dr.ambedkar on official language, linguistic states, surpluses, resources and 'exploitation'

a few points in the statement 'Maharashtra as a Linguistic Province' submitted by dr.ambedkar to the 'Linguistic Provinces Commission' or Dar Commission in 1948 that caught my eye:

The solution of the difficulties

9. If the problem must be dealt with immediately what is to be the solution ? As has already been pointed out, the solution must satisfy two conditions. While accepting the principle of Linguistic Provinces it must provide against the break-up of India's unity. My solution of the problem therefore is that, while accepting the demand for the re-constitution of Provinces on linguistic basis, the constitution should provide that the official language of every Province shall be the same as the official language of the Central Government. It is only on that footing that I am prepared to accept the demand for Linguistic Provinces.

10. l am aware of the fact that my suggestion runs counter to the conception of Linguistic Provinces which is in vogue. It is that the language of the Province shall be its official language. I have no objection to Linguistic Provinces. But I have the strongest objection to the language of the Province being made its official language where it happens to be different from the official language of the Centre. My objection is based on the following considerations:

(1) The idea of having a Linguistic Province has nothing to do with the question of what should be its official language. By a Linguistic Province, I mean a Province which by the social composition of its population is homogeneous and therefore more suited for the realisation of those social ends which a democratic Government must fulfil. In my view, a Linguistic Province has nothing to do with the language of the Province. In the scheme of Linguistic Provinces, language has necessarily to play its part. But its part can be limited to the creation of the Province, i.e., for demarcation of the boundaries of the Province. There is no categorical imperative in the scheme of Linguistic Provinces which compels us to make the language of the Province its official language. Nor is it necessary, for sustaining the cultural unity of the Province, to make the language of the Province its official language. For, the cultural unity of the Province, which already exists, is capable of being sustained by factors other than language such as common historic tradition, community of social customs, etc. To sustain Provincial cultural unity which already exists it does not require the use of the Provincial language for official purposes. Fortunately for the Provincialists there is no fear of a Maharashtrian not remaining a Maharashtrian because he spoke any other language. So also there is no fear of a Tamilian or an Andhra or a Bengali ceasing to be a Tamilian, Andhra or Bengali if he spoke any other language than his own mother-tongue. [emphasis mine].

later, in 1955, in his 'Thoughts on Linguistic States' dr.ambedkar had recommended that Hindi be made the official language of all states. but what he said in 1948, that the official language of a state should be different from the provincial language, should that principle have been applied to hindi speaking states too? dr.ambedkar didn't miss the provincialism or chauvinism of the hindi speaking states, and i feel he'd have talked more about it later, after the drive to impose hindi on the south in the 1960s by the central government. unfortunately, he passed away soon after the publication of his 'Thoughts on Linguistic States'. would he have stressed on the need to impose a language different from hindi as the official language of the hindi speaking states if he had lived into the sixties?

again, from his statement to the Linguistic Provinces Commission:

SHOULD THE MAHARASHTRA PROVINCE BE FEDERAL OR UNITARY?

20. I will now turn to what are known to be points on which there is controversy. There is no controversy regarding the unification of Maharashtra into one Province. The controversy relates to the way it should he brought about. One view is that the new Maharashtra Province should be a unitary Province, with a single legislature and a single executive. The other view is that Maharashtra should be a Federation of two sub-provinces, one sub-province to consist of the Marathi-speaking districts of the Bombay Presidency and the other of the Marathi-speaking districts of the present Province of the Central Provinces and Berar. The idea of creating sub-Provinces has originated from the spokesmen of the Marathi-speaking districts of Central Provinces and Berar. I am satisfied that it is only the wish of a few high-caste politicians who feel that in a unified Maharashtra their political careers will come to an end. It has no backing from the people of e fact that it gives me an opportunity to enunciate what I regard as a very vital principal. When it is decided to create a Linguistic Province, I am definitely of opinion that all areas which are contiguous and which speak the same language should be forced to come into it. There should be no room for choice nor for self-determination. Every attempt must be made to create larger provincial units. Smaller provincial units will be a perpetual burden in normal times and a source of weakness in an emergency. Such a situation must be avoided. That is why I insist that all parts of Maharashtra should be merged together in a single province. [emphasis mine].

that's quite clear. in 1948, dr.ambedkar was clearly in favour of 'all areas which are contiguous and which speak the same language should be forced' into a single province. which means he wouldn't have supported the idea of a separate telangana in 1948.

would he have supported telangana in 1955, when he wrote his 'Thoughts on Linguistic States'? he was more concerned with the smaller size of the southern states on an average, in terms of population, in relation to northern states.

more from his statement to the Linguistic Provinces Commission:

44. Secondly, the surplus from Bombay is not consumed by Maharashtra alone but is consumed by the whole of India. The proceeds of the Income-tax, Super-tax, etc. which Bombay pays to the Central Government are all spent by the Central Government for all-India purposes and is shared by all other Provinces. To Prof. Vakil it does not matter if the surplus of Bombay is eaten up by United Provinces, Bihar, Assam, Orissa, West Bengal, East Punjab and Madras. What he objects to is Maharashtra getting any part of it. This is not an argument. It is only an exhibition of his hatred for Maharashtrians. [emphasis mine].

