Aug
12
The nation-wide anti-quota protests held months back were of deep significance, though not quite in the sense the media have got it. It was an apparent demonstration of emotions taking precedence over rationality and youngsters being defenders of the status quo. When rationality would have taken them to a supposedly inconvenient conclusion, they had to repress it. The conclusion had to be the removal of education from clutches of the government. Instead, we saw students giving moral sanction to Government funded education, and yet, protesting at the expense of tax payers, their patients. How moral is to punish X for Y’s fault? How reservations are any different from subsidized education other than that one is based on alleged deprivation, while the other on supposed merit? It proved beyond doubt that most of the errors we think as intellectual are of a much evil origin.
If you are opposing reservations for the right reasons, go for it. I am with you. No double standards or undefined ‘values’ and ‘principles’. No compromise on ‘equality’, ‘efficiency’ and ’social justice’. No ‘free quality primary education’. No ‘public funded quality higher education’ for the meritorious or reservations for the ‘real poor’. Needless to mention, that doesn’t seem to be the case here. They were against reservations for the ‘backward’, but for reservations for the ‘meritorious’. How are ‘reservations for the meritorious’ any different from government privileges for Big Businesses?
Whatever the popular media might have made you believe, education is not a birth right of the ‘meritorious’, as it is not any one’s birthright. There is no such thing as a positive birthright. No one has the right to say “I am smarter than you all. So pay up for my education, and it means, at the exclusion of everyone else.” Who is the one to decide who is smart and who is not? Definitely, it shouldn’t be the Government. While it is true that the privileged among the backward classes avail of the benefits of caste based reservations, same goes for subsidized higher education where the relatively affluent avails of benefits denied to the rest. The solution isn’t ‘Free quality Primary Education’ or “Reservations for the meritorious’, but an uncontrolled, unregulated economy. The meritorious wouldn’t have problems educating themselves, or paying up through scholarships on a free market.A homeschooled child wouldn’t be dragged into a public shool at threat of a bayonet either.
Let us dig deep into the oft-repeated arguments against the quota system. Hues and cries are made over the likeliness of quota doctors to kill patients. I have no means to get to know opinions of each and everybody, but what I surmise is most, if not all believe in the prevalent politico-economic system. It is a system in which the rulers are elected by public polls, not on the basis of ‘merit’. It is a system in which the majority, which constitutes of the uneducated, illiterate, and the mindless sheep, votes out the minority, the intellectuals, and ones eligibility is decided by public support, not by grasp of economic fundamentals or knowledge. A politician or bureaucrat can easily thwart the dreams of a nation of a billion people with its ill informed or evil intentioned populist policies. An ill informed Economic policy of a politician, however well intentioned it maybe, may lead to starvation deaths, many going penniless & committing suicide, more than any number of doctors can ever do. What about Government school teachers messing up lives of hundreds of millions of children?
Medical services are just like any other service. Government regulations deny medical advice at a low cost which would have been possible without it. It also prevents men with a different theory of medicine from practicing it. It would be better to leave it to the private sector and people to fix on which doctor to go to and not. Government in all probability is not the right body to tell us which one to choose and which to not. Is that right when one is forced to concede to the majority and wrong when one is let free to decide for himself?
Reservations are not to be opposed pretending not to see the high correlation between caste and poverty. While it is mysticism and the earlier social institutions that have made the blacks and dalits poor, it is collectivism, the welfare state that has kept them that way. Add to this: Labor unions restricting membership to the poorest. Add to this: Minimum wage laws which keep them from getting a job which they would have had otherwise. Add to this: License raj which expects them to report to a bureaucrat not driven by any objective standards, in proper legal language. Add to this: The fact that we hadn’t really a private sector until the 90’s.
If reservations aren’t implemented well, so isn’t government funded primary education. Why are reservations opposed, but public funded education supported? Isn’t it social injustice? Isn’t forceful taxation from the ‘deserving’ for income redistribution social injustice? You say 60 years of reservations haven’t helped all the poor, so it probably isn’t the solution “60 years of Public funded education” too haven’t helped the situation. Why aren’t you opposing it when it is well evident it isn’t the right solution? You say if a student knows a seat is reserved for him he is not going to work towards it. Ask yourself - If a person knows education is subsidized for his kids, food items are subsidized for him, is he going to work? Isn’t it harming the economy? Isn’t the highly subsidized education we avail a classic example of social injustice? What is subsidized higher education other than the subsidization of the educated upper middle class at the expense of the poor?
