The Unequal Modernity, Why India’s Economic Growth Must Be Matched by Social Integration
India’s economy has experienced robust growth for four decades. From the reforms of 1991 to the digital revolution of the 2020s, the country has transformed itself into one of the world’s fastest-growing major economies. Skyscrapers dot its cities, unicorns populate its startup ecosystem, and global corporations compete for its market.
Yet beneath this veneer of modernity, an older India persists—an India of caste hierarchies, social isolation, and persistent discrimination. The modernisation of the economy and the modernisation of society are connected, but they are not proceeding at the same pace. As a pointed analysis argues, the deepest root of social inequality in India remains the hierarchy of caste, and the proof of genuine social modernisation will be measured not in GDP figures, but in the rate of inter-caste marriages.
The Persistent Hierarchy
Traditional Indian society was organized around a rigid hierarchy between castes. This hierarchy was expressed through within-caste endogamy—the requirement that marriage occur only within one’s own caste—and a division of labour according to caste-based occupations. During British rule, this system was, in some ways, formalized and hardened. The Census enumerated castes, and colonial courts enforced within-caste marriage under Hindu law. Inter-caste marriage was possible only by renouncing Hinduism altogether.
At the bottom of this hierarchy were placed the Dalits (formerly “untouchables”) and Adivasis (tribal communities), who together constitute about 25% of India’s population. Their position was not just one of low status; it was one of profound social exclusion, marked by practices of untouchability that denied them access to temples, wells, and public spaces.
The freedom movement brought a rejection of untouchability into the national mainstream. Leaders like B.R. Ambedkar made social equality a central demand. Even before independence, Vithalbhai Patel placed a Bill in the Imperial Legislative Council proposing the elimination of the age-old ban on inter-caste marriage under Hindu law. Though that Bill was not passed, the Arya Samaj succeeded in getting a Bill passed permitting inter-caste marriages among its members. The full modernisation of marriage laws came only with the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, which legally permitted inter-caste marriages for all Hindus.
The 5% Barrier
Yet legal permission is not social transformation. Most surveys conducted over the decade beginning 2010 show that only 5-6% of marriages in India are inter-caste. The vast majority of marriages—and by implication, the vast majority of families—remain within the inherited caste.
The Dr. Ambedkar Scheme for Social Integration through Inter-Caste Marriages, designed to promote marriages between Scheduled and non-Scheduled Castes, has had a very limited impact. This continuing dominance of within-caste marriages is an indication that social separation is still prevalent.
What inter-caste marriages do occur are largely a product of growing social connectivity among the upper castes. They are mainly between non-Scheduled Castes, particularly the top three castes, whose economic status and occupational profiles have converged. The integration of Scheduled Castes into this socially connected circle depends on their economic status rising to that of the upper castes.
This is why the principal instrument for social development must be education and employment for Scheduled Castes and Adivasis. Only by raising their work and economic status closer to upper-caste levels can the foundation for genuine social integration be laid.
The Economic Divide
The shortfall in equalisation between Dalits and Adivasis on the one hand and middle and upper castes on the other is starkly visible in economic data. The Household Consumption Expenditure Survey, 2022-23, shows that Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) monthly consumption is 7% to 20% lower than the national average. A study by Azim Premji University shows that income earned by SC/ST relative to others is about 10% lower for casual workers, 24% lower for regular workers, and 28% lower for self-employed workers.
Employment patterns reinforce these disparities. According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) 2023-24, the percentage of Adivasis with regular wages or salaries is just 12.6%, compared to 20.6% for Scheduled Castes, 20.2% for Other Backward Classes, and 30.3% for the remaining higher castes. The PLFS data also shows that 29.7% of Adivasi employment is as helpers in household enterprises—often unpaid work with no recognised worker rights.
These are not just numbers; they are the material expression of centuries of exclusion. They show that caste is not merely a social identity but an economic reality, shaping access to jobs, incomes, and opportunities.
The Occupation-Based Separation
The occupation-based separation between castes has been reduced but not eliminated. Certain tasks continue to be associated with specific castes. Manual scavenging, waste disposal, and the handling of dead bodies in crematoria remain disproportionately performed by Dalits. These are not just low-status jobs; they are dangerous, degrading, and a direct continuation of the caste-based division of labour that the Constitution was meant to abolish.
Adivasis, by and large, remain isolated from the mainstream of the economy. Concentrated in remote rural areas, they have limited access to markets, education, and healthcare. Their integration into the broader economy is one of the most neglected challenges of Indian development.
Discrimination in Campuses
The persistence of caste discrimination is not confined to villages or traditional occupations. It has followed Dalits and Adivasis into the institutions of higher education that are supposed to be engines of social mobility. The suicides of Rohith Vemula, a PhD student whose final words were “my birth is my fatal accident,” and Payal Tadvi, a medical student, exposed the brutal reality of caste discrimination in India’s universities.