45. Granting that, Bombay was made into a separate Province, what I don't understand is how Prof. Vakil is going to prevent Maharashtra from getting share of Bombay surplus revenue. Even if Bombay is made separate Province, Bombay will have to pay income-tax, super-tax, etc. and surely Maharashtra will get a part of the revenue paid by Bombay to the Centre either directly or indirectly. As I have said the argument has in it more malice than substance.

how about the revenue surpluses from hyderabad which the telangani separatists claim are being used to fund development in other regions? following dr.ambedkar's common sensical logic, one could say: the surplus from hyderabad is not consumed by andhra pradesh alone but is consumed by the whole of India. and: granting that, hyderabad goes with a new telangana state, what i don't understand is how the separatists are going to prevent andhra-rayalaseema from getting a share of hyderabad's surplus revenue?

finally, one last point from the statement:

59. To reconstitute Provinces on economic basis—which is what is meant by rational basis—appears more scientific than reconstituting them on linguistic basis. However, unscientific linguistic reorganization of Provinces I cannot see how they can come in the way of rational utilization of economic resources of India. Provincial boundaries are only administrative boundaries. They do not raise economic barriers for the proper utilization of economic resources. If the position was that the resources contained within a Linguistic Province must only be explained by the people of the Province and no other than it could no doubt be said that the scheme of Linguistic Provinces was mischievous. But such is not the case. So long as Linguistic Provinces are not allowed to put a ban on the exploitation of the resources of the people by any body capably of wishing to exploit them a Linguistic Province will yield all the advantages of a rationally planned Province. [emphasis mine].

so, what would dr. ambedkar have said about all the noise being made by the separatists that telangani resources, like coal from singareni, are being 'exploited' by people from andhra-rayalaseema? as you can see, dr. ambedkar would have approved of the 'rational exploitation' of resources. if the rest of india can exploit resources from bombay high, or jharkhand or assam, why should there be any objection to resources from telangana being used to meet power needs in andhra-rayalaseema? they're not being 'stolen', they're being sold. just as they're being sold to power plants in karnataka, maharashtra and other parts of the country.

how i wish the separatists would read dr. ambedkar's views with open eyes, and minds, before putting words into his mouth!!

these learned purveyors of bazaar gossip

the amount of bazaar gossip that has been bandied around as knowledge by the activists and 'researchers' of the separate telangana movement is amazing. what's equally amazing is the quality of the pathetic leadership of the congress party at the centre which all through the last ten years listened to that kind of wild arguments and nodded its head.

would you nod your head at this kind of argument?

According to an estimate, while Rs.1,30,856 crores has been spent on education in Coastal Andhra and Rs.38,247 crores in Rayalaseema, expenditure on Telangana is only Rs.16,338 crores.

found that precious nugget of knowledge in an appeal sent to the prime minister (and sonia gandhi, of course) recently by an organization called 'Hyderabad Forum for Telangana' (you will find the appeal here on facebook, and with some of my comments on it, here).

look at those figures: 1,30,856 crores were spent on the nine districts of coastal andhra since 1956, while 38,247 crores were spent on the four districts of rayalaseema and only 16,338 crores were spent on the ten districts of telangana! while around 14,000 crores were spent on each district of andhra, 9,500 crores on each district of rayalaseema, and only 1600 crores were spent on each district of telangana. or only around 8.5% of the entire education expenditure since 1956 was spent on telangana (which is home to around 40% of the total population of the state)! i ask myself, shouldn't the estimator have asked himself: am i going slightly overboard, maybe?

if you were a plain, garden-variety conspiracy theorist, you'd hesitate a little before manufacturing those kind of estimates. you'd worry about believability. but in the homes of the telangana separatists these days, every ganesha on every wall calendar drinks milk, so all the manufacturers need to worry about is to keep the supply of milk running. and that's the only concern that worries them: the supply shouldn't run dry, we'll think about quality later, much, much later. so like illicit liquor producers across the slums of india, they throw in whatever they can lay their hands on into the brew: the academic equivalents of chemicals, offal, dead rats. because the market needs the fix, and now. more than it needs solutions to hunger, caste or poverty.

