Savarkar's Apology Letter ....Content and Analysis

CONTENT : 

Petition from V D Savarkar (Convict No. 32778) to the Home Member of the Government of India, dated November 14, 1913.

I beg to submit the following points for your kind consideration:

(1) When I came here in 1911 June, I was along with the rest of the convicts of my party taken to the office of the Chief Commissioner. There I was classed as "D" meaning dangerous prisoner; the rest of the convicts were not classed as "D". Then I had to pass full 6 months in solitary confinement. The other convicts had not. During that time I was put on the coir pounding though my hands were bleeding. Then I was put on the oil-mill - the hardest labour in the jail. Although my conduct during all the time was exceptionally good still at the end of these six months I was not sent out of the jail; though the other convicts who came with me were. From that time to this day I have tried to keep my behaviour as good as possible.

(2) When I petitioned for promotion I was told I was a special class prisoner and so could not be promoted. When any of us asked for better food or any special treatment we were told "You are only ordinary convicts and must eat what the rest do". Thus Sir, Your Honour would see that only for special disadvantages we are classed as special prisoners.

(3) When the majority of the casemen were sent outside I requested for my release. But, although I had been cased (caned?) hardly twice or thrice and some of those who were released, for a dozen and more times, still I was not released with them because I was their casemen. But when after all, the order for my release was given and when just then some of the political prisoners outside were brought into the troubles I was locked in with them because I was their casemen.

(4) If I was in Indian jails I would have by this time earned much remission, could have sent more letters home, got visits. If I was a transportee pure and simple I would have by this time been released, from this jail and would have been looking forward for ticket-leave, etc. But as it is, I have neither the advantages of the Indian jail nor of this convict colony regulation; though had to undergo the disadvanatges of both.

(5) Therefore will your honour be pleased to put an end to this anomalous situation in which I have been placed, by either sending me to Indian jails or by treating me as a transportee just like any other prisoner. I am not asking for any preferential treatment, though I believe as a political prisoner even that could have been expected in any civilized administration in the Independent nations of the world; but only for the concessions and favour that are shown even to the most depraved of convicts and habitual criminals? This present plan of shutting me up in this jail permanently makes me quite hopeless of any possibility of sustaining life and hope. For those who are term convicts the thing is different, but Sir, I have 50 years staring me in the face! How can I pull up moral energy enough to pass them in close confinement when even those concessions which the vilest of convicts can claim to smoothen their life are denied to me? Either please to send me to Indian jail for there I would earn (a) remission; (b) would have a visit from my people come every four months for those who had unfortunately been in jail know what a blessing it is to have a sight of one’s nearest and dearest every now and then! (c) and above all a moral - though not a legal - right of being entitled to release in 14 years; (d) also more letters and other little advantages. Or if I cannot be sent to India I should be released and sent outside with a hope, like any other convicts, to visits after 5 years, getting my ticket leave and calling over my family here. If this is granted then only one grievance remains and that is that I should be held responsible only for my own faults and not of others. It is a pity that I have to ask for this - it is such a fundamental right of every human being! For as there are on the one hand, some 20 political prisoners - young, active and restless, and on the other the regulations of a convict colony, by the very nature of them reducing the liberties of thought and expression to lowest minimum possible; it is but inevitable that every now and then some one of them will be found to have contravened a regulation or two and if all be held responsible for that, as now it is actually done - very little chance of being left outside remains for me.

In the end may I remind your honour to be so good as to go through the petition for clemency, that I had sent in 1911, and to sanction it for being forwarded to the Indian Government? The latest development of the Indian politics and the conciliating policy of the government have thrown open the constitutional line once more. Now no man having the good of India and Humanity at heart will blindly step on the thorny paths which in the excited and hopeless situation of India in 1906-1907 beguiled us from the path of peace and progress. Therefore if the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me, I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of constitutional progress and loyalty to the English government which is the foremost condition of that progress. As long as we are in jails there cannot be real happiness and joy in hundreds and thousands of homes of His Majesty’s loyal subjects in India, for blood is thicker than water; but if we be released the people will instinctively raise a shout of joy and gratitude to the government, who knows how to forgive and correct, more than how to chastise and avenge. Moreover my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise. The Mighty alone can afford to be merciful and therefore where else can the prodigal son return but to the parental doors of the government?

Hoping your Honour will kindly take into notion these points.

ANALYSIS:


The authenticity of the above letter has been established time and again by eminent historians of India chief amongst them ironically is Mr.R. C. Mujumdar who himself belongs to the hindutva camp.Yet many of the Savarkar supporters are in a denial mode.Even then after this the psyche of Savarkar behind writing this letter (and 3 others) began to be probed into.

The common defense that comes in the support of Mr Savarkar is that he wrote the letters to trick the british Govt into setting him free so that once he comes out he could do his work again.So much strong is the argument that Savarkar's this letter is even compared to the letters written by Shivaji Maharaj to Aurangazeb while the former was in captive at Agra. This argument I suspect should have come from the RSS as they idolize Savarkar.But is there even a grain of truth in it?I say not.

If we see the mercy plea carefully we will find that in the first half Savarkar writes about the bitter treatment and complains about the food.This is hardly going to hurt hurt the british empire anyway.The sole purpose for including those things is for a better life for himself.

Even if the argument in the second part is to be believed that Savarkar wanted to trick the British Govt, one can say that he succeeded, though not immediately.Savarkar was sentenced to 50 yrs but was released in 14 yrs.

What the Hindutva camp do not say out in loud is that even congress member and Sardar Patels brother Vitthalbhai Patel backed by Mahatma Gandhi moved to court seek Savarkars release in 1920.

Was it due to his letters or congress effort or change of heart of the British Savarkar was released in 1924.What is interesting to note is Savarkars behavior after his release.