Such questions are not to be asked. It’s a world where hypocrisy and intellectual bankruptcy is the default state. It is a world where Microsoft’s Intuit acquisition is considered as the ‘too much power’, but Government monopolization of education as an act of ‘social commitment’. It is a world where the denial of primary education by private schools is considered as denial of ‘social justice’, but the same thing done by the Government in the higher education sector is considered as “social good”. It is ‘insane elitism’ when done by DPS, ‘meritocracy’ when done by IIT’s and IIM’s. It is ‘cut-throat competition’ when done in the primary education sector, but ‘recognition of merit’ when done in the higher education sector.
How could one expect the government to educate tens of crores of kids free of cost? There are only two possibilities-1) They are too unaware of the economic situation 2) They pretend to be unaware of it. Which rings true? “There is ‘Free Primary Education’. There is ‘Quality Primary Education’. There is no such thing as ‘Free Quality Primary Education’. There is no such thing as free lunch.” The harm these schools have done is incalculable. “If you are for subsidization of education, let me ask you one question - Would you recommend distributing rotten vegetable’s and torn clothes to the `poor because they can’t afford them?
“If you say you are against reservations but for providing the poor quality primary education, you are contradicting the very principles of equality, efficiency and freedom you are projecting. Is Quality Primary Education absorbed from the atmosphere? Does Quality Primary Education grow simply in the nature? Quality primary education doesn’t grow on trees, but is at the expense of higher unemployment, lower wages & less capital accumulation.” They were once screaming against the ‘Kill of Merit’, but later went on to claim they are for economic reservations. Does an economic benchmark mean ‘merit’ is protected? No answer! Don’t ever talk of merit when you yourself aren’t meritorious, intelligent or knowledgeable by any normal definitions of these terms. Don’t ever go to the battle field without a well thought out ideology. You will be torn down mercilessly by your opponents if you ever do!
Random Posts
154 views16 Responses to “Hypocrisy Of Anti-Reservation Activists”
Leave a Reply
stuntman mike Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 12:07 pmdear diva,
i get ur point … but fail to validate ur logic.
i played my small part in the anti caste based reservation protests, got arrested and lathhi charged, thus my views are rather first hand.
you say govt funded higher education which is merit based bein analogous to watever we were protesting against. but tell me , lets assume this guy x has the talent and the merit to pursue his medical dreams … but has this screwed up dad who has not half enuf means of sending him to a college which demands 16 lakhs , wouldn’t that be deprivation and injustice.
you talk of open market scholarships… i think govt money is wat is serving that very purpose.
tax payers .. y wud they like to pay for my education? so y do they pay for the road on the other side of the country that the’ll maybe never use. i think it works like this… they pay for educating some ppl .. who again earn better and are supposed to pay more taxes to ensure the prosperity of the ppl who provided for their education. there are faults in every system .. but i think this one looks pretty fine on paper.. its perhaps unjust to blame the system always.. for a change lets blame the tax evading ppl.. ourselves.
there are problems .. a lot many of them.. and i’m not brave or intelligent enough to give u their solutions.. but i think you are a li’ll off target in identifying this one …
renegade_division Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 12:44 pmI am sorry dude but not every author on this site is a Diva, this is our new author by the name “Deadmanoncampus”, it says right under the topic. There are more than 7 different authors on this site.
renegade_division Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 1:41 pmLets say I am an average Joe, I don’t have much talent as your guy X(its so funny we always presume our kids to be the most brilliant, anyways), my dad wants best for me, he is a nice guy, saved money all his life for my education.
Now you basically want to take money from my dad for the education of X. Of course when my dad pays taxes year after year for IITs and AIIMS, where I can never go, this all money could have been accumulated and spent over my actual education.