so none of the believers ask: whose estimate? what source? when did they compile the data? but until now the immensely creative knowledge of the manufacturers was mostly thrust on domestic users. and for a major part of the fifteen years of their efforts to build a market, there were very few takers for their kind of knowledge, their product, even in the domestic market. until sections of the congress, away from power for nine long years and desperately short of electoral mantras, and a few other mainstream politicians took on the responsibility of marketing this new post-reforms variant of an old, discredited product. it was only then that it attained the kind of visibility in public discourse that sharad pawar and many others in the congress lend to the shiv sena in maharashtra.

did andhra pradesh spend rs.1,30,856 crores plus 38,247 crores plus 16,338 crores on education since 1956?

no. rs.1,30,856 crores plus 38,247 crores plus 16,338 crores is rs.1,85,441 crores, and i don't think the government of andhra pradesh has spent even half as much on education, cumulatively, in all the years since 1956. but you can check for yourself from the andhra pradesh government's own budget estimates that you can find through a little exploration here. let me outline here some of the results i obtained through my own efforts at exploration there:

*2009-10. the budget estimate for expenditure on education for the year 2009-10 is around 10,800 crores in 2009-10, (page 32),
* 2000-01. 3,619 crores was actually incurred in 2000-2001,
* 1990-91. rs.995 crores in 1990-91,
* 1980-81. 198 crores in 1980-81,
* 1970-71. rs.60 crores in 1970-71
* 1960-61. rs.15 crores in 1960-61

those are mostly budget estimates (and i've rounded off some of them), culled from various budget speeches by the finance ministers of those times, and there'd be very minor revisions at the end of those years. i've quoted figures from the first year of each decade (1960-61, 1970-71, 1980-81, 1990-91, 2000-2001 and the current year, 2009-10) so that we'd get a very general sense of what could be the average spending on education, each year, during any particular decade (50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and 2000s). after going through the figures for many other years which i am not quoting here (because i don't think they're needed to make the point i'm trying to make-- any reader is welcome to check whatever figures are made available on the site, and please correct me), i've come up with some estimates of i) how much was spent, on an average, in each year in every decade since 1956 and ii) also an estimate of what could be the total amount spent by the government of andhra pradesh in all those years on general, higher and technical education. please note that i might be erring on a higher side, because i'm still trying to give the unnamed estimator a huge benefit of doubt:

1956-60: average spending on education in each year was rs.15 crore (i am taking the higher figure of the budget estimate of 1960-61, the first year of the next decade, as the average because i don't think it'd make much of difference to the total). the total spending on education for the four years (1956-57 until 1959-60) of the 50s comes to rs.60 crores.

1960-70. average spending on education in each year was rs.35 crores (i am still taking a higher figure, i think) and total spending on education in all the years during the 60s comes to rs.350 crores.

1970-80. average spending on education in each year was rs.150 crores, and total spending on education in all the years during the 70s comes to rs.1500 crores.

1980-90. average spending on education in each year was rs.600 crores, and total spending on education in all the years during the 80s comes to rs.6000 crores.

1990-2000. average spending on education in each year was rs.2,500 crores (i am still taking the higher figures), and total spending on education in all the years during the 90s comes to rs.25000 crores.

2000-2010. average spending on education in each year was rs.5,500 crores (i am still taking the higher figures), and total spending on education in all the years during the 2000s comes to rs.55000 crores.

what do all those figures add upto? rs.60 crores (total spend in the 50s) + 350 crores (total spend in the 60s) + 1,500 crores (total spend in the 70s) + 6,000 crores (total spend in the 80s) + 25,000 crores (total spend in the 90s) + 55,000 crores (total spend in the 2000s) = rs.87,910 crores. is that half of rs.1,85,441 crores, the figure the unnamed estimator had come up with? no.

the government of andhra pradesh hasn't spent half as much as the figure mentioned in the appeal in all the years since 1956. so forget the veracity of all the rest of the figures pertaining to allocations to the different regions. i am still willing to give the estimator a very long rope: was the estimator using present values of those sums spent in the past? it doesn't say so anywhere in the appeal which is addressed to the prime minister, an economist. nor does it seem likely, looking at the total figure the estimator has come up with. my own view is that if the estimator was using present values, not a paisa was spent on education in telangana, going by his estimate, since around the eighties. i don't think i need to say any more about the quality of that estimate.

but i wonder: how could all these learned, public spirited individuals have signed that appeal without checking the quality of the facts and figures mentioned in it?

Prof. Rama S. Melkote, Rtd. Professor, Osmania University
Prof. E. Revathi, Professor, Kakatiya University
Dr. K. Lalita, Director, Yugantar
Ms. K. Sajaya, Caring Citizens’ Collective
Dr. A. Suneetha, Coordinator, Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies
Ms. Kaneez Fathima, Muslim Forum for Telangana
Ms. Sandhya, President, Progressive Organization of Women
Ms. Vasudha Nagaraj, Advocate
Ms. Mandakini Mallaram, Advocate
Dr. K. Satyalakshmi, Associate Professor, Gandhi Naturopathic Medical College
Mr. Burgula Narsing Rao, Freedom Fighter
Prof. Madabhushi Sridhar, Professor, NALSAR Law University
Mr. Lateef Mohammad Khan, Gen.Secretary, Civil Liberties Monitoring Committee
Mr. K. T. Rama Rao, Member, Andhra Pradesh Assembly
Mr. Vidyasagar Rao, Rtd.Chief Engineer, Andhra Pradesh
Mr. M. Lakshmaiah, Senior Journalist
Mr. Chukka Ramaiah, Eminent Educationist
Mr. Sridhar Reddy, Indian National Congress
Dr. G. Vinod Kumar, Faculty, Law College, Osmania University
Dr. P. Harinath, Professor, Vivek Vardhini College
Mr. S. Jeevan Kumar, President, Human Rights Forum
Mr. Madan Mohan Rao, Senior Journalist
Mr. Sashi Kumar, Development Consultant
Dr. Ananth Maringanti, Journalist
Prof. M. Kodandram, Professor, Osmania University
Mr. D. Sitaram, Senior Journalist
Dr. Vithal Rajan, Member, World Future Council
Dr. R.V. Ramana Murthy, Associate Professor, Hyderabad Central University
Mr. Burgula Vijay, Telangana Development Forum
Ms. Seethalakshmi (Usha), Freelance Researcher and Consultant
Ms. Uma Bhrugubanda, Assistant Professor, English and Foreign Languages University
Dr. Rekha Pappu, Independent Researcher, Hyderabad
Dr. M. M. Vinodini, Dalit Writer
Mr. P.Kishan Rao, Farmer and Engineer, Khammam
Ms. Ravi Kumar, Development Consultant
Prof. D.Vasanta, Professor, Osmania University
Dr. R.Srivatsan, Senior Fellow, Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies
Dr. Mohammad Khaza, Poet and Writer
Mr. Kondala Reddy, Social Activist
Ms. V. Usha Rani, Director, Sannihita Resource Centre for Women
Mr. B. Rameshwarayya, Social Activist
Ms. Gogu Shyamala, Dalit writer
Ms. Joopaka Subadra, Dalit writer
Dr. Surepally Sujatha, Assistant Professor, Satavahana University, Karimnagar
Ms. G. Uma Devi, Rtd. Non-gazetted officer, Hyderabad
Ms. R. Lakshmi, Social Activist
Mr. Rajiv Velicheti, Associate Professor, Hyderabad Central University
Dr. Suguna Rammohan, Professor in Pathology, Kamineni Medical College
Dr. Manguta, Paediatrician
Ms. Burgula Suguna, MPTC, Burgula village, Mahboobnagar district
Dr. Peddi Rama Rao, Associate Professor, Telugu University
Dr. K. Madhavi, Associate Professor, Begumpet,
Mr. Jasraman Singh Grewal, Poet and Film maker
Mr. Diia Rajan, Researcher, Yugantar
Dr. Satish Poduval, Associate Professor, English and Foreign Languages University
Dr. Sarath Davala, Independent Researcher
Ms. Saraswati Kavula, Documentary Film Maker
Mr. Burgula Sudheer, Rtd. SBH officer
Mr. Burgula Dileep, Agriculturalist
Mr. Vommi Ramesh Babu, Journalist and writer
Mr. Burgula Pradeep, Trade Unionist
Mr. Pasham Yadagiri , Senior journalist
Ms. J. Subhadra, Dalit writer
Ms. G Uma Devi , Rtd. Non-gazzetted officer
Dr. Surapally Sujatha, Asst. Professor
Ms. Soumitri, Development Consultant.
Mr. Raghavan, Development Consultant
Mr. Errabelli Siddarth Rao, Advocate
Mr. Sri Harsha Rao, Advocate
Ms. Rohini Rao, Advocate

the hindu, upper caste liberal (which is what most of those signatories are) is a very anxious animal: the race to seem liberal is such an intensely competitive struggle, i guess, that you can't blame them for not bothering to check what they're liberal about.

no, i am not going to blame them for not checking the rest of the very argumentative, many times offensively sectarian, appeal either. i can only admire their blind faith in the cause: who said education is about learning to reason?

a non-antagonistic contradiction

the mala-madiga divide in andhra pradesh in many ways mirrors the andhra-telangana divide: both the divides have been assiduously built over most of the post-independence period by certain very narrow-minded elements to play up the minor differences, rather than focus on the huge commonalities. another common trait among both kinds of divisive elements is their excessive reliance on selective data, in very select areas, to wrangle over some small issue, the whole picture be damned. distribution of jobs in government is one favourite area of contention. should this issue have consumed so much time and passion? s.r.sankaran, an ex-bureaucrat with an impeccable work record (especially among disadvantaged sections) in andhra pradesh raises the same question in an attempt to look at the larger picture in this old epw article (january 31, 1998 issue) on the mala-madiga issue:

Based on the information supplied by different departments of the government, it is understood that the Ramachandra Raju Commission found that the vacancies reserved for the scheduled castes in public employment and the seats in higher educational institutions have been availed of between malas and madigas broadly in the ratio of 64:36. As the population is almost equal between malas and madigas, the madigas would appear to have received less than the proportionate share. There are a large number of historical reasons as a result of which such a situation has emerged. The reasons would perhaps include the comparatively faster growth of coastal Andhra, better educational opportunities, spread effect of education and first generation employment, missionary activities and a host of other factors; but the present position is one of imbalance and needs appropriate correctives. Availment of whatever job opportunities that arise in proportion to the population may not place anyone at a disadvantage and may serve to correct the imbalance.

It is to be appreciated that those employed in public services are less than 4 per cent of the population, though they may be the most visible particularly in urban areas and more articulate. They are a small if not minuscule minority. With liberalisation and the shrinking public sector, not many job opportunities in the state sector are likely to emerge in future. The categorisation orders issued by the state government, even if they are upheld by the courts do not apply to the posts under the central government or central public undertakings which account for the larger proportion of the jobs in the public domain. It is also to be noted that a large part of the jobs in the state sector will be in clerical or lower categories which do not substantially enhance the social status. While not underrating the importance of public services, its significance in relation to the scheme of reservations seems to be limited in the coming years. Looking to all these factors, the virulent fight about the government jobs does not seem to be worthwhile for either side. In fact the problem itself has arisen as a result of some gains to the scheduled caste community as a whole from the policy of reservations. At a period of time when there was no representation at all or negligible representation in services, there was perhaps nothing to quarrel about or to share; but when there is something gained after a combined struggle for decades, the relative shares have become the subject of dispute. One wishes that such a situation had not arisen at all. These conflicts are bound to arise in a differentiated and segmented society like ours. Whatever course the cases in the courts take, the responsibility for finding a solution will still rest with the society as a whole and more specifically on the scheduled caste community.

Another point needs to be stressed. Other than employment in services and admissions to technical courses like medicine and engineering, generally described as statutory benefits, other facilities and schemes like hostels, scholarships and other educational facilities, provision of housing or drinking water supply are unlimited and universal as far as all the scheduled castes are concerned. They need not become issues of controversy at all. So far as political representation is concerned, that will be decided by the balance of political forces at any point of time and surely no government order can decide such matters.

The most unfortunate development is that the debate is being carried on in antagonistic terms and in an adversorial manner. There have been extreme demands by some sections that malas should be removed from the list of scheduled castes which, to say the least, is ridiculous. Similarly, the statements that the madigas could not avail of the job opportunities because of their caste based occupations or lack of education will be going counter to the spirit behind the principle of reservation which is essentially to assist those who are left behind.

The mala community, particularly those who are articulate and their leadership should realise that the madigas are a few steps behind and they do need and deserve a special support. The madiga community on their part should understand that if they are relatively less developed, it is not the malas who are responsible for it. Both should appreciate that lasting damage will be done to the community of scheduled castes by hostility and acrimony, particularly in the villages where they have to live together and work together. Any diminution in the strength and unity will have economic, social and political consequences. Both the communities should recognise the need for securing equality among themselves and strive for equality with the rest of the society. The equitable sharing of jobs or seats can become a part of the process of strengthening the unity. They should sit together and evolve a consensus. It is imperative that the masses of the labouring classes should stand united. To emphasise the point, the issue is not at all a mala vs madiga issue, but one arising from the differing levels of development of the two communities at a particular historical moment and the efforts needed to reduce the differentials and to bring about equality. There is no doubt a contradiction that has emerged and given rise to conflicts but it is not an antagonistic contradiction but a non- antagonistic contradiction that can be resolved by mutual understanding, recognising the fact that both malas and madigas are bound together by the common suffering and common bond of untouchability and that indeed is their togetherness in history. [emphasis mine].

now, i'd say, all the people from the different regions of andhra pradesh could benefit from following that sane counsel, not just the malas and madigas.

time to talk

by adopting the very legalistic line that the merger in 1956 was conditional and hence could be unilaterally revoked, the separatists have until now managed to avoid talking to other, to use a very chidambaramesque term, 'stakeholders' in the state. but they didn't stop talking across, over, around, everywhere about the so-called 'discrimination' they have had to face all through these years. and they didn't stop talking about how the merger itself was 'undemocratic' (a not very legalistic line to take), that the people of telangana had opposed it. who had opposed it? a few reactionary elements who had enjoyed high privileges in the feudal regime. and their cousins, perhaps. they've called the majority decision of the elected legislature in favour of the merger as 'undemocratic', which of course means 15 illegitimate legislatures and governments, in some of which they were a part, have presided over the state until now. some naive observers would sense hypocrisy there, but not the separatists. not their gang of 'ideologues' and 'intellectuals' who have worked or are working in jobs the illegitimate governments entrusted them with.

now, they'll have to talk. because they don't like talking to their fellow citizens, like in any democracy, but would rather prefer talking to delhi, they should like this idea of a committee appointed by delhi. i've called them inveterate courtiers earlier, because their genius lies in gossip, innuendo and rumour. and they've spread the disease across the land. i don't think they'd like to talk now, considering most of their talk until now has been mostly gossip, innuendo and rumour. now, they might have to talk facts, because the committee may rather listen to facts. perhaps, that's what they've been avoiding until now. a discussion of facts which might rip apart most of their claim. and all that they might be left with is the clever logic that it's their culture to talk around facts.

what's atrociously, horribly wrong with you?

MUMBAI: A minimum of 35% is essential to be promoted to a higher class under almost every Indian school board or university. But you don't need
that much to make it On Saturday, when the Indian Institutes of Technology released report cards of students who joined these engineering schools
this year, it transpired that the entry bar for the reserved category students had dropped to a mere 18% (89/480).

The IITs were forced to make various concessions to fill SC/ST seats this year. Entry levels were lowered to half of what the last general category student who got through to the IITs scored. So, as the last general category student admitted to the IITs bagged an overall score of 178 (out of 480), the cut-off for an SC/ST student was brought down to 89 (half of 178). Till last year, the cut-off for SC/ST students used to be 60% of the score of the last general category student.

a report in the economic times on the results of iit-jee this year. and abi, in this excellent post, tells you what's wrong with the report:

Even if she wants to highlight the fact that 18 percent is what the SC/ST students needed to get into the IITs, she chooses the wrong number -- 35 percent that one needs in Board Exams -- for comparison. The relevant number should have been the subject-wise averages in this year's JEE itself: 7%, 4% and 7% (in math, physics and chemistry, respectively).

In fact, one of the striking features of JEE is the very low averages -- percentages in single digits. Remember, this is an exam that students self-select into. Remember also that this is an exam for which they prepare hard and pay good money for coaching.

Given these facts, the single-digit averages are atrociously, horribly, low.

there must be figures somewhere on how many general category and reserved category students appeared for the iit-jee- the total number of candidates, it appears, to be around 4 lakhs. and the average score of those 4 lakh students was much below the average score of the sc/st students who scored above the cut-off of 18%. and this despite history and all its burdens falling heavily on only one side.

i feel compelled to ask, and i find two words that abi used very useful, all those bigoted journalists of the media: what's atrociously, horribly wrong with you?

do upper caste poor constitute 14% of rajasthan's total population?

Brought by the previous Vasundhara Raje government, the Rajasthan Reservation Bill, 2008, providing five per cent reservation in jobs to Gujjars and three other communities and 14 per cent to the economically poor among the forward castes was cleared by the Governor last night.

we don't know how things will eventually turn out, after the courts and delhi are done with it, but the rajasthan government has brought in a new reservations bill which grants a 5% quota to the gujjars. the media will mostly focus on that, and will mention only in passing the bigger quota, of 14%, that has been set aside for the economically backward classes. who are they? the poor among the upper castes. do they make up 14% of the state's population?

the upper castes in rajasthan- the rajputs, brahmins and vaishyas are the major groups- account for 25% to 30% of the total population, according to most media estimates (published during the election season, mostly). even though indian media counts the twice born twice, most of the time, i am going to go by the numbers it reels out- the higher figure, in fact- of 30%.

are half of rajasthan's upper castes poor? if yes, they need serious help, mere reservations won't do. call in the united nations.

driving ms.roy

the andhra pradesh government has issued 138 government orders until now to make the employment guarantee act, which guarantees 100 days of work to every rural household, work better. a commenter on a telugu channel asks: how many times was the constitution amended?

one report says only 4 lakh people have been provided some work until now. of the 88 lakh applicants who'd been issued job cards in the state. less than 5% performance is okay with p.sainath. i guess it's okay with praful bidwai, who wrote in journals published across the globe and spoke in conferences held in as disparate international venues as the gulf and japan before the act was brought in, too. curiously, he seems to have lost interest in the subject now. like so many others engaged in shouldering the brahminical burden of educating the dumb lower castes about their rights (why not just educate them by making the schools work is a dumber question).

well, 5% seems to be the universal, but unwritten, performance norm expected of most of the 1000 odd schemes in operation right now (yes, there are a 1000 odd schemes according to dr. jayaprakash narayan of lok satta and i'm not sure the number includes schemes fathered exclusively by state governments). including the pds. and silence, or the occasional outburst in defense of failing schemes, also seems to be the universal performance norm expected of radical proponents of all such schemes...after the bills have been passed.

[thanks apurva, hope you're reading this, for leading me to the title].

this is what i mean by jnu gyan

check this interesting article by chandrabhan prasad: a critique of buffalo nationalism that kancha ilaiah seeks to promote. i'd not like to attempt here a critique of the critique (i think it'd be useful), but i'd definitely like to point out some factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies that many knowledgeable folks from indian academia seem to consistently indulge in. especially those articulate folks who work, or have spent a few years (like prasad), in jnu.

for instance, the jats. the jats from uttar pradesh are not obcs- not according to the national commission for backward classes (check the u.p. list). neither are the jats from punjab. nor haryana. only the jats from rajasthan (excluding jats from bharatpur and dhaulpur districts, where nearly half of the state's jats live) are in the central list of backward classes.

which means around 95% of the jats in the country are not obcs. which also means: the jats cannot be taken to represent the obcs.

let me quote here a paragraph from this excellent article, in frontline, on why some jats from rajasthan are in the central list):

The NCBC further reasoned in its advice: “No doubt, after the effective abolition of jagirdari and zamindari systems, the condition of Jats in Rajasthan have begun to improve, but considering the time-span required for advancement of a community as a whole from a position of backwardness, the time that was available for Jats in Rajasthan (excluding Bharatpur and Dholpur) to move up from a position of social backwardness to that of social advancement, cannot be reasonably considered as adequate. The exceptional circumstances dating at least from the late medieval age through the modern period, which were available for communities like Kamma and Reddy of Andhra Pradesh and the Jats of Punjab, etc., have not been available for Jats of Rajasthan (excluding Bharatpur and Dholpur). (italics mine)

so, if you wish to place the jats in any category, place them alongside the reddies and kammas of andhra pradesh, or the marathas of maharashtra or the patidars of gujarat. they don't belong in the obc category. their ascendancy- social, economic, political- is not recent: it has been happening over the last three, four centuries at least. and in the non-aryavarta states, these castes have emerged, as if naturally, to assume the place of the absent kshatriyas.

call them the intermediate or intermediary castes, or the middle castes: in most indian states they're the upper castes. but that news doesn't seem to have reached jnu until now. for a lot of the tv stars from jnu, and other universities across india, the intermediate castes (or upper castes not of upper varna origin) are quintessential obcs.

there is not just socio-economic, but also a consistent historical logic to the castes in the central list. it's another matter that there have been reports from some state commissions for backward classes that have found inconsistencies pertaining to a few castes in the respective states' lists (but not in the central list). prominent among doubtful inclusions are a couple of castes from tamil nadu and karnataka and uttar pradesh. but by and large, there have been more, many more, non-inclusions, of small unknown castes, than inclusions, of large, prominent castes.

look at this way: if the obc population of india, let's assume, is around 50 crores. what would be the average size, in terms of population, of the 2000 odd obc castes? around 2,50,000. if we exclude those few castes whose numbers run into lakhs and a few times, a couple of millions, what would be average size of the average obc caste? many wouldn't even reach the one lakh mark. no, you've never really met the average obc, even though you've met him hundreds of times: he might be the hawker who sells vegetables at your door, the janitor in the lift, the plumber or the electrician, the thelawallah selling plastic goods, the mechanic, the paanwallah...but how would you recognize him if he isn't a yadav or a jat or a kurmi or a lodh? most likely, not even the government has heard of the name of the plumber/electrician/janitor's caste.

why does the focus of the committed academia (and the media and most of the chattering classes who follow their performances in the media) in india remain fixed on the few prominent intermediate castes at the top of the social order in many states, historically, even when most of them are not even obcs, according to the ncbc? considering, even those among them who are obcs, probably constitute around 5% of the obc population in the country, and less than 1% of all obc castes?

and the popular myths propagated by this set of jnu led dons is based on such poor research- it's ages since most of them have actually done any field work, i think. most of the best research has been done by researchers from outside india. and even when they do do field work: they seem to know beforehand what to find.

creamy layer: a figure from the dark ages

OBC job share plunges to 5% in 13 yrs of quota

NEW DELHI: In 1990, other backward classes claimed 12.55% of government jobs. But 13 years after the government created a 27% quota in their favour in 1994, the OBC share in jobs has, in fact, plunged — to an alarming 5.21%.

The figure emerged from the documents submitted by the Centre to the Supreme Court during arguments on anti-quota PILs challenging the validity of the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admissions) Act, 2006.

that's from a six month old report in the times of india, always on the right side of upper caste righteous indignation. and this is a frustrated jayanthi natarajan at a debate telecast a couple of days ago by ibn live, a channel that'll dramatize whatever it takes to drive home some politically difficult sense into the lower castes:

Jayanthi countered that politically difficult statement with a politically correct one. “After the Indra Sahni case, when we’ve had reservations for OBCs in employment, only 5.4 per cent of those seats have been filled. So until social inclusiveness is totally achieved, I don’t think it’s time yet to talking about leaving people out. It may be a very attractive argument. It’s also not true to say that it replaces merit,” she said.

and a five month old story from the hindu, that doesn't see any contradiction between being the mouthpiece of the brahminical left and the working classes in the country, says:

Speaking at the end of the rally on Parliament Street, Dr. Ramadoss said Central Government jobs should be distributed to various social groups in proportion to their population. Though the share of the OBC population in the country was over 52 per cent, its share in government employment was only 5.3 per cent.

yes, the core message in all the links is the same: obc representation in the central government has fallen from around 12.5% in 1989 to 5.21% in 2007. then why so many links?

so that some folks, like this commenter at abi's blog, would see the light: the obcs are still in the dark ages. like i had said in a recent post, it is quite impossible for certain folks who've been taught by the army of intellectuals opposing reservations to see the obcs in a certain light, as powerful and prosperous, to accept any information that punctures that picture. hence, the multiple links: choose you favourite rag. and forgive it for slipping up- this isn't the kind of news you'd like to read or reread. what you like is more objective stuff, right? the headlines should say, in your kind of politically correct language: the students opposing reservations aren't elitist, and the editorial should say: the poor among the upper castes deserve a break too.

the figure i'd suggested in this post, a couple of days ago, that only 0.5% of all obc families belong to the creamy layer, isn't from the dark ages, as the commenter suggests. as you can see, things were better for the obcs in the dark ages.

in 1990, when the estimate of obc representation in central government jobs, according to mandal, was 12.55%, the size of the central government was 34 lakhs. now it's 31 lakhs (according to the report of the 2004, the latest, census of central government employees ). 5.21% of 31 lakhs- which means the number of obcs in the central government is around 1,62,000.

and how many of those 31 lakh jobs could be group (a) and group (b) officers (check sections II A and II b of the creamy layer categories)? around 7-9% of central government jobs fall in those categories- say, 2,50,000 jobs. ignoring for the moment group (a) and group (b) officers of state services, how many obc group (a) and (b) officers do you think could be skimmed off? how many obcs do you think actually hold those posts? 5%? 6%? 10%? remember, the percentage of obc officers in 1989-1990, was- class I: 4.69%, class II: 10%. less than the number of total representation in central govt jobs- 12.55%. the percentage of sc/st officers too is usually less than their total representation in jobs. a great majority of the obc/sc/st/ employees hold group (c) or (b) jobs- yes, following a historically ordered pattern. they want jobs, right? give them all those menial jobs so that they can gloat about the numbers, but never make too many of them officers! so how many obcs do you think are group (a) or (b) officers in the central government. 4% of the total number of officers? 3%? 2%? 1%?

what will you skim off, mr.balakrishnan, pasayat, bhandari ...?

it's not the ignorance that's staggering, it's the blatant refusal to see an apartheidic divide building over the years. and i'm not talking about only excitable commenters. it's like men and women, so wise and knowledgeable and sensitive on other issues, automatically switch off their minds when a fact that contradicts their flawed understanding of what the obcs and other unfortunate sections of the indian population are. obcs? prosperous, powerful, and too goddamm many- but not enough to deserve any special attention. definitely not the benevolent kind of attention, anyway.

let me end this post with an illustration of the selective blindness i've been talking about- in this post, bhupinder, talking about how and what he learnt about mandal, quotes an excerpt from an article by s.s.gill. the argument in the post and the article is almost the same- most people have failed to see mandal in its true light. let's see what mr.gill does see- here are a few other excerpts from the same article:

And who were the main beneficiaries of this provision? Only the better off among the OBCs — the so-called creamy layer — who already had access to good educational facilities and could outperform their lesser privileged peers at competitive examinations within the reserved quota. This deepened the divide among the OBCs, as those who were already at the top of their community cornered the plum jobs and those at the bottom were left further behind.

plum jobs? he goes on to say:

Of course, Article 16 (4) empowers the State to make job reservation for "any backward class citizens... not adequately represented in the services under the state". But is it anyone's case that the forward castes as a whole are not adequately represented in the services?

is he blind or what? where are the the plum jobs that were cornered, mr.gill? if the obcs' share has fallen from a tokenistic 12.5% to a dregs-at-the-bottom-of-the-glass 5%, and the dalits and the muslims together do not make up more than 20% of the plum jobs, who's been sucking up the milk and the cream, mr.gill?

gill has been a babu in the mandal commission. but it looks like, like many objective observers, he didn't see even 12.5% of the truth then, nor does he see even 5% of it now.