Caste discrimination and other bogus concepts
|
Now that election season is upon us, we’re going to be subjected to the usual rhetoric on caste discrimination – we’ve already heard the great Varun Gandhi’s vitriol on the other religious kind of rhetoric (it’s a moot point whether the BJP which is desperately looking for allies would pushed into supporting Varun only because the Election Commission’s actions made him a national hero). So, while getting in her Brahmins, Mayawati will go on about how she will get the Dalits a better deal; Lalu Prasad will do the same for the OBCs; and so on. But how real is the discrimination and, to that extent, how much has electoral representation helped alleviate this? That is, are the OBCs in Bihar any better for having had Lalu and family in charge of the state? There is the argument that Lalu being in power gave the OBCs a ‘voice’ – they can now go and report a crime against them in the police station, for instance – and ditto for the Dalits and Mayawati, but I’m not sure how far you can live on ‘voice’ if it doesn’t get followed up quickly enough with some income. If it did, Digvijay Singh would never have got voted out in Madhya Pradesh. Unfortunately, the data on political representation is too scanty to arrive at a firm conclusion – we know, for instance, that Mayawati is a Dalit leader but if 50 per cent, say, of her MPs/MLAs are Brahmins, we can hardly put that down as Dalit representation, can we? Apart from the reserved SC/ST seats, there is no data on what proportion of MPs/MLAs are from different castes. That’s clearly the subject of a PhD thesis or two, given that it can’t be too difficult to figure out the castes of a few thousand MLAs/MPs based on their surnames. On the face of it, though, the evidence is likely to show that political representation doesn’t make more than an iota of a difference. The average income of OBC households across the country is around Rs 60,000 (I’ll come to how I know that in a minute) while that in Bihar is just two thirds of that at Rs 41,000. Assuming, and I’d appreciate it if political scientists gave me more information on this, that most of Lalu’s MLAs were OBCs, this is as clear a rejection of the political-representation-helps’ thesis. Take the other argument made, while talking of the need for OBC reservations a few years ago – OBCs are 33 per cent of the population (in later NSS surveys, more castes were added to the OBC list and so the proportion of population shot up to over 40 per cent) but they’re just 24 per cent or so of what are called ‘professional’ jobs. Clear evidence of ‘discrimination’. Economist Surjit Bhalla looked at the data from the government’s own National Sample Survey (I wrote up the stories in this newspaper) and it turned out there was no discrimination. Here’s why: OBCs were 32 per cent of the population, but they were just 26 per cent of those who’d passed high school … the rest of the numbers pretty much flow from this one – the OBCs were 24 per cent of those who were enrolled in colleges and 24 per cent of those in professional jobs. So, if there’s a problem, it lies in the proportion of OBCs passing out of schools, it is not in reservation in colleges or in jobs. My friend Rajesh Shukla who is the Chief Statistician of the National Council of Applied Economic Research (the only organisation in the country to do a large annual income survey) and I are, in fact, working on a data-based book on income/expenditure/savings patterns of various castes in the country – hopefully, we’ll be done in a couple of months. While it’s early days yet, what’s interesting is that for most areas – income/expenditure/etc – the caste factor is a lot less important than others. A sneak-peak at one or two sub-heads in the book will give you some idea of what I’m saying. Take the income levels of those working in agriculture. SC/ST families here have income levels that are around half those of the upper-caste Hindus, but break this up into land-ownership, and you’ll find this is what accounts for much of the difference. If you’re still not convinced, look at the income levels of those employed in the modern services sector – the income levels of SC/STs is broadly similar to that of the upper castes! I could go on, but you get the picture – the SC/STs in modern services are as educated as the upper castes are, and this is what is primarily determining salary/income levels. So, if you’re interested in reading about this kind of stuff, do write in, book your copy now, and that kind of stuff! |
(14 votes, average: 4.07 out of 5)
Loading ...Disclaimer
All the content posted in the 'Business Standard Blogs' section, unless specified otherwise, are made by Business Standard employees. The content posted in 'Business Standard Blogs' does not follow routine internal Business Standard reviews and editorial processes and should be considered only as the views and opinions of the employees and not of Business Standard.