For that read the Paragraph again

"...Therefore if the government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me, I for one cannot but be the staunchest advocate of constitutional progress and loyalty to the English government which is the foremost condition of that progress. As long as we are in jails there cannot be real happiness and joy in hundreds and thousands of homes of His Majesty’s loyal subjects in India, for blood is thicker than water; but if we be released the people will instinctively raise a shout of joy and gratitude to the government, who knows how to forgive and correct, more than how to chastise and avenge. Moreover my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be...."

Savarkar promised that he would never go against the british govt and that he would bring back the "young men misled on the path of freedom" back on the track.If we examine the works of Savarkar after his release we find that he did exactly what he promised.
For some reasons best known to Savarkar himself, he suddenly had no objections to the British ruling India.He became an law-abiding citizen of the British India.He gave up his freedom struggle activities and started his Hindutva campaign.There is not a single speech, single article, single call to the nations by Savarkar after 1924 in which Savarkar critisized the British.He neither joined Congress which was working for the freedom of the country from the british rule nor did he start any political body of his own supporting that cause.

All his guns which were first pointed towards the British now were trained at the Muslims.Some of the quote of his would be sufficient for stating how he was creating communal tension in the times when hindu muslim unity was the need of the hour.

“The scandalous activities of Bengal Moslem gundas and proselytisers, working hand in hand have become so persistent and so notorious that one cannot understand how the Hindus in East Bengal have grown so incredibly emasculated” ; “The Moslem shopkeepers, those who visit Hindu ladies for selling glass bangles, Moslem servants in Hindu houses – all try to seduce or kidnap boys and girls and generally force them to accept Mahommedanism”[V. D. SAVARKAR, “Facts Without Comment”, Pg 180.]

This is not the only thing.He promised full co-operation to the Britishers.In 1937 he urged all the hindus to help the britishers in the war under the pretext of getting trained in arms and ammunitions so that it can be used latter.Could there have been any better opportunity of using the training than assisting Subhash Chandra Bose?But did Savarkar ever make any call to his hindu youths to join Subhash Babu??Nay...Infact so active was Savarkar in assiting the British army that because of his zeal many congress people even called him as the recruiting officer of the british army.

That Savarkar did not participate in any freedom struggle activities post his cellular jail is an established fact...as promised in the letter.

That Savarkar opposed congress and Gandhiji(who backed his release from cellular jail) is an established fact.... as promised in the letter

That Savarkar diverted lacks of hindus youths from the path of freedom struggle to his Hindutva is an established fact...as promised in the letter.

That Savarkar helped the britishers is an established fact...again as promised in the letter.

Savarkar staunchly advocated the two-nation theory and the partition of India. He said: “I have no quarrel with Mr. Jinnah’s two-nation theory. We, Hindus are a nation by ourselves and it is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations”[V.D. SAVARKAR, Hindutva, 140.]

A.G.Noorani notes that Savarkar propounded the two-nation theory first in 1923 in his Hindutva and next in 1937 in his presidential address to the Hindu Mahasabha


In his early days when he wrote "The war of Independence 1857" written in 1909 he stresses on Hindu-Muslim unity appreciating even the muslims for their role,criticizing the British Govt.But post his Andaman Days his hindu muslim unity goes out of the windown and he says "Muslim remains a Muslim first and Muslim last and Indians never" [V.D.SAVARKAR, Hindu Sanghatan, 68]

A lot more of his quotes can be brought out but that would be unecessary.I am sure readers would have formed their opinion by now.Is there any truth in the claim that Savarkar had begged for his freedom only to fool the British?To me his actions doesnt say so...
One last thing that needs to be said is about the comparison of Savarkar to Shivaji Maharaj.If Shivaji Maharaj wrote the letters, he on gaining the freedom from the Emperor faught back, but Savarkar when he wrote the letters on gaining freedom chickened out....Thats the difference between Great and Pseudo-Great.What do you think?

Upper castes dominate national media

The dalits woes have never been upheld by the media.This is the cry of the dalits from independence.Obviously there has to be a reason.Incidents like Kherlanji were covered after 3 weeks of the actual happening and that too only after the dalits started getting violent.Even yesterday a dalit women was paraded naked in Maharashtra and that doesnt for the news.Why is this happening????The answer lies in who controls the media.Read below to find out the truth...the truth that no one wants to speak about.

In the first-ever statistical analysis of its kind, a survey of the social profile of
more than 300 senior journalists in 37 Hindi and English newspapers and television
channels in the capital has found that "Hindu upper caste men" — who form eight percent of the country's population — hold 71 per cent of the top jobs in the national media.

Women, non-upper castes, and Muslims are grossly under-represented in relation to their share in the population.

The survey notes that Dalits and Adivasis "are conspicuous by their absence among the
decision- makers. Not even one of the 315 key decision-makers belonged to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.

The survey was designed and executed by Anil Chamaria, freelance journalist, Jitendra
Kumar from the Media Study Group and Yogendra Yadav, senior fellow at the Centre for
the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS).

If men and women are taken together, the share of upper caste Hindus or `dwijas' in the upper echelons of the media is 85 per cent. These castes account for 16 per cent of the national population.

Brahmins alone, the survey found, hold 49 per cent of the top jobs in national journalism.

If non-`dwija' forward castes like Marathas, Patels, Jats and Reddys are added, the total forward caste share stands at 88 per cent.

In contrast, OBCs, who are estimated to constitute around 40 per cent of the population, account for an "abysmally low" four per cent of top media jobs. In the English print media, OBCs account for just one per cent of top jobs and in the Hindi print media eight per cent. Muslims too, the survey noted, are "severely under-represented in the national media": they account for only three per cent among the key decision makers in the national media, compared with 13.4 per cent in the country's population.

Muslims do better in the Hindi electronic media, forming six per cent of key decisionmakers.
In the English electronic media, the survey found there were no Muslims at the
senior- most levels in Delhi. Christians, however, are proportionately represented in the media (mainly in the English media). Their share is about four per cent compared with their population share of 2.3 per cent.

