Monday, March 21, 2011
Height of Hypocrisy
Why do western states frequently interfere in middle eastern states ?
Obviously for Oil.
Iraq was raped and murdered. Now it is the turn of Libya.
If their love for democracy and human rights is to be believed, why didn't they dare attack China after Tiananmen Square incident ?
Too scared ?
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Hypocrisy ?
I fail to understand how an eminent and successful person sermonised a short while ago that India “is a Banana Republic” and later puts on paper the righteousness of the Prime Minister of the same “Banana Republic” who shielded his erring colleague for such a long time.
I would love to know his reaction when a lobbyist engaged by someone like him lobbies for Directorship of his company for a known and proven swindler.
Monday, May 29, 2006
Our Self-seeking Politicians
OUR SELF-SEEKING POLITICIANS
Consensual Corruption
There is a cosy arrangement between all parties that doesn't go beyond political posturing. With little to choose between them on this count, corruption has become electorally irrelevant. And within a democratic system, if an issue cannot lead to the loss of power, it will not to be addressed.
There was a time when profit was a dirty word in
Since then, however, we have veered to the opposite extreme, and profit has come to justify everything, including outright fraud, corruption and criminality. Just as we practiced an utterly false socialism, we have now committed ourselves to a substantially false capitalism and liberalism. The most significant beneficiaries of the new 'licentious raj', as in the old 'licence raj', are political and bureaucratic middle men, commission agents and money changers who manipulate the system to skim the cream off the top of every deal, building personal fortunes of thousands of crores in tenures that last no more than a few years.
That is the reason why Parliament has been reduced to a forum for debates on one scandal after another, with little time left over for discussion of policy, and why political parties are utterly devoid of any credible design for India's future beyond platitudes about globalisation, rapid growth and India's presumed future as a great power.
Commission agents and money changers have penetrated every aspect of the nation's functioning, including, crucially, national security. Purchases of equipment for the defence, paramilitary and police forces are now in the domain of these money changers, whose utterly unscrupulous pursuit of profit endangers not only the lives of India's fighting men, but the security and integrity of the nation itself. As has repeatedly been the case through history,
It is, however, not sufficient to rail against corruption. If the malaise is to be addressed, the degree to which it has become integrally linked, indeed, completely enmeshed, with the acquisition and retention of power within the Indian system must be understood fully. That is why, despite the fitful and half-hearted action that is sometimes taken against the occasional high-profile offender who is unfortunate or foolish enough to get caught, a culture of impunity generally prevails.
Political parties are quick to 'forgive' and rehabilitate those who are known to control the purse-strings of large and ill-gotten fortunes, and little stigma attaches to the subjects of scandal once the media spotlight has shifted. In any event, with little to choose between various political formations in the country on this count, corruption has tended to become electorally irrelevant. And within a democratic system, if an issue cannot lead to the loss of power, it will generally tend not to be addressed.
While a great deal of noise is, no doubt, still made on a regular basis on the issue of corruption both in Parliament and in the general political discourse, there is a relatively cosy arrangement between all parties that political posturing will not ordinarily be carried beyond a point where real harm could be done to the leaderships that fuel or tolerate such corruption.
If corruption was a moral issue alone, its consequences would not be so grave; but it undermines the very foundations of the tasks of nation building.
This is even more the case within the context of the fragile and highly competitive economies of the globalised world order, where corruption allows profits to flow towards relatively inefficient modes of production and operation, protecting weak systems and undermining long-term capacities for survival and growth.
Corruption also combines with short-term profiteering to divert investment flows away from the development of necessary institutional strengths, and into an economy of increasing dependency that militates directly against the long-term prospects of the system. And if we go beyond mere economics to comprehend the socio-political complex that is generated by corruption, we find the privileging of those who can pay, and an imposition of multiple costs and greater deprivation on the poor, who cannot.
This filters down the chain of administration to the lowest levels, victimising the powerless and, in the process, delegitimising the state, undermining administrative institutions and lawful governance, and fuelling a limitless hatred against the agencies of government and against those who have secured a measure of prosperity in the country. This, precisely, is what feeds the multiple insurgencies across the country, further undermining the capacities of the state to deliver the minimal security and services that a population has reason to expect from its elected administration.
It is relevant, within this context, to underline the fact that these many insurgencies do not, on this argument, represent any measure of hope or relief to the people. Indeed, these movements of political violence have been uniformly transformed into organised operations of widespread extortion that not only directly impose unaffordable costs on the poor in both cash and kind, but intentionally obstruct development in wide areas in order to augment and exploit the resentment and anger of the people against the state's failures to meet their expectations. The 'revolutionary' parties in
All our institutions, today, have turned into oligopolistic cabals, run by the same mindset. This culture cannot leave the corporate ethos unaffected, and our industries, our newspapers and media houses, our centres of production, are equally tainted by a collapse of norms and scruples. Large sections of the police, customs, direct and indirect tax, and enforcement agencies of the state have become mirror images of criminal enterprises. And ruling all this is the political class which has no historical memory, no vision of the future, and no shame. Unless we shed this mentality and get rid of the enveloping culture of extortion and loot, we cannot take the task of nation building forward.
K.P.S. Gill is former director-general of police,
Farm Fight
Is Sharad Pawar taking agriculture seriously?—Congressmen ask
The "creative tension" between the Congress and the Sharad Pawar-led NCP—allies in the UPA—has often enough led to a turf war in
With elections in four states imminent—where the NCP has no stake—a Congress minister admitted to "hostility" towards Pawar: "The perception is that his bungling of the food economy could jeopardise our poll prospects." Stung by Congress' accusations, Pawar stressed—while replying to the discussion on farmers' suicides in the Rajya Sabha on August 24—that he worked from 9.30 am to 6 pm every day, clearing all files within 24 hours; agriculture, not cricket, he said, was his priority.
When the Congress Working Committee (CWC) discussed the grim price situation on June 29, party sources said Union defence minister Pranab Mukherjee—commenting on the wheat fiasco—said if the agriculture minister had been a Congressman, he and his secretary would have been sacked.
"Big players entered the market and prices went up. MNCs cornered the wheat for international markets." Digvijay Singh, Congress
The CWC officially sought a quickfix: it asked for "an effective mechanism to manage the demand and supply of essential commodities and to check the rise of prices" to minimise its impact on the poor. Then, on July 5, Congress CMs met party president Sonia Gandhi and PM Manmohan Singh. Party general secretary V. Narayanswamy said, "The CMs wanted the NDA-sponsored order dated
But on August 21, Pawar introduced the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2005, in the RS to amend provisions permitting insertion and deletion of items from the essential items list. Pointing out that 11 commodities were deleted from the list in 2002—when the NDA was in power—and three more in 2004, he said the proposed amendment sought to delete some more items including cattle fodder, coal, component and auto parts, iron and steel, paper among others.
The CPI(M) was furious—and was backed, interestingly enough, by Congress MPs: they included Narayanswamy, former Union minister Janardan Poojary and S.L. Naik. Poojary said, referring to the Congress CMs' demand: "A wrong message will go now..." Naik added: "During natural calamities this is a vital instrument to control the situation. But the BJP looked after the interests of only traders." But eventually, the RS passed the bill with some amendments.
But the disquiet in the Congress had its impact: at a cabinet meeting on August 24, the government decided not to bring the bill to the Lok Sabha the next day, as planned, but instead pass an executive order to allow the states to set a ceiling on wheat stocks and crack down on traders who had excess and force them to bring wheat to the open market.
"We are worried that huge amounts of wheat are being imported. Structural issues must be addressed." Jairam Ramesh, MoS, Commerce
Party general secretary Digvijay Singh said: "Removing stockholding restrictions benefits the farmer. It also leads to speculation; the consumer has to pay a higher price. Therefore, I've suggested the government should announce the MSP but, simultaneously, purchase wheat at previous market rates so that it can subsidise grains through the PDS." But he sounded doubtful whether it would be possible in the long run to avoid liberalising the ECA: "The CMs wanted the 2002 order to be rescinded, but since the government is committed to the principles of the market economy, this will be hard to resolve." However, party functionary B.K. Hariprasad said, "The procurement policies of the Congress and the NCP differ. Pawar feels the MSP should be announced only during distress. We feel it should be at all times. The FCI must procure at normal remunerative prices."
More controversial than whether to liberalise or tighten the ECA has been the management of wheat. Minister of state for commerce Jairam Ramesh says, "The Congress is concerned that substantial amounts of wheat are being imported after a long time; the party feels structural issues in agriculture need to be addressed."
