Organizer, the RSS mouth piece, in an article in two parts written by CI Isaac, a History Professor in Kerala (September 19 & 26, 2004) has claimed that due to a "conspiracy" by minority communities, Hindus in Kerala are fast becoming a "minority". One does not know where to begin the reply to an article replete with so many inaccuracies, half truths, lies and bland statements. Nonetheless, in this reply I attempt to do two things: 1. Examine his "data", "explanations" and fallacious arguments and 2. Make bare the political mission of this article in contemporary Kerala.

The article begins by stating that Hindus are "getting to be a minority". Hindus are "getting to be a minority"? Inaccurate figures on population share of Hindus in Kerala are provided to represent their demographic strength at the time "when India became a Republic" (which was 26th January 1950)and present. Probably he is quoting the figure from the 1951 census which gives the percentage figure for Hindu population in Kerala as 61.58. Then he goes on to lament that it has come down to 55% "now". When? Today? I think by this the author meant the figure from 2001 census, which gives the figure as 56.2 and not 55. At the all India level also, where the Kerala specific dynamisms that he specifically labours to explain this decline subsequently are virtually absent, a more or less similar pattern can be found for Hindu population. But what he suitably conceals in this apocalyptical description of the fall in the Hindu population is that comparative figures for one of the villains of his story- Christians- also have shown the same demographic tendency. In fact the comparable data is between 1961 and 2001 (and not 1951 as has been pointed out by experts on census data). The percentage of Christians in Kerala has declined from 21.22 to 19.02 during the period. The only plausible explanation is that in communities where literacy rates have been comparatively higher, we see a relative decline in growth rate of population which accounts for the percentage changes. It may be noted that the growth rate is lowest for Christians followed by Hindus. In fact after "India became a Republic" growth rate of Christian population in Kerala has been less than that of other communities. And particularly after 1970, it is significantly lower than Hindus and Muslims (60% of Hindu growth and less than 50 % of Muslim growth). This clearly points to the fallacy of using data from demographic transition on major communities to establish their relative socio-economic decline. Population decline is a major threat only to the Adivasi population in Kerala. Poverty, depravation and loss of rights over their own livelihood has affected the demographic transition of Adivasis in Kerala negatively. Another interesting development is the increase in the percentage of people declaring themselves as having no religion. In Kerala it has increased from 0.4% in 1991 to 0.8% in 2001.

In fact the very premise of CI Isaac's article that Hindus in terms of a numerical decline face an exclusive socio-economic threat n Kerala is thus totally unfounded. Apparently, CI Isaac has no inclination to explain the decline in Hindu population on the basis of any sociological or anthropological arguments. Instead, he seeks recourse to an unsubstantiated and unspecified remark about "the handiwork of anti-national forces" Admittedly he was not interested in using the space- i.e., pages of Organizer where his article got published- "for a detailed analysis of this U-turn in the demographic structure of Kerala". Airing unsubstantiated accusations on an unspecified "force" appear to him a superior method to discussing and analyzing facts. This decline in Hindu population (which is only similar to such decline in Christian population as we have seen), according to him, has led to a "defeat of the community as a whole from the social, economic, cultural, political, etc. scenarios of the land". What does he mean by defeat? How is this perceived defeat related to the phenomenon of relative decline in population shares which in Kerala, is in fact not unique to Hindus?

CI Isaac argues that Hindus are only technically a majority in Kerala since they are divided along caste lines and lacking the "Hindu feeling". The so called Hindu feeling is missing because Hinduism historically has been a divider. Its ideology of caste is one of the craftiest tools of oppression and domination that humanity has witnessed. Hindu unity is not only impossible, but also ahistorical since lower castes under its fold can only express themselves politically and establish their social and ritual identity by challenging Hinduism and opposing its ideology of caste. That's what the Dalits in Kerala are doing now. It is in the interest of the Ezhava community to join hands with Dalits and fight Hindu ideology rather than go in for a politically and socially degrading Hindu unification with upper castes.

CI Isaac is attempting to exploit the historical situation of the failure of the communist movement in Kerala (and elsewhere in India) to fully comprehend the dynamics of caste/class politics. He is at pains to use the vexed relationship between communist parties and Dalits in the state of Kerala to create an impression that within Hindu fold they have a more peaceful and contented existence. It is true that domination of Kerala Shoodras (who have historically aligned with Nampoothiris, the upper caste Brahmins and considered as upper caste by themselves as well as by the Caste hierarchy in Kerala, being second only to Nampoothiris in most instances) in the communist movement has caused a relative or near total absence of Dalits in their leadership. Communist parties have not been able to come to terms with this reality and live in a wishful world where everything is explained away by the evasive category of class politics. But to accuse, as Isaac does in his article, that the communist movement is responsible for the low socio economic standard of Dalits in Kerala is not historically or politically accurate. Their failures to address the question of Dalits and Adivasis are legendary. No doubts about that. Their approach to the Dalit question and the Adivasi question in Kerala has been at best insensitive and at worst reactionary. But it is part of the larger Shoodra politics in Kerala. Communist party has been high jacked by Shoodras and from land reforms to Narendran commission, it could reflect only Shoodra aspirations. But to hold communists responsible for the marginalization of Dalit literature in Kerala etc, as has been attempted by Isaac, is being acutely bereft of any understanding of the history of Kerala literature and its evolution. Dalit themes were brought to the mainstream of Malayalam literature by writers who had close relations with the communist movement. If CI Isaac ever cared, as a history teacher, to look at the dramatic shifts in literary narratives in Malayalam in 1930s and decided to be honest with his own self, he would never have made this totally erroneous statement. It was caste Hindus, the Thampurans (Lords) of the Sahithya Parishads who always tried to belittle the contributions of Dalits.