Doubly disadvantaged sections of the population, such as women Other Backward
Classes or backward caste Muslims and Christians, are nearly absent among the key
decision-makers. The survey, for example, found that there was not a single OBC woman among the 315 journalists enumerated.

Gender balance

When it comes to gender balance, the English electronic media does best, with women
accounting for 32 per cent of the top jobs. Women account for 16 per cent of top editorial positions in the English print media and 14 per cent and 11 per cent in the Hindi print media and electronic media.

Explaining the survey methodology, Yogendra Yadav said details of designation, age, religion, caste, gender, mother tongue, and domicile of up to a maximum of 10 key decision- makers from 37 `national' media organisations were collected on a standard pro-forma between May 30 and June 3, 2006. In most cases, the data were generated by journalists from within each newspaper or television channel being surveyed.

Source : http://www.hindu.com/2006/06/05/stories/2006060504981400.htm

Caste by Birth or by Karma ????

Caste system is one bolt on the face of hinduism that they can not wipe out how much ever they try.By no means one can justify it.This barbaric practice finds its origin right in the Vedas.But the jingoism in hinduism has gone to such an extent that many Hindus even today try and defend this insane system.

I have been involved in numerous debates on caste system on various forums and one thing that shocked me was that even the most qualified people have tried and defended caste system as it was based on Karma(work) and not on Janma(Birth)...meaning that caste of a person was decided on his birth and not on his birth.Latter the system got corrupted and came to be by birth.This is a refuge that many people take to give some respectability to the caste system.

But there can not be a bigger lie than this.

Caste was not at all decided on work, but it was decided on birth and the profession was thrust on the individuals.Anyone who has taken the pains to study some of the texts would have known it.But the tragedy with hinduism is that 99.99% of the hindus have never ever bothered to as much as peek at the religious scriptures and yet very passionately defend it (generally based on the call of some self-proclaimed hindutva parties that hinduism is the best).In the process they end up defending even the wrongs of hinduism.This happens when the need of the hour is to have a through cleansing of the structure of hinduism itself.

If we go through various texts carefully we find that Caste system finds its origin in Rig Veda's Purush Sukta.Here no mention of Karma occurs.Infact Purusha Sukta is cosmogony of hinduism and it speaks about the Origin of various things in nature like cows and horses.Of course none of it can be seen from scientific microscope as with all other cosmogonys of the world.But when it comes to the creation of man the verse breaks its flow and creates not a homosapian, a human being but it talks about creation of Brahmins and other castes with graded inequality.Not a single word about Karma is spoken in the entire verse, the only verse in the Most important Veda the Rig Veda!!!So where does the question of Caste by Karma arise from?Manusmriti and latter texts thrust the professions on various castes.

If we turn to more popular events of mythology we have two very clear examples in the Mahabharata.
First one is of Eklavya.
Eklavya was refused training by Dronacharya owing to his caste.Now the act of Dronacharya...is it justifiable or no is an entirely different issue.Right now what we are concerned is that Eklavya had a caste.Before taking any education and much before taking up any occupation Eklavya had a caste....ie before doing any karma Eklavya had a caste...the caste on whose grounds dronacharya refused eklavya the education....So how can anyone say that caste was dependent on Karma?

The second example is more prominent.This is the example of Lord Parshurama and Karna.Initially Karna lied to parshurama to get the education.And the lie he told was that he was Brahmin by birth....He had a caste before taking up occupation.
Karna was then trained by Parshurama himself.And yet he finds out latter that Karna is not a Brahmin but a Kshatriya....now how would that be possible.Considering that if Parshurama had trained karna to be a Brahman and if caste was indeed by Karma then Karna should have become a Brahmin...but he still is a Kshatriya and thats why Parshurama curses him.

Again in Ramayana we find that King Ram goes and kills Shambuka because he is a lower caste person and yet meditating....

So we can say Caste by Karma is a theory which has no grounds...its only a lame attempt to give some respectability to the dreaded caste system.

Not only that. Wouldn't we have atleast one person who was born to lower caste parents and become a Brahman??When this question is put up we have suddenly 3 or 4 names popping up.Prominant amongst them is Ved Vyasa, Valmiki, Vasishtha and few other names like vishwamitra.All of these people have lower caste women as their respective mothers.Hence the argument comes that caste was by karma otherwise how else would the children of these lower caste women become brahmins.A plausible argument...atleast at the outset.

But two things have to be noted here.One is that these people have become Maharishis and NOT Brahmins.There is a difference.Maharishi is a title but Brahmin is a Caste.And yet the things that most of the hindutva vadis try to hide is their Fathers.

Maharishi Valmiki is born of a fisherwomen and hence called Valya Koli during his bandit days...Koli means fisherman.
But Valmikis father is Sage Prachetasa... A Brahmin

Ved Vyasa is also born of a fisherwomen called Satyavati...but his father is Sage Prasara A Brahmin.

Vashishtha is born to Urvashi a prostitute...but his father is Brahma Himself..the Lord.

Vishvamitra...born to due to a charu (you can well imagine what this chari is) given by Rishi Richika a Brahman to his own Mother in law.

Sage Rsyasrnga born to a deer and Sage Vibhandaka, a Brahman...
I dont really know what prompted Vibhandaka to give a birth to a son through a deer but he acts even more strange and raises his this son in isolation and doesnt tell him that female species exist...Why?

There are few others like Jambuka or Agatsya...but again these rishis have divine birth and are not born to human beings at all...so how can they be classified as born to lower caste people?Jambuka is born to a Jackle (I dont know what sick father he had) and Agatsya to a pitcher!!!