Digvijay adds, "Big players entered the market and prices went up. The government should have immediately gone for market intervention. Instead, they allowed the MNCs to corner the wheat for the international market. Now we are importing wheat from
Summing up, Congress general secretary Margaret Alva says, "The challenge is to satisfy the consumer and the farmer, while balancing the government's priorities with the party's perceptions. For our own survival, we have to express our concerns to the government."
Bull's Eye
Apparently MPs believe their job lies only in making new laws. Such as about their salaries.
Television channels can be quite unprofessional. The frequency with which young twits anchoring news violate defamation laws leaves one breathless. But to suggest new laws to curb TV could be a remedy worse than the disease.
Recently, a news channel broadcast a taped conversation allegedly between a jailed UP don and a minister of state in the Centre. The minister’s alleged voice begged the don for help to sort out a land dispute. An all-party meeting convened by the Lok Sabha Speaker requested the PM for a probe. A prompt investigation took place. According to the official probe report, the voice did not belong to the minister. If the probe vindicates the minister, he can go to court and take the channel to the cleaners. As a minister he had the obvious advantage of a prompt official probe. And that, even without a formal complaint to the police! Would ordinary citizens receive such attention?
The reaction of the members of Parliament to the broadcast was, to say the least, odd. The targeted minister vowed to abjure work till his name was cleared. Why? Should an unproved allegation suspend a minister’s functioning?
The whole House defended the minister. Leader of Opposition L.K. Advani said: "The government must examine the possibility of legislating an act in respect of sting operations."
JD(U) president Sharad Yadav said: "Let the government conduct a probe within five days and if this is found false let there be some law to stop this kind of channel."
BJP leader Sushma Swaraj, facing the minister, said: "There is no need for a probe! I am giving you a certificate—you are innocent!" Alas, if only her former colleague Madan Lal Khurana who is making charges against her would also give her a certificate of innocence!
Not one MP suggested recourse to the law of defamation—perhaps because defamation cases drag on for years? So, why not a simple reform setting up fast-track courts which decide all defamation cases within two months? That should end unfounded allegations. But that would be using existing law. And apparently MPs believe their job lies only in making new laws, isn’t it? Such as about their salaries?
MPs claim they are underpaid and overworked. That’s why they can’t do justice to their work. But now they have increased salaries. It is reasonable to expect a more effective performance. In the coming days may we expect they will abuse each other more viciously?
Mr. Rajnath Singh,
Bharatiya Janata Party
I only hope that busy political professionals like you may have learnt that Professor Harbhajan Singh, his face smeared in black paint, was killed by blows and punches of dozens of angry students at
It is not the first such incident, a few days’ ago, Soumik Basu, a student in
Such incidents would continue to happen if politcisation of so called teachers' and students' unions are NOT BANNED IMMEDIATELY.
I don't believe that parents send their wards to the colleges for joining politics. The students who want to join politics during their study, may do so outside the school / college / university campus as a whole timer of the respective parties and not at the cost of their parents' hard earned money.
Most of these politicised students who become used to receive everything while doing almost nothing vitiate the professional atmosphere later when they graduate.
The political DADAs of all parties (your party included) find the schools, colleges and universities recruiting centres for free cadres, who mostly are incapable of any independent thinking, in the fond hope that these recruits in future may turn out to be their robot soldiers for perpetuating their mis-rules. I personally pity those politicised teachers and students as they are likely to pity me.
I ask, which union activist or their political DADAs can now return Harbhajan Singh and Soumik Basu to their relatives ? I also ask all the union activists what good of the teachers and students have they done so far except showing their ‘DADA-giri’ and extract benefits for themselves ?
Now that most of you professional politicians, have blood on your hands, I strongly appeal to you all to IMMEDIATELY BAN POLITICISATION OF STUDENTS’ & TEACHERS’ UNIONS otherwise, these incidents would continue to happen and you all would shake your hands off by sending some flowers, may be.
Manojendra Gupta
____________________________________________________________________
Mr. Rajnath Singh
Bharatiya Janata Party
May I congratulate you for adding one more feather to your cap ?
As if demolishing Babri Masjid and utter failure by Gujrat Government run by your party to control the riots after the Godhra massacre were not enough, you have now decided to ban films of capable actor Mr. Amir Khan ostensibly for supporting courageous Ms. Medha Patkar.
Bravo what achievements indeed !!
In this connection, may I proudly inform you that I also support Ms. Medha Patkar and signed petitions supporting the issue she is fighting for. I challenge you to gag my voice of protest.
In this connection, an ex-Central Minister of your party, once an actor and now a semi-blue politician, Mr. Shatrughan Sinha, in his press conference, claimed that like voice of protest, there is a voice of rejection also and had the temerity to compare allegedly criminal activities of actors Mr. Sanjay Dutt and Mr. Salman Khan with that of Mr. Amir Khan.
May I also congratulate you for having such excellent colleagues ?
Whereas we have not yet heard anything officially either from you or your party on the explosive issue of reservations in this country, your party, bereft of any issue of national importance, is busy in diverting public attention to mundane issues like banning a film in a state whose governance is by your party.
Has it ever occurred to you that there are many other states in this country and what would happen if as retaliation, their inhabitants decide to ban anything and everything connected with Gujrat ?
Don’t you modern day political professionals who do not contribute an iota to the national GDP, but like social parasites, live off the toils of the commoners and most of whom in private live in five star luxury and wear pro-something attire as the situation demands, think that you are going too far to destabilise this country, more than the ISI, as claimed ?
Don’t you also think that it is time that all such political professionals bent upon destabilising this country on religious and caste lines and many other mundane issues are taught exemplary lessons ( like caning ? ) in full public view ?
Incidentally, is there a retirement for political professionals of this country ? Or has it become customary for you self-seeking politicians to bark till you live ?
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
Reservations Indian Style
RESERVATIONS INDIAN STYLE
Mourn, Reflect, Hope...
A perfidious piece of legislation, the Quota Bill, is about to arrive. The dark clouds it brings in its wake will dissipate only when this crisis becomes an occasion for genuine soul searching, for focusing attention on the meaning of citizenship and justice. Updates
A perfidious piece of legislation, the Quota Bill, that has long been in the making is about to arrive. Its arrival will not give proper shape to affirmative action; instead, it will, in its wake, signal the passing of a moment when discussion gives way to conflict, reason becomes subservient to identity, cynicism replaces whatever little vestiges of idealism that remain, and an open future of possibilities is replaced by a close suffocating horizon.
Perhaps it will not matter at all; after all we have weathered worse storms. The costs will not appear catastrophic.
It will not be a civil war; it may not even be widespread protest. It will rather be a slow and insidious death of many values we cherish, and it might be so insidious that we will not even notice what we have lost.
The costs will not appear catastrophic. It will not be a civil war; it may not even be widespread protest. It will rather be a slow and insidious death of many values we cherish, and it might be so insidious that we will not even notice what we have lost
The combined weight of political interests, unimaginative and entrenched ideas and the burden of the past, make it unlikely that the Bill can be critiqued in any radical form.
Yes, the government might assert its reasonableness by staggering its implementation. Yes, it might still exclude the creamy layer, but these will not be symptoms of moderation. They will be, rather, the small mercies that are often extended after a great travesty has taken place.
The arrival of this Bill is, in some ways, an occasion for mourning and an occasion for reflection.
Who is it that should mourn? And why?
All Those Who Care About Social Justice Should Mourn for injustice has not only taken its place but is carrying its name.
The cause of justice has been setback in more ways than one can list.
OBCs have appropriated the language of deprivation and the instruments to remedy them, that at best belong only to the SC/STs, the most deprived. By treating unequals equally, we are violating justice. By misidentifying target groups, by using blunt instruments, we are violating the very essence of justice.
OBCs have appropriated the language of deprivation and the instruments to remedy them, that at best belong only to the SC/STs, the most deprived. By treating unequals equally, we are violating justice.
Justice is premised on an ability to make fine distinctions, by a determination to match ends to means. Our ends are unclear: Is reservation about caste headcounts and representation? Is it about equal opportunity? Is it about compensating for disadvantages that prevent promise and ability from being translated into performance and marks? It is about anti-discrimination? Is it about equal outcomes? Is it about creating a middle class? Is it simply about displacing upper castes? Each objective is different, each requires different beneficiaries, each has different normative underpinnings and each requires different instruments. But we have lumped them all together and reduced everything to the logic of numbers. No wonder we cannot get clarity and consistency over tricky questions like: Should, if at all, the creamy layer be defined? Should minority institutions, some of which structure access to power as much as any others, be excluded?
