B +ve

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Root of Reservation...

In the last entire week, the incident which stole the limelight was Doctor's strike against OBC reservation in the field of medicine.

RESERVATION... one school of thought advocates it is an instrument to bring equality. The other school of thought tells just the reverese... it is to divide people in order to meet the vested interest of some socio-political groups. And the fight between the two thought-groups is on since independence. From 'discussion in drawing rooms' this has spilled over to streets often when either the quota-limit jumps with/without inclusion of a new section of the society in the reserved category or the quota enters into a new domain. Present medical student unrest/revolt is due to the later.

RESERVATION... though it takes certain tangible form in academics and jobs, but I think, it is very much there in the mind and action with even the so-called unreserved category from the early stages of life. Firstly, when a new born baby is named with a Surname - the caste tag, reservation germinates. Later in life, this tag plays its role on infinite occasions, small or big. Majority of marriages are in caste line, and the tag follows the person even after death in terms of the rituals performed. At all stages of life, in different socio-political sphere, this caste/community tag acts as an incentive or dis-incentive. Because of the inertia of caste-based practices of past, higher castes get an advantage, lower castes are in disfavour.

RESERVATION... the name carries it all. Even the sheer announcement of one's name does matter. I am not the only one saying this. Rather it is an experimentally proven fact, by World Bank. This year's World Developemnt Report (WDR 2006) says so in the following lines in page 24 of 300+ page document titled "Equity and Development" ... ''Striking evidence of the impact of stereotyping on performance comes from a recent experiment in India. Children from different castes were asked to complete simple exercises, such as solving a maze, with real monetary incentives contingent on performance. The key result of the experiment is that low-caste children perform on par with high-caste children when their caste is not publicly announced by the experimenter but significantly worse when it is made public (figure 5). If a similar inhibition of talent occurs in the real world, this implies a loss of potential output owing to social stereotyping.''

RESERVATION... many who are for it, argue that it is there to counter the "reservation" the high caste get in many other forms in society. It is a sort of 'government-oiling' required to decrease the 'frictions' the low caste experinece throughout in life; friction of all forms - social, interpersonal, or psycological. Isn't the root of this lies with the surname we carry? And... when we get the courage to drop our surnames to break the legacy of caste system - then I think, the authorities who ask for 'caste' or the individuals who declare the same volunterily - both would be ashamed of doing that. [Today invariably all forms carry the surname column, some even carry religion/caste column when the same is absolutely unnecessary.]

Lets give a big blow to this quota system by not declaring our castes... in both mind and action...
Lets uproot the reservation concept by naming our children synthetically... without surnames...
Lets imagine a society with only Sarthak Gauravs, and Nimisha Namratamayees...

Friday, May 12, 2006

Winner wins all... Not fair

One more round of election over... Switch on TV on 11th May. 90% of news of 10-15 news channels speak on one thing - the election results of 5 states... In any post-election analysis, two scorecards figure - 1. No of Seats and 2. Share of votes.
On the basis of former Govts form, collapse. Later is just for theoretical purpose :).

Share of vote does not matter as whether one wins by couple of hundreds of votes or few lakhs, result is the same - winner wins it all, looser looses it all.

Take the case TamilNadu election. The % share of vote for DMK led alliance was 45%. AIADMK led alliance vote share was somewhere around 40%. Out of 100 electorates, 70 voted (that was the turn out); and out of them 28 voted for AIADMK and 32 voted for DMK (i.e. 14% more). But If we look at the seats AIADMK+ got 69, where as DMK+ got 163 (i.e. 194% more). And the flaw is with the “simple majority” voting system.

I guess, political parties are silent about the system because even the victims of the system, think they can get benefited out of this flaw system 'next time'.

It is high time to dump the simple majority system and adopt MMP (Mixed Member Proportional System) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_Member_Proportional, which is there in countries like Germany, NZ and the UK. Proportional representation is more democratic as everyone would be represented in true proportion and no group unjustifiably get promoted or demoted.

Are you all listening…


 
 

-->