http://ia.rediff.com/news/2006/may/16inter2.htm?q=sp&file=.htm
(Also read the comments in the above link)
Krishna has 10 kids and went out of country for 10 years leaving behind a huge source of food. Two of his kids started dominating others and started to eat most of the food in the house, leaving the other eight starving to major extent. The eight kids become weak, so weak to the extent that they could not even eat what they were supposed to eat. If this continues, they will eventually starve to death. His father returned home. He ordered the two guys can eat upto 50% of the food and leave the rest to 8 guys. ofcourse the two will be affected temporarily, as they each use to eat 40% of the total food. Is Reservation bad ?
2 comments:
I have not read the article or the comments. But your analogy and the inference is too simplistic.
Reservation is not as bad if it targets people who are economically downtrodden. The current day reservation is based on social class. A large percentage of OBC are rich enough and have the power to pursue education even without reservation.
If reservtion puts a meritorious, but afflicted fellow, who can't go afford college, into college it is good. But reservation puts a rich guy who deserves a low-quality engineering seat into Anna university. That is bad!
Another point to note. Today we dont have an independent body to review if reservation has really helped the downtrodden.
Reservation targets voters, not the downtrodden.
for TN, I think we can make BCs under OCs catagory (or make them FCs), as majority of them is competing in the OCs quota. Rest of India I don't know.
Post a Comment