It is rarely that Khullamkhulla receives reactions to its articles from the handful of people who may have been accessing the content of this low profile free-expression site. However, the OBC quota issue seems to have stirred up a few. We are glad to post these reactions as well as their rejoinders on the site.
 

Sukla Sen on the Reservation Imbroglio
 

The desirability and efficacy of affirmative actions in the form of caste-based reservations, in educational institutions at various levels and job opportunities, has again come to occupy the centre-stage of our social discourse.

So far as the government of India is concerned, two moves are underway. One, extend reservation to the OBCs even in the portals of higher education including the "Iinstitutes of excellence". While this is partly a new initiative, it is partly also to offset the earlier Supreme Court verdict drastically curtailing the scope for such caste-based reservations, by doing away with the same in the private institutions, and upholding/promoting money-power based reservations - just not implicitly, but also explicitly by validating management/NRI quota. There is also another move to extend job reservations to the organised private sectors.

So far as the reservation in the field of education is concerned, South Indian states are already having systems in place, which are far more radical than the one now proposed by the MoHRD. Interestingly, the ongoing student agitation led almost exclusively by the medical students has so far failed to cause any comparable impact in the southern (and eastern) states.

The aim of the current agitation, even if it appears to lie beyond the realm of feasibility, is just not to scuttle the new move granting the OBCs special quota in the domain of higher, or tertiary, education but to reverse and scrap the present system as well catering principally to the SCs and STs. The agitating (upper caste) students must also be having the contemplated job reservation in the private sectors on their minds.

The anti-reservationists in the main put forward the argument of 'merit' over 'equity'. They also challenge that reservation promotes equity. Now in so far as the 'merit' argument is concerned, the anti-reservationists are evidently on a sticky wicket. These self-styled champions of 'merit' have nothing to say against various quotas, in the (mainly private) educational institutions, explicitly linked to payment of (much) larger than usual amount of money - in terms of capitation fess, higher tuition fees etc. (There is no murmur against the continually rising cost of education at all levels. In fact, it is even welcomed as a system which would help filtering out the ‘non-meritorious’. Money, in this case, is considered coterminous with ‘merit’.) The fact that acquiring of 'merit', to be established through various competitive exams, also calls for expensive tutorials - not excluding purchase of question papers etc., apart from education in premier institutes entailing heavy expenses is simply glossed over. The highly non-level playing field that a student from the disadvantaged and discriminated against castes is compelled to face in terms of highly asymmetrical distribution of accumulated cultural capital, apart from economic conditions etc., is hardly ever acknowledged.

The affirmative actions, on the other hand, apart from promoting social equity and thereby integration, actively facilitate enlarging the social base/pool of the ‘meritorious’ by providing opportunities to come up in life to the members of those disadvantaged and traditionally oppressed ‘majorities’, at the lower/lowest rungs of the social ladder, who’d have been otherwise excluded. Hence the affirmative actions actually help to raise the level of the ‘merit’ of the society taken as a whole.

But the question whether and how, or rather to what extent, reservations actualise its promised objectives and whether it effectively preempts other positive measures, arguably far more fundamental, imperative for radical restructuring of the social hierarchy and democratisation of all spheres of life, of course, is a much trickier one and calls for a far closer and dispassionate look into the whole set of related issues. But this is hardly possible in an atmosphere charged with irrational emotions where the narrow self-interests of a rather thin slice of the incumbent elite is tried to be blatantly and aggressively sold and foisted upon the rest of the society in the name of ‘merit’ and all that.

Khullamkhulla Rejoinder to Sen's Views

Affirmative action that gives rise to a new series of injustices is counter-productive, and divisive. When it is used as a ploy to bribe, create, and nurture vote banks, it gets dangerous and destructive as well.  It sends a clear message to the electorally marginalized blocks of population that their voices will not be heard and they are being discriminated against and persecuted with due constitutional and legislative sanctions. The democratic processes really become futile and extremely frustrating from their perspective since a brute and immoral majority bulldozes them into submission. Strangely, the proponents of OBC caste quota use this very argument to support their unjustified stand.

We strongly disagree with Sen when he keeps harping on the theme that the OBCs (Other Business Castes) were traditionally oppressed. They were not. This is pure bunkum and bullshit. To equate and club them with SCs and STs is blatant mischief mongering. Khullamkhulla has been vehemently and repeatedly putting forth the facts. Sukla conveniently overlooks them. How can a dairyman or a trader or a barber be considered oppressed? Can you really equate an Ahir with a Chamar? Lalu Yaadav was not forced to live in a ghetto as an outcast on the outer fringes of his village?

And why to conjure 'those who have money get admissions in professional courses and it is as good as having a quota for the non-meritorious rich' sort of stupid argument out of thin air? Does Sen really think that the rich among the OBCs do not use their money power to have their nitwit wards admitted to these courses the way upper caste parents do? The fact is that the rich OBC parents are going to have a windfall as their nitwit wards may get admission in prestigious courses through the quota route without denting their bank balances. The meritorious but poor OBCs will get into the same courses in the general category. So, the OBCs will enjoy the benefits of quota as well as non quota categories, at the cost of the poor and meritorious ECCs (Excluded Castes & Communities).

