Part II of Reservation (Quota System) Vs Real development of the underprivileged
Reservation was a perceived historical necessity
Originally quota system was expected to bring in a level playing ground between those who were oppressed and those who were oppressing them. Evidently, people who were oppressed lost the same level of opportunity to rise up to the level of the rest others in the society. The quota system was hence perceived as a historical necessity to bring the oppressed class to the same level of the oppressing class by providing them greater opportunity. But if we see whether this perceived historical necessity was well-thought-out and implemented, a 'reason, means and outcome’ based inference alone can pragmatically ascertain ‘the efficiency, success and failure’ of the system.
On the contrary, if since independence, over these six decades had the Indian Government built resources, facilities and support systems to cater to the economically underprivileged people of this country, by now it would have created a level playing field for all. The underprivileged people of this country would have got all the means and resources to poise themselves to face any stringent competition with equal might as those economically privileged. And if successive Governments which ruled India, until now, had taken conscious unbiased effort with equalitarian vision, caste/communal distinction, oppression, and backwardness would have ceased to exist by now. Perhaps we will be living in an India, which metes out, equal opportunity to every citizen of the country, without the discrimination of caste and religion.
But unfortunately, what we are left with is a quota system with none of the efforts mentioned above. And it is an evident fact that the quota system has neither achieved uniform growth nor vanished class distinction from the society. Although perceived as a historical necessity, today the quota system has outlived its age. In its current form, it can never bring in an equal/uniform growth, because individuals at the receiving end of reservation and those others who face the open competition; both are confronting a failing system. While many among the former are losing the opportunity to excel, some among the later too, are losing opportunity even when they excel.
Why quota system in its present form cannot bring in a level playing ground?
Individual Excellence Vs Opportunity
The quota system distributes opportunities to individuals without ascertaining their adequacy of excellence (knowledge, real-skills, performance or experience) thereby compromising heavily on individual excellence and performance.
Let us take the case of an individual who enters a particular field without making himself an expert in knowledge, skill or performance. Outwardly the individual would have won an opportunity (through reservation) but would have lost the working knowledge or performing ability, which the individual would have otherwise achieved or minimum endeavored for, had he came through an open competition.
It is likely that one who fights without reservation in an open competition is going to endeavor more than the one who has a quota reserved already. In the long run, this compromise on ‘personal endeavor’ is going to cost the individual gaining through the quota system more than the one who wins an opportunity without quota. The individual loses the opportunity to excel (through personal endeavor) because ‘the scale of excellence’ itself is compromised to accommodate him/her.
Look at the wider picture. When an entire set of the population competes for a level of benchmark of minimal excellence, they stand not only compromised on, but also deprived of the very opportunity/endeavor to excel. While on the other hand, individuals who endeavored harder (particularly those who are economically underprivileged), but failed to make it into a shrinking list of open seats, down-sized constantly by the ever increasing number of reservations, have been losing 'opportunity', simply because they happened to have born in a particular religion or community.
Fostering a greater divide
A deserving individual will always remain an asset to the society immaterial of which religion or caste one belongs to, whereas the one who leaps up ladders without the ability to create value is likely to be looked down with discontent by his/her own fellow contenders, colleagues, and peers. This way the system not only groups people into two (those with reservation and those without reservation) and further into many, but also deepens the divide among them.
The outcome: One group leans towards the system, another stands against the system with dissent towards those gaining opportunity through the system without an equal strive. This dissent between them is likely to grow deeper and stronger, fostering an even greater divide. So instead of creating a level playing field, the reservation/quota system, simply furthers the divide among people on the lines of religion and caste, verily to fulfill the power hunger of politicians, religious sects and caste groups with a divisive interest.
Laxity affects the quality of labor outcome
When a system allows any under-performing candidate to take up tasks, roles, and responsibilities it sets a wrong precedent. The laxity in the system is likely to bring laxity among those contending through the quota system to endeavor ‘less-harder’ than those fighting for the opportunity in an open competition without reservation. Further, any under-performing individual who lacks necessary expertise will only produce poor or mediocre outcome, in whichever field of activity he/she is engaged in unless the individual makes a conscious effort to improve upon his/her working knowledge, skills and performance.
Inaccurate classification and failure of successive governments
Though it is true that a wide section of the Indian population is still underprivileged and economically backward, to tag an entire community as underprivileged, especially after 69 years of Independence, could be misleading. And even if the majority of people in a community are underprivileged, then all those who have been ruling the country for 69 years should be blamed for that. The policies adopted by them and even their motives should be questioned. And since the reservation/quota system, as on date, is based on inaccurate classification, all those who are really underprivileged and economically backward are not getting the much-needed support from the Government.
