My views on reservations based on caste in educational institutions are quite clear. They're pointless. The downtrodden still remain downtrodden and the wealthy, greasy lalas derive all the benefits they can out of this whole thing. I mean the whole system has become a big fat joke, because a time will come when everyone will want to be included in the SC/ST/OBC category, and the "General" catgories will need reservation. It's quite a clear indication of things having gone awfully awry, when people start rioting to be included in a category of people who, as per their own claims, are a poor and oppressed lot.
As far as reservations in academics go, I don't think any reservations should be made at the University level. In fact, reservations should be made on economic grounds in primary and secondary educational institutions across India, so that the problem- which is basically a problem of unequal opportunity- is sorted out at the first rung of the ladder. Once an opportunity is given at the lower levels, the ball is in ability's court.
Recently, the much awaited question of reservation for women in Parliament has raised itself from the dead like a phoenix again. A bill that was shamefully torn to pieces in Parliament as slap on the face of democracy a decade ago, has once again become the top agenda of the Government- apart from the Nuclear Deal of course which is threatening to sink the mother ship.
Now the argument in favour of reservation of women in Parliament is as follows- because of patriarchal social structures and attitudes, women cannot contest and win elections without the crutches. It is sad, indeed it is. But it is also true. Women have neither money nor clout. "But they have principles, sensitivity, and sensibility-don't they?" Yes. Some, if not most, do.
But the sad fact is that even if some people in the history of the world may have won an election on principles and vision alone, it is not something that has happened often enough for us to internalise it as a modo de vida.
So coming back to the question of reserving seats for women in Parliament. My views are not well formed or coherent enough to be put down here. I do understand that the problem is too deep seated to be resolved easily. Women are systematically discriminated against where is comes to education, free thinking, liberation of mind and spirit, employment, and of course money - things that are all (in theory) part of the Successful Political Candidate Kit.
What I do not understand, is the hypocrisy and blindness of the Government when it comes to the question of reserving seats based on gender. They are okay with reserving seats based on caste, class and religion, but not gender.
Someone from the Government recently cited the example of what Sarojini Naidu had said in 1932, and actually hinted at it being an ideal we would be compromising on if we reserved seats for women in Parliament. Naidu had said that she dreamt of an India where special privileges were not given on the basis of caste, class, religion or gender.
Of course she did. So did hundreds of leaders then and so do hundreds of leaders now. All of us wish for an India where such privileges will not be necessitated by the social conditions that systematically oppress and suppress certain classes of persons. However, the dreams that our leaders had in those days have sadly not been our guiding forces in other matters. One look at the state of our nation today will tell you so.
She also dreamt of no reservations based on caste and class. Is that being followed? Do we not have reservations based on class and caste in all spheres of political, academic and social life? Kind sir who made the above mentioned statement, wake up and smell the rot. The ideals you remind us of have been compromised a long time ago.
Why are these reservations in place? Because the Government believes that special safeguards need to be given to certain groups of persons, who, because of the thousand year old history of India, have not been given an opportunity to rise. Why is this ideal of 'not giving special privileges' only being quoted when the question of reservation for women comes up? Does that not reflect a blindness on the part of the Government, to the fact that women are also one such group, and the most heterogeneous? Should gender not be considered an oppressed class in itself?
The dilly-dallying that is happening on the bill the second time around is on the question of reservation for OBC and other religious minorities, within the 33% reservation for women. All this is just a very cheap stunt on the part of the Government to postpone the passing of the bill in the next session. What annoys me about this entire situation is blatant hypocrisy and absence of credible arguments to support one's stand. As of this moment, there are no such safeguards for anyone from the OBC or religious minorities- male or female. Why rake this issue up when it comes to a question of reserving seats for women alone? Why has this wisdom not dawned on them for so many years? When the parliament deems fit, it shall make constitutional amendments to the existing laws to provide for quota for men and women from OBCs and religious minorities.
Whether or not there should be sub-quotas within quota is an issue that the parliamentarians can and should battle out on the floor of the Lok Sabha. Discrimination based on caste, class and religion affect men and women equally. However, gender based discrimination affects women alone, and it is this discrimination that the present bill seeks to tackle.
Principles of categorisation that we all acquire as children usually proceed from the super-ordinate to the sub-ordinate categories. SC/ST/OBC/Religious Minorities are sub-ordinate categories of oppressed persons within the much larger, super-ordinate category of "Women" .
Just to, you know, put things in perspective.