Their deaths, and the subsequent pleas by their mothers, led to a recent University Grants Commission regulation on the implementation of strict anti-discrimination measures across Indian campuses. But regulations alone cannot change the deeply ingrained attitudes that lead to exclusion and humiliation. The battle against caste must be fought in the classrooms and hostels as much as in the fields and factories.
The Informal Employment Crisis
A broader issue for social policy and development is the informal nature of employment in India. According to PLFS 2023-24, only 21.7% of workers have a regular wage or salary. Another 19.8% are casual labourers, and 19.4% are helpers in household enterprises with little or no recognised worker rights.
Even among those classified as regular wage or salary employees, the protections are shockingly thin: 58% have no job contract, 47.3% are not eligible for paid leave, and 53.4% are not eligible for any social security benefit. This is not just a problem for Dalits and Adivasis; it is a problem for the entire workforce. But for those already disadvantaged by caste, the lack of formal employment compounds their vulnerability.
If India is to become a developed economy by 2047, this gross shortfall in worker’s rights must be corrected. Job creation must be accompanied by job quality. Formal employment, with contracts, leave, and social security, must become the norm, not the exception.
The Role of Education
The analysis argues that the most crucial need is equalisation of access to quality higher education. Data shows that lower-caste individuals and Adivasis with higher education show significantly lower disparity in outcomes. Education is the great leveller—but only if it is of high quality and accessible to all.
Given the persistence of caste hierarchy in the minds of upper-caste individuals who still dominate senior bureaucratic and management jobs, a measure of caste-linked reservations may still be required for a defined length of time. Reservations are not an end in themselves; they are a means to an end. That end is a society where one’s caste no longer determines one’s destiny.
The Ultimate Proof
The analysis concludes with a powerful proposition: the more complete modernisation of our society will come when economic and educational gains translate into increased inter-caste marriages. These marriages are the ultimate proof that social barriers have fallen, that individuals from different castes can meet as equals, form families, and create new kinship networks that transcend the old divisions.
At present, only 5-6% of marriages cross caste lines. Raising that figure will require not just better education and jobs for Dalits and Adivasis, but a fundamental shift in attitudes among upper castes. It will require them to see their lower-caste colleagues not as beneficiaries of reservations, but as equals. It will require the dismantling of the mental hierarchies that have persisted for centuries.
This is the real work of social modernisation. It is slower, harder, and less visible than building a highway or launching a startup. But it is no less essential. Without it, India’s economic growth will remain incomplete—a modern superstructure built on an ancient foundation of inequality.
Q&A: Unpacking the Social Modernisation Argument
Q1: Why does the article argue that inter-caste marriage is the “proof” of social modernisation?
A: The article argues that inter-caste marriage is the ultimate proof because it represents the deepest form of social integration. While education, employment, and economic mobility are essential, they can coexist with continued social separation. Two colleagues may work together in an office but still maintain caste barriers in their personal lives. Inter-caste marriage, by contrast, breaks those barriers at the most intimate level—creating families, kinship networks, and social bonds that transcend caste. The current rate of only 5-6% inter-caste marriage indicates that, despite economic progress, social separation remains deeply entrenched.
Q2: What does the economic data reveal about caste-based disparities?
A: The data reveals persistent and significant disparities. SC/ST monthly consumption is 7-20% below the national average. Income gaps are even wider: SC/ST workers earn 10% less than others for casual work, 24% less for regular work, and 28% less for self-employment. Employment patterns show that only 12.6% of Adivasis have regular wage/salary jobs, compared to 30.3% of upper castes. These disparities are not accidental; they are the economic expression of centuries of social exclusion and discrimination.
Q3: How does the informal employment crisis intersect with caste inequality?
A: The informal employment crisis affects all workers, but it compounds the disadvantages faced by Dalits and Adivasis. With only 21.7% of workers in regular wage/salary employment, and even among those, a majority lacking contracts, leave, or social security, the entire workforce is vulnerable. But Dalits and Adivasis, already at the bottom of the income distribution and facing discrimination in hiring and promotion, are even less likely to access the limited pool of formal, protected jobs. Formalising the economy is thus not just an economic policy; it is a social justice imperative.
Q4: What role does higher education play in addressing caste inequality?
A: Higher education is the great leveller. Data shows that lower-caste individuals and Adivasis with higher education show significantly lower income disparity compared to their upper-caste peers. This suggests that education can overcome, to a significant extent, the disadvantages of birth. However, this requires that higher education be both accessible and of high quality. The suicides of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi are tragic reminders that access alone is not enough; campuses must also be spaces free from discrimination and humiliation.
Q5: What is the relationship between economic modernisation and social modernisation?
A: They are connected but not identical. Economic modernisation—growth, technological change, urbanisation—can create conditions that weaken traditional hierarchies. It brings different castes into shared workplaces, creates economic opportunities independent of caste-based occupations, and raises aspirations. But it does not automatically eliminate caste prejudice or social separation. Social modernisation requires conscious effort: anti-discrimination laws, affirmative action, educational access, and a cultural shift in attitudes. The article argues that both are necessary, and that the pace of social modernisation must catch up with the pace of economic growth.