By reducing the deprivation to be targeted to a single dimension, caste, we have obscured the true causes of lack of access. By suggesting that caste matters more than income, we are giving a false sense of the causal underpinnings of justice. By suggesting that quotas are an important and effective instrument of promoting justice, over and above all other instruments, we are ensuring that real deprivation will continue to persist. In the process, we will render invisible other forms of deprivation. We will not genuinely empower the poor, but confine them to a status where they remain fodder for a self destructive, symbolic politics.
Parliament will give its imprimatur, not to justice, but to an impostor.
All Those Who Care About the Nation Should Mourn for we have fallen into the narcissism of small identities.
We inherited one of the most iniquitous, enduring and appalling social structures that any society has known. It would be moral blindness not to acknowledge the reality and persistence of caste, the daily violence and humiliations it can still bring. But not all beneficiaries of reservation experience these realities in the same way. Acknowledging caste should be a stepping stone to transcending it, not perpetuating it in professional, educational and civic life.
Instead of the language of citizenship, we will have the language of caste; instead of reciprocity, competitive group competition; instead of a slow withering away of caste, an enhanced consciousness of its salience.
It would be moral blindness not to acknowledge the reality and persistence of caste, the daily violence and humiliations it can still bring. Acknowledging it should be a stepping stone to transcending it, not perpetuating it
In a society that very effectively mutilated the dignity of its members, that denied them the minimal bases for self respect, politics will be about a politics of esteem rather than effectively securing the public good. What was supposed to be an interim and exceptional measure for a group like SC/STs, whose treatment was appalling beyond all measure, will become an entitlement for which any group with the numbers can clamor. It will come to define the very essence of justice, the very essence of politics and the very meaning of citizenship.
Yes,
The Brahmins may have long fled the South, their power in public life attenuated, but the stranglehold of caste and community persists. Just examine the Dalit OBC fault lines in
The truth about caste should also acknowledge the truth about caste politics. The canard that caste has always existed, that it continues to exist, should not be used as an argument to persist with it in public, professional and civic life.
Instead of asking: "How do we create an education system, where no student of promise is deprived of the education they deserve, because of their social or financial background?" we have committed ourselves to a non-answer to this question.
The only way of overcoming caste is to actually overcome it.
All Those Who Care About Alternative Futures Should Mourn for government has foreclosed the possibility of experimenting with other and more effective instruments of social justice.
The government has decided that social policy can have only one mould, that all institutions should look alike, that other schemes - deprivation indexes - for instance, will not so much as even merit consideration. The old paradigm that imprisoned us should continue. This is not a polity that can brook a diversity of experiments; it is not a polity that can provide room for alternative imaginings of justice. Justice will be as the government defines it: all others, you have no space. The government does not want a conversation on justice or equality,
On the other hand all the words we use in this argument - merit, excellence, inclusion, diversity, justice - have become unmeaning rhetorical tropes each side uses to beat the other down. But we will not be allowed the space to think through the conditions under which the tradeoffs that seem to so insistently divide society will not longer be that stark? For instance, those who claim that, by definition, excellence and inclusion are incompatible are wrong. But equally, those who think that they can be made compatible simply by saying so are also perpetuating an illusion. For excellence and inclusion can be made compatible under certain conditions. Out current institutional rigidities do not fully allow for these to be made compatible.
All Those Who Care about Marginalized Groups Should Mourn for their leadership has profoundly betrayed them. Instead of charting an imaginative economic agenda that can liberate them from poverty, instead of ensuring that the state delivers the essential goods that are the minimum bases of social self respect, instead of creating genuine opportunities for them, instead of giving them the same choices and freedoms that the privileged have, their leadership wants to keep them trapped in a politics of dependent tutelage.
Instead of saying to the state: "Don’t give us crutches we cannot outgrow, use the vast wealth of the state to create genuine opportunities" their leaders have taken the least effective path to social justice.
And in the process they have ensured that all the achievements of all those who achieve so much in the face of untold hardship will be diminished. In the process, they have ensured that they themselves cannot aspire to anything beyond their own narrow constituencies that do not wish to represent the nation as whole.
The politics of reservation represents an unconscionable diminution of social aspiration, a will not to be liberated.
They have ensured that all the achievements of all those who achieve so much in the face of untold hardship will be diminished. They have ensured that they themselves cannot aspire to anything beyond their own narrow constituencies
All Those Who Care About Higher Education Should Mourn for whether staggered over three years or implemented in one go, we will push an already deteriorating system to the brink.
Any expansion would be credible, not just if it were a statistical exercise in counting heads or rupees, but came with a credible plan to infuse new life and vitality into Higher Education.
What does it mean to expand existing universities, some of which already have over one hundred and fifty thousand students? What does it mean to attract more talent, when flagship institutions are already at forty percent faculty shortage? What does it mean to expand by thirty percent a system already tottering on the brink? Where are the new regulatory systems in place? Why continue with the irrational affiliated college system? Where are the new mechanisms to reform universities? What is the strategy for overcoming the immense shortage of talent?
The expansion plan is not a pedagogic exercise, it is a numbers game, designed as a palliative so that the number of general seats remains the same.
The ardor for reservations is not accompanied by a zeal for reform.
All Those Who Care About Setting Priorities Right Should Mourn this inordinate rush for a divisive measure of dubious value.
The Right to Education Bill continues to languish for years, while the constitution is amended without batting an eyelid. Thousands of crores will be poured into a Higher Education System that is not delivering, that could mobilize resources from elsewhere, while primary education will continue to be neglected. It took us more than fifty years to recognize the right to education as a fundamental right and we still don’t want to give it full effect.
Think of the tens of thousands of crores the government can easily make available for creating opportunity for all if it wanted, if it were determined not to run things like hotels and airlines, not to give subsidies to the rich, not to create insidious tax exemptions through SEZ’s.
Why has the education debate been reduced to reservations? Think of the tens of thousands of crores the government can easily make available for creating opportunity for all if it wanted, if it were determined not to run things like hotels and airlines, not to give subsidies to the rich, not to create insidious tax exemptions through SEZs.
This social policy is not about empowerment or justice or education or about creating access, it is about tokenism.
All Those Who Care About Democracy Should Mourn for the sequence and timing of Bills make no sense.
The Constitution was amended ostensibly to provide for reservation in private institutions. Yet the amendment was used as a pretext by the government to insist that its hands were tied with respect to Central institutions.
The government appoints an Oversight Committee, but Bill is introduced before its final report is in.
The Bill is introduced in the last days of a parliamentary session. To what end? To ensure minimum debate?
But these minor lapses hide the larger fact: that our democracy is no longer about public deliberation or an exercise in public reason, it is no longer one where representatives can say what they believe, it is about performing a simulacra of social justice, not achieving true justice, it is about privileging an imagined logic of numbers over demands of freedom.
All Those Who Care about Idealism Should Mourn for we have become a nation where there is no space for thinking of any interests that are other than your own.
Academics will not protest because they have long absolved themselves of the responsibility of governing their professions; teachers will not protest because at last retirement ages might be increased; administrators will not protest because at last a few buildings might come their way.
Students might protest, but they will be seen not as standing for a principle, but preserving their own general category seats: not rising above interest but simply matching it.
The few odd commentators who voice concern will be dismissed as upper caste, and those who defend the bill will be equally dismissed as opportunistically positioning themselves in the current of political correctness.
In short, the country is reduced to nothing but a clash of interests that will become all the more insidious by a being called identity. Don’t dream of transcending your identity, because nobody believes you can; don’t rise above your own interest because not body believes you will, don’t overcome caste because no body believes it can be done.
The only garb idealism will wear is the false political consensus that will be on display in Parliament.
Overcoming the Moment
It is difficult not to fear that the arguments in the coming months will be profoundly distempered. Anyone opposing the quota bill ought to take extra care that in their very opposition to these insidious uses of caste, they do not, intentionally or by oversight, reproduce offensive symbolism in their actions. Opposing identity politics is easier than transcending identity, fighting for a principle is always easier than living up to it.
What will be the new repertoire of representation, of argument and rhetoric that will truly help us overcome our encrusted paradigm?
It would also be a great travesty, if the only grounds for agitation were preserving the number of general category seats. That would not be a principled movement, simply a self interested lobbying effort. But, most importantly, the opposition to the Bill will have to clearly define the ground it stands on.
At the very least, it will have to make it clear that this is not a battle for extra seats, but a fight for justice. And the fight for justice is not simply on behalf of students who might lose out but the nation as a whole.
As a nation we have to acknowledge that we have miserably failed our poor and marginalized: oppression still goes unchecked, promises remain unfulfilled, basic freedoms are denied and opportunities remain a distant gleam. Any movement that does not take seriously this reality, is not credible or serious and ought not to carry any authority.
