Religious Demography in India

3 03 2007

.

This is a review of Religious Demography of India, A.P. Joshi, M.D. Srinivas and J.K. Bajaj, Centre for Policy Studies, Chennai, 2003, pp. i-xxii + 358, Rs. 800.

I wrote it in October 2003 when I was working for The Hindu, but unfortunately, it never got published. The issue of “religious demography” remains as important today as ever and the carnards spread by Hindutva propagandists as vile as ever, therefore I am posting this review.

~ ~ ~

My two year old daughter often picks up the TV remote and furiously punches its buttons in imitation of her parents, to try and get to her favourite animal channels. Sometimes she is lucky, most often she misses her mark completely. She notices that her animals come on screen when her parents press the buttons on the remote. She is not aware of how the TV functions and what relation is the remote to the pictures on the screen. For her it’s a simple equation between pressing the buttons on the remote and watching the tigers frolic.

Reading the book under review reminded me of my daughters struggle with the TV remote. But before we go to that let me state the main assumptions and arguments of the book.

The book begins by dividing the Indian population into two basic categories—the “Indian Religionists” and those who are not Indian Religionists. The authors define Indian Religionists as a residual category of all those who are not Muslims or Christians. In the preface they state “…this book is concerned mainly with the heterogeneity introduced by Islam and Christianity…”(xviii) into the “…civilisational and cultural homogeneity of her [India’s] people”. Apart from the inexplicable inclusion of Jews and Parsis among the Indian Religionists, the assumption that heterogeneity was brought to India’s culture and civilisation by Islam and Christianity is not only historically incorrect, but can also be construed as a gross insult to the cultural achievements of the people of India before the coming of these religions. Moreover, it is also incorrect to claim that religion was the only, or even primary, contribution of those who came to India in the middle ages, either as members of invading armies, as traders, as fortune seekers or as refugees.

But to move on to the main argument of the book.

Here are three physicists who look at a century long series of Census data for the country and ask the question, whose population is growing faster—the “Indian Religionists” or the “non-Indian Religionists”?

No where in the book do the three authors explain the co-relation between religious affiliation and demographic trends. They could very well have asked whether the population of those who brush their teeth with toothpaste or of those who use the traditional Indian Neem was growing faster, or whether Idli and Sambar eaters were increasing their population as against the Aloo Parantha eaters! All of them actually have the same irrelevance as a causal relation to population growth.

In other words, one can take any category, howsoever ludicrous, run it through a series numbers and come up with elaborate results in weighty tomes. These would all, if one had the time, money and patience (or should one say, ideological perseverance), produce “illuminating results”. One could even argue that unless urgent steps are taken, the future of Aloo Parantha was in danger! That tonnes of data have been churned through tables and graphs and put between fancy hardcovers does not make a credible argument. It is merely a simulacra of an argument, just like my daughters playing with the TV remote is a simulacra of her parents actions.

Whatever the problems with the method or lack of it, the results they come up with show that Hindus are to become a minority in India due to unchecked growth in the population of the Muslims and Christians.

To quote the authors, “Indian Religionists have suffered a loss of more than 11 percentage points between 1881 and 1991 in India as a whole [pre-partition India]…”. Further, “It is, howeve, even more significant that the losses have been highly pronounced in border regions, especially since Independence.” And so the authors warn, “Existence of such distinct pockets formed the demographic basis of Partition of the country in 1947”.

So obviously, it is historical inevitability at its truest (More Muslims = Partition). So we were all wrong when we blamed the British for their “Divide and Rule” policy or when we agonised over who and what led to the Partition. In fact even historical records are wrong when they show that the almost wholly Muslim province of North West Frontier Province had a Congress Government well into Independence and merged with Pakistan out of geographical necessity, more than anything else.

Despite all the ideological and disciplinary arguments, demographers have accepted that socio-economic factors like income, education, access to health and social security, possibilities for upward social mobility, etc are the causal factors for demographic trends. Today, if anyone makes an argument that these are not the prime factors for demographic change but rather religious affiliations, this needs to be argued out and proved to be a debatable hypothesis. Merely placing religious identity parallel to demographic changes does not prove any causal link. This is where the basic argument of the book is fundamentally flawed.