Now with this clarifications you can see for yourself that all the names that are brought out just to tell that caste system is by birth either have a Brahmin as their father or are of divine origin...not a single example in the whole 5000 yrs of history of hinduism we see a single person jumping Caste barriers of his parantage...nay fatherage.It is abundantly clear that Caste was not only by Birth but was and still is such a rigid system that in the entire history of hinduism...and this is the oldest religion... not a single person has been elivated in his caste status.

Another point to be considered is that if in the known 5000 yrs if hinduism couldnt make a single Shudra as a Brahmin or a Shankaracharya is that teaching of any practical use?After all religious teachings are supposed for the progress of man, but hinduism with all its text have failed is what the figures suggest!

Hindu Kasab V/S Muslim Kasab

Kasab is currently being charged with 86 crimes.But most serious of those is the killing of innocent people.He came armed and opened fire indiscriminately on people for killing them.But all said and done he is a terrorist and an anti national.His acts are the results of communal hatred and unethical politics by pakistan.

But India has a Hindu Kasab.His actions/crimes are same as that of Kasab.His actions were the result of hatred as well.And his actions date back 12 years.It took 12 yrs for the court to convict him.I wonder with a Muslim Kasab will it take 12 yrs?

Lets go back in time.Date is 11 June 1997.An old lady who ritually paid respect to the Ambedkar statue in the Ramabai Ambedkar slum colony comes at around 8:00 am as usual to the statue.There she is shocked to find that the statue of the Man who is (deservedly) god to her has been garlanded with slippers.She is infuriated and raises a commotion in the colony.All the people come there and see the sight and get infuriated.They are all furious.But some good sense prevail in them and instead of getting violent or destroying any public property they call up the local corporator.He sensing the public mood appeal them to keep their cool and immediately calls up the Mayor.A simple solution which is agreeable to every one is reached.It is decided that the Mayor will come up to the slums himself and remove the slipper garland and put a flower garland.People get pacified a bit there and go and wait for the Mayor.But after this promise the mayor fails to turn up.In the mean while the sight of such an insult of the great personality who is actually their god start getting on the peoples nerve.Yet they dont get violent.By 11:00 AM the mayor has still not turned up nor has left any message for the residents either.Finally their patience give up and this people still peaceful stage a "Rasta Roko" outside their slum.

Some how this news reaches the police station.Castist Inspector Manohar Kadam with his SRPF jawans comes to the scene.Without any warning within 10 mins of his arrival he orders his jawans to open fire on the peaceful unarmed protesters.A normal process for controlling a crowd is first warning on the microphone then Lathi Charge, then tear gas then firing in the air and even after that if the crowd is still violent then FIRING at their legs.

But this bastard doesnt do any of the available options.He straight way order killing of the innocent people.11 people lost their life including a 10 yr old kid who was watching the proceedings from his house balcony.If this is not hatred for the dalits then what is it?People who are given the charge of protecting the citizens life can not just kill them at their whim.

What follows up is this bastard framing charges that the crowd was getting violent and was trying to burn public property and some oil tanker crap.There was a tanker which was about 1.5 Kms from the site of the incident.Using his powers he tried to prove that the firing was done near the tanker and the killings happened there.

But the tanker was not working and no amount of his lies could justify his crap.If he was firing at the people who were trying to set the tanker ablaze then how could that police be so sure that his bullets wouldnt hit the tanker and set it ablaze?After all 50 rounds were fired.And if the police were in between the protestors and the people that means the people couldnt set the tanker on fire without crossing the police.

When he saw after some days that his arguments couldnt hold grounds he changed the statement to self defense.But not a single arm or ammunition was found on the protesters.They were totally unarmed people.And yet he put up a counter case on the civilians.....

Govt tried its best to protect this officer but there were few people from Ramabai Ambedkar nagar who refused to give up and hence this case after 12 long years saw a bit of justice.Manohar Kadam is sentenced to life imprisonment(Not a death sentence)

If one compares him with kasab we find that the actions and the intentions were the same.Both fired indiscriminately at unarmed people.Action of both were the result of hatred towards a particular group with the intentions of killing them.But if we take a look at what happened with Manohar Kadam is this:

1.Fast track court in which Manohar Kadam was tried gave its verdict really fast...after 12 years!

2.For 12 yrs Manohar Kadam was granted bail.

3.Manohar Kadam in the capacity of SRPF officer files a case against the witness and even against the dead!

Will kasab have the same options?
Can anyone imagine 12 yrs to convict Kasab?Can even in your wildest dreams think of Kasab getting bail?Will Kasab be able to file a counter case against anyone?

Between 1997 and now 2009 both the leading parties BJP and Congress had their share of rule...nither felt the need to expidiate the process.Even after 12 yrs only the lowest court has given the verdict, the option of higher courts is still open for Kadam.Justice delayed is justice denied....but that obviously doesnt count when dalits are in question.Bal Thackrey tells to the media...why waste courts time and money in giving a trial to Kasab...but he has not even bothered to utter a single word against Kadam...doesnt he feel that a crime commited in broad day light under full public view shouldnt be given trial as well?

Hindutva parties are after the blood of Kasab...not a single one demanding hanging of Kadam.

When it comes to reservations these very parties say that dalits are hindus and reservations is creating a rift in the society.But when they are butchered these very (self proclaimed) protectors of hindus are strangely mum....why?

I am not advocating that Kasab should be given any of the priviledges (like bail) given to Kadam...I am asking why was Kadam given it???

Why ?Why?? Why???

