Hypocrite is a word some folks have used to describe me, directly or indirectly.. ironically most of them have never even talked to me for more than an hour, all put together. So I often wondered why I make this sort of impression on people. Seemingly my views strike people as contradicting : I am a self-proclaimed sympathizer of minorities and yet I defend sentiments of the majority, I am a strong adherent of meritocracy and yet a staunch supporter of reservation, despite my belief that there is no strong leadership I am all for creation of a separate state of Telangana … the list is pretty long. Folks seem to have lost a sense of the continuous spectrum that exists between extremes. Let me explain.. not in each case but at least in reservations case because that often leaves people’s blood boiling.
The Merit Argument: One of the most compelling arguments against reservations comes from the advocates of meritocracy. This is a very strong argument. Merit, Intellectual Prowess etc. seem to be the cool ideal that should dictate the world order. In a world where there was universally objective index of merit, that would have been possible. In contrast, merit as measured today, in India in particular, is one of the most misleading indices.. both manipulated and manipulative. One only needs to look at the mad machinery in today’s coaching centers that regularly churn out ‘toppers’ to crack any kind of exam. These almost exclusively serve the urban populace and, within it, only those who are rich enough to afford the overpriced services. I do not intend disparage the kids who attend these centers. My case here is that being blind to the underlying mechanism that determines ‘merit’ and harping on meritocracy is total BS. It reminds me of Ayn Rand’s arguments (the stupid and insensitive ones.. she had many great ones too). As much as I love Objectivism, I am appalled by her inability to realize that ‘the weak’ are neither born weak nor are ‘the strong’ born strong. Like Rand’s argument, the merit argument against reservations ignores that fact that there is whole range of factors that shape the character of a person, that there is long phase of nurturing, learning and skill-sharpening that gives final shape to the raw talents of an individual. And no measure of merit is decoupled from the influence of these. In India, in particular, a vast majority of the population was deprived of access to such skill-development and intellectual pursuits.. and deprived for long enough to even kill such aspirations among these people. Now, after centuries of oppression, suddenly waking up and saying “Oh!! that’s horrifying!! Come on, let’s go purely by merit!!” is like asking a lame man and a super-fit athlete to compete in the same race!!. Lets face it : the resistance is simply because the section that has been enjoying the benefits, so far, lacks the courage to face the consequences of a corrective action. In meritocracy, they find an ideal that can conveniently hide their insecurities. On the other hand, affirmative action addresses real problems. Problems that cant be solved by individual will alone. Social changes that could take several strong-willed generations are brought about in much shorter span. A progressive society would happily embrace such a corrective action and not hide behind manipulative theories that seek to continue the old rotten systems. I welcome merit, but not when its determination is flawed.
The Economic Backwardness Argument: This is another hard-nut. I saw a lot of self-proclaimed progressive thinkers bashing Arjun Singh when he came up with the idea of OBC reservations (some even using the choices of abuses). To their credit, Mr. Singh is no saint and the true intentions behind his crusade are not known. But the critics conveniently forget to show an alternative. Apart from the shallow merit argument most of them claim that economic backwardness should be basis for reservations. Unfortunately, none of these ‘thinkers’ had a road-map for a viable implementation of these new category of reservations. Once again, the plank of economic-backwardness is a seemingly a pure and holy ideal that would only end up serving the cause of incumbent system. As sickeningly oppressive as it was, the caste system could never beat the basic laws of nature and its only natural to find a poor Brahmin and a rich Sudra. That fact should never be taken out of context to suggest that corrective action should not be caste based. The burdens of being social outcasts, of being banished to do jobs that would crush the basic sense of dignity, of having to live as second-class citizens, of being manipulated to believe their worth is only so much (and all this for centuries) are really intangible. Refusing to pay reparations for such abuse is the highest sin that I can imagine. Letting ourselves get away, under the pretext of forgetting or erasing caste system, from that responsibility is paramount to cheating ourselves. Moreover, any implementation of an economic-backwardness based affirmative action is very likely to be corruptible and aid those calling the shots currently. That is not a corrective action but a disguised aid to perpetuate the status-quo. It is inevitable that seemingly better measures like merit and economic-backwardness will eventually guide us but that can only happen when the ghosts of past are buried forever. Surely, 60 odd years of reluctant corrective action is not enough to offset thousands of years of exploitation.
The Centers of Excellence Argument: This argument is specific to the so called premier institutions (read IITs). I see a lot of folks (mostly, alumni of these institutes) claiming that bringing these institutions under the scope of affirmative action would somehow ‘drag down’ the ‘level’ of these institutions. No offense to the genuinely worried ones, but most of these ‘intelligent’ folks seem to be worried that their own worth might later on be undervalued. I wonder how much value these guys add to the label of their institution and how much they derive from the label. Do not get me wrong!! Academic excellence of the students from these institutions is indisputable. However, I wonder if the role of a center of excellence ends in taking the sharpest minds of the country and sharpening them further and then promptly exporting a good number of them to the so called ‘land of opportunities’. These institutions are some of the biggest beneficiaries of public money that is pumped in to them with near-zero accountability. With a few honorable exceptions, a good deal of ‘research’ that happens is incremental and way below international standards. Even the excellent ratings from the industry is a result of the hard work and brilliance of students who have learned to work under cut-throat competition. It would be interesting to see the results of the same amount of money poured into improving the infrastructure and facilities of smaller institutes or even allowing individual states to develop their own premier institutes. And yet, somehow I am regularly told that this is all worth my tax money and none of these institutes should be asked to fulfill their social obligations. Its like the offerings made to a God who is never to be questioned. An institution that can nurture only the best minds, as measured by a flawed system, and not raw talent (that has the potential) has little intrinsic worth. My opinion is that institutions that refuse to do so should be asked to find avenues to raise their money by themselves (like IIIT-H is now obliged to) or justify how money being spent on them is helping in making us a better country.
The number of arguments is endless. The point I want to make is .. things were pathetic, we want them to be ideal.. the intermediate path has non-zero length. Simple!! We cant erase the caste system overnight. Its a long and painful (at least to some) path. Refusing to take that path is to cheat. Having the courage to accept the consequences of taking that path is a big deal. Even an utterly capitalist society like America has eventually recognized the inevitability of course correction and affirmative action. In Parsifal Mosaic, Micheal Havelock answers Alex Kalyazin’s accusation of America’s indifference to hunger and poverty : ‘If that is true, then we deserve to lose‘. I wish I could say the same about my country with the same conviction. I wish, like in Guru Gobind Singh’s prayer, that courage to follow the right path may never desert my countrymen. Bless those who call me a hypocrite for doing this!!.