If politically complacent young men and women have been moved to political action, let them also make this a transformative moment in the process of social reform and justice. The campaign should not be about the number of seats, it should be about saying emphatically:
"We all want to build an inclusive society, where no one will be denied opportunities because of social and financial circumstances. But we will no longer accept chimerical solutions to this aspiration, we will cut through the cant and diversion that the politics of quotas represent, and we will put pressure on government to take all those instruments that build an inclusive society seriously: making the right to education effective, creating new institutional architectures, setting the priorities of the state right, creating new ways of making it more accountable and thinking of more sensible forms of affirmative action."
If the opposition to quotas does not occupy the ground of justice in an enlarged sense, it will simply be reproducing the narrow mindedness it is objecting to. The dark clouds will dissipate only when this crisis becomes an occasion for genuine soul searching, for focusing attention on the meaning of citizenship and justice.
The transformation of caste politics will not be possible without the transformation of
"India must be the only country in the world, where
people fight to get called backward"
- Narayan Murthy
Received from a friend :
Excerpts from a diary 50 years from now:
1. Jamshedpur, May 30, 2056: I attended the bash at the XLRI-OBC Alumni Association to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the reservation of seats for OBCs (Other Backward Castes) in XLRI. Since I'm not an OBC, I was not supposed to attend, but at present, we MBFCs (Moderately Backward Forward Castes) together with the Non-Scheduled Tribes have a political alliance with the OBCs. We sipped champagne (I was enjoying my orange juice) and talked about how so many of us had progressed from reserved seats in the XLRI to reserved jobs to reserved promotions. Unfortunately, the party broke up when a Non-scheduled Tribes faculty member objected to the OBCs dancing with all the pretty girls - he wanted equal opportunities for every caste at each dance. I pointed out that the Non-scheduled Tribes had exceeded the quota of champagne reserved for them. The party ended in a pitched caste battle.
2. May 2056: Today, Ram became President of the IIM Board of Directors. Under the present rotating presidency system, a member of each caste is made the president by turn. When it was the turn of the MBFCs for President, they had to choose him because he is the only MBFC on the campus. True, he is only the campus dhobi, but then every caste must be given an equal opportunity. All those centuries of oppression by the OSBFCs (Only Slightly Backward Forward Castes) and the OFCs (Other Forward Castes) must be rectified. He's issued a press release saying, "I hope to restore the high standards at IIM - I overheard some foreigners calling it the Indian Institute of Morons, the other day".
3. May 2056: They've announced the cricket team for the series against Ethiopia. I was overjoyed when they chose an MBFC man as captain. But my hopes were dashed when I realised he was a Most Backward Forward Caste and not a Moderately Backward Forward Caste. The selection committee lamented that it was gross discrimination that no member from the Jarowa tribe (the Stone Age tribe in the Andamans) had ever found a place in the Indian cricket team. A squad has since been dispatched to the Andamans to capture a Jarowa tribal to play in the national team. I hope he will improve their performance - they had an innings defeat against the Maldives recently. I would have played myself except for the fact that I lost a leg some years ago when I was in hospital with a toothache and a doctor recruited through the Unscheduled Caste quota extracted my leg instead of my tooth.
4. May 2056: There are too many NFCs (Neo-Forward castes) in the IT business. Under the terms of the Business Reservation Act, their firms will now be taken over by the other castes. I hope they will be able to restore the Indian IT industry back to its former glory. For some unfathomable reason, it has gone down the drain after job reservations were implemented. I went for a movie featuring star actor Mungeri Ram. He may lack teeth, be four-feet-three and have hair growing out of his nose, but this year it's the turn of the EBC-RYs (Extremely Backward Caste-Rural Yokels) to be stars and Mungeri Ram is the best of the lot. I wonder why foreign movies have become so popular.
5. May 2056: A truly great day. We now have an OFBMBC (Other Forward But Moderately Backward Caste) general as the Head of the Armed Forces. I hope he'll be able to win back the territory we lost ever since reservations were implemented in the Army. Since then, the north has been taken by Pakistan, the Northeast by China, the east by Bangladesh and the south by Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Only last winter, we lost the war against Bhutan and free India is now limited to the western coastal states. But I'm sure the OFBMBC general will turn the tide.
6. May 2056: My wife and I have been blessed with a bonny daughter. Since my wife's an SBBNSBC (Slightly Backward But Not So Backward Caste), my daughter will be an MBFC-SBBNSBC. I must lobby for reservation for her caste. She's the only member and I'm sure she has a great future.
____________________________________________________________________________
My Musings
____________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Prakash Karat,
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Sir,
I am unable to resist the temptation to quote verbatim from a news item appearing in Times of India today :
“ CPM on Friday said continuance of the anti-quota agitation “smacks of a blatant upper caste bias”.
Politburo member Staram Yechury in an editorial in People’s Democracy said the agitation is being “ably assisted by a section of the media”.
Yechury said the government stand on the issue is “balanced”. Taking on the critics of reservation, he said, “All intellectual pretensions of seeking to counter pose ‘affirmative action’ as an alternative to reservations is just a diabolic subterfuge to subvert social justice …. Reservations, in fact, are a part of affirmative action.
“If this (anti-reservation strike is continuing, then, clearly, its objective is not a protest against the potential decrease in the seats for the general category but its aim seems to oppose reservations altogether ”.
First of all, I was happy to learn (so ignorant of me) that the communists of the Indian variety publishes a weekly “People’s Democracy”, thereby admitting that they have long ago drifted far away from their Marxian path of revolution and are trying to adopt democracy with all they have.
Many in the know told me earlier that the modern political professionals of the country most of whom do not contribute an iota to the national GDP but like a social parasite lives off the toiling commoners, are a human example of fluorescent lights. Being a student of science, I was not prepared to accept the hypothesis without a proof. Science also taught me not to accept anything without the test of repeatability. I shall now have wait for the recurrence of similar occurrences.
Coming back to the delayed understanding of the objective of the anti-reservation stir by your comrade Mr. Sitaram Yechury, may I have the audacity to ask you a few more questions ?
1. To my understanding, secular means “not religious or spiritual”. If my understanding is correct, how the secular government run by your dynastic right hand and ably supported by you, not only supports but also is desperate to increase the scope of reservations for only a section of the religious majority only ? For the sake of secularism, so vociferously propounded by you all, why the reservations should not be extended to the religious minorities also ? After all they also have Shias and Sunnis, Catholics and Protestants, Naamdharis, Digambars and Pitambars ?
2. If you are so convinced about reservations, why exactly same reservation system actively being propounded by you, should not be implemented for all our parliaments / state assemblies / panchayats / municipal bodies ?
While on the subject, may I once again ask you :
1. Why Justice Mukherjee Commission’s Report on most of Indians’ Idol, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, was rubbished by your dynastic right hand without publicly giving any reason,
2. Why important ministers of the government run by your dynastic right hand are absenting themselves from the parliament (being scared of facing embarrassing questions ?), You must be aware that the parliament is run by public money.
3. Your right dynastic hand issuing veiled threats to the private sector of this country for faster implementation of similar reservation system,
4. Financial wizardry of your right dynastic hand watching the wiping out most of the middle class investments,
5. Superlative agricultural management of your associate hand necessitating import of food grains and suicides by our farmers whose cause you champion so often,
6. Successfully solving the Siachen issue by your dynastic right hand,
7. Successful eradication of militancy throughout the country, particularly in Kashmir and North-East by your dynastic right hand,
8. Courageous foreign policy management by way of inauguration of paintings of naked Hindu Gods by Mr. M. F. Hussain by an Indian Government Servant in foreign land,
9. Courageous display of religious tolerance by way of allowing a mosque inside the Kolkata airport in spite of security threats,
10. Equally courageous immigration management by your dynastic right hand, allowing drastic changes in demographic pattern in West Bengal, arguably worst sufferer of the partition of India based on religious lines,
11. Exemplary display of secularism by way of not allowing the films of actor Mr. Amir Khan to be screened for his fault of supporting a courageous lady Ms. Medha Patkar, and
12. Almost always promising people of the organised sector the moon even if they choose to be non-productive, precious resources guzzling individuals and promising almost nothing for the hapless of the unorganised sector.
Incidentally, may I point out to you the email box of the dynastic right hand of yours as published in their official website, is overflowing for almost six moths now. Is it because they prefer communication from their majesty only ?
The mailbox as published in their official website of the offshoot of the dynastic right hand who happens to be your another hand, of late, is behaving the same way.
What a coincidence !!
Once again, may I congratulate you and your ilk for allowing us, commoners, a chance to live in your paradise ?
