They were still separated, and kids from upper caste families were still not allowed to go there. I was absolutely disgusted. By believing those two got through only with reservation? You cannot even claim caste-based discrimination does not exist.
While it exists very obviously in villages, in the cities, it is subtle. Caste-based discrimination exists today as well. That premise itself is wrong, therefore providing no basis for saying that reservation as a policy is wrong. They have not even been allowed to eat the food that comes out of the cow dung of the upper castes, how can we expect them to compete on the same level as us with all our privileges?
We cannot, and therefore, reservation should be prolonged as long as caste-based discrimination does not end. Maybe the educated elite of the cities misuse it, but what about the downtrodden people in the villages who do not even know of the existence of such laws?
Nice article. Continuing on your argument. It is downtrodden and poor SC and ST who still needs reservation to come to mainstream. Bcz the caste based discrimination never died. More so, the discrimination still exists by the virue of having advantage if money and more opportunities.
Tina Dabri. Both sides are right. And when you say that a few privileged lower caste people are getting the benefits of reservation even when they are financially strong, then first talk about the majority of upper caste goons who are acting like parasites and eating the country from within by using political power, black money and whatnot. Why does no one speak about them? Shame on you hypocrites! How will we know if it has ended?
By reading your blog?. There is a thing such as sense of proportion and measurement. Do not make it appear like things are same as years ago. Progress always is measured from one point to another. Things how does it compare with 10 years back , 20 years back etc? Are you aware of that kind of notion?
Or is easier to misinform with sweeping statements without any specific references or links? Your sweeping generalizations are not fooling anyone here. And when you speak of that bias why are you failing mention the legal evolution that has happened in favor of Dalits? Why else would be scared that poor from upper castes would take the seats from Dalits?
What advantage do they have if they are as poor as the dalits? Are you saying they have some innate advantage over the dalits? There are numerous cases of people get into Engineering colleges scoring next to nothing in entrance exam. AND such students struggle to pass after getting into the college.
But how far will you keep playing this victim card?? Not everything can be blamed on the external environment. Not forever for sure. Are there no other castes within their reservation categories? Here caste discrimination is not important. Ten things to remember when discussing reservations 1- For the beneficiaries of reservation, it is not a necessity. It is rather a political right. It can not feed the poor. Upper castes have enjoyed it for millennia.
Only the deprived portion loves the idea of sharing. It was a by-product of divisive social consciousness. Wanting a shelter from discrimination in order to be a part of a discriminatory system is not a rational idea. Both go together or both exist together. Reservation is as ancient as discrimination. Reservation is a policy of representation provided to the unrepresented communities for centuries in the administration of the state. Because the representative government is more democratic government.
According to the anti- reservationists merit is nothing but memory test…but according to pro-reservationists merit is creativity…and creativity will lead to efficiency.
The moral of competition is that…there should competition between equals not between unequals. And this keeping dalits confined to seeking just jobs rather political power. As a common man with a rationalistic viewpoint, I have some observations w.
Politicians are using it as a tool for making political gains and thus dividing the society in general. Take the case in UP.. Either SP or BSP is coming in power and how they enjoyed the taxpayers money as against the development of lower caste people. What is the fault of a general class BPL student who is sincere, hardworking,and somehow complete his study and wandering here and there in search of jobs.. Will it not create unrest in Society. It is only percolating hatred in the society, which is not good for the development of any nation.
This will only support brain drain. Google CEO 5. Reservation will never remove discrimination but it will increase as identified groups are being treated as not hardworking, less intelligent with stigma of reservation, although they may be very intelligent and hardworking… 6.
Those who are well off are also enjoying the fruits of reservation. Equality among equals should prevail. Your post is, politely put hogwash! S south. Ensure that you have enough policing, that your police is robust and honest rather than solving this problem by making everyone equally uneducated. That will never happen even in your funny social experiment with somewhat devastating results.
As a scientist, this is natural to me. Representation is a core principle of democracy and the latter has no meaning without the former. However, a fair representation is still not possible for the underprivileged and deprived sections of society due to the existing caste discriminations, Brahmanical attitudes and prejudices. It is also imperative to note that representation alone is not enough to democratise the social spaces.