Quota and the Tamil Nadu experience

S. Neelakantan
Former Director of the Madras Institute of Development Studies


TAMIL NADU has a long record of enforcement of the reservation policy to redress the
problem of group injustice. The late S. Guhan has provided the best justification for
reservation ( The Hindu , December 11, 1990). To my knowledge, no study establishes thatTamil Nadu has become relatively inefficient because of its reservation policies. On thecontrary, data show that the level of competitiveness of the Scheduled Castes, the ScheduledTribes, and the Other Backward Classes, as revealed by the cut-off level of marks scored for their admissions to professional courses, is continuously increasing and progressively nearing the cut-off marks of those selected in open competition. To quote Guhan, "This only shows that, given time and patience, `merit' ceases to be the monopoly of the forward communities and the so-called backward classes tend to catch up fast."
The reservation policy is unfair when individual cases are considered in isolation of the group context. Since the seats in educational institutions are limited, reservation would necessarily reduce the number available for open competition. The competing groups diverge in competitive strength. Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy (in K.C.V. Kumar V. Karnataka 1985 SCR 394) refers to a backward class child "who has no books and magazines to read at home, no radio to listen, no TV to watch, no one to help him with his homework, whose parents are either illiterate or so ignorant and ill informed that he cannot even hope to seek their advice on any matter of importance." He goes on to ask: "Has not this child got merit if he with all his disadvantages is able to secure the qualifying 40 per cent or 50 per cent of the marks at a competitive examination where the children of the upper-classes who go to St. Paul's High School and St. Stephen's College, and who have perhaps been specially coached for the examination may secure 70, 80 or even 90 per cent of the marks? ... surely a child who has been able to jump so many hurdles may be expected to do better and better as he progresses in life."

In the past in Tamil Nadu, elitist schools in Chennai and the hill stations catering to the rich used to corner the top ranks in SSLC and matriculation examinations. Now the top rankers come from schools in relatively small towns serving all classes of society. In the 1950s, top rankers belonged mostly to forward castes. Now it is no longer true. These again reinforce Guhan's conclusion quoted above.

Nearly 80 years of practice of the reservation policy in Tamil Nadu have produced some visible improvements in the conditions of the deprived sections. But to achieve social justice in full measure, Guhan's conclusion that it has to be continued for three or four more generations is still valid.

However, Guhan's partial defence of reservation for the `creamy layer' on the ground that the "elites fulfil a useful function in groups that have remained backward for generations" is no longer valid. First, the media now perform that function well. Secondly, the mushroom growth of capitation-fee levying professional colleges has helped the `creamy layer' to capture a sizable portion of seats. There are higher secondary schools where rich children are tutored, coached, and drilled to pass the entrance tests.

A. Vaidyanathan ( The Hindu , May 18, 2006) has proposed a simple and workable solution to exclude the creamy layer: "limit eligibility to students from families that are not liable to income tax." However, it might penalise the honest income tax payer and reward the dishonest tax dodger! So other proxy indic ators such as property ownership, size of business or trade, level of parents' education, and permanent employment may be necessary to supplement it.

The time is ripe for a reconsideration of the exclusively caste-based criteria for reservation. India is probably the only country where there is a clamour to get labelled backward/most backward! Once a caste group manages to enter the reservation list, now there is practically no possibility (given our electoral politics) of it being excluded later.

I agree with Prof. Vaidyanathan's suggestion that there must be a public provision for facilities for children from all castes who perform commendably in the SSLC examination but who are unable to meet the expenses of pursuing further studies. They must all be given economic support to pursue further studies and must be given the best coaching that is now available only to the affluent. There can be differentiation in the performance standards for eligibility according to SC-ST-OBC categories. Caste would still be a valid, but not the sole, criterion for eligibility. In fixing such standards, the special and preferential treatment to SCST
candidates should continue. The scheme should be so structured that there is some
correspondence to the shares obtained by the different groups to their population share. Loan finance for higher education on easy terms should be assured for all who secure admission for courses in university or professional education.

More important still is his complaint about the "basic problem of inadequate and poor quality of teaching and facilities and equipment of the public school system." The public schools cater to the deprived sections of students who do not have any other choice.

Right from the primary level, there is a vast dissimilarity in the type and quality of education imparted between private and public schools. The students from the two streams differ in many ways, especially in their communication skills, confidence levels, and body language. The set of opportunities open to public school students is constrained. This makes them losers in the race for `merit'. There is a crying need for a reform of the system. If this is done, we may find that the differences in the cut-off level marks between different caste groups might disappear altogether!

The current agitation to push back reservation is misguided. Instead, a concerted effort by the media and the enlightened public to force Parliament to have a fresh look at the methods, justification, and desirability of redressing historic ally accumulated inequalities could be more fruitful.

Reservations: Towards a larger perspective

D.Parthasarathy
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences
Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay
The debate on reservations as one of the affirmative action policy measures in India has largely revolved around issues of merit and efficiency. While it is fairly easy to debunk the often ignorant and ill-informed ways in which these concepts have been used by those opposed to such policies, they are rarely questioned on the basis of a sociological imagination that is critical both for a better understanding of the problems involved as well to locate the whole debate in the larger context of the Indian social structure as it has evolved to its present stage.

This paper seeks to understand the whole debate within a larger theoretical and conceptual framework by interrogating the many in-built systemic biases that maintain and extend power and status inequalities in India today. One needs to understand the larger philosophical and epistemological issues that underpin the valorization of specific policy measures such as reservations and of issues such as “merit” and ‘efficiency”, so that a more objective view may be taken of the whole issue. Partly because of the influence of Ambedkar’s writing, activists and scholars sympathetic to reservation policies have to a certain extent launched epistemological critiques of concepts such as “merit”; on the contrary the thinking of opponents of such policies are clearly influenced by caste biases of an especially crass kind.

