 |
Purushottam
Agrawal |
The Indian government’s
intention of introducing caste based quotas for the “Other Backward
Classes” in centrally funded institutions of higher learning and
the prime minister’s suggestion to the private sector to ‘voluntarily
go in for reservation’, has once again sparked off a debate on
the merits and demerits of caste-based reservations. Unfortunately,
the predictable divide between the votaries of “social justice”
on one hand and those advocating “merit” on the other seems
to have once again camouflaged the real issues. It is necessary to take
a holistic and non-partisan view of the issues involved.
The hue and cry
about “sacrificing merit” is untenable simply because merit
is after all a social construct and it cannot be determined objectively
in a historically unjust and unequal context. The idea of competitive
merit will be worthy of serious attention only in a broadly egalitarian
context. But then, caste is not the only obstacle in the way of an egalitarian
order.
After all, economic
conditions, educational opportunities and discrimination on the basis
of gender also contribute to the denial of opportunity to express one’s
true merit and worth. It is interesting to note that in the ongoing
debate, one side refuses to see the socially constructed nature of the
notion of merit, while the other side refuses to recognise the multiplicity
of the mechanisms of exclusion with equal vehemence.
The idea of caste-based
reservations is justified by the logic of social justice. This implies
the conscious attempt to restructure a given social order in such a
way that individuals belonging to the traditionally and structurally
marginalised social groups get adequate opportunities to actualise their
potential and realise their due share in the resources available.
In any society,
particularly in one as diverse and complex as the Indian society, this
is going to be a gigantic exercise and must not be reduced to just one
aspect of state policy. Seen in this light, caste-based reservation
has to work in tandem with other policies ensuring the elimination of
the structures of social marginalisation and denial of access. It has
to be seen as a means of achieving social justice and not an end in
itself. By the same logic it must be assessed and audited from time
to time like any other social policy and economic strategy.
 |
| |
Can
we say that a pupil from a panchayat school in Bihar is equipped
to compete with an alumnus of Doon School on an equal footing,
even if both of them belong to the same caste? |
Hence, it is important,
to discuss reservation in the holistic context of much required social
restructuring and not to convert it into a fetish of ‘political
correctness’. Admittedly, caste remains a social reality and a
mechanism of oppression in Indian society. But can we say that caste
is the only mechanism of oppression? Can we say with absolute certainty
that poverty amongst the so-called upper castes has been eradicated?
Can we say that the regions of Northeast, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh are
on par with the glittering metros of Delhi and Mumbai? Can we say that
a pupil from a panchayat school in Bihar is equipped to compete with
an alumnus of Doon School on an equal footing, even if both of them
belong to the same caste group? One of my students once remarked that
he was regularly compelled to swim across a rivulet in order to reach
his school, and the rivulet in question did not distinguish between
Brahmins and dalits. Incidentally, this young man happens to be a Brahmin
by birth! Can we also say that gender plays no role in denial of social
opportunities? After all, this society discriminates against girls even
before they are born. What to talk of access or opportunities, they’re
denied birth itself. Such discrimination exists across religious and
caste lines.
Moreover, the question
is: do we want to eliminate caste as a factor of social relations and
political processes or do we want to perpetuate it forever? Is it not
true that by treating caste as the only medium of oppression and hence
by focusing all remedial measures on caste alone, we have only added
to the longevity of caste as the determining factor of social identity?
Individuals have been virtually turned into the epitomes of the caste
of their birth — denying the multiple identities that every individual
perforce carries. This also helps the powerful amongst the generally
disempowered sections to corner most of the benefits of caste-based
reservation. Caste, which in reality is only one of the features of
identity at the individual level and the manifestation of an abhorrent
social order at the social and structural level, has been turned into
the essential identity of individual citizens. Such a situation helps
only those politicians who are in search of shortcuts to power. It is
harmful for the cause of a modern social democracy as well as to the
cause of individuals in need of social justice and related affirmative
action.
There seems to be
a deliberate attempt to mislead public opinion by projecting caste-based
reservation as the only form of affirmative action. Affirmative action
has to “affirm” the social will to rectify unjust structures
and practices in existence. Any society has a multiplicity of such structures
and practices. Any programme of affirmative action has to tackle all
these factors and not elevate any one factor to the level of a political
“fetish”.
Some of the votaries
of caste-based reservation in our country liken it to the American model
of affirmative action. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a
matter of fact, the spirit of AA is contrary to the stagnant quota system
in place in our country. The American system does not have any pre-fixed
quota for those belonging to historically disadvantaged ethnicities.
Marquita Sykes defines the American model as follows: " Affirmative
action, the set of public policies and initiatives designed to help
eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, colour, religion,
sex, or national origin. This model is all about the provision
of opportunities to those belonging to the historically disadvantaged
communities so that they can be integrated into the mainstream. This
has helped both the corporate sector and public institutions in America
to reflect the diversity of that society to a significant extent. The
American model does not focus exclusively on ethnicity; gender and economic
factors are taken into account as well.
A similar comprehensive
model of Affirmative Action was in place in the Jawaharlal Nehru University
admissions policy till 1983, and undoubtedly helped JNU to reflect diversity
of Indian society along with maintaining the highest academic standards
in the country. Due to administrative expediency, this system was revoked
in favour of the easier and politically more suitable system of flat
caste-based reservation.
I hereby propose
a model of affirmative action that I will call MIRAA — Multiple
Index Related Affirmative Action. As the name suggests, this model will
take into account several factors when a candidate is considered for
admission or employment.
In the specific
situation of our country, MIRAA will consist of the following indices:
1. Caste/Tribe
2. Gender
3. Economic status of family
4. Kind of schooling received
5. Region where candidate spent his/her formative years
6. Status as a first generation learner/educational achievement in the
family
Let me explain
how this system will work. There will be no pre-fixed quotas. MIRAA
will be operative on hundred percent of the available seats for education
or employment. Suppose there is a 100-mark scale for entry to a college/organisation.
These 100 marks can be distributed amongst entrance test, interview,
and academic performance as per the wishes of the institution in question.
First and foremost, all candidates would be ranked on this hundred mark
scale, depending on their performance in the entrance test, interview
etc. Then MIRAA would be applied and each candidate irrespective of
their caste can potentially benefit from it, due to the different indices,
which make up the system.
The maximum points
a person can get under MIRAA are 30 and the minimum is 0. Now the candidate’s
MIRAA subscore is added to the score s/he achieved in the admission
process described above. This will be the total score. The candidates
whose total score clears the cut-off for a particular subject/job will
then be offered the position. (see boxes on facing page)
Hence, this system
does take into account both the qualification of the individual as well
as the demands of social and economic justice. Unlike the quota/percentage
system which confines the social justice mechanism only to a fraction
of the available vacancies, MIRAA brings each and every seat under the
ambit of social and economic justice.
This proposal doesn’t
take into account the religion of the applicant, as it is based upon
the realisation the ubiquitous nature of the institution of caste in
Indian society. Hence, the members of marginalised and disempowered
communities across the religious spectrum will get due benefits.
For example, a Kidwai
or Raza Muslim will not be awarded any points under caste index while
an Ansari or a Salmani will get points in accordance with obc status.
The same logic applies to Christians and others as well. I request the
reader to think, consider and react to MIRAA.
The writer teaches at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi
TEHELKA
QUOTA DEBATE: FEEDBACK