Now when I ask these anti-reservation guys that why is that my dad pays taxes for over 20 years for IITs, and then IITs refuse to take me in saying that “your son isn’t smart enough”.
My dad has not to send me to an average college, which with his money could have given me better services, that money right now being spent on X with a poor dad.
Who is the victim of injustice in this picture here? Is it X, or Me?
Wrong, the real victim here is my Dad, he saved his money to be spent on my education but he couldn’t because someone thinks that I am not intelligent enough so he was literally robbed to pay for the education of some “smart kid”.
Now about your road example, you are presuming that the author here supports this single payer road system, due to space constraints we haven’t taken a jab at the current road system.
Lemme tell you one thing buddy, we are consistent throughout all our positions.
Lets have a common shoe system, you pay for my shoes today, and then tomorrow when I go to office on them, I will pay for your shoes.
Why not do it for each other’s daughter’s weddings too? Lets have tax payer pay for each other’s daughter’s weddings.
I mean take a look at this girl Meena who is really poor, can’t get married, because she has an alcoholic father.
So lets have govt pay for the lavish marriages of women with abusive fathers.
And if you don’t support this idea you are just trying to evade taxes.
stuntman mike Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 4:05 pmhi,
apologies first for my mistake …. sorry deadmanoncampuss….
i’ll try to be more attentive from next time round …
@ everybody
i’ve already said i’m not smart enough to give the solution for the problem …. in fact my sole purpose of comin back here is to try and educate myself … let myself understand what you ppl believe …
agreed … joes dad shud feel undone since he has to pay for all the smart alecs in iits and iims. but even x’s dad is paying for joe’s education in someway or the other … this guy may be poor and maybe poor enough not to pay taxes … but he does contribute … now lets say x has a kid who’s as another avg joe(lesse tom) …. and joe’s kid turns out to be “y” another smartie pant. i guess that shud level it out somwhat…
# u must agree that the iits and iims are the best centres of learning… or at least portals of ensurin a lavish livelihood… so if u believe merit shoudn’t be the parameter of qualification then you must suggest an alternative… and if your real heartburn is that even if the ppl going in are chosen by merit their education shouldn’t be subsidised then i do agree at some level. but again the govt should again ensure that X gets aid to pursue his medic course. cos even if “X” mightn’t be poor enough to solicit financial reservation … his dad wont be able to pay up the whole fees without it (i.e the financial aid)
i’m a great believer of the phrase survival of the fittest …. but i think we were meant to be benevolent enough to allow the not so fit at least a small opportunity to improve their fitness. and i humbly state that to me the right to education high enuf to justify ones merit is far more fundamental than the right of a woman to have a lavish marriage.
clarification : when i said ppl who want to evade taxes i never meant joes dad. being a joe myself i know how my dad feels about the whole thing. i meant the multitude of “X”s who forget what they need to repay to the nation and the system, who hate taxes even though taxes are what made them worthy enuf to have taxable income….
lookin forward to hearing more from all of you
deadmanoncampus Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 4:39 pmStuntsman,
I don’t think the Government should decide who is meritorious and who is not.Let’s leave it to the private individuals.Privatizing IIT’s and IIM’s doesn’t mean that merit would be given a backseat.There would be scholarships for talented students.What is more important is that no one should have the right to coerce anyone into anything.No one should have the right to make another person pay for his education forcefully.Why should people live a life sacrificing oneself to each other.
renegade_division Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 11:04 pmIf I agree that going through IITs and IIMs will definitely make you a rich person, than that gives them no reason to have tax-payers pay for their education. They must go to the bank or other free market players, ask for loan, and pay it back once they get the lavish lifestyle.
But didn’t you say that x’s dad is a lousy alcoholic?
If X’s dad can’t pay for X’s education, I hardly think X’s dad can pay for my education in any way.
No I don’t believe that merit should be a parameter of qualification, I believe anyone who is genetically close to me must be given a higher opportunity. I don’t care what you think. I will give job to anyone who is closer to me in blood.
The point here is, private property rights, not merit or anything. If I work hard and earn some honest living do I have a right to do whatever I wanna do with it or not?
