Hindus' Population Share Shrunk 8%, Muslims Grew 43% Between 1950 and 2015: PM's Panel | News18

Replacement theory around the globe. Is this probable in the Indian context? Your study cites the example of other nations where majorities have become minorities in just 65 years. Well, now ours is relatively modest if you consider country like France which has seen close to almost 30% decline in share of majority over this long time frame. There are several countries in Europe which are seeing but remember the forces on the plane the the different we have of course we are not talking about any specific driving factor because this is migration, this is natural. You know it's a rate of fertility rates and this is conversion, right. And we are basically saying that the final share of minority in the population is like a a final outcome of all these different policies and and reality across countries combined. And so I think different countries have had different, in fact we also look at a handful around 10 countries which have had minimal growth in last 65 years. So they've had very stable populations like Thailand, If you look at Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan and also these are extreme cases, but there are countries which which have seen varied degrees of change. But India is like, you know, India is becoming more heterogeneous from that perspective. We are seeing a decline in the Hindu population which is around 7.82 and a commensurate increase in not just minorities combined, but different elements of that. We are seeing a significant increase in the Muslim population. We're seeing a significant increase in the Christian population, Buddhist population and the Sikh population. In fact, the only religions whose shares have declined in 65 years are Parsis and Sikhs. But minority as a whole is, is actually growing in India, much unlike the neighbourhood. So let me ask you, is the impact of migration, especially illegal migration conversion, potentially underreported which could lead to a greater skew going ahead? You know we will have to do a much more thorough analysis. For instance, in the African case, you know, 24 countries had Animism as the majority religion in 1950 and in in the 65 years of the study period, none of those countries have animism as a a major religion. And obviously the forces that play there is conversion. Almost all of, almost all of them have converted to either Islam or Christianity. Now you know, you have to study country by country and in the Indian case, obviously it's a combination of declining fertility and there has been differential of course you're seeing convergence lately, but fertility rates have been significantly different across different groups. We do have cases of migration but we have not measured it because also remember some of these things have to be studied much more at a stadium. The whole country does not see uniform changes, you're seeing pockets and similarly conversion. We will have to study more localised to see where is it that you are having, you know, drastic changes. And I the reason I say drastic is because if you only leave it to natural sort of demographic changes based on just the fertility rate or birth rate, you are unlikely to see such big differences. So obviously there is element of migration and element of conversion which is at play here, but its an empirical study and we will need far better data, far more granular data and I'm not sure we have that in the public domain. OK, so tell our viewers what's new about the study, apart from establishing that Muslim populations are growing at a faster pace in South Asia and that the Hindu population is shrink, is shrinking alarmingly in both Nepal and India. Well, it's a it's a global study. It is showing that India is, you know, it's a liberal plural democracy. It's not just Muslims, it's all minority groups barring to which are where, where you are seeing their shared group. And so this really flies in the face of a lot of, you know, attempt to to sort of term India as being majoritarian or being being, you know, particularly inhospitable to minority populations. Because that is not true. I mean, clearly the data is telling you that minority populations across these different groups is not just changing, you know, in in small ways, but these are big, big changes that is happening in the country. So India is clearly conducive to, you know, it's a, it's a it's extremely hospitable, but not just why it's progressive. And the other thing to note, Rahul, is that no every country in the world has policies or even legally defines minorities. So countries like China, there is no legal definition of what construes minority. So clearly there are no policies which are targeting specific groups and and that is where I think India is again an exception. And that's why we are a true sort of liberal and plural democracy, because not only do we define minority, but we have a lot of policies, we have a ministry of minority effects, we have lots of policies not just at the central federal level but also at the at the regional and the state levels which cater to a minority populations. So in that sense, you know this whole narrative is clearly its all manufactured and the reality in India is very, very different. What many like Western liberal democracies. OK, so many say that the conclusions from the study will create fresh mistrust between Hindus and Muslims in India. What's your response? A lot of opposition parties are saying this. Oh that's absolutely untrue that you know its its a politics season, it is election season. You're going to hear all kinds of noise. The way to look at the study like this, frankly the the analogy I want to use is in the midst of the pandemic, when you put out daily statistics or statistics on the nature of the infection, one reaction would be why are you putting out these statistics? Because when you tell us that things are getting better people become relaxed and and they're not you know going to be careful. At the same time you would also hear people say why are you putting out these statistics? It makes people fearful and they'll be excessively you know, alarmed. The point is, how can not knowing be better than either of these? And so the idea, I think the idea of this paper is to document scientifically as objectively as possible in terms of available data what is happening on the ground in India. And I think another fact one has to accept is that this study will not come as a surprise to any Indian data scientist, economist, scholar of demography, because these are not shocking numbers to them. We have always anecdotally known this. I think it's it's it's the context, the global context. It is the regional context within which when you put the numbers together it it looks drastic but there is nothing terribly surprising or or new if you look at these trends. So, so if there's nothing new why release this data at all according to you Doctor Ravi and many people are questioning the timing of the study saying that its been time to the elections to help in polarizing the election etcetera. Again Rahul, how can not knowing be better? I have also been asked why didn't you put out the study two months back? I mean why, you know? So again, it's exactly the same as saying, you know, let's not know. I think not knowing is is never a good option, particularly for, you know, scientific inquiry. The fact is that when we find data sets as researchers, as scholars in the community, when we find something exciting, interesting, we are motivated to dig and and do a rigorous analysis and econometric analysis and put it out in the public domain when the paper is ready. It's a working paper. We welcome, absolutely welcome any feedback on the findings themselves. But if we are going to discuss motivations and intent, then I'm sorry, that is that we'll leave that to the political, political space. Well, Doctor Ravi, thank you very much for giving us an insight into this study beyond, of course, the numbers, putting it into context. Thank you very much.