Between 1950 and 2015, the population share of Hindus in India declined sharply by 7.8% while Muslim share grew by 43.15%, Christians by 5.38%, and Sikhs by 6.58%, as revealed by a recent report submitted by the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi (EAC-PM). However, the share of Jain and Parsi communities in the population mix has decreased in the last 65 years which is equivalent to three generations.
The study titled, Share of Religious Minorities – A Cross-Country Analysis (1950-2015) was released in May 2024. It has been co-authored by Shamika Ravi, Abraham Jose, and Apurv Kumar Mishra.
According to the study, the share of Hindus in India’s population saw a decrease from 84% in 1950 to 78% in 2015, while that of Muslims witnessed an increase from 9.84% to 14.09% in the same period.
As soon as the EAC-PM report was made public, the usual suspects started their attempts to discredit the study by first admitting that the findings of the report were true, but then, suffixing that with how the growth rate decline has been sharpest among Muslims in India.
Career propagandist and one of the dullest bulbs in most rooms, Dhanya Rajendran, took the same line of argument. When it was pointed out to her that the study shares X percentage change over Y years, defiantly, she claimed that fertility rates have gone down and that the X percentage change over Y years is insignificant data.
NGO ‘Population Foundation of India’ run by the TATAs too toed to the same line.
As per a report in Times of India, the NGO, with Ratan Tata on the board, said that ‘population growth is not linked to religion’. In a statement, the Population Foundation of India said it is deeply concerned about recent media reports “misreporting” the findings from the study to spread alarm regarding the growth of the Muslim population in the country. “The study’s focus on changes in the share of majority and minority religious groups globally over 65 years should not be used to incite fear or discrimination against any community,” it said.
According to census figures, the decadal growth rate for Muslims has been declining over the past three decades. Specifically, the decadal growth rate for Muslims decreased from 32.9 per cent in 1981-1991 to 24.6 per cent in 2001-2011. “This decline is more pronounced than that of Hindus, whose growth rate fell from 22.7 to 16.8 per cent over the same period,” the NGO said. The census data is available from 1951 to 2011 and is quite similar to the data in this study, indicating that these numbers are not new, the organisation said. Noting that the TFR among all religious groups is declining, it said the highest decrease in the TFR from 2005-06 to 2019-21 was observed among Muslims, which dropped by 1 percentage point, followed by Hindus at 0.7 percentage point. “This trend underscores that the fertility rates are converging across different religious communities,” it said.
Rajdeep Sardesai, a veteran propagandist too tried to “fact-check’ the report.
These NGOs and ‘journalists’ would want Hindus to believe that their ‘fact’ is far superior to the facts mentioned in the report. Essentially, the report says that the total share in the population of Muslims in India has increased drastically and that the total share in the population of Hindus has declined in India. It is a fact that in 65 years, the Hindu share in the population in India declined sharply by 7.8% while the share of Muslims grew by 43.15%, and Christians by 5.38%. It is also a fact that in the 65 years, the share of Hindus in India’s population saw a decrease from 84% in 1950 to 78% in 2015, while that of Muslims witnessed an increase from 9.84% to 14.09% in the same period.
NGOs and journalists like Dhanya claim that this FACT they acknowledge as well is irrelevant. Per them, it is irrelevant because the Total Fertility Rate of Muslims has seen a sharper decline compared to the Hindu Total Fertility Rate, thus causing a lower decadal rate of growth of the Muslim population. This is a hogwash, and let us see why.
The TFR argument and why it is irrelevant
TFR means the average number of children a hypothetical cohort of women would have at the end of their reproductive period if they were subject during their whole lives to the fertility rates of a given period and if they were not subject to mortality. It is expressed as children per woman. It basically means the average number of children a set of women are producing.
When the NGOs and journalists make this argument, they too acknowledge that the Muslim TFR is higher than the Hindu TFR – which is to say that they acknowledge that on average, Muslim women have more kids than Hindu women. However, they argue that there is a sharper decline in the number of kids that Muslim women are having compared to Hindu women.
Let us simplify this.
Let us take the comparison of two women – M and H. M produces 10 children by the end of her reproductive cycle while H produces 3. M’s mother had produced 20 children in her time while H’s mother had produced 4. The ‘liberal’ argument is that it is true that between the mother and daughter, Ms family produced 30 children and Hs family produced 7. However, because from generation to generation, M produced 50% fewer children and H produced 25% less, liberals believe that there is no reason to ‘fear’ M’s family taking over. They also believe that pointing to the simple fact that even if M produced 50% fewer children, Ms still have 30 children between them while Hs have 7, is deemed ‘fearmongering’.
