Quota shota

Ok so this is not a cricket topic - but this is the only forum I have so here goes.

U guys must have read about Pramod Mahajan being in hospital and being very critical etc ... coz his brother shot him and his liver / kidneys / etc r damaged severely. While I feel sorry for the man (life is short ... and everyone should enjoy it to the full - Chuckster's philosophy), it was ironic that at this time of talks about backward classes and reservations and social equality etc, we the public lost a great chance to see practically what could have been a very strong statement.

Specialists were flown in from Hyderabad, London and Bangalore (maybe more places too ... I dunno) but were any of these specialists those who became doctors coz of getting their seat through the 22.5% SC / ST quota that has been prevalent for a long time now? I think not ... these were all guys who r considered to be the best of the best ... and while I do not know their castes etc (any of them could be SC / ST or not ... I have known some brilliant people of these castes) I do know that the govt. (or the BJP party ... or whoever is looking after Mahajan's treatment etc) would not dare to pick someone who became a doctor / surgeon etc not coz he was the best but coz he was actually far back in the rankings but got it coz of quota.

This was the crucial point where a point could have been made - "See, here is one of those who benefitted from the quota system ... and today he has done these complicated surgeries and saved Mahajan's life ... this shows that selecting people under quota does not indicate the person is not good or qualified or meritous".

But then ... do we really expect the politicians who pass these laws for increasing quota percentage etc to go to these quota candidates? Of course not ... they will get their treatment from London / Paris / New York ... or specialists flown in from Hyderabad and Delhi and Bangalore ... we, the public, will go to the Munnabhai MBBS types.

Wonder why none of the news channels have brought up this point? I know that the man's life is in danger and all that ... but here I am not talking about Mahajan at all ... I am talking about the people who plan to increase reservation on the argument that this doesn't make the quality go down and at the same time the backward communities come up ... what better way to prove it than to get treated by such quota candidates when the whole nation is watching the developments on TV?

BTW< i was watching this program on TV some days back where they were debating among three important people (one was an author on dalits and social equality etc ... and the others also somehow pro-reservation ... today being anti-reservation is political suicide) ... so one of the audience asked "Sirs ... don't u think the quality of people coming out of the IITs / IIMs etc come down coz of these reservations?" and the author guy says "No ... I disagree with that ... rather than the quality going down, I can assure u the quality will go up coz of the OBCs getting their chances" ... he didn't really give a reason for this brilliant analysis of his ... just put forward his view that the quality would definitely improve ... and the show was worth watching for the hooting and booing that followed this answer.

See guys ... for those reading this blog, let me make it clear. It is not about people ... the SC / ST / OBC / General people ... it is about whether reservation will have the benefits intended or not. It hasn't in 50 years ... just coz u increase it, why should anything change? Another 50 years later, since it will not make any difference then also, there will be calls for increasing it again ... and again ... and again ... and soon we will have 200% reservation. It is not about changing the percentage of reservation ... it is about implementation of how reservation helps.

Two guys study in the same school, study together, play together, have same kind of incomes in their families, obviously have same kind of brains ... and finally when both score the same marks in entrance exams etc, one gets something and the other doesn't coz the first one was a quota candidate. How does it make sense? If the guy didn't have money to go to good schools or take tutions or pay the fees, I can understand it ... but not in the above case mentioned coz everything is bloody same. And that is what will happen once reservation happens ... the guys with no money and willingness to learn and study etc will not be the ones entering the premier institutions ... it will be the sons and nephews of netas and businessmen who would have studied in the best of schools and had plenty of money .... and who spent their time in playing the fool than in studying. Why should they waste their time??? Quota is there, na???

If someone says - I will make primary education free for backward classes below a certain income level, I will give 100% support ... in fact, I will say - "don't limit it to backward classes ... include general too ... coz not having money is the same for general and other classes". So make primary education free and compulsary (I think it says that in our constitution or something ... but u don't see our netas scrambling over themselves to promote that ... that won't get them votes) ... negotiate with schools and colleges so that money is never a constraint for anyone ... we pay an education cess in our income tax ... hell, increase it from 2% to 5%, put the remaining funds from govt. resources and let the economically backward sections have free education ... that will be a 100 times more effective than giving reservations at job / higher education levels.

Or else, let the next operation on a big neta be done by one such quota candidate ... remember, not a backward class member who qualified on merit but one who didn't qualify on merit but got in coz of quota ... and if the netas who propose such things r ok to go to these people for treatment, we, the public can be more comfortable with the thought too.

Ok let me end this with some cricket stuff ... ;-) What is Gavaskar's problem in life nowadays ... one day he was talking about "I am ready to sweat it out for India 365 days an year ... players who complain of over-cricket should pack up and go home" etc etc ... and then the next day "Ponting and the Aussies have had a hard year ... while Ponting might have crossed the line in questioning the umpires etc, I am not too worried about it ... these things happen when players play for so long continuously" etc etc etc.

Firstly, this "sweating it for the country" thingy ... as I have frequently posted here, when any of the sportsmen / film personalities etc yap about "desh" and "honour representing the country", my blood begins to boil. Gavaskar is so vocal about all things under the sun ... he was so hurt to see the support staff wearing the Indian colours / crest / whatever ... and he he keeeps yapping about the honour of representing the country ... I really wondered how a desh bhakt like him doesn't open his mouth when the BCCI says in court - "we r not the indian cricket team ... we r a private body etc etc etc". Why did he not shout from the rooftops - "what shame on behalf of the BCCI to talk like this ... I have always thought of myself as representing India ... and I am ashamed to hear my employer speak like this". Kinda might cut down all that lovely money he makes from being the BCCI's blue eyed boy ... he is on so many committees and things ... who cares what the BCCI says about it not representing India or anything like that ... all that counts is that lovely green paper ... ;-)

Cheers

The Chuckster