Intersecting Hierarchies: Caste and Class in India

India carries two powerful systems of social hierarchy that shape people’s lives from birth: caste and class. While one is rooted in ancient religious tradition and the other in economic position, they do not operate in isolation. They intersect, overlap, and sometimes pull in opposite directions – creating a layered social landscape that is uniquely complex. Understanding how these two systems relate to each other is key to understanding inequality, opportunity, and social mobility in India today.

Defining caste and class: two different hierarchies
The caste system
The class system
Where caste and class intersect
Land, labour, and rural India
Urban India: class rises, but caste persists
When caste and class diverge
Sanskritisation and the limits of mobility within caste
Affirmative action: where caste and class policy collide
Income, education, and the caste-income correlation
Two systems, one layered reality

Defining caste and class: two different hierarchies

Before examining their relationship, it helps to understand what each system actually is and how it works.

The caste system

Caste is a hereditary, closed system of social stratification rooted in the ancient varna framework, which divides Hindu society into four broad categories: Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (traders and merchants), and Shudras (labourers). Outside and below all four groups are the Dalits – historically referred to as “untouchables” – who faced severe social exclusion and were assigned the most stigmatized occupations. According to the Asia Society, caste ranking is grounded in concepts of purity and pollution, with roles associated with intellectual or religious work considered “pure” and those involving waste or manual labour considered “polluting.” Crucially, a person is born into their caste and cannot change it – caste identity is fixed at birth and maintained through endogamy, the practice of marrying within one’s own caste group.

The class system

Class, by contrast, is based on economic position – income, wealth, occupation, and education. Unlike caste, it is theoretically an open system where people can move between levels based on achievement and circumstance. Social Work Institute notes that urban India divides broadly into an elite class controlling wealth and power, a growing middle class, a working class, and those below the poverty line. The liberalization of the Indian economy in the 1990s accelerated the formation of these class divisions, expanding the urban middle class while simultaneously widening income inequality. Class is not tied to notions of ritual purity – it is shaped by material conditions.

Where caste and class intersect

Despite their different origins, caste and class frequently overlap in India. This interrelationship is sometimes called the “caste-class nexus” – the tendency for caste position and economic class to reinforce each other across generations.

Land, labour, and rural India

In rural India, the overlap between caste and class is most visible. Land ownership – the primary source of wealth in villages – has historically been concentrated in upper-caste hands. Lower-caste communities, particularly Dalits, have worked as landless agricultural labourers on land they do not own, a pattern that simultaneously reflects and reinforces both their caste position and their class position at the bottom of the economic hierarchy. Research published in World Development shows that caste continues to distort rural labour and credit markets, with Dalit farmers in many regions facing discrimination in accessing water, seeds, and credit – all of which directly impact their economic outcomes.

Research published in the Oxford Review of Economic Policy found that the wealth of Dalits ran between one-fifth to 40 percent of the wealth of all other caste groups in both rural and urban areas – a stark quantification of how caste hierarchy and class inequality converge. Upper castes, comprising roughly 25 percent of India’s population, hold approximately 55 percent of India’s total wealth.

Urban India: class rises, but caste persists

In cities, class becomes a more visible organizing principle. Industrialization and urbanization have weakened some traditional caste-based occupational divisions – when people from different castes work together in offices and factories, rigid boundaries begin to blur. However, this does not mean caste disappears. A study on residential segregation in Indian cities found that caste-based discrimination continues in urban areas, often in new forms – including in hiring decisions in the corporate and technology sectors, where audit studies show that caste and religion continue to influence recruitment outcomes. A Dalit professional gaining occupational mobility may still face discrimination in housing, social interactions, and marriage prospects.

B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of India’s Constitution and a Dalit himself, believed that cities could offer Dalits an escape from the stigma of caste-based village life. In practice, urbanization has only partially fulfilled that promise. While some economic advancement has occurred, structural discrimination persists in urban employment, housing, and access to services.

When caste and class diverge

One of the most important insights in understanding the caste-class relationship is that the two do not always align. A caste group can hold high ritual status but rank lower economically, or vice versa. This divergence creates complex local hierarchies that vary significantly across regions.

