This week I was planning to write on this latest reservation controversy in India created by Indian . Before I start anything I got following words in e-mail by my friend D. So I just pasted as it is for blog readers. Once you read this, don’t forget to comment your stake for reservation?

Many politicians in India are propagating the theory that “if a developed country like America can have Affirmative actions, why India cannot have the policy”.

While the objectives of India’s reservation policy might be similar in spirit to the USA’s affirmative action programmes, this rhetoric propagated by Indian politicians was bugging me for past several days, untill I found this article by Maya Mirchandani which tells exact difference between the two systems:

  • First, Affirmative action in the US is directed at eliminating discrimination against race and gender, not caste and class. Yet, the guidelines stop short of specifying which races can or cannot benefit from such policies. As an example, while African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics and Women might benefit from such policies in an admission process, Asian Americans, in spite of being an ethnic and racial minority will not, as their numbers in US universities are already higher than most other ethnic or racial groups.
  • Second, India’s reservation policy is based on a quota system that ensures a fixed number of seats in government jobs, educational institutions and parliament are reserved for the qualifying groups. If the requirements are not met, those seats remain vacant. Contrary to this, America’s affirmative Action programme is mainly voluntary.Meaning that all things remaining equal (qualification, experience etc), a job or a seat in a state university is more likely to go to someone from the minority group. However if the position continues to remain vacant, a company or a university can place anyone it sees fit. As long as it’s clear that a good faith search has been made to meet affirmative action goals, the company or school faces no legal penalties.
  • Third, In the US, discrimination in higher education was the target of the original breakthrough in civil rights cases. And here lies the crux of the issue. Perhaps the most significant difference between the two models is that those applying for admission into universities have all, irrespective of class, creed or colour, had access to a primary and secondary public school system, both free of charge and compulsory.

    • So while reserving seats in medical colleges, engineering colleges, government jobs, and parliament may be well intentioned, they are no good without complementary resources. For the millions who might be eligible for these seats, basic primary education is still a pipe dream. Poorly run government schools and the struggle to make ends meet mean that the number of school going children in poorer and oppressed communities has continued to remain below targets. So what good is it to know there’s a place reserved for you in medical school when you are not likely to finish high school?

    Isn’t that the question the government should be asking itself? Isn’t that what everyone should be taking to the streets for? It would be a far better use of everyone’s resources if Arjun Singh and the rest of the UPA government put the same resources to work to improve the lot of government schools, ensure that every village, every town has a school system that is committed to providing the education that’s necessary for students to make it to that seat that’s being kept for them in university.

    There is no doubt that in a society plagued at every level by social and economic injustice, affirmative action of some kind seems a logical solution - to create the level playing field that we all desire. The state must intervene to ensure its creation, but first and foremost by providing everyone a chance at the same kind of primary education facilities.

    As much as it’s in the larger interest of all of us more “privileged” to help the state along in its task, it’s equally the state’s responsibility to do so in a way where hard work and merit, no matter what caste or class, is not dismissed out of hand just for the sake of meeting its quota goals. “