The recent judgment on affirmative action in US colleges have had reverberations in India as well. In India, reservations in jobs, admissions, and other opportunities in career and education can be generally referred to as affirmative action, although their legal basis and invincibility differ significantly. Unlike the US, reservations in India are largely immune from legal challenges, making a situation similar to the current state in the US inconceivable.
Clear Parallels
However, like affirmative action in the US, reservations in India are also a polarizing idea, with clear parallels. The justification for reservations in India is similar to the one offered by Lyndon Johnson nearly 60 years ago in the context of affirmative action in the US. The idea resonates perfectly in India’s case as well. It is seen as a crucial tool to provide historically disadvantaged groups such as scheduled castes, tribes, and backward castes with opportunities that were unavailable to them due to a flawed and oppressive social hierarchy that persisted for centuries. The continuation of reservations has become politically expedient, morally compelling, and comforting to the nation’s conscience.
While some may argue that continuing reservations indefinitely to any group even after 75 years of independence could have undesirable consequences, any such idea is likely to face overwhelming opposition. Like affirmative action in US, reservations are viewed as a means to rectify a historic injustice, the effects of which are deeply entrenched and emotionally moving. Many believe that the perpetuation of reservations is the only just and fair course of action.
However, the recent judgment in the US should prompt us to consider the future of reservations in India. The US discourse on exploring alternative methods to ensure racial diversity, which has gained traction after the judgment, holds relevance and resonance in our context as well. Should the sections of society currently benefiting from reservations perpetually depend on this mechanism, or should they eventually outgrow it? Although no political party dares to discuss discontinuing or diluting reservations even after 75 years, it does not serve the long-term interests of the beneficiaries. Once they have been brought to the starting line, empowered, and adequately enabled, the race must continue without any encumbrances to any participant.
Privileging the Privileged
The US context reveals that considering race indefinitely, even when socioeconomic factors can produce diversity, ignores the downsides of using race as a determining factor for advancement. In India, a policy of reservations in perpetuity without in some way, considering socioeconomic factors would only serve to privilege those who are already privileged.
The notion that caste-based reservations alone can be used as a proxy for achieving social progress requires serious exploration. Once we free our minds from preconceived notions, the universe of social progress becomes liberated from restrictive and politically expedient ideas. It is time to look beyond reservations and strive for social equity and harmony.
In US, the idea that race should be perpetually considered, even when socioeconomic preferences can achieve racial diversity, disregards the division caused by racial preferences. Martin Luther King Jr. recognized the costs of using racial preferences, particularly for the progressive coalition. He understood that wealthy white interests had long used race to divide working-class whites and blacks, preventing them from joining forces. King did not want to further that goal by embracing racial preferences. In a letter to an editor of “Why We Can’t Wait,” King wrote: “It is my opinion that many white workers whose economic condition is not too far removed from the economic condition of his black brother will find it difficult to accept a ‘Negro Bill of Rights’ which seeks to give special consideration to the Negro in the context of unemployment, joblessness, etc., and does not take into sufficient account their plight [that of the white worker].”
King’s close advisor, Bayard Rustin, emphasized the division caused by racial preferences in a 1987 address at Harvard University’s chapel commemorating King’s life. He declared, “Any preferential approach postulated along racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual lines will only disrupt a multicultural society and lead to a backlash.”
Re-engineer Reservations- Make It Inclusive
In any human society, especially one like India, characterized by complex social layers deeply ingrained over centuries, perpetuating privilege is likely to have two clear consequences. Firstly, it will result in a backlash from those who are deserving but denied opportunities they are worthy of, due to a flawed system. This backlash may take time to manifest but will eventually arise. Secondly, a group that enjoys prolonged privilege may develop complacency and arrogance. Eventually, discrimination may even emerge within the privileged group, as those who have grown beyond their initial disadvantages adopt an adversarial position against the socioeconomically disadvantaged within their own group.
Both these consequences are inevitable and contribute to the same social tensions that reservation policies seek to diminish. Only the actors and roles may change over time. A society built on either privileges or deprivations can never truly become cohesive and syncretic, even in the long run. It is crucial for us to reflect on this, including those who are the beneficiaries of these preferences.
(Concluded)
scribo ad LX 