Let146;s talk out the reservations

Assuming that equating Schedule Caste and OBC status with social and economic backwardness is not a sweeping generalisation...

Assuming that equating Schedule Caste and OBC status with social and economic backwardness is not a sweeping generalisation, the Supreme Court8217;s verdict to uphold the 27 per cent OBC quota pits two compelling democratic values against each other. For even as it is important to make our society more egalitarian, it is crucial to keep that which represents the best of India surging ahead. The dilemma is that both views stem from equally valid concerns.

Advocates of meritocracy believe that education is an investment that must be earned on the basis of personal merit and diligence. For them, the main concern is that giving away half the total seats doesn8217;t only lower the overall standard and global competitiveness of Indian institutions and force India8217;s brightest students to turn to the West. Equally, the worry for them is that if such a step does not spur corruption, it encourages the beneficiaries of reservations not only to internalise the dangerous belief that a lower set of personal and professional standards is permissible for them but also that they have a right to be exempted from the exacting requirements of academia because they are victims. That is, reservations encourage grade inflation, lower overall standards and erode personal ethics.

Proponents of entitlement argue that every student in India, regardless of circumstances, must have the right to access that education which leads to upward social and economic mobility. They point out that even seats falling within the reserved quota are allotted on the basis of merit, albeit merit within the SC and OBC category. Besides, they say, merit is not only an inherent ability but also the outcome of the socio-economic circumstances into which a child is born. Given the right environment, opportunities, and assistance, they believe, students from socially and economically deprived backgrounds can shine as bright as any other. They assert that the reality is that there exists a professional and political elite in this country whose agenda is served by keeping certain sections of society perpetually underprivileged and undereducated.

Anti-reservationists reply that professionals have not only put

India on the path to irreversible prosperity but also ensured that the wealth generated trickles down to the lowest strata through philanthropic activity and increased job creation. The solution to bridging the social, economic, and cultural gap, for them, does not lie in taking what belongs rightfully to the meritorious and handing it on a platter to the deprived. Instead, it lies in three long-term measures. First, in improving overall primary education so that even students from the backward classes can compete legitimately by the time they reach the graduate and postgraduate levels. Second, in increasing the number of merit-based and/or need-based scholarships/ grants/ fellowships/ teaching assistantships that students can earn from the university, or the government, or even charitable institutions. And, third, in increasing public-private partnerships that create internships and allow students to earn while they learn.

The reservationists contend that doing so only perpetuates the social and economic asymmetries and leaves out the marginalised even as it implicitly teaches the deprived to revere the value system of the rich and powerful that in the end is as constructed by culture as any other. The solution, they observe, lies somewhere between increasing quotas in the premier institutes as well as increasing the overall number of professional and vocational institutions. As the economy booms, they say, there is a real manpower gap in the country, both at the top of the pyramid and the bottom.

But anti-reservationists indicate that this only divides the country further by perpetuating two very different and distinct Indias: one, meritorious, globally competitive, and truly flourishing; the other, a token for the non-discerning, a sop for the gullible. This in the long run creates a new kind of vertical social order wherein social mobility goes from being upward to sideward. Still, the true goal of achieving a society with minimum dividing lines remains unattainable.

Missing from this debate so far is a substantive account of the larger context within which this debate plays itself out: how access and use of common resources in a country that is deeply divided by class and caste issues can be negotiated amongst multiple stakeholders so as to develop a common framework of acceptance and understanding.

Story continues below this ad

Overlooked also is the role of the English language as the instrument of power that integrates into the thriving mainstream students who know it while further marginalising those who do not. Quality higher education in India, after all, is primarily available in English and those whose medium of primary instruction is in a regional tongue are at a serious pedagogical disadvantage. Moreover, the absence of the right vocabulary inhibits complex and nuanced understanding of the subject and in the long run contributes directly or indirectly to higher attrition rates, and waste of reserved seats.

Perhaps one short-term suggestion to addressing the reservations dilemma, then, is not to jump the gun with band-aid policies but first to play out various pilot scenarios in the public intellectual arena within a mutually agreeable timeframe.

The writer is a Mumbai-based academic

patel1nanditayahoo.ca