And who is supporting the 'admissions for donations' policy of moneymaking and privately run educational institutions? Nationalise them and let merit alone count in all the institutions of learning. Charge minimal fees from students, make the admission process transparent, and remove all colour, gender, physical, regional, caste, community, religious, ideological, urban, and rural biases in the selection process. Fund and run them with the best of the faculty and facilities. This is the kind of affirmative action we need.

Why does Sen advance the preposterous argument that 'equity' is opposed to 'merit' or vice versa? Equity and merit are complimentary concepts. Inequity is the result of non-recognition of merit. We must not forget the Eklavya story where a heartless teacher maimed a poor and dedicated student of his to kill competition and promote the career of his favourite pupil, a prince. All socialists and communists have all along rued that the upper classes exploit and alienate the truly talented and meritorious. The foundation of the Marxist philosophy, theory, and practice is built on the merit principle alone.

The ‘cultural capital argument’ seems to be the most lethal teer in the tarkash of caste quota proponents. What cultural capital are we talking about? It was lost a long time ago for Indians (Hindus) of various castes and creeds. Sen forgets that India was under the yoke of Muslim and Christian rule for more than nine hundred years. All of them did their best to exploit the caste differences among Hindus to perpetuate their rule. In these regimes, the upper castes and the OBCs were the targets of bloody and brutal repression and the untouchables were the subjects of religious conversions through deceitful means. These foreign rulers could have very limited success though in dividing and destroying the Hindu body politic. The proponents of caste quotas are doing what the foreigners could not do in more than nine hundred years of their rule. They are losing the sense of social balance and charting out a dangerous course driven by sheer greed for power and freebies. And if the OBCs lacked cultural, social, and political capital, how come they have come to rule all the major Indian states within 59 years of our independence?

When are we going to purge our intellect of ‘the level playing field argument’? There is nothing like a level playing field in any society. Everyone levels one’s own field and plays ‘Kabaddi’ or sows the seeds of prosperity and growth in it or lets it lie barren. All of us are born with advantages and disadvantages. We struggle and then make it in life. Some like Rahul Gandhi do not struggle yet they remain at the helm by virtue of what their ancestors left behind for them. The problem actually is with their ancestors who insisted on leaving their litter behind. Now, if someone blames Sukla Sen and the writer of these lines for having been born to their parents and for having a family history, what would you call it but sheer stupidity. History gets appended to us even before we create it. This is the truism of life that should be accepted with or without a pinch of salt, whatever you prefer. Yet, if you want to wage a war over it, let us bare our teeth and claws and fight like dogs.

The OBC quotas are patently unjust, and wrong. Those who believe in truth and justice should oppose its constitutional and social validation vehemently. Let this struggle get as bloody and bitter as it can get. Let there be another internecine Mahabharata war over this issue if that is what is needed to resolve it. Truth and justice must prevail at any cost.  ‘Dharma’ must prevail ultimately.

RKS

Rajeev Kalelkar writes…

Editor,

I request you to end reservation in cleaning, and sweeping roads. I would love to see you and your honourable friends to do these jobs-

Rajeev Kalelkar

Khullamkhulla replies...

Hi

Thanks for the response. It seems you have not read the khullamkhulla articles carefully. The reservation for SCs and STs is completely justified because they were the true victims of our caste traditions for thousands of years according to these articles.

The OBCs are the business castes from khullamkhulla point of view. They were the real beneficiaries of our caste traditions. They were never discriminated against. They are not untouchables and they never faced social ostracism. They are not made to live in ghettos like the SCs like Chamars and Mahars. They are economically as good or bad as the ECCs (Excluded Castes & Communities). They also enjoy a lot of political power. They were never forced to do a particularly demeaning job. They conducted their business, trade, and profession of their own free will and choice. Their children proudly carried on the family business and traditions. They have always been free to pursue alternative careers and they have been particularly  successful in politics since independence. It will be grossly wrong to compare them with the SCs and STs.

As far as road sweeping jobs for the ECC are concerned, the reservation policy will be applicable there as well. There will be many upper caste youth who might take up such jobs if available. And they do take up such jobs. You will find many upper caste peons, darbaans, housekeeping workers, and ward boys all around you.

This is the reality. None ever objected to the reservation for the SCs and STs even though they were not an electorally significant population. Ambedkar could never win a single parliamentary election. Even today, the Dalits of Maharshatra have to seek the support of others to get represented in the parliament and legislative assemblies.

Please consider these points. You can post your khullamkhulla views at this site if you wish, bitter or sweet, whatever. Why don't you write something and send it to me? I will put the content of your letter in the Letters, Reactions, & Rejoinders section anyway.

Regards and best wishes,

Editor

Related articles:-
Say no to the very principleof caste based quotas
Stop the Reservation Drama
Bribe, divide, and rule