The practice of affirmative action, positive discrimination or reservations, is not restricted to India. The US has a quasi-compulsory affirmative action policy which gives preference to minorities in institutes of higher education. The difference made? When California banned affirmative action in undergraduate admissions in 1998, and the effect at Berkeley was immediate. In its first year without race-based preferences, the school accepted its least diverse undergraduate class in 17 years, admitting 56% fewer African-Americans and 49% fewer Latinos than in 1997.
The major difference between the American system and the Indian one is that affirmative action is not quota-based in the US, [where] in the Grutter vs Bollinger [hyperlink] case, the SC upheld the University of Michigan Law School?s admissions policy as saying it would help gain a ?critical mass? of non-white students, and therefore essential for a diverse student body.
But I don?t think a policy modelled on American lines will work in India, for the American system only attempts to help a non-white student gain admission. I am not really aware of the magnitude of social disparity in the US, but with the irreconcilable differences between classes in India, a more proactive measure may be required. Perhaps, a student?s eligibility for reservation could be plotted against his/ her caste, economic standing, academic history in the family and so on.
The media?s response [to Arjun Singh?s proposal] has been to show him up as a demented power zealot trying to manipulate issues to garner votes. I don?t see anything inherently wrong in vote garnering by populist measures. If the public is the paymaster, working for the good of the people is the expected result. I have scant regard for political formalists who claim that the aam junta cannot see what is good for them and can be perpetually hoodwinked into believing what politicians want them to.
Angry Fix
angryfix.blogspot.com