Caste in India: Continuity and Change

Caste is one of the oldest and most debated features of Indian society. Traditionally, it was described as a hierarchy of endogamous groups, or jatis, ranked by notions of purity and pollution, linked to occupation, and reinforced by rules about marriage, food and social contact. The broader varna scheme divided society into Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras, with groups outside this scheme historically treated as untouchable and subjected to severe discrimination. Sociologists stress that varna and jati are not the same: varna is a broad textual classification, while jati is the lived, local community into which a person is born and usually marries.

The Constitution sought to transform caste without pretending it had disappeared. It abolished untouchability under Article 17 and prohibited discrimination on grounds including caste under Article 15, while allowing the state to make special provision for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes under Article 15(4). Scheduled Castes, listed in a presidential order for each state, were given reserved seats in legislatures, reservations in public employment and education, and protection under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. According to Census 2011, Scheduled Castes were 16.6 per cent of the population. These measures were intended as compensation for historical disadvantage and as a route to representation.

Caste has changed, but it has not vanished. Urbanisation, education, migration and new occupations have weakened some traditional rules, especially about food and occupation in cities, and inter-caste marriage, though still uncommon, is more accepted among the educated urban young than a generation ago. At the same time, caste has taken new political forms: caste associations mobilise voters, parties seek caste coalitions, and demands for inclusion in reservation lists have become a major political issue. Sociologist M. N. Srinivas described this as the politicisation of caste, in which caste identity becomes a basis for claiming resources and power in a democracy rather than only a ritual hierarchy.

For civil studies, caste must be understood as both a social reality and a policy category. It affects access to land, education, jobs and justice, and it shapes elections and welfare targeting. Yet treating caste only as a vote bank misses its effects on dignity, violence and everyday discrimination, including atrocities that continue to be reported. A careful answer distinguishes between caste as identity, caste as inequality, and caste as a basis for affirmative action, and asks whether reservations, anti-discrimination law and economic change together can reduce caste inequality without freezing caste identity permanently.