Now, let’s bear in mind that this supposed ‘faster decline in TFI’ has happened over decades. The counter-argument is that eventually, the TFR of Hindus and Muslims would ‘converge’ and be the same because the Muslim TFR is declining at a faster pace. That argument is completely misplaced. They are telling Hindus that we must not fear a complete demographic shift with the Hindu population becoming a minority because, in decades or centuries, the TFR of Muslims and Hindus could possibly be the same. What they won’t tell you is that firstly, this is speculation. TFR does not follow a linear pattern or a mathematical series. There are several examples of how some women, who for a long time don’t believe in raising a family eventually find joy in family pursuits and have multiple children. Or, how Hindu women are increasingly believing that their calling is becoming professionally proficient and not having families at all. There are generational, situational, cultural and circumstantial variables to TFR that simply cannot be foreseen. What is obvious, however, is that by the time this mythical conversion happens (which seems unlikely), the total population of Hindus would already be far diminished compared to Muslims.
Going back to our simplified example, even if the Ms TFR declined by 50% and the Hs TFR declined only by 25%, at the end of the day, you will still have 30 little Ms and only 7 little Hs. That is a fact that is unchanged.
TFR, Education and Kerala
There was an interesting argument made by Rajdeep Sardesai while trying to ‘fact-check’ the EAC-PM report. He says, “Fertility rates are closely linked to education and income levels, not religion. States with better access to education, healthcare, and socioeconomic development, such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu, exhibit lower TFRs across all religious groups. For example, the TFR among Muslim women in Kerala (2.25) is lower than the TFR among Hindu women in Bihar (2.88). Net net: focus on education, not religion and stop the dog whistles”.
He says that TFR is linked to education and socioeconomic development. He then proceeds to compare Kerala Muslim women with Bihar Hindu women. He says that Kerala Muslims have a TFR of 2.25 while Bihar Hindu women have a TFR of 2.88 – which means that educated Muslims produce fewer babies compared to uneducated Hindu women and therefore, the increase in population argument is bogus – since TFR is not dependent on religious group but education.
Of course, just like Dhanya, Rajdeep is not a bright bulb. Perhaps just less dim because at least his attempt at misleading the people is slightly more nuanced.
There is a reason why Rajdeep compared Kerala Muslim women with the Hindu women of Bihar – because comparing Kerala Muslim women to Kerala Hindu women would expose his sinister agenda.
According to census data and a study conducted, the TFR of Kerala Muslims was 2.25 while the TFR of Kerala Hindus was 1.53. In Bihar, in 2019, the TFR of Muslims was 3.63 while the TFR of Hindus was 2.88.
Clearly, whether it is the supposed “literate” society of Kerala or the “illiterate” society of Bihar, the Muslim TFR is higher. Unless Rajdeep wants to insinuate that the Kerala Hindus are literate but the Kerala Muslims are illiterate, while also saying that the Kerala Muslims are more literate compared to Bihar Hindus, his argument does not hold.
This also busts Rajdeep and the NGO Population Foundation of India’s claim that TFR is not related to religion but to education and financial stability. Regardless of those parameters, when apples are compared with apples, the Muslim TFR is higher compared to the Hindus of that same society given the same level of access to education, healthcare etc.
Muslims in Kerala were never ‘oppressed’. They were never really kept away from education and progress, as admitted by Rajdeep himself. There is a party quite literally called the ‘Muslim League’ which is in power and the Communist government of the state, for decades, has also espoused Muslim appeasement as state policy. There is no BJP-RSS and Hindutva to blame which elements like Rajdeep can attribute to keeping Muslim women illiterate or backward. Why then is the TFR still higher among Muslim women from Kerala compared to Hindus? In reality, a state like Kerala is the greatest argument against what Rajdeep wishes to propagate. A state like Kerala and the substantially higher TFR of Muslims compared to Hindus proves that TFR seems to be purely based on religion, even when all other factors are ‘liberal worldview’ compliant.
Other important factors like illegal migration and conversion
Apart from TFR, several other factors play a crucial role in the total population as well. The TFR argument deeply underscores the impact of unchecked Muslim immigration and the conversion of Hindus. Several countries and towns in the world have experienced devastating demographic shifts based on illegal Muslim immigration. PEW did research where they estimated the Mulsim population in low, medium and high migration scenarios. They concluded that even if there was no migration, the population of Muslims would increase drastically (the TFR argument). However, with high migration, the demographic change could be devastating.
With zero migration, there would be 7.4% Muslims in the region by 2050. With medium migration – 11.2% and with high migration – 14%.
It is to be kept in mind that while the EU sees unchecked migration, the situation in India is perhaps far more grim compared to Western countries. Even with high migration, the percentage of Muslims by 2050 remains at 14%. In India, the percentage of Muslims was already at the 14% mark in 2015. With unchecked immigration from Bangladesh and Myanmar, and state governments working to legitimise illegal migration and scams where these illegals get govt documents, the effect of migration, while not estimated yet, is potentially devastating for India.
