow,=20
and Ahmad, I (1978) Caste and Social Stratification among Muslims in=20
India, Manohar, Delhi; Ahamad, A (1999) Social Geography, Rawat,=20
Jaipur.
52 Pinto, A (2001) 'The Great Forgery', Mainstream, March 2001, pp 15-16.

--=20