For instance, certain lower-caste communities that have benefited from political mobilization and affirmative action have risen into the middle class, while some upper-caste individuals from rural areas may be economically poor. Equally, a Dalit individual who becomes a doctor or government officer moves up in economic class terms but does not shed their caste identity – and may still encounter social discrimination despite their economic standing. The Asia Society describes this through the idea that Indians simultaneously participate in what it calls the “caste game,” the “class game,” and the “power game” – three overlapping but distinct systems of status.

Sanskritisation and the limits of mobility within caste

One historically significant process showing how caste can be navigated – though not escaped – is Sanskritisation, a concept developed by sociologist M.N. Srinivas. He defined it as the process by which a lower-caste group adopts the customs, rituals, and lifestyle of a higher caste in an attempt to claim a more elevated position in the social hierarchy. This form of social mobility happens at the group level, not the individual level – entire communities shift their practices rather than individuals changing their caste. It shows that caste is not entirely static, but it also reveals the limits of individual class advancement: economic improvement alone does not automatically translate into a higher caste standing or the social acceptance that comes with it.

Affirmative action: where caste and class policy collide

India’s reservation system – one of the world’s oldest and most extensive affirmative action programmes – directly engages with the caste-class intersection. Established after independence in 1950, it reserves seats in educational institutions, government jobs, and political bodies for Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The policy was designed to correct centuries of systemic exclusion by ensuring representation for historically marginalized groups in spaces of economic and political power.

The Mandal Commission of 1979, which recommended a 27 percent reservation for OBCs in central government jobs and educational institutions, was a landmark acknowledgment that caste-based disadvantage and class-based disadvantage are related but not identical. The “creamy layer” concept – which excludes economically well-off OBC individuals from reservation benefits – is precisely an attempt to account for cases where improved class position has reduced caste-based disadvantage. A 2024 Supreme Court ruling further acknowledged that even within the Dalit community, disparities exist between sub-castes, with some groups remaining far more marginalized than others despite decades of reservation policy.

In 2019, the government introduced a 10 percent quota for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) – reserved on the basis of income rather than caste – signalling a growing recognition that class-based disadvantage must also be directly addressed within India’s framework of affirmative action. This move reflects the broader tension in policy: should remedies focus on caste identity, economic status, or both?

Income, education, and the caste-income correlation

Data consistently show that caste position and income are strongly correlated in India. One study found that Dalits have incomes approximately 27 percent lower than upper-caste groups, with OBCs and Muslims also earning significantly less. The order closely mirrors caste hierarchy – the lower the caste rank, the lower the average income. While economic growth and education have somewhat narrowed gaps over time, the structural link between caste and economic position remains deeply embedded.

Education is often cited as the primary route out of caste-based poverty, but access to quality education itself remains unequal. Social mobility in India remains persistently low, with children’s outcomes strongly shaped by their parents’ class and caste position. The intersection of these two systems creates what sociologists describe as cumulative disadvantage: those born into lower castes often also lack the financial resources, social networks, and cultural capital needed to access upward mobility.

Two systems, one layered reality

Caste and class in India are neither the same thing nor entirely separate. They are distinct but deeply intertwined systems that together shape access to resources, social status, and opportunity. In rural India, they tend to overlap strongly. In urban India, class becomes more prominent while caste recedes in some areas but persists – often invisibly – in others. And in specific cases, the two can pull in opposite directions, producing individuals or groups that are high in one hierarchy but low in the other. What this means in practice is that analyzing Indian inequality requires holding both systems in view at the same time, recognizing where they reinforce each other and where they diverge.

What do you think? If economic growth and urbanization have not been enough to dismantle caste-based discrimination on their own, what kinds of interventions – social, legal, or economic – are most likely to reduce these intersecting inequalities? And when policy must choose between targeting caste identity or economic status, which approach better addresses the roots of inequality in India?

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 5 / 5. Vote count: 1

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

References

PDF 📄

Table of Contents

Defining caste and class: two different hierarchies 🔗

The caste system 🔗

The class system 🔗

Where caste and class intersect 🔗

Land, labour, and rural India 🔗

Urban India: class rises, but caste persists 🔗

When caste and class diverge 🔗

Sanskritisation and the limits of mobility within caste 🔗

Affirmative action: where caste and class policy collide 🔗

Income, education, and the caste-income correlation 🔗

Two systems, one layered reality 🔗