Coupled with that, unchecked illegal conversions of Hindus regularly by proselytising faiths like Islam and Christianity also have an impact on the total population of Hindus.
Let us bear in mind that in neighbouring countries where Muslims (or their sect) constitute more than 50% – a majority, the community’s share witnessed an increase in the demographic mix. Bangladesh saw the steepest increase of 18.5%, followed by Pakistan (3.75%) and Afghanistan (0.29%).
According to the EAC-PM study, Pakistan witnessed an increase of 3.75% in the share of the majority religious denomination (Hanafi Muslim) and a 10% increase in the share of the total Muslim population despite the creation of Bangladesh in 1971. Pertinent to note that while Muslims’ share increased by 10%, the study registers the rise of Pakistan’s majority as 3.75% as Hanafi Muslims constitute the majority ID in Pakistan, as per the study.
However, Hindus’ decline by 7.8% in India is the second most significant decline in the immediate neighbourhood, just after Myanmar’s 10%. Myanmar saw the highest decline in the majority community’s share in the overall population of the country.
In Pakistan, for starkly obvious reasons, there is no illegal migration of Hindus. There are also widespread illegal conversions of existing Hindus in the country, a fact documented by Pakistani courts and human rights organisations. It is obvious that the majority community thrived because of the higher TFR of Muslims in general coupled with zero migration of Hindus and other non-Muslims and rampant conversion.
Arguments to keep Hindus like frogs in boiling water
The arguments furthered by the Tata NGO, Rajdeep Sardesai, Dhanya Rajendran and others is a sinister sleight of hand. The arguments are tailored to keep Hindus boiling in the demographic fire, without really realising the catastrophe they are headed towards. Demography is indeed destiny for any country and India serves as a sobering reminder of what the consequences are when the Muslim population crosses a certain threshold. Kashmir is perhaps the most horrifying reminder of the consequences of an unchecked Muslim population – demands for a separate nation, Sharia rule and brutal oppression of Hindus is the norm when the Muslim population becomes the majority.
The influx of Rohingya and Bangladeshi Muslim population in India has repeatedly shown itself to be a national security threat. How can anyone forget the 2012 Azad Maidan riots where even the Amar Jawan Jyoti memorial was desecrated by protestors? The agitation was initiated by Raza Academy to protest against the alleged atrocities on Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar.
A group of thousands of Muslims united under the Anjuman Ahle Sunnatul Jamat (ASJ) flag went on a rampage in Malda, West Bengal in 2016 over late Kamlesh Tiwari’s “anti-Islam” remarks. More than thirty people, including police officers, were hurt in vandalism that targeted the Kaliachak Police Station, the Block Development Office and public property. Several vehicles were also set on fire.
India witnessed similar protests after Mohammed Zubair of Alt News shared an edited clip of former Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Nupur Sharma in 2022. Murderous slogans like “Gustakh-e-Rasool ki Ek hi saza, sar tan se Juda, sar tan se Juda” were heard all over India and Kanhaiya Lal in Rajasthan and Umesh Kohle in Maharashtra lost their lives merely for supporting her.
Hindus can not celebrate any festival in peace as reports of stone pelting and attacks on their religious processions are a common occurrence during these events. A startling example of the same came to the fore when on 31st July, an Islamist mob attacked the Jalabhishek Yatra procession organised by Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal in Nuh, Haryana. The violence claimed six lives. Vehicles were burnt and stones pelted at the VHP’s Jalabhishek Yatra as extremists unleashed violence against the Hindus in the Muslim-dominated region of Nuh, Mewat in Haryana.
This year, Haldwani violence brought to light that when confronted with extremists, even performing official tasks may turn violent. The unrest transpired on the evening of 8th February after the administration took measures to remove encroachments which resulted in the loss of life and property. The rioting resulted in five fatalities and hundreds of injuries including male and female (at least 250) authorities.
The daily headlines are dominated by stories about the sexual abuse, murder and oppression of Hindu women at the hands of Muslim males in the name of love jihad or unrequited love. Neha Hiremath (24) the daughter of Congress Corporator Niranjan Hiremath, was the most recent victim of the dreaded phenomenon. She was repeatedly stabbed by Fayaz at B V Bhoomaraddi College of Engineering and Technology in Hubbali because she didn’t accept his relationship proposal. The two were studying there.
Hindus must realise that they are perhaps the most friendless people. They not only get persecuted by Abrahamics but also elements from their own community – like Rajdeep – who wish to ensure that Hindus remain immune to their own demise. The demographic threat does not disappear into the darkness if we close our eyes. Those like Rajdeep and the dubious NGOs certainly wish for you to believe it does. The only question now is will the Hindu community realise the imminent threat or continue to document their own end.