In fact, recent United Nations projections for population (The State of World Population 2000) trends show that culture, religion, etc have very little bearing on either population growth or on use of contraceptives. Even in India, NSS data and other Government data indicates that it is lack of access to education, stable income and social vulnerability, not their religion, which makes Musilms, Dalits and Tribals go for larger families (see Mohan Rao, “The Chimera Of a Muslim Population Growth Rate” http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organisations/healthnet/SAsia/repro3/mohanrao.html ).

The significant aspect of this book is that it is the first attempt to provide an academic garb to the century long propaganda that Muslims are swamping India. Similar “calamitous” predictions are to be found in the writings of Dayanand Saraswati, Swami Vivekananda, V.D. Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar. Adolf Hitler’s unambiguous exposition of this theory which links fertility with “alien” populations and sees in that a threat to national security has discredited any such talk in today’s world.

That such an argument, with its disturbing lineage, is put forward and is endorsed by no less than our Deputy Prime Minister, L.K. Advani, who “commend[s] this work to all Indians, but especially to the political leaders, strategic thinkers, administrators and those entrusted with the task of keeping peace and order in the country”(xvi) [italics mine], is as clear an insight into the dangerous minds with their tortured ideologies which rule our country today.


.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

9 responses

29 09 2008
S.Bijja

Hello Sir,
Could you please let me know where this book “religious Demography ” is available for purchase, is it available in Bangalore.Please inform us
Thank you
S.Bijja

13 08 2009
shweta

The authors seem to be to unconcerned,and insensible towards the integrity and peace of this nation. How could they make such blunders.Have they lost all their common sense and fallen pray to senility? On the one hand where efforts are being made to materialize the concept of secularism and foster the true sense of fraternity,such people and their works might prove detrimental.

21 12 2010
SACHIN

@ S.Bijja

CENTRE FOR POLICY STUDIES

27 Rajasekaran Street Mylapore
Chennai-600004
Phone: 044-28473802, 28474352; Fax: 044-28474352

60, North Avenue
New Delhi-1100001
Phone: 011-23094444, 55394444

e-mail: policy@vsnl.com

21 12 2010
SACHIN
21 12 2010
SACHIN

@ shweta (19:07:00) :
The authors seem to be to unconcerned,and insensible towards the integrity and peace of this nation. How could they make such blunders.Have they lost all their common sense and fallen pray to senility?
PLS READ THE WORK BEFORE MAKING SUCH COMMENTS

21 12 2010
SACHIN


SEE THIS STATISTICS…

21 12 2010
SACHIN

“Demography is destiny, said Augustus Comte…Though several other factors do indeed matter, yet growth and decline of populations and changes in the relative balance between various groups within a population play a crucial role in the rise and fall of nations and even civilisations. That is why active and alert societies, especially of the modern times, keep a keen eye on the changing demographic trends within themselves as well as everywhere else in the world….

For more than a millennium now, India has been host to some of the greatest, most vigorous and expansive religions of the world. This circumstance has endowed India with a rich diversity; but it has also given rise to some of the most acute strategic, political and administrative problems that the Indian nation has had to face in the past and continues to face till today. Rigorous and continuous observation and analysis of the changing demography of different religious groups in various regions of the country is therefore of paramount importance in maintaining the integrity of our borders and peace, harmony and public order within the country.

Centre for Policy Studies, Chennai, have now produced an exhaustive compilation of the religious demographic data of the last hundred years for different regions of the Indian subcontinent and almost all districts of Indian Union. And they have put the Indian situation in the context of the world by compiling the changes that have taken place in the religious demography of different countries and regions of the world in the course of the twentieth century…” (jacket)

3 01 2012
NIRMAL LAUNGANI

You call this a review of the book? I call it nothing less but a JOKE. It goes on to show why leftists in Indiam, who fancy showing their academic achievements to all and sundry, do not have the basic common sense to comment on any serious subject with an untainted mind . It would have been better if the “esteemed” writer had challenged the authors from the book, and refuted the facts based on “socio-economic factors like income, education, access to health and social security, possibilities for upward social mobility, etc are the causal factors for demographic trends”. Otherwise, even to “illiterate” persons like myself, I just need to look at Kerala, where Muslims are ahead of Hindus in terms of income, access to health and social security, and yet have a higher rate of growth than Hindus

22 11 2014
organic farming

organic farming

Religious Demography in India | Left ~ Write

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: