Reservation

The Desi Blogosphere, a medium of hegemonistic libertarian propaganda, has been roiling with debate on the reservations proposed by the honorable HRD minister, Arjun Singh. ArS wants to extend caste-based reservations in higher educational institutions like IITs and IIMs to 50%. (HyperTree'd touched upon these imperialist inegalitarian higher education institutions in this earlier post.)

HyperTree feels those opposing ArS's splendidly egalitarian proposal are not thinking with due emotional clarity. You see, for centuries, people in India have been discriminated on the basis of caste. Not just people, but the state and society itself has discriminated against people on the basis of caste. Naturally, we should ask what can state and society do now to redress these past injustices. The answer is simple: discriminate on the basis of caste; not just state but society itself should discriminatively allocate jobs and education seats on the basis on birth and caste. Only this can destroy the discrimination of society and state on the basis of caste.

Another argument for ArS's proposal, splendidly put forward by Dilip, an eminently socialist and emotively-logical thinker, is that those opposing these reservations only point out the injustice to those who'd be cut out of the pie. But do they talk about those who'd unjustly get a piece of the pie? This shows that libertarian hegemonists have lost grasp of even basic mathematics: if we steal candy from a poor brahmin and give it to a rich OBC, that's not just an unjust loss to the poor Brahmin, it is also an unjust gain to the rich OBC. So how can they say it is all a loss? HyperTree wishes more people were such clear thinkers like Dilip.

Another argument that the hegemonists give is that they want a system similar to the US, where instead of an egalitarian quota system, there is an insufficient affirmative action system. Instead of a rightfully blind entry on the basis of birth like in India, inegalitarian thought is given to make sure there is diversity as well as a certain minimum standard of ability.

HyperTree feels that even considering the notion that lopsided differences in ability along caste lines enforced by a quota system would lead to disharmony and a disservice to those been "quotaed in" is submitting oneself to the hegemonists' trap of looking at mere amply available empirical evidence as opposed to looking in one's heart and mind.

The final argument they give, that we should also take care to not disincentivize merit, is of course laughable. I mean, if we wanted to incentivize merit instead of a righteous egalitarianism, we might as well call ourselves a fully free capitalist society. A hegemonist dream we must not allow to come true, my dear comrades.