Reservation Reality: Understanding Caste-Based Affirmative Action in India
Many people in India have varying and often misunderstood perceptions of the caste-based reservation system. Some think it is a support system for the poor or economically weaker sections, while others view it as a freebie granted to certain castes. There are those who believe it is a tool used to divide citizens. Concerns are also raised about reservations undermining meritocracy, diminishing the quality of education and workforce, and perpetuating caste divisions. However, the essence of the reservation system is far more complex and significant.
Before delving into the concept of reservation, it is crucial to understand the caste system in India. The Manusmriti, widely regarded as one of the important and authoritative books on Hindu law, dating back at least 3,000 years, acknowledges and justifies the caste system as essential for societal order and regularity. The caste system divides Hindus into four main categories: Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras, believed to have originated from different parts of Brahma, the Hindu God of creation.
At the top are the Brahmins, mainly teachers and intellectuals, from Brahma’s head; followed by Kshatriyas, the warriors and rulers, from his arms; Vaishyas, the traders, from his thighs; and at the bottom, Shudras, who perform menial jobs, from his feet. These main castes are further divided into about 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes, each based on specific occupations. Outside this system are the achhoots, or Dalits, known as the untouchables.
Class and caste are both systems of social stratification, but they differ fundamentally in their basis and flexibility. Class is an economic and social ranking based on factors such as income, education, and occupation, allowing for mobility as individuals can move up or down the social ladder through changes in these factors. In contrast, caste is a rigid, hereditary system, where social status is determined by birth and is immutable. While class divisions can change over a person’s lifetime through personal achievement or economic shifts, caste divisions are fixed and dictate social interactions, occupation, and marriage alliances, often enforcing strict social boundaries and perpetuating long-standing inequalities. This is exactly the problem caste is facing in India.
Many people living in cities have not experienced the harsh discrimination faced by lower castes in India and are often ignorant or less informed about the current situation. However, the discrimination is significant, with many people denied basic rights in various parts of the country. This caste-based discrimination is akin to racial discrimination but can be even harsher, particularly in workplaces and educational institutions. While urban areas may appear more progressive, caste-based biases persist subtly, affecting opportunities and social interactions. In rural areas, the situation is often dire, with rigid social hierarchies and systemic exclusion of lower castes from fundamental rights and resources, perpetuating a cycle of poverty and marginalization.
A recent and notable caste-based survey conducted in Bihar, the only one of its kind in India, revealed that around 85% of the state’s population falls under Other Backward Classes (OBC) and Scheduled Castes (SC). Despite this significant demographic, their representation in major sectors remains disproportionately low. Nationally, there have been only a handful of Chief Ministers, two or three Presidents, and no Prime Ministers from these communities since India’s independence in 1947, despite the country now having 29 states.
This glaring underrepresentation highlights the deep-rooted inequities and the necessity of affirmative action like reservations to ensure these communities have fair access to leadership roles and opportunities in various fields. The lack of representation is a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for social justice and the importance of continuing efforts to address these historical injustices.
In a recent interview, Rahul Gandhi, a notable Congress leader (I am not endorsing any political party), asked the journalists how many of them were from OBC or SC communities. To my surprise, only one cameraman raised his hand, indicating that an entire press conference did not have a single OBC or SC representative. This is striking considering that these communities make up an estimated 70% or more of India’s population, yet they are glaringly absent in higher job sectors.
This massive underrepresentation highlights a significant issue: how can we claim to be a non-discriminatory society when such a large portion of our population is not represented in key sectors? This gap in representation is not just confined to journalism but is likely pervasive across every major sector, reflecting deep-rooted systemic biases that continue to marginalize these communities.
To those who claim that merit is more important than equal representation, consider this: how do we fairly assess the merit of a child from a regional language school compared to a student from an International Board school? Which of them is truly more meritorious? Similarly, how do we evaluate the merit of a child from a family with a generational educational background against a child who is the first in their entire generation to receive an education?
The playing field is far from level. Students from privileged backgrounds often have access to better resources, tutoring, extracurricular opportunities, and a supportive environment that naturally boosts their academic performance. In contrast, students from marginalized communities may have to overcome significant obstacles just to attend school regularly, such as financial constraints, lack of study materials, or a need to contribute to household income.
This discrepancy highlights that merit, as traditionally measured by test scores and grades, does not account for the vastly different starting points of students. It overlooks the resilience, determination, and potential of those who have had to overcome far greater challenges. Is it fair to measure merit without considering these contextual factors? True meritocracy should recognize and compensate for these disparities, ensuring that everyone, regardless of their background, has an equal opportunity to succeed. Equal representation in education and employment is not about lowering standards; it is about acknowledging and addressing the systemic inequities that prevent a fair assessment of true potential and talent.
This same issue extends to job opportunities. Even a marginalized student from a privileged background faces significant mental blocks. The disparity between a regional language student and an International Board (IB) student exemplifies this challenge. The mental block experienced by the former, who may feel less competent or out of place compared to the latter, is a pervasive issue. To eradicate such mental blocks, the deeply ingrained caste system, which perpetuates these inequalities, must be addressed. However, this is far from an easy task.
Babasaheb Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Indian Constitution and a stalwart advocate for the rights of marginalized communities, acknowledged the enormity and complexity of this challenge. He recognized that eradicating the caste system is not only difficult but perhaps an impossible process. The caste system is deeply embedded in the social fabric of India, influencing every aspect of life from birth to death. It is reinforced by long-standing cultural practices, societal norms, and even economic structures.
Ambedkar himself faced immense obstacles in his fight against caste discrimination. He emphasized the need for systemic change, including legal reforms and social movements, to dismantle caste-based inequalities. Despite significant progress, the remnants of the caste system continue to manifest in various forms, from educational disparities to employment discrimination. This underscores the need for sustained and comprehensive efforts to address these deep-rooted issues.
Can reservation help? The concept of reservation, when implemented without political motives, has the potential to address systemic inequalities and provide opportunities for marginalized communities. However, the reality of the Indian political landscape has often led to the exploitation of the reservation system for electoral gains. Political parties have historically used reservations as a tool to secure votes, rather than genuinely striving for social justice.
This manipulation has undermined the true purpose of reservations, which is to uplift those who have been historically oppressed and denied equal opportunities. Moreover, there have been increasing demands for reservations from dominant upper-caste groups in various parts of India, further distorting the original intent of this policy. This trend devalues the fundamental reason for reservations, which is to redress historical injustices and create a more equitable society. The misuse and politicization of the reservation system highlight the urgent need for a more sincere and principled approach to affirmative action, ensuring it serves as a means of empowerment rather than a mere political strategy.
Ending it seems impossible unless politicians stop politicizing the issue and genuinely work for the betterment of the people.