Its a different thing that most of the people who earn money will spend money on his kid’s education.
Imagine this, I am a completely non-studious kid, and my dad plans to set me up a shop, but then he has been paying for x’s education and numerous other kids, and in no other way they pay for my shop.
Here merit is not even a criteria.
Why should govt ensure anything? Aren’t your hands burnt enough by the govt already? Govt sold the seats to backward castes for votes.
If there is any X out there, he is still without any quality education. Please don’t tell that “We must elect honest leaders, and change the govt” and that bull ****, because lets say hypothetically even if we achieve that in a few years when this leader goes away(because now he does not have the popular vote), same old people will come back.
So what is a much more efficient and long term solution?
Don’t subsidize education!
Let every person who owns his wealth decide who is a profitable venture for an educational loan and who is not, rather than making all those individual pay taxes to the govt and then govt gives that money to the poor caste kids with no talent but a massive vote bank behind them.
None of the authors on this site support Taxes.
Taxation is theft. Its the property extracted from the rightful owner of the property without his consent with a threat of violence.
stuntman mike Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 5:16 pm@ deadman : the government does not decide who’s meritorious and who’s not. there are boards of professors and learned men who sit down and work through the year to prepare those papers for iit and iim entrance. and they are but individuals. yes the govt. machinery and infrastructure is involved in organizing the tests. even if iits and iims are privatised , i dont see any other better method of distinguishing talent coming up.
stuntman mike Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 5:58 pm@ renegade :
They must go to the bank or other free market players, ask for loan, and pay it back once they get the lavish lifestyle.
true they must. absolutely just. but then if the privately own colleges have exorbitant fees the banks will also think twice. most banks in india have a ceiling of 7.5 lakhs for an ug course within india. that too you get that much after you present the bank with both a gauranter and collateral security of half that much amount. so with the kind of dad that x has, his dreams are undone if all colleges are privatised , and theres no check on the fees they demand. so i think i’ve made my point farely clear … privatisation is perfect as long as this problem is taken care of.
But didn’t you say that x’s dad is a lousy alcoholic?
this is a possibility but i never said that. x’s dad might also very well be a regular guy who did not have enough brains and /or made wrong choices and has now ended up bein more or less a loser who’s just making ends meet.
I don’t care what you think. I will give job to anyone who is closer to me in blood.
i beg to disagree. if i am in a position to employ somebody , it’ll be keeping in mind my ulterior benefits. like if i own a company and i have a duffer of a sun i’d rather give him an allowance and let him do whatever he likes with it and appoint somebody with gray matter to help me out with the decisions. that way i think i gain more .
“don’t subsidize education” :
well don’t. i’m ok as long as my first concern is addressed.
govt gives that money to the poor caste kids with no talent but a massive vote bank behind them.
well that was what to me the movement was all about. it was against the vote bank politics of these autocratic politicians. we always wanted the removal of reservation of all sorts. especially caste based. just please make sure that a talented guy doesn’t lose out cos he’s poor. but talent is the keyword.
taxes : everybody hates them . but if nobody pays them the govt has no money . then who will make the roads , who’ll protect our country against foreign attacks, who’ll pay for the water you use and who cleans up the vat in your area ?
deadmanoncampus Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 7:59 pmPrivate players can’t set their fee arbitrarily.Prices are determined by demand and supply.There will be scholarships in an entirely private world and a poor kid won’t go without education simply because he don’t have enough money to pay the fee.Taxation should be abolished.Private individuals would run roads.Private defense agencies would protect the country against attacks if necessary,but who would wage wars when there are no Governments? I myself would pay for the water I use.I don’t understand why you don’t think that these services could be done by private individuals?Why should the Government do these services and collect its fees through coercion?
stuntman mike Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 8:17 pmvery very rational thoughts… maybe they seem overboard to me cos my thinking has been stunted by convention. but i’m trying ….
private individuals managing roads and defence … ok … but in exchange you have to pay something.. i think its the same with taxes … u pay something for getting certain services .. atleast that seems to be the basic idea behind taxation.
please don’t lose patience with me …
deadmanoncampus Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 8:31 pmYeah.People would pay with their money in back for these services.The problem with taxes is that it would be taken without your consent and is not directly proportional to the services you avail.If everyone paid exactly the same as they had availed of,there would be no need for taxation at all.Moreover,the services are largely inefficient.if Government is the sole provider of roads,the Government can’t economically calculate-Which means the Government would’nt know how to price the services-There would be no competition-There would be no profits and there would be no way to know whether resources are being wasted or not.It would lead to a wastage of resources,higher costs and hence higher prices for people.The quality of service too would be very low.
renegade_division Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 9:40 pmThat’s their risk management model. With more freeing up of tax payer’s money, there will be more players providing educational loans.