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Prakash Karat,
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Sir,
A hearty congratulation to you and your ilk for your right hand announcing that a bill would be introduced in the monsoon session of the parliament for reservation of 27% of seats for OBCs for higher education. I am sure late Karl Marx is immensely pleased and may be rubbing his hands in glee in his grave by your interpretation and implementation of caste-less society.
It is likely that you chose to ignore the fact that when designed and implemented, persons in pursuit of knowledge were categorised as Brahmins, people having martial skills as Kshtriyas, those having business skills as Baishyas and the rest were categorised as Shudras and this categorisation was not based on birth but by their own skills-set. Over the centuries, this system was allowed to degenerate by the people in power and categorisation started on the basis of birth. Instead of eradicating the degenerated system or restoring it to its past glory, true to the characters of true-blue self-seeking politicians in pursuit of power, you chose to perpetuate the system.
Bravo, what an achievement indeed !!
In this connection, may I quote from a mail received by me several months ago ?
“ I think we should have job reservations in all the fields. I completely support the PM and all the politicians for promoting this. Let's start the reservation with our cricket team. We should have 10 percent reservation for muslims. 30 percent for OBC, SC/ST like that. Cricket rules should be modified accordingly. The boundary circle should be reduced for an SC/ST player. The four hit by an OBC player should be considered as a six and a six hit by an OBC player should be counted as 8 runs. An OBC player scoring 60 runs should be declared as a century.
We should influence ICC and make rules so that the pace bowlers like Shoaib Akhtar should not bowl fast balls to our OBC player. Bowlers should bowl at a maximum speed of 80 kilometers per hour to an OBC player. Any delivery above this speed should be made illegal.
Also we should have reservation in Olympics. In the 100 meters race, an OBC player should be given a gold medal if he runs 80 meters.
There can be reservation in Government jobs also. Let's recruit SC/ST and OBC pilots for aircrafts which are carrying the ministers and politicians (that can really help the country.. )
Ensure that only SC/ST and OBC doctors do the operations for the ministers and other politicians. (Another way of saving the country..)
Let's be creative and think of ways and means to guide INDIA forward... Let's show the world that INDIA is a GREAT country. Let's be proud of being an INDIAN.
So, what do you think, huh ??? ”
As a commoner, I am sure once the bill is introduced, it would be passed by all self-seeking political professionals of modern India, most of whom enjoy five star luxuries in private at the expense of the commoners and wear pro-poor attire in public. Our constitutional figurehead may be pleased to accord his consent at his earliest without perhaps asking :
1. Why there shall not be similar reservations for religious minorities,
2. Why exactly same reservation system should not be implemented for all our parliaments / state assemblies / panchayats and
3. For how long this reservation system shall continue, would it continue in perpetuity ?
Now that you have decided to let the caste system perpetuate and thus continue to allow division of this country on caste lines, I feel a strong motive to urge our young generation to form a political party only and only for the “general category”. The new party, once formed, shall be of the “general category”, for the “general category” and by the “general category”. As a stipulation, members and supporters / sympathisers of this party must not vote for any other party. I am sure, it would please you immensely as this may lead to chaos which may usher in true-blue Marxian Communism, discarded all over the world, except in certain pockets of India.
In this connection, may I also congratulate you for :
13. Your right dynastic hand issuing veiled threats to the private sector of this country for faster implementation of similar reservation system,
14. Financial wizardry of your right dynastic hand watching the wiping out most of the middle class investments,
15. Superlative agricultural management of your associate hand necessitating import of food grains and suicides by our farmers whose cause you champion so often,
16. Successfully solving the Siachen issue by your dynastic right hand,
17. Successful eradication of militancy throughout the country by your dynastic right hand,
18. Courageous foreign policy management by way of inauguration of paintings of naked Hindu Gods by Mr. M. F. Hussain by an Indian Government Servant in foreign land,
19. Courageous display of religious tolerance by way of allowing a mosque inside the Kolkata airport in spite of security threats,
20. Equally courageous immigration management by your dynastic right hand, allowing drastic changes in demographic pattern in West Bengal, arguably worst sufferer of the partition of India based on religious lines,
21. Exemplary display of secularism by way of not allowing the films of actor Mr. Amir Khan to be screened for his fault of supporting a courageous lady Ms. Medha Patkar, and
22. Almost always promising people of the organised sector the moon even if they choose to be non-productive, precious resources guzzling individuals and promising almost nothing for the hapless of the unorganised sector.
Once again, may I congratulate you and your ilk for allowing us, commoners, a chance to live in your paradise ?
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
________________________________________________________________
My Reply to mail received from AID-INDIA
Dear Madam,
Thank you for your above mail.
Please note that I do not agree with the views expressed by Mr. Ravishankar Arunachalam.
The fact that matrimonial advertisements still show caste bias does not necessarily mean it has to be accepted. I am a 60 years old man and when I married at the age of 21.5 years, I married a lady who did not belong to my so-called caste. Long ago, two of my aunties married outside our so-called caste. Out of seven brothers and two sisters (including the cousins) five of us, brothers, married outside our so-called caste and one sister followed suite. One brother married a lady belonging not only to a different state of India but also a different religion. My daughter also married outside our so-called caste. My son is still a bachelor.
I believe our younger generation must not encourage age old caste system which has lost its value in present days. On the contrary, all citizens of this great country must unitedly work to eradicate this evil.
After all, what is religion and caste, if not congregation of a group of people bound by social laws, some of which lost their usefulness now, designed by the people in power to keep people not in power under tight leash ? There were no religion and caste when people used to hunt in groups and share proceeds together as per the level of their hungers. These social laws were designed when some smart thinkers understood agricultural science and the economic theory that more land tilled by more people yields more money and power.
I do not subscribe to the view that you can set a wrong right by doing another wrong.
I strongly believe that in an independent democratic country, there must not be any reservations and our topmost priorities should be POPULATION CONTROL; PRIMARY, IF NOT SECONDARY, EDUCATION FOR ALL; HEALTH CARE FOR ALL, FOOD FOR EVERY CHILD OF THIS COUNTRY AND ERADICATION OF ILLETERACY AND HUNGER. Rest of the items would follow automatically.
The need of the hour is to make our greedy and power-hungry politicians understand that we had enough of divisive politics and it is time for them to say (like our beloved Netaji) "give me your sweat and I would give you education, food, shelter and take care of your health". After all, this country attained independence 58 years earlier and it is time all of us work together to make this country great, as it was once upon a time.
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
________________________________________________________________
Mail Received from AID-INDIA
Mathematics of Reservations
- Ravishankar Arunachalam
Imagine that the government came up with a proposal to build a new world-class technology institution to provide quality education to all students. Imagine, too, that a debate rages on the viability of building such an institution – in terms of the costs involved, student quality, desired outcomes etc. Now, imagine that such a debate takes place with little reference to IITs or the role they have played in technical education. Outrageous, you would think ? Yet, something similar is happening in the reservation debate, both within and outside AID. The record of states which have implemented OBC reservations already is seldom brought up.
The case of Tamilnadu
States like Tamilndu, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have already implemented reservation for OBCs in educational institutions. I will restrict my references to Tamilnadu alone, since I do not know about the situation in other states. In Tamilnadu, the total reservation is 69%, the split up for which is given below (ref www.tn.gov.in/policynotes/bc_mbc_welfare.htm) for convenience.
Category Population (lakhs) % of Total %Resered
Backward Classes 287 46.2% 30%
Most Backward Classes 129 20.7% 20%
Scheduled Classes 118 19% 18%
Scheduled Tribes 7 1.1% 1%
Others 80 13%
Total 621 100% 69%
BCs and MBCs of Tamilnadu are together equivalent to the "Other Backward Castes", as they are referred to in the rest of the country. The most obvious observation from the table above is that the percentage of reservations is only equal to or lower than the percentage of the group in the overall population. So the reservation system is only trying to bring about proportional representation in educational institutions. It does not result in a reverse-discrimination (which would mean BCs get more than their proportional share in order to right historical wrongs), as many people claim. FCs, who form the "others", still get the bulk of the 31% open-quota seats even though their population percentage is only 13%.
Overall, the experience with reservation has been very positive, and that is why there is wide-spread support for it in the state. The government health-care system in Tamilnadu is better than most other states, and one reason has been the quality doctors that the system produces, a factor attributed to reservations. Many of them also opt to serve in rural areas. Not surprisingly, the TN chapter of the Indian Medical Association supports quotas for the OBCs.