In critically examining the need and possible impacts of affirmative action policies like reservations, the first thing to be aware of is that de facto and de jure reservation is accepted and practiced by all societies in many different ways, most of which are not opposed at all, since they especially benefit the rich and middle classes. One example is inheritance rights. Going by the logic of anti-reservationists that merit alone and not accident of birth should be the criteria for seats or positions, one can ask why a son (or, rarely a daughter) should get the property of a parent when the parent dies. Should not the merit of candidates be assessed before passing on the property? Take agricultural land in India. In many cases, the skilled agricultural labourer doesn’t get the property but an unskilled, absentee landlord living in a city gets access to agricultural land from his (mostly) or her parent when he (mostly) or she dies. Some of the great thinkers of the last couple of centuries (including Gandhi in India) have opposed inheritance rights on the ground that it rewards those who are not necessarily the most deserving. How many of those opposing reservations speak out against inheritance rights? Even if one accepts right to inheritance, why should property be reserved only for sons and not daughters as happens in reality in most families in India. Would it be correct to say that sons have no merit and cannot fend for themselves and therefore need the property, but daughters don’t since they have more merit?
Another example is a practice found among most of our large, medium and small businesspersons who are now raising their voice against reservation in the private sector. In India in the case of most businesses, including those where shareholders and financial institutions hold the majority shares, management is by inheritance whether you take the Ambanis, Birlas, or most other families. Some exceptions are Narayanamurthy, Deepak Parekh and Sunil Mittal who have said that they will not pass on management and control to their children, but will pass on or have already passed on management control to professionals who have the ‘merit’ and ability. How many of those opposing reservations speak out against business and management inheritance? In most countries in Europe and North America, the founding families have very little control over the running of the company. In a recent famous case, the families of Hewlett and Packard opposed the merger of Compaq and HP, but the shareholders and the CEO went ahead with it. In most companies in the US, it is the shareholders who decide the CEO and other functionaries through the board of directors, not one’s father or sometimes mother as in India. Mr.Rahul Bajaj who has expressed a wish to start a movement against reservations, is himself said to be “grooming” his son to take over from him as CEO. The excuse that people like Mr.Bajaj always give for putting their children in positions of power is that they have been ‘groomed’. What prevents them from grooming a non-family member? How is it that fairly young family members are pushed to the top whereas those who have worked for a company and proved their talents over a long time never get the top positions? Mr.Bajaj asked for a level playing field when it comes to competition from MNCs, but doesn’t believe in a level playing field when it comes to the underprivileged! Mr.Bajaj should justify to his shareholders why the CEO position is reserved for his son, before he retires and starts a movement against reservations. Similarly many companies including some top ones have other forms of biases or ‘reservations’ in their recruitment. Mr.Dhoot of Videocon publicly stated that his company does not take women at the executive level. In the context of this kind of exclusion, how do opponents of reservation policies justify the exclusion of some groups and the inclusion of others? If one does an informal survey, it is easy to find out how many big companies have senior staff belonging to members of the company owner or major shareholder or founder’s caste, community, gender, region, linguistic group. How many women members of the Birla, Bajaj, or Ambani families are permitted to work in group companies? One could go on and on with examples. Contrast all this with corporations, government agencies, and universities in the US who in their advertisements put in a special line: “Women and minorities are especially encouraged to apply”.

Bias enters in recruitment in other ways too. Many software companies recruit new employees by asking existing employees to recommend new ones. So they contact people in their networks. Some ongoing studies by sociologists show that this leads to concentration of people from similar background in terms of gender, caste, and community within companies. They also found that qualified candidates from dalit or OBC backgrounds since they are first generation educated persons in their families and are not part of these networks, find it difficult to get jobs because of this practice. If companies want merit, wouldn’t the best practice be to advertise on a wide scale and attract the best to choose from? Sadly even a company like Infosys follows this practice to some extent. Employees are actually paid to refer new candidates.One hears from many management graduates from premium institutes in India that large corporates and MNCs in India prefer candidates who may not be very good but who come from influential families, so that they can get their jobs done using their contacts and networks. What happens to the candidates with merit? And yet these very corporates oppose reservations in the name of merit!

A fourth example is in the field of education where there is reservation on the basis of ability to pay, which no one opposes. There are hundreds of private professional colleges where one may have very good marks but can’t get in because you can’t afford to pay. These are justified in the name of a euphemism – “management quota”. How many of the anti-reservationists oppose this? Hardly any of the private professional colleges have adequate loan or scholarship schemes. In many states in India, students are admitted to engineering colleges with 45% as the minimum marks. Those who have low percentages and enough money get seats. One doesn’t hear of anyone complaining against the seats going to non-merit candidates in this case. In fact there is such an oversupply that despite the low eligibility marks, thousands of seats go vacant every year!

In every state in India over 85% of seats in government run educational institutions and offices are reserved for natives, those who are domiciled in that state. Political parties such as the Shiv Sena who are vociferous in opposing caste based reservations in fact equally vociferously support reservations for the natives identified on the basis of language. And yet almost no one in India thinks of this system as unfair or discriminatory, and as undermining “merit” in society. Reservations are fine if it is practiced on the basis of family (a euphemism for caste), language, or region. But the moment caste is a basis for affirmative action there are howls of protest!

The major issue therefore is that there are already schemes of reservation operating in society, which favour those who are more privileged. There would be little or no need for reservations in the public or private sector if these other schemes were non-existent, which is how it is in many economically developed countries. If positions or seats went to those who had the best ability or skill, then there would be more equity in society. But that is not the way things happen in India. Why is it that in our country land does not belong in a large number of cases, to those who actually cultivate the land – the dalit or adivasi landless agricultural labour? Why is agriculture not even considered to be an important skill in India? If our best scientists and engineers or doctors go and cultivate the land, the crops will fail for sure. Agricultural workers also have a skill that is important for society but we give it a low value and hence low wages, primarily because the task is performed by so called polluting and ‘low’ castes which has led to devaluing an important skill required for society to survive. If they were paid higher wages, over a period of time their socio-economic situation would improve, their children would be educated, and there would be no need for reservations. But because of past (and current) discrimination, and our present devaluation of an important skill, a certain section of the population continues to be poor, illiterate and so on. This is not what happens in western countries.
Why is it that even factory workers, construction workers, or municipal cleaners can afford to educate their children and even own a car in these countries? Because these societies realize the importance of dignity of labour, that minimum wages are to be given to every worker for a society to progress; whereas in our case, a vast majority do not even get enough for self-subsistence, and we justify it by arbitrarily imposing different values on different skills. The differential valorization of skills in India is related to who performs these jobs and how much profit is to be made from it. So since leather was considered to be a polluting occupation, it was left to dalit castes, but when export markets made leather work profitable, and technology no longer required one to touch leather with one’s hands, brahmins and upper castes also got into it. Cooking and stitching at home is unpaid so women have to do it. But when these occupations become paid, men take it up, so most chefs and cooks in restaurants, and tailors (even ladies tailors) are men! It doesn’t matter if women have a long history, tradition, and skills in cooking and tailoring, most of these jobs go to men anyway.