Plus don’t tie all the factors as is, and just change one factor when you are talking about such a situation.
For example you are saying that without publicly funded education, poor kids will be able to have only half the money through loan. Now what you have done is, just presumed that all the banks remain the same, the market remains the same, the fees of private colleges will remain the same.
That’s not true, when there are no public schools, the market will invest heavily in private schools to make profit since now they are highly profitable. The best way to make maximum money is to provide quality education at cheap prices.
Most colleges will become highly specialized in providing you only the most relevant education, if you wanna make a career in Comp Sci, you will not have to go through the pains of studying irrelevant Physics Chem, and Maths(I know how much pain I took in first year of my college).
Are you saying that no private player is willing to pay for his education? Does that mean no private player is willing to back his money on this guy because they don’t think they can get this money back?
If true then your presumption that X is an intelligent guy is wrong. If the money spent on him cannot be get back with profit, there is no point in wasting money on him or unless he puts a collateral.
Good then x’s dad is just like me, not so smart, so why the hell I am being punished for not being as intelligent as X, by making my dad pay for X’s education.
You see I don’t mind you taking that approach, all I was saying that you can’t force a guy to take people based on caste, creed, kins, or MERIT.
What we are just trying to point out here is, that the movement was definitely against giving all the taxpayers money to lower caste kids, but then that movement stood for giving all that money to the smart kids.
Its like saying that we will feed our athletes by taking away the food from not-so-athletic citizens.
Look dude, as much as you have been made to think to sympathize with the talented poor guy over and over and over by various bollywood movies, you tell me if its right to rob money from one rich dad whose kid is stupid, to spend on a talented kid whose dad is poor.
I will pay the person or company which provides me water for whatever water I use. Just like I pay my cellphone bills. I will pay the road company which builds the road when I use the road, just like I pay for the rent in a house if I live in it. I will pay the person or company which cleans up the vat[sic] in my area, whenever they clean it and if I ask them to clean it.
renegade_division Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pmDo you have a cell phone? I am sure you do. Tell me how does the cell phone bill payment model works for you.
You use the phone, and as much as you use the phone, You receive a bill for your cell phone usage and then you go to the office of cell phone company and pay them the money precisely for the services you used. If you use less cell phone, you pay less money to them, if you use more then you pay them more.
OR
You submit your income statement to the Cell phone company, and then they look how much you earned last year, then the company charges you a percent of your income from you, claiming that poor people also need to use cell phones and forces you to pay for their cell phone usage. It doesn’t matter how much you use the cell phone, or how less. You must pay Rs 5,000/- if you earn higher income for same cell phone usage, and you pay only Rs 100/- or nothing in many cases if your income is lower or none, for the same cell phone usage. If you refuse to pay cell phone company whether you use it or not, they come down to your house with their guns, throw you in a patty wagon and drop you in jail for 3-4 years.
So tell me which of the above more closely reflect the service-fee model private companies use?
Do you understand the problem with the govt’s taxation model and how its a big insult to justice if you call the taxes as “JUST”.
Gopi Krishnan Says:
August 15th, 2008 at 1:02 pmLots of issues coming up in discussion.. Let me address it one at a time.
Roads - I believe what deadmanoncampus is saying is right.Private players can be held more accountable than the Govt
Defence - Privatisation can lead to power(to produce and distribute arms) in the hands of a few, whose sole interest is profit and MIGHT not be the security of the nation. They cud sell arms to terrorists if it seems profitable to them. Otherwise, like deadmanoncampus said, abolishment of Govt and privatisation shud happen simultaneously. If only privatisation happens,it cud lead to disastrous consequences.