Reservation was a perceived historical necessity
Originally quota system was expected to bring in a level playing ground between those who were oppressed and those who were oppressing them. Evidently, people who were oppressed lost the same level of opportunity to rise up to the level of the rest others in the society. The quota system was hence perceived as a historical necessity to bring the oppressed class to the same level of the oppressing class by providing them greater opportunity. But if we see whether this perceived historical necessity was well-thought-out and implemented, a 'reason, means and outcome’ based inference alone can pragmatically ascertain ‘the efficiency, success and failure’ of the system.
On the contrary, if since independence, over these six decades had the Indian Government built resources, facilities and support systems to cater to the economically underprivileged people of this country, by now it would have created a level playing field for all. The underprivileged people of this country would have got all the means and resources to poise themselves to face any stringent competition with equal might as those economically privileged. And if successive Governments which ruled India, until now, had taken conscious unbiased effort with equalitarian vision, caste/communal distinction, oppression, and backwardness would have ceased to exist by now. Perhaps we will be living in an India, which metes out, equal opportunity to every citizen of the country, without the discrimination of caste and religion.
But unfortunately, what we are left with is a quota system with none of the efforts mentioned above. And it is an evident fact that the quota system has neither achieved uniform growth nor vanished class distinction from the society. Although perceived as a historical necessity, today the quota system has outlived its age. In its current form, it can never bring in an equal/uniform growth, because individuals at the receiving end of reservation and those others who face the open competition; both are confronting a failing system. While many among the former are losing the opportunity to excel, some among the later too, are losing opportunity even when they excel.
Why quota system in its present form cannot bring in a level playing ground?
Individual Excellence Vs Opportunity
The quota system distributes opportunities to individuals without ascertaining their adequacy of excellence (knowledge, real-skills, performance or experience) thereby compromising heavily on individual excellence and performance.
Let us take the case of an individual who enters a particular field without making himself an expert in knowledge, skill or performance. Outwardly the individual would have won an opportunity (through reservation) but would have lost the working knowledge or performing ability, which the individual would have otherwise achieved or minimum endeavored for, had he came through an open competition.
It is likely that one who fights without reservation in an open competition is going to endeavor more than the one who has a quota reserved already. In the long run, this compromise on ‘personal endeavor’ is going to cost the individual gaining through the quota system more than the one who wins an opportunity without quota. The individual loses the opportunity to excel (through personal endeavor) because ‘the scale of excellence’ itself is compromised to accommodate him/her.
Look at the wider picture. When an entire set of the population competes for a level of benchmark of minimal excellence, they stand not only compromised on, but also deprived of the very opportunity/endeavor to excel. While on the other hand, individuals who endeavored harder (particularly those who are economically underprivileged), but failed to make it into a shrinking list of open seats, down-sized constantly by the ever increasing number of reservations, have been losing 'opportunity', simply because they happened to have born in a particular religion or community.
Fostering a greater divide
A deserving individual will always remain an asset to the society immaterial of which religion or caste one belongs to, whereas the one who leaps up ladders without the ability to create value is likely to be looked down with discontent by his/her own fellow contenders, colleagues, and peers. This way the system not only groups people into two (those with reservation and those without reservation) and further into many, but also deepens the divide among them.
The outcome: One group leans towards the system, another stands against the system with dissent towards those gaining opportunity through the system without an equal strive. This dissent between them is likely to grow deeper and stronger, fostering an even greater divide. So instead of creating a level playing field, the reservation/quota system, simply furthers the divide among people on the lines of religion and caste, verily to fulfill the power hunger of politicians, religious sects and caste groups with a divisive interest.
Laxity affects the quality of labor outcome
When a system allows any under-performing candidate to take up tasks, roles, and responsibilities it sets a wrong precedent. The laxity in the system is likely to bring laxity among those contending through the quota system to endeavor ‘less-harder’ than those fighting for the opportunity in an open competition without reservation. Further, any under-performing individual who lacks necessary expertise will only produce poor or mediocre outcome, in whichever field of activity he/she is engaged in unless the individual makes a conscious effort to improve upon his/her working knowledge, skills and performance.
Inaccurate classification and failure of successive governments
Though it is true that a wide section of the Indian population is still underprivileged and economically backward, to tag an entire community as underprivileged, especially after 69 years of Independence, could be misleading. And even if the majority of people in a community are underprivileged, then all those who have been ruling the country for 69 years should be blamed for that. The policies adopted by them and even their motives should be questioned. And since the reservation/quota system, as on date, is based on inaccurate classification, all those who are really underprivileged and economically backward are not getting the much-needed support from the Government.