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Great idea, why go for NSS results. Its time for Census 2011. Let us have caste based Census this time. The picture will be clear that after Independence which group has gained most and which group has lost. This is because I doubt the figures of 40000 and 60000 incomes for OBCs. But I am sure that will never be done because it will made it very clear that how upper caste upper class people have gained a lot from the policy of states and not the so called reserved classes. The author must be residing in an metropolitan city, I would advice him to visit near by places to get the actual picture of caste discrimination in this country.
April 13th, 2009 at 11:18 am
Salute,
I have three points to think:
1. Cast and Religion should not be basis for elections. No body should be allowed to talk of them publically.
2. Reservation should be based on the level of income.
3. if we really love our country we should think of development only and only.
Thanks and regards
April 1st, 2009 at 1:05 pm
We can debating the caste and religion aspects rather than looking at getting rid of these from any kind of decision and policy making. Over last sixty years we have added to the caste and religion hatred in this country rather than the other way around. We must get rid of reservations and other benefits linked to caste and religion. Design the policies to bring up poor people. If you are indeed belong to poor economic background, regardless you will get benefited in any case. But then how can our political parties continue to play vote- bank politics? They will have to ensure country’s progress- right? And who wants to do that anyway? So we will continue to discriminate more and more and talk of ‘equality’ in the same breath.
March 31st, 2009 at 10:56 pm
What we need is to have reservations in Sports! Let the indian cricket team have SC/STs players compulsorily and then watch the fun!
Similarly there should be reservation for Hindi movie heros and heriones too from SCT/STs.
When we do that, the reaility will come out in the open!
March 31st, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Definitely an interesting take…and as always well researched…
Pro-reservation/affirmative action lobbyists will argue that the comparable levels of income that you quote are indeed a result of the decades old reservation system that has been practised in the country. Without recourse to numbers to back the claim, I would suspect that there a significant disparity in incomes in the 70s - 80s compared to now.
Having said that, there would be no justification in having assembly/parliamentary constituencies earmarked to represent certain castes. At the end of the day, they are supposed to be people’s representatives - not representatives of one community / caste which may atbest form 30-40% of the population that they seek to represent.
The focus should rather be on overall upliftment of the economically weaker section - irrespective of the caste that they belong to…else it will only lead to lopsided development.., but then, this is too much to expect from the current crop of politicians.
March 30th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Hi Sunil
I disagree with your analysis about whether Lalu has helped the cause of OBCs in Bihar. Saying Bihari OBCs earn 40K and the rest of the country’s OBCs earn 60K doesn’t mean much since Bihar is a poorer state than the rest of the country and it is likely that its OBCs are poorer than the other OBCs for that reason. What would be more illuminating is the relative status of OBCs with respect to the rest of society before Lalu and after Lalu. Or, if that data is not available, then the relative income status of OBCs in Bihar vis-a-vis other states. Of course, my disagreement with your analysis doesn’t mean I’m claiming that your conclusion is incorrect, since I obviously don’t have the data to conclude either way.
March 29th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Mr. Sunil
The message that ” Vote for Development, voting for your caste candidate is not going to improve the lot” is not coming out clearly from this article.
The middle class is a economically self sustaining unit. Every community/caste must enter this unit to be prosperous.
Middle class consists mainly of (the generations ) of Govt employees, rich farmers and traders. (Education is the only panacea, but that can be afforded and appreciated by the members of the above mentioned group viz. govt employees, rich farmers and traders.)
So the only by which you can guarantee the entry of the underprivileged in the middle class through by affirmative action in Govt jobs and education institutions.
I fully agree that this is going to improve the lot of very small number of people as the fiscal position of our govt is limited. The situation can be radically improved by the providing job opportunities in the skilled and unskilled sector through rapid economic development.
So vote for the economic development for greater good.
>
Jai Hind !
March 27th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Excellent, as usual…!