The concept of ‘merit’ itself is not properly understood by many. First of all we should remember that in India the most popular way of assessing merit is through an examination which is not often the best way of doing it. Take our IAS or IPS officers. Apart from the corruption issue, many of them have contributed to developing or implementing development programmes which are absolutely useless or inappropriate. A large number of studies have shown that these are because the officers are not actually equipped with the skill to understand the problems or best ways to implement them. If only doctors can treat patients and software engineers can develop software, how come a person who can pass exams in any subject can become a development and administration expert? Throughout the world there is a trend towards participatory development wherein, it is believed that the poor are better aware of their problem and they should decide the development model to be implemented. However they can’t pass the UPSC exams, and we believe that only those who can pass have the merit to devise, design, and implement development programmes on behalf of the poor!

Why is it that we believe that someone who has skills to memorize and regurgitate the answers in an exam have merit?

But even to memorize or to study well and pass an exam, certain pre-requisites are required. For example one of our most progressive Supreme Court judges had this to say: “What is merit? Is not a child of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes who has been brought up in an atmosphere of penury, illiteracy and anti-culture, who is looked down upon by tradition and society, who has no books, newspapers or magazines to read at home, no radio and TV to listen and watch, no private tuition, no one to help him with his home work and no one to advise him because his parents themselves are illiterate and ignorant, and who has to trudge to the nearest local board schools or colleges, has not this child got merit, if he with all his disadvantages, is able to secure the qualifying marks of 40% or 50 % of the total at a competitive examination, where the children of the upper classes who have all the advantages, go to the Sacred Heart Convent and St. Stephen’s college and who have perhaps been especially coached for the examination may secure 70, 80 or even 90% of marks. Surely a child who has been able to jump over so many obstacles may be expected to do better and better as he moves along in life.”

[1]Let us take the example of other skills. In India, there are some who speak English very well, whereas there are some who cannot. Some are very confident, while others are timid. Some look and act smart while others don’t. These are things people acquire from their family background and through socialization. Sometimes, some people who are academically very good get a lesser placement or job, compared to others who are not very good academically, but who are very confident, smart looking, and able to talk glibly. Meritorious candidates lose out. We need to remember that the criteria for assessing merit are very arbitrary and often not related to the job or expectation. So if we have a better system of assessing skill and attitude (other than rote learning and examination based systems), many of those currently considered as without merit will get in. Most US universities, when they ask for references specifically ask whether the marks are a true reflection of the candidate’s ability, and if not, if there were any reasons why the candidate could not perform well despite being a meritorious or talented person. We don’t do it in India, except in a handful of universities. The above statement by Justice Reddy makes us ask who has merit, someone who has all the advantages in life and gets 90% or someone who has a lot of obstacles to cross and gets a lower percentage?Upper castes have been dominant in India for centuries. Even today if one looks at the government sector, judiciary, corporate sector and so on, minority groups, women, dalits, adivasis, and other backward classes are much fewer in number at the top level compared to their proportion in the population. Can we attribute all the corruption, illiteracy, poverty, inefficiency and lack of development in India to the dominance of the upper caste - that they lacked merit to rule the country? Why is it that we did not develop on many indicators for centuries, and for decades after independence inspite of the dominance of the so-called meritorious upper castes? Why is it that in the south India states representation of these groups is much higher in government and private sector and these states perform better on most development indicators?

The debate over merit versus reservation is therefore a false one. We must realize that merit is generally not recognized and rewarded in society. In many different ways, everyone from ordinary people to rich business families are out to protect their privileges, and deny basic rights to others, and merit is usually a casualty in this process. Further, the characterization of merit in terms of marks, degrees etc., takes away the focus from actual ability, appropriateness, aptitude, and competence for a specific task which are actually what you require to do a job well. There is no such thing as a universal or context-neutral merit. Merit is always context specific.We must also realize that what is recognized as merit, whether in terms of a specific ability, academic record, talent, or skill – all constitute what sociologists such as Bourdieu refer to as “cultural capital”. While some of these are acquired in educational institutions, part of these, and how well we learn them depends on our social background. So if we come from an illiterate family, a family without a culture of learning or reading, then in general we don’t do as well, because of many reasons such as limited help at home with studies, interaction with peers who are not very knowledgeable, limited knowledge and awareness because of lack of books, newspapers, TV etc. at home and so on. Of course these are related to economic status. But in India, because of past discrimination, those with a lower economic status are mostly those with a low social or caste status. The objective of reservations therefore is to offset social and cultural deprivations resulting from past and present discriminatory behaviour by one section of the population against another. Nowadays we find some students - because they are always are teased by classmates, others don’t speak to them, or they are not able to match the lifestyles of some prosperous students - get depressed and perform poorly. Imagine if a person comes from a family which is always looked down upon, if his or her caste members are humiliated, beaten up, not allowed to be part of social gatherings, not allowed to use public facilities, how would he/she feel, and would he/she perform well in his/her academics?T