The representation will not fulfill the purpose if there is no recognition. The instance of denial of entry of President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, into a temple in Odisha because of his Dalit identity indicates the fact that representation has no meaning without recognition.
Both recognition and representation are complimentary to each other. Recognition is a matter of attitudinal change and transition of morality from social to constitutional and can be achieved when people adopts democracy as a way of life. Another normative claim of reservation lies in the concept of Social Justice. It is defined in the theoretical parlance as an equal distribution of primary goods like wealth, prestige, power, rights, honors, self-respect, dignity, duties, gains as well as burdens in the society.
Social justice as a policy seeks to prevent the concentration of these valuable resources of the community in the hands of the rich and the privileged sections, and to create a social order which will enable the deprived sections.
Rawls has revolutionized the debate of justice in the contemporary America. His redefinition of justice was instrumental in exerting a moral pressure over the privileged sections of American society to ensure representation for the underprivileged sections like Blacks and Women.
The rationalisation for caste-based reservations can also be found in the notion of compensation. The Indian caste system engenders a social norm by which the birth of individuals qualifies them be in a particular occupation and denies them the accessibility to education and administration.
Consequently, the lower caste people are alienated from the highest echelons of administration and education. Since property rights under the caste system are assigned unequally across castes, income distribution is generally skewed along caste lines. B eside the general negative impact on income distribution, labour immobility across occupation also adversely impacts employment.
A high caste Hindu would generally prefer to be voluntarily unemployed for some time than to take up an occupation not assigned to his caste. Thus, judged by the standard criterion of economic efficiency, the caste system as an economic organisation lacks all elements required to fulfil the conditions for optimum economic outcome. The caste and untouchability based economic discrimination have serious consequences on economic development, income distribution, right to individual development and equal right to employment, all of which cumulatively have poverty-inducing consequences, particularly for the low caste untouchable.
R educing economic discrimination thus becomes essential because it is likely to increase economic growth, provide equal access to discriminated groups, reduce inequality between groups and minimise the potential for conflict which inequality between groups may give rise to. What are the remedies against market discrimination? Conclusions regarding the consequences of market discrimination on economic growth and income distribution are derived from mainstream economic theory.
This theoretical perspective thus posits the resultant erosion of profits as a self-correcting dimension of discrimination. The free market solution is not, however, a practical remedy as, discrimination might persist, particularly in the labour market, over long periods with or without prevalence of a free market situation.
First, not all markets are highly competitive. The persistence over decades of labour market discrimination in high income countries attests to that. Indeed, in developing countries, employers have significant monopoly power to discriminate at will. Second, even if competition exists in all markets, is not a sufficient condition for the elimination of discrimination if all employers are discriminators.
T hese two theoretical viewpoints have obvious policy implications. Those who believe that discrimination is indeed self-correcting argue for strengthening competitive market mechanisms. But if discrimination continues to persist despite competitive market process which in reality is the case or for other reasons mentioned above, market interventionist policies will be necessary.
It presumed that if individuals act on the basis of pecuniary self-interest then market dynamics dictate equal treatment for equal individuals regardless of inscriptive characteristics such as race.
Consequently, observed group inequality is attributed to familial, educational, or other background differences among individuals who are unevenly distributed between social groups. The causes of a dissimilar distribution of individuals between social groups may be genetic, cultural, historical, or some combination thereof.
The differences in cultural attributes include the value families and neighbourhoods place on education, attitudes, and work habits. The historical refers primarily to the impact of past discrimination on current inequality.
Structuralism as an analytical method holds that aggregate outcomes are not the result of a simple summation of individual behaviours, but rather arise from the constraints and incentives imposed by organizational and social hierarchies.
In this view, individual behaviour achieves its importance within the context of group formation, cooperation, and conflict.
Economic and political outcomes are thus a function of the hegemony exercised by dominant groups, the resistance offered by subordinate groups, and the institutions that mediate their relationship. Discrimination, in this view, is an inherent feature of the economic system.
0コメント