Now it is not difficult to see why the anti-reservation polemic does not refer to states like Tamilnadu with an OBC reservation record. It is because there are no instances of bridges cracking due to faulty design and patients dying due to incompetent doctors. These are often cited as the potential dangers due to reservations, either directly or more subtly as "quality will deteriorate". I am not saying that there are no problems with govt doctors or hospitals in TN, but these problems are present in other states too, and the overall quality is still better in Tamilnadu.
Who gets in and who does'nt ?
Of course, forward castes aren't happy with the situation, in spite of having a larger representation than their proportion in the population. The problem is that the total number of seats available is so low that most people are left out. But this is true of every single category, and not just FCs. Many of us, belonging to the forward castes, have a lot of friends who are "left out", and feel outraged that its due to reservations ( though many FC candidates score lower than even the reserved-category cut-off marks, and still blame reservations!). But the question to ask is: What about the lakhs of people from the MBCs and BCs who get left out ? There are thousands of farmers' daughters and weavers' sons who either are unable to get to high school, or even if they do, do not get adequate support from home and are unable to afford coaching classes. We seldom know them and do not encounter them in our day-to-day lives. Yet they are real students, who are not only unable to get into these seats, but do not even get the opportunity to compete on an even footing. Are we pre-supposing that these students are all devoid of merit? According to the math above, for every FC friend of ours, there are atleast 5 BC/MBC students who were denied the opportunity to get a seat. Who speaks for them ?
Economic criterion
Such examples immediately bring up the point that reservations have'nt resulted in what they intended to do. Again, experience in Tamilnadu points otherwise. There are any number of good students from backward castes who get into Anna university every year due to reservations, and excel in their careers.
In addition, there is already a provision for excluding the creamy layer of each caste from reservation (the list of conditions that exclude a person from enjoying OBC reservation benefits, is at http://ncbc.nic.in/html/creamylayer.html) so that only the needy get the benefits.
What about purely economic criteria, leaving out caste ? While that might work in an ideal caste-less society, we have to acknowledge that caste is still a huge factor governing societal relationships today. Those who think that "caste is not a factor in urban India anymore", need only look at the matrimonial columns of any popular newspaper.
The supreme court has also ruled that reservations based on purely economic conditions is unconstitutional. Besides, economic conditions can easily change over time, whereas caste does not offer any mobility. That is why, inspite of reservations, it takes a lot of time for real empowerment of the lower castes. And just because a caste is "considered" low, it wont become an OBC. It has to satisfy several conditions to be included as socio-economically" backward , for example that the proportion of graduates is 20% lower than the state or local average (complete list of guidelines at http://ncbcnic.in/html/guideline.html). The outrageous fact is that there still are clearly identifiable castes and sub-castes which fall in such categories, exposing the deep-rooted nature of our caste system.
Conclusion
As AIDers, we have a conscious responsibility to not only appreciate the problems of those from our castes and backgrounds, but also the millons of Indians who are generally unable to take part at all levels in the government education/adiminstration system. Let us go beyond our individual class/caste biases and take a position on the issue.
________________________________________________________________
Mr. Prakash Karat
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Sir,
I apologise for my failing memory.
Bhishma and not Dronacharya disarmed himself in order not to harm "Shikhandi". Arjun made a bed of arrows for Bhishma for him to rest till he decided to die. Dronacharya was foxed by the lie "Aswatthama iti gaja" stated by Dharmaraj Yudhisthir and was killed by Arjun.
My sincere apologies once again.
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
________________________________________________________________
Mr. Prakash Karat
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Sir,
Not even in my wildest dreams I expected you to reply to my mails reproduced below. However as per civilised norms, I expected an acknowledgement at least. How audacious of me ! I forgot that political professionals in our country are not only Gods but Super Gods with super powers to lord over more than a billion unfortunate mortals who could exercise their franchise without fear only when Election Commission intervenes.
You and your ilk lived up to my expectations by not accepting my challenge of introducing at least 75% reservation for SC/ST/OBC for all seats in our parliaments / state assemblies / panchayats / municipal bodies with immediate effect. How silly of me ! How can Gods be SC/ST/OBC ?
In certain parts of the country, people would have liked to present men folks amongst you, bangles. Fortunately, in the part of the country where I grew up, we were inspired by many women folk also compared to whom most of you may appear pygmies and presenting bangles would have been a great dishonour to them.
In my childhood I was fascinated by the character “Shikhandi”. In the Kurukshetra war, Dronacharya, the great Guru disarmed himself in order not to harm “Shikhandi” and grabbing that opportunity by both hands, Arjun killed his own Guru who taught him all that he knew about warfare.
I learnt through media, both electronic and print run by your friends (relatives, if any, included) and foe that the Super Gods have bent their necks by a few seconds, may be in fear of aggravating their spondyloisis and are trying to dupe the public by their creamy layer hypothesis. Obviously, the same creamy layer hypothesis is not applicable to the Super Gods and how can it be, after all, being Super Gods and lording over others is their chosen profession.
I also learnt through media, both electronic and print run by your friends (relatives, if any, included) and foe that Justice Mukherjee Commission’s Report on almost the entire country’s beloved Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose has been rubbished by the central government run by your right hand.
You must be rejoicing as the “Quisling” finally got his just desert. So must be your comrades-in-arms belonging to the party the greatest hero of the land founded.
Alas, to us common Dronarcharyas, the right hand of the democratically elected dynasty is showing behind the “Shikhandi”.
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
________________________________________________________________
Mr. Prakash Karat,
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
Dear Sir,
Now that you have been successful in insulating your comrades-in-arms from being disqualified for holding offices of profit, further to my mail of yesterday to you reproduced below, may I have the audacity to challenge you and your ilk to implement with immediate effect 75% reservation of all seats in all parliaments / state assemblies / panchayats / municipal bodies for SC/ST/OBC ?
That would certainly be leading by example.
Till you do that do you think it would be prudent to introduce the system for higher studies only ?
May I also ask you what is the retirement age you politicians have set for yourselves ? Or is politicking a life time profession ?
Best Regards,
Manojendra Gupta
____________________________________________________________________________
OUR HRD MINISTER SPEAKETH
__________________________________________________________
Decision on quota is final: Arjun
CNN-IBN
QUOTA UNCOATED: Arjun Singh says the decision on the quota issue is made by Parliament.
Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to the Devil's Advocate. As the debate over the reservations for the OBCs divides the country, we ask: What are the government's real intentions? That is the critical questions that I shall put today in an exclusive interview to the Minister for Human Resource Development Arjun Singh.
Karan Thapar:Most of the people would accept that steps are necessary to help the OBCs gain greater access to higher education. The real question is: Why do you believe that reservations is the best way of doing this?
Arjun Singh: I wouldn't like to say much more on this because these are decisions that are taken not by individuals alone. And in this case, the entire Parliament of this country - almost with rare unanimity - has decided to take this decision.
| |
| "Parliament has taken a view and it has taken a decision, I am a servant of Parliament and I will only implement" |
| |
Karan Thapar: Except that Parliament is not infallible. In the Emergency, when it amended the Constitution, it was clearly wrong, it had to reverse its own amendments. So, the question arises: Why does Parliament believe that the reservation is the right way of helping the OBCs?
Arjun Singh: Nobody is infallible. But Parliament is Supreme and at least I, as a Member of Parliament, cannot but accept the supremacy of Parliament.
Karan Thapar: No doubt Parliament is supreme, but the Constitutional amendment that gives you your authorities actually enabling amendment, it is not a compulsory requirement. Secondly, the language of the amendment does not talk about reservations, the language talks about any provision by law for advancement of socially and educationally backward classes. So, you could have chosen anything other than reservations, why reservations?
Arjun Singh: Because as I said, that was the 'will and desire of the Parliament'.
Karan Thapar: Do you personally also, as Minister of Human Resource Development, believe that reservations is the right and proper way to help the OBCs?
Arjun Singh: Certainly, that is one of the most important ways to do it.
Karan Thapar: The right way?
Arjun Singh: Also the right way.
Karan Thapar: In which case, lets ask a few basic questions. We are talking about the reservations for the OBCs in particular. Do you know what percentage of the Indian population is OBC? Mandal puts it at 52 per cent, the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) at 32 per cent, the National Family and Health Survey at 29.8 per cent, which is the correct figure?
Arjun Singh: I think that should be decided by people who are more knowledgeable. But the point is that the OBCs form a fairly sizeable percentage of our population.
Karan Thapar: No doubt, but the reason why it is important to know 'what percentage' they form is that if you are going to have reservations for them, then you must know what percentage of the population they are, otherwise you don't know whether they are already adequately catered to in higher educational institutions or not.
Arjun Singh: That is obvious - they are not.
Karan Thapar: Why is it obvious?