Education - If there are lots of private players to set up LOTS of good institutes(like iit and iim) and there are good enuf faculties for all those institutes (which is not the case at present), then free mkt mechanism can work and the price determined by supply and demand will b affordable to the poor talented guy. Since it is not the case as of now, rich guy’s stupid kid gets to study @ IIT. Consider the state of affairs of our society if that continues to happen over de next 5 yrs.. all de stupid kids holding key positions in society.. our country will surely go down the drain!!! so, for de benefit of the society, it is necessary to tax de rich dad to finance de education of poor man’s son. after all, i’d be willing to pay my taxes if it ensures no stupid kids hav decision making power in the future. However, de ‘stupid’ kid may hav other abilities and talents,like arts,music,sports etc. Let everyone do what they do best and trade de services to each other so that society gains as a whole (theory of comparative advantage)
deadmanoncampus Says:
August 15th, 2008 at 7:04 pmGopi Krishnan,
Thank you for the comment! There is already power to produce arms and distribute them,though it is regulated heavily by the Government.Privatization of defense won’t breed terrorism. Quite the contrary.For instance,if people had the right to possess arms,the 9/11 incident wouldn’t have happened.A pistol in the cockpit would have saved the world what it had went through.First of all,no poor smart kid has the right to study at the expense of a rich dad who has a dumb kid.This is a question of ethics.Moreover,Government is not the agency to decide who is smart and who is dumb.You should also take into account the fact that this won’t lead to dumb people holding key positions in the society.Even now,a lot many of the people who hold key positions in the technology sector are college dropouts.If education is privatized,good institutions would evolve and students who want to avail of education in these institutions would find it easy to get bank loans or scholarships.I find no reason why a poor smart student would have difficulty obtaining scholarships or educational loans.If you think it would be otherwise,explain objectively why they would have difficulty obtaining educational loans.I don’t think a case can me made for that.
Gopi Krishnann Says:
August 18th, 2008 at 11:54 amDefence - A pistol newhere doesnt save a life. It has only taken lives.A suicide bomber cannot be stopped howmuchever guns u produce or keep. Privatisation, i believe, is good in every other field except defence because the main motive in privatisation is profit (Mind you, I havent said that making profit is bad; it is in fact good for all other fields other than arms). This desire for profit and desire for the firm to grow can lead to either 1) more prodn (mass production of arms) for higher economies of scale to capture more of the existing market or 2) create or explore new markets (sell to unauthorised ppl like terrorists,war mongerers,mafia). Both of the above scenarios will increase tension. Since arms are now cheaper, everyone has access to it.The magnitude of tension is not so obvious in case of a pistol…but what happens if we r talking abt bigger and ‘better’ weapons… nuclear weapons or maybe a death ray (in de future). And dont think for a moment that if all nations hav access to all weapons,it’ll prevent war. It will only accelerate the rate of armament untill one day they will either 1) destroy each other or 2) will realize their folly and go for disarmament making huge losses on their investment in arms. Both scenarios lead to huge economic loss.
Education - 1) “Government is not the agency to decide who is smart and who is dumb” - Who should and what is the method of judging? A really smart kid wud beat de stupid kid whatever be de test conducted by whomsoever. The ppl who decide is irrelevant if the questions in de test is common for both!!!
2) “a lot many of the people who hold key positions in the technology sector are college dropouts” - true… i’m not saying that everyone should get a degree to become a genious!! Dumb ppl may not hold key positions (bcoz its difficult to get up de corporate ladder being dumb)…but do u know how much it costs a company to hire ( just bcoz he’s frm a good college), train and then layoff(bcoz he’s useless) the rich dumb kid?
3) If all poor smart students can get enuf loans (by providing collateral) frm bank to finance their education, I hav no problems.
PS : u still havent answered my question : a large no: of private educational institutions are not possible due to 1)the amt of money that needs to be invested in infrastructure and 2)lack of good quality proffessors (faculty). How then do u think that free market mechanism can work and ensure that higher fees will not be charged?