why bring up caste?

randomly picked, these two articles refer to the 'yadavisation' process in u.p., and bihar. what's yadavisation? the reporters, you'll notice, offer the barest explanation. the underlying message is that - it's such a well known phenomenon, don't you know about it? where were you? you'd be too naive to ask- well, so is the loch ness monster, tell me what does yadavisation look like? somebody tell me- what does yadavisation look like? does it look anything like this:

A quick head-count reveals that right from the present cabinet secretary to other key positions like secretary, RAW, defence research and development, agriculture and cooperation, economic affairs, revenue and legal affairs, Brahmins hold key jobs. As many as 37 top officials in the list of secretaries and officers of equivalent rank in the present administrative set-up are Brahmins. Going by figures quoted by the Backward Classes Commission, Brahmins account for 37.17 per cent of the bureaucracy. Other forward castes too constitute a substantial chunk.

that's the face of the central government- do i hear anyone whispering, forget shouting across the national media, brahminisation? notice that the magazine calls the article, oh so indulgently (as if the writer was describing interesting peculiarities of some species of fauna and not outlining the contours of an ugly man-made monstrosity called the indian government), 'the durbar hall pundits'. and don't miss the note of hope at the end:

But the winds of change are blowing. This year 144 candidates who cleared the civil services examinations are from other backward classes. Even the candidate who topped was an OBC. As a senior official remarked, perhaps 2010 may throw up an altogether different bureaucracy—one that is more inclusive and representative. Till then, it’s Brahmins who will dominate.

if anyone seriously believes that 'an altogether different bureaucracy' (the magazine has done another story, pushing forth the same happy idea, recently called the 'backwoods babus' - do you see the pattern?) would emerge even by the year 2110 leave alone 2010, i'd definitely advise him/her to get his/her head examined. some minor changes in some rungs are possible, but the truth is: the size of the indian public sector, which means the central and state governments and the psus, has remained the same since 1990, more or less. and given the size of the current wage and pension bill of these employees, and also imminent hikes and further hikes in the future, any massive new recruitment that would substantially change the composition of the entities listed...wouldn't be possible until the year 2030 or 2035 or so. and given also the history of determined and successful opposition to the entry of the lower castes into the bureaucracy (unless if it's in the lowest echelons) in the last sixty years, i don't think any restructuring would happen even in 2030. or for sixty more years or so.

this is my response to readers who didn't agree with the tone of my last post (was the media trying to point out an 'against all odds' success or was it trying to convey the subliminal message that the lower caste aspirants who want reservations are no-good-idlers?)- when the media and the articulate classes in india can call dirt dirt, even if most possibly it isn't, why can't they call a spade a spade? why don't they see, (possibly irreversible, in my view) the brahminisation/rajputisation etc., of india?