Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site topaz.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!bhatnaga
From: bhatnaga@topaz.ARPA (Bhatnaga)
Newsgroups: net.nlang.india
Subject: Re: In defense of caste-based reservation
Message-ID: <1672@topaz.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 18-Apr-85 21:40:38 EST
Article-I.D.: topaz.1672
Posted: Thu Apr 18 21:40:38 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 01:56:47 EST
References: <403@sftri.UUCP> <1638@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 92

> In article <403@sftri.UUCP> rajeev@sftri.UUCP (S.Rajeev) writes:
> 
> >
> >The recent debate about this has prompted me to point out a few things
> >that I feel justify caste-based reservation schemes.
> >
> 
>   I disagree with the premise that anything can justify a policy which
> differentiates between individuals on the basis of birth. What follows
> is a point by point rebuttal of some of Rajeev's arguments.
> 
> >                           This is really a non-issue, I think,
> >because as far as I know, there are income limits that apply in most
> >cases, especially the backward castes (as opposed to SC/ST). So it
> >really benefits the lower-income lower-caste person.
> >
> 
>   The fallacy is obvious: the issue is that while a distinction based on
> income might be (I personally think it is) justifiable, one based on 
> caste is most certainly not. Clearly, a scheme which benefits 'lower-caste,
> lower-income' people is not justifiable. What of 'non-lower-caste, lower-
> income people'? There are many such.
>   
> >                I think reservation should exits as long as certain
> >sections of society are demonstrably getting less than their share of the
> >pie.
> >
> 
>   I agree. But don't make 'certain sections' synonymous with 'certain castes'.
> 
> >                 People will make class-based distinctions rather than
> >caste-based distinctions.
> >
> 
>   I'm not sure I understand this :-) !!
> 
> >
> >Finally, I have often heard that giving an underqualified Harijan a medical
> >college seat is akin to giving him/her "a licence to kill". But remember, a
> >large number of upper-caste doctors finished bottom of their classes, and
> >some of them are surely using the above licence :-)
> >
> 
>   No system is perfect, and there are bound to be people who rise to (or
> beyond!) their level of incompetence. This does not mean we throw up
> our hands and grant positions of responsibility to those who are clearly
> incapable of handling it - this applies equally to an incompetent 
> Harijan benefitting from misguided reservations and to an incompetent
> 'higher-caste' person benefitting from some other loophole.

I agree with what Raghunath has said in response to Rajeevs original 
message. I shall like to add some thing more. Most people will agree 
that caste based reservations are theoretically wrong. Any concept 
that divides humanbeings on the basis of birth is wrong and caste is 
one such concept.

	Some years ago ( after independence to be exact ) our policy
planners made a mistake by granting caste based reservations and we 
have lived with that mistake all these years. Our problem is that 
we have no way to rid this situation overnight. Now we are at a situation
where whatever decision the government  takes, will ignite a spark.
We are seeing violence in Gujarat (and elsewhere) against the 
reservations. If reservations are scrapped overnight, we will see 
worse violence and worse change in our social structure than this.


  	One thing that I have noticed is that nothing is going on 
in India to reassure the lower castes. Except the reservations we 
have not done any thing to boost the morale of the downtrodden.
We have not even told them that we did injustice to them for 
hundreds of years. I am talking of social and not governmental 
level. On social level our society is still caste ridden. 


	What can we do? I suggest that we should think of 
abolishing reservations on a time-scale manner. Today if we have 
17% reservations, we can reduce it at a rate of, say 1% a year. 
And, most likely, by the time we abolish the reservations to a 
zero level, we shall not need them any more. But more than any thing 
else we need to attack the problem on mental (and not political level).
Even if we don't (current generations) discriminate on the basis of 
caste, our parents and grand parents did ( we don't have to go 
many generations behind ). And if we are proud of the achievements 
of the past generations, we are culpable for their sins (don't 
ask me to quote sections of the penal code; this is not a legal 
but moral setting ).

	I again repeat reservation is an evil, but we can't rid it
over night.


*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***