Arjun Singh: Obvious because it is something which we all see.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that the NSSO, which is a government appointed body, has actually in its research in 1999 - which is the most latest research shown - that 23.5 per cent of all university seats are already with the OBCs. And that is just 8.5 per cent less than what the NSSO believes is the OBC share of the population. So, for a difference of 8 per cent, would reservations be the right way of making up the difference?
Arjun Singh: I wouldn't like to go behind all this because, as I said, Parliament has taken a view and it has taken a decision, I am a servant of Parliament and I will only implement.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely, Parliament has taken a view, I grant it. But what people question is the simple fact - Is there a need for reservations? If you don't know what percentage of the country is OBC and if, furthermore, the NSSO is correct in pointing out that already 23.5 per cent of the college seats are with the OBC, then you don't have a case in terms of need.
Arjun Singh: College seats, I don't know.
Karan Thapar: According to the NSSO - which is a government appointed body - 23.5 per cent of the college seats are already with the OBCs.
Arjun Singh: What do you mean by college seats?
Karan Thapar: University seats, seats of higher education.
Arjun Singh: Well, I don't know I have not come across that so far.
Karan Thapar: So, when critics say to you that you don't have a case for reservation in terms of need, what do you say to them?
Arjun Singh: I have said what I had to say and the point is that that is not an issue for us to now debate.
Karan Thapar: You mean the chapter is now closed?
Arjun Singh: The decision has been taken.
Karan Thapar: Regardless of whether there is a need or not, the decision is taken and it is a closed chapter.
Arjun Singh: So far as I can see, it is a closed chapter and that is why I have to implement what all Parliament has said.
| |
| "So far as I can see, it is a closed chapter and that is why I have to implement what all Parliament has said" |
| |
Karan Thapar: Minister, it is not just in terms of 'need' that your critics question the decision to have reservation for OBCs in higher education. More importantly, they question whether reservations themselves are efficacious and can work.
For example, a study done by the IITs themselves shows that 50 per cent of the IIT seats for the SCs and STs remain vacant, and for the remaining 50 per cent, 25 per cent are the candidates who even after six years fail to get their degrees. So, clearly, in their case, reservations are not working.
Arjun Singh: I would only say that on this issue, it would not be correct to go by all these figures that have been paraded.
Karan Thapar: You mean the IIT figures themselves could be dubious?
Arjun Singh: Not dubious, but I think that is not the last word.
Karan Thapar: All right, maybe the IIT may not be the last word, let me then quote to you the report of the Parliamentary Committee on the welfare for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes - that is a Parliamentary body.
It says, that looking at the Delhi University, between 1995 and 2000, just half the seats for under-graduates at the Scheduled Castes level and just one-third of the seats for under-graduates at the Scheduled Tribes level were filled. All the others went empty, unfilled. So, again, even in Delhi University, reservations are not working.
Arjun Singh: If they are not working, it does not mean that for that reason we don't need them. There must be some other reason why they are not working and that can be certainly probed and examined. But to say that for this reason, 'no reservations need to be done' is not correct.
Karan Thapar: Fifty years after the reservations were made, statistics show, according to The Hindustan Times, that overall in India, only 16 per cent of the places in higher education are occupied by SCs and STs. The quota is 22.5 per cent, which means that only two-thirds of the quota is occupied. One-third is going waste, it is being denied to other people.
Arjun Singh: As I said, the kind of figures that have been brought out, in my perception, do not reflect the realities. Realities are something much more and, of course, there is an element of prejudice also.
Karan Thapar: But these are figures that come from a Parliamentary Committee. It can't be prejudiced; they are your own colleagues.
Arjun Singh: Parliamentary Committee has given the figures, but as to why this has not happened, that is a different matter.
Karan Thapar: I put it to you that you don't have a case for reservations in terms of need, you don't have a case for reservations in terms of their efficacy, why then, are you insisting on extending them to the OBCs?
Arjun Singh: I don't want to use that word, but I think that your argument is basically fallacious.
Karan Thapar: But it is based on all the facts available in the public domain.
Arjun Singh: Those are facts that need to be gone into with more care. What lies behind those facts, why this has not happened, that is also a fact.
Karan Thapar: Let’s approach the issue of reservations differently in that case. Reservations mean that a lesser-qualified candidate gets preference over a more qualified candidate, solely because in this case, he or she happens to be an OBC. In other words, the upper castes are being penalised for being upper caste.
Arjun Singh: Nobody is being penalised and that is a factor that we are trying to address. I think that the Prime Minister will be talking to all the political parties and will be putting forward a formula, which will see that nobody is being penalised.
Karan Thapar: I want very much to talk about that formula, but before we come to talk about how you are going to address concerns, let me point one other corollary: Reservations also gives preference and favour to caste over merit. Is that acceptable in a modern society?
Arjun Singh: I don't think the perceptions of modern society fit India entirely.
Karan Thapar: You mean India is not a modern society and therefore can't claim to be treated as one?
Arjun Singh: It is emerging as a modern society, but the parameters of a modern society do not apply to large sections of the people in this country.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you Jawaharlal Nehru, a man whom you personally admire enormously. On the 27th of June 1961 wrote to the Chief Ministers of the day as follows: I dislike any kind of reservations. If we go in for any kind of reservations on communal and caste basis, we will swamp the bright and able people and remain second-rate or third-rate. The moment we encourage the second-rate, we are lost. And then he adds pointedly: This way lies not only folly, but also disaster. What do you say to Jawaharlal Nehru today?
Arjun Singh: Jawaharlal Nehru was a great man in his own right and not only me, but everyone in India accept his view.
Karan Thapar: But you are just about to ignore his advice.
Arjun Singh: No. Are you aware that it was Jawaharlal Nehru who introduced the first amendment regarding OBCs?
| |
| "I don't think the perceptions of modern society fit India entirely. It is emerging as a modern society, but the parameters of a modern society do not apply to large sections of the people in this country" |
| |
Karan Thapar: Yes, and I am talking about Jawaharlal Nehru in 1961, when clearly he had changed his position, he said, “I dislike any kind of reservations”.
Arjun Singh: I don't think one could take Panditji's position at any point of time and then overlook what he had himself initiated.
Karan Thapar: Am I then to understand that regardless of the case that is made against reservations in terms of need, regardless of the case that has been made against reservations in terms of efficacy, regardless of the case that has been made against reservations in terms of Jawaharlal Nehru, you remain committed to extending reservations to the OBCs.
Arjun Singh: I said because that is the will of Parliament. And I think that common decisions that are taken by Parliament have to be honoured.
Karan Thapar: Let me ask you a few basic questions. If reservations are going to happen for the OBCs in higher education, what percentage of reservations are we talking about?
Arjun Singh: No, that I can't say because that has yet to be decided.
Karan Thapar: Could it be less than 27 per cent?
Arjun Singh: I can't say anything on that, I have told you in the very beginning that at this point of time it is not possible for me to.
Karan Thapar: Quite right. If you can't say, then that also means that the figure has not been decided.
Arjun Singh: The figure will be decided, it has not been decided yet.
Karan Thapar: The figure has not been decided. So, therefore the figure could be 27, but it could be less than 27, too?
Arjun Singh: I don't want to speculate on that because as I said, that is a decision which will be taken by Parliament.
Karan Thapar: Whatever the figure, one thing is certain that when the reservations for OBCs happen, the total quantum of reservations will go up in percentage terms. Will you compensate by increasing the total number of seats in colleges, universities, IITs and IIMs so that the other students don't feel deprived.
Arjun Singh: That is one of the suggestions that has been made and is being seriously considered.
Karan Thapar: Does it find favour with you as a Minister for Human Resource Development?
Arjun Singh: Whatever suggestion comes, we are committed to examine it.
Karan Thapar: You may be committed to examine it, but do you as minister believe that that is the right way forward?
Arjun Singh: That could be one of the ways, but not the only way.
Karan Thapar: What are the other ways?
Arjun Singh: I don't know. That is for the Prime Minister and the other ministers to decide.
Karan Thapar: One way forward would be to increase the total number of seats.
Arjun Singh: Yes, definitely.
Karan Thapar: But the problem is that, as the Times of India points out, we are talking of an increase of perhaps as much as 53 per cent. Given the constraints you have in terms of faculty and infrastructure, won't that order of increase dilute the quality of education?
Arjun Singh: I would only make one humble request, don't go by The Times of India and The Hindustan Times about faculty and infrastructure, because they are trying to focus on an argument which they have made.
Karan Thapar: All right, I will not go by The Times of India, let me instead go by Sukhdev Thorat, the Chairman of the UGC. He points out that today, at higher education levels - that is all universities, IITs and IIMs - there is already a 1.2 lakh vacancy number. Forty per cent of these are in teaching staff, which the IIT faculty themselves point out that they have shortages of up to 30 per cent. Given those two constraint, can you increase the number of seats?