he policy of reservations is not the only or even the best option for development in the context of a hierarchically ordered society like India. Other options include provision of free or cheap good quality education in schools which are accessible to everyone, land reforms by giving land to the actual cultivator, strict implementation of minimum wages, and a complete stoppage of all forms of discriminatory behaviour whether in the villages or in the corporate sector. If all these were successfully implemented, there would be no need for reservations for any section of the population now. Not just western countries, but also the East Asian tigers such as South Korea, Japan, and China have been very successful in implementing the above measures. That is why they are much ahead of India as far as social and economic indicators are concerned. If we are successful with the measures above, along with a properly designed and implemented policy of reservations, there would soon be no need for such policies. But since we have failed on these fronts, (and it is a deliberate failure, since the failures benefit the already privileged groups), reservations seem to be an easy and justifiable option. Even though the policy has had some tangible benefits to a significant minority, it doesn’t change things much, and doesn’t lead to structural change in society. In the context of shrinking jobs in the public and government sector, dalits and other similarly placed groups are at further risk of marginalization. While economic liberalization may ‘open up’ the economy, it does not necessarily open up new opportunities for economic and social mobility for those in need of affirmative action, those who have been and are discriminated against on the basis of caste, religion, or gender. Given the attitudes of those in the private sector towards dalits and other backward classes, the limited gains due to affirmative action policies may receive a set back in the absence of policy measures for greater inclusion, so that more sections may gain from processes of economic change. Without going into the merits of the debate over economic liberalization, it is undeniable that new opportunities are being opened up by this process. It is here that affirmative action programmes act to deliver substantive rather than formal equality.[2] The push towards substantive equality requires that “law and administration serve the equalization of economic and social opportunities”. It requires a rejection of ‘rational’ systems that merely work towards enhancing ‘efficiency’. Merely providing for formal equality of status may result in missed opportunities for those who lack - for historical and current reasons of bias and discrimination – abilities (as arbitrarily decided by the market and dominant social forces) to compete with others from more privileged backgrounds. Constitutional provisions and judicial pronouncements in India have precisely relied upon the principle of substantive justice or equality as the legal basis for upholding reservation policies. In the era of privatization and liberalization, it is all the more important we do not lose sight of this very important democratic principle.

[1] Presidential Speech delivered by Justice Mr O. Chinnappa Reddy on the occasion of the release of Dr Paramji’s Book, “CASTE RESERVATIONS AND PERFORMANCE’ on 14th April, 1985 in the Jawaharlal Nehru Museum Auditorium, Teen Murti House, New Delhi.
[2]Max Weber, ‘Rational and Irrational Administration of Justice’, in Max Rheinstein, 1969: 347-356.

Maharashtra Din !!!

Recently the Maharashtrian issue and Marathi language made a lot of noise in the political senario.Initially I had no doubt in my mind that whatever fuss these political parties created were nothing but a publicity stunt.But the amount of noise that MNS made compelled me to wonder that is this more than a cheap publicity stunt?Has it happened that in Raj Thakrey we finally have a person who genuinely cared for the "Marathi Manoos" and his cause?

Yesterday was "Maharashtra Day".So all these thoughts came creeping back to my mind...But I had business to take care of.I had to leave to pune (from Nasik).Knowing the amount of rush on long weekends I decided to book private bus ticket.When I went to book the ticket, I saw a south-indian person sitting at the tickit counter.They agency was also owned by a Shetty.I said to myself...."Yes, this is a job in Maharashtra which could have been done by a Marathi Manoos as efficiently as the Shetty, but this is an opportunity snatched by a Non Maharashtrian in Marathi land...Raj Saheb is right! "I booked the ticket never the less.

Then I looked at the ticket and found out that it was printed entirely in english.The attacks on McDonalds came back to my mind.Even these buggers need to be taught a lesson.Shouldnt they show some respect to Marathi in Maharashtra?Shouldnt the tickets also be printed in Marathi?Or atleast it should be in both the languages?Much like what happens with the Post Office forms?

After waiting for about 45 Mins the bus came.The "Bhaiyya" driver got down and started shouting in his typcal Bhaiyya tone to the people to get in to the bus.Now every one knows how uncultered these "Bhaiyyas" are.So what the hell does is he doing as the driver?Shouldnt it be a marathi manoos driving the bus?

Then I looked at the bus...this was a bus which was running only between Stations in Maharashtra, and yet not a word was printed in Marathi!!!Gujrats bus have their name plates and tickets in Gujrati even if it is coming to Maharashtra.Go to Karnataka...everything there is in Kannada...So why shouldnt the same happen in Maharashtra?I was wondering why MNS spared these travels?

Just as they attacked the poor shop owners shoulnt they be attacking this travel agency as well?This is an agency which is voileting every thing that MNS has been saying for past so many months.English display boards, earning opportunity to Non Maharashtrians, employing the rowdy Bhaiyya's! And yet the MNS has been overlooking it...why?The answer can be found out by mearly glanicng at the photo.I have given a couple of photos of different buses of the same travels agency.

Take a look at the bus :

In case you dont know Neeta Volvo is Owned by none other than Raj Thakrey!!!

To run his bussiness Raj doesnt mind giving the agency of his highly sucessful Neeta Volvos to non-maharashtrian.He obviously doesnt seem to take interest in Marathi while printing his tickets or even while putting his companies name on his bus.And he doesnt think the Bhaiyyas as rowdies while using them as drivers.When it comes to running his own bussiness, his political thoughts go to the dogs.Shetties and Bhaiyyas take preference over his "Marathi Manoos"

But yet what he doesnt follow himself he wants others to follow.Reminds me of a gazal by Jagjeet Singh:

kabhi kabhi yun bhi humne apne jee ko behlaaya hai

jin baatoN ko khud nahiN samjhe auroN ko samjhaaya hai

Request to MNS activists...Please dont go and attack Jagjeet Singh for this...his Gazal is far more older that Raj antics and was not written for Raj saheb....Jai Maharashtra !!!