Arjun Singh: That can be addressed and that shortage can be taken care of.
Karan Thapar: But it can't be taken care of in one swoop, it will take several years to do it.
Arjun Singh: I don't know whether it can be taken care of straightway or in stages, that is a subject to be decided.
| |
| "I would only make one humble request, don't go by the media, because they are trying to focus on an argument which they have made." |
| |
Karan Thapar: Let me ask you bluntly, if you were to agree to compensate for reservations for OBCs by increasing the number of seats, would that increase happen at one go, or would it be staggered over a period of two-three or four year old process.
Arjun Singh: As I told you, it is an issue that I cannot comment upon at this moment because that is under examination.
Karan Thapar: So, it may happen in one go and it may happen in a series of several years.
Arjun Singh: I can't speculate on that because that is not something on which I am free to speak on today.
Karan Thapar: Will the reservation for OBCs, whatever figure your Committee decides on, will it happen in one go, or will it slowly be introduced in stages?
Arjun Singh: That also I cannot say because, as I told you, all these issues are under consideration.
Karan Thapar: Which means that everything that is of germane interest to the people concerned is at the moment 'under consideration' and the government is not able to give any satisfaction to the students who are deeply concerned.
Arjun Singh: That is not the point. The government knows what to do and it will do what is needed.
Karan Thapar: But if the government knows what to do, why won't you tell me what the government wants to do?
Arjun Singh: Because unless the decision is taken, I cannot tell you.
Karan Thapar: But you can share with me as the minister what you are thinking.
Arjun Singh: No.
Karan Thapar: So, in other words, we are manitaining a veil of secrecy and the very people who are concerned...
Arjun Singh: I am not maintaining a veil of secrecy. I am only telling you what propriety allows me to tell you.
Karan Thapar: Propriety does not allow you to share with the people who are protesting on the streets what you are thinking of?
Arjun Singh: I don't think that that can happen all the time.
Karan Thapar: But there are people who feel that their lives and their futures are at stake and they are undertaking fasts until death.
Arjun Singh: It is being hyped up, I don't want to go into that.
Karan Thapar: Do you have no sympathy for them?
Arjun Singh: I have every sympathy.
Karan Thapar: But you say it is being hyped up.
Arjun Singh: Yes, it is hyped up.
Karan Thapar: So, then, what sympathy are you showing?
Arjun Singh: I am showing sympathy to them and not to those who are hyping it up.
Karan Thapar: The CPM says that if the reservations for the OBCs are to happen, then what is called the ‘creamy layer’ should be excluded. How do you react to that?
Arjun Singh: The ‘creamy layer’ issue has already been taken care of by the Supreme Court.
Karan Thapar: That was vis-a-vis jobs in employment, what about at the university level, should they be excluded there as well because you are suggesting that the answer is yes?
Arjun Singh: That could be possible.
Karan Thapar: It could be possible that the ‘creamy layer’ is excluded from reservations for OBCs in higher education?
Arjun Singh: It could be, but I don't know whether it would happen actually.
Karan Thapar: Many people say that if reservations for OBCs in higher education happen, then the children of beneficiaries should not be entitled to claim the same benefit.
Arjun Singh: Why?
Karan Thapar: So that there is always a shrinking base and the rate doesn't proliferate.
Arjun Singh: I don't think that that is a very logical way of looking at it.
Karan Thapar: Is that not acceptable to you?
Arjun Singh: No, it is not the logical way of looking at it.
Karan Thapar: So, with the possible exception of the creamy layer exclusion, reservation for OBCs in higher education will be almost identical to the existing reservations for SC/STs?
Arjun Singh: Except for the percentage.
Karan Thapar: Except for the percentage.
Arjun Singh: Yes.
Karan Thapar: So, in every other way, they will be identical.
Arjun Singh: Yes, in every other way.
| |
| "Actually, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had a meeting in which OBC leaders were called to convince them that this would give them the desired advantage" |
| |
Karan Thapar: Mr Arjun Singh, on the 5th of April when you first indicated that the Government was considering reservation for OBCs in higher education, was the Prime Minister in agreement that this was the right thing to do?
Arjun Singh: I think, there is a very motivated propaganda on this issue. Providing reservation to OBCs was in the public domain right from December 2005, when Parliament passed the enabling resolution.
Karan Thapar: Quite true. But had the Prime Minister specifically agreed on or before 5th of April to the idea?
Arjun Singh: Well, I am telling you it was already there. A whole Act was made, the Constitution was amended and the Prime Minister was fully aware of what this is going to mean. Actually, he had a meeting in which OBC leaders were called to convince them that this would give them the desired advantage. And they should, therefore, support this resolution. And at that meeting, he himself talked to them. Now, how do you say that he was unaware?
Karan Thapar: But were you at all aware that the Prime Minister might be in agreement with what was about to happen but might not wish it disclosed publicly at that point of time? Were you aware of that?
Arjun Singh: It was already there in public domain, that's what I am trying to tell you.
Karan Thapar: Then answer this to me. Why are members of the PMO telling journalists that Prime Minister was not consulted and that you jumped the gun?
Arjun Singh: Well, I don't know which member of the PMO you are talking about unless you name him.
Karan Thapar: Is there a conspiracy to make you the Fall Guy?
Arjun Singh: Well, I don't know whether there is one or there is not. But Fall Guys are not made in this way. And I am only doing what was manifestly clear to every one, was cleared by the party and the Prime Minister. There is no question of any personal agenda.
Karan Thapar: They say that, in fact, you brought up this issue to embarrass the Prime Minister.
Arjun Singh: Why should I embarrass the Prime Minister? I am with him. I am part of his team.
Karan Thapar: They say that you have a lingering, forgive the word, jealousy because Sonia Gandhi chose Manmohan Singh and not you as Prime Minister.
Arjun Singh: Well, that is canard which is below contempt. Only that person can say this who doesn't know what kind of respect and regard I hold for Sonia Gandhi. She is the leader. Whatever she decides is acceptable to me.
Karan Thapar: They also say that you brought this issue up because you felt that the Prime Minister had been eating into your portfolio. Part of it had gone to Renuka Chaudhury and, in fact, your new deputy minister Purandar Sridevi had taken over certain parts. This was your way of getting back.
Arjun Singh: No one was taking over any part. This is a decision which the Prime Minister makes as to who has to have what portfolio. And he asked Mrs Renuka Devi to take it and he cleared it with me first.
Karan Thapar: So there is no animus on your part?
Arjun Singh: Absolutely not.
Karan Thapar: They say that you did this because you resented the Prime Minister's popular image in the country, that this was your way of embroiling him in a dispute that will make him look not like a modern reformer but like an old-fashioned, family-hold politician instead.
Arjun Singh: Well, the Tammany Hall political stage is over. He is our Prime Minister and every decision he has taken is in the full consent with his Cabinet and I don't think there can be any blame on him.
| |
| "I have not jumped the gun. If this is an issue, which is sensitive, everyone has to treat it that way." |
| |
Karan Thapar: One, then, last quick question. Do you think this is an issue, which is a sensitive issue, where everyone knew there would have been passions and emotions that would have been aroused has been handled as effectively as it should have been?
Arjun Singh: Well, I have not done anything on it. I have not, sort of what you call, jumped the gun. If this is an issue, which is sensitive, everyone has to treat it that way.
Karan Thapar: But your conscience as HRD Minister is clear?
Arjun Singh: Absolutely clear.
Karan Thapar: There is nothing that you could have done to make it easier for the young students?
Arjun Singh: Well, I am prepared to do anything that can be done. And it is being attempted.
Karan Thapar: For seven weeks, they have been protesting in the hot sun. No minister has gone there to appease them, to allay their concerns, to express sympathy for them. Have politicians let the young people of India down?
Arjun Singh: Well, I myself called them. They all came in this very room.
Karan Thapar: But you are the only one.
Arjun Singh: You are accusing me only. No one else is being accused.
Karan Thapar: What about the Government of India? Has the Government of India failed to respond adequately?
Arjun Singh: From the Government of India also, the Defence Minister met them.
Karan Thapar: Only recently.
Arjun Singh: That is something because everyone was busy with the elections.
Karan Thapar: For seven weeks no one met them.
Arjun Singh: No, but we are very concerned. Certainly, all of us resent the kind of force that was used. I condemned it the very first day it happened.
Karan Thapar: All right, Mr Arjun Singh. We have reached the end of this interview. Thank you very much for speaking on the subject.
