What's in "Aarakshan"?: Is Reservation Debate Resuming?

[கால பைரவன்]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Which criteria of Mandal Commission?

All criteria of Mandal Commission for determining backwardness suggest comparison against average levels only. For eg, criteria for educational backwardness is listed as:

1. Castes/classes where the number of children in the age group of 5–15 years who never attended school is at least 25 percent above the state average.
2. Castes/classes where the rate of student drop-out in the age group of 5–15 years is at least 25 percent above the state average.
3. Castes/classes amongst whom the proportion of matriculates is at least 25 per cent below the state average.

State govts may follow different criteria. But the question is does TN even have any criteria to determine educational backwardness? Do you know? what is it? Does TN govt provide data for communities that it currently classifies as BC and MBC?

Communities classified as BC and MBC in Tamilnadu are represented in the Central lists as OBC. If OBC enrollments were just 68% - 69% until 2010, it merely means around 30% of communities listed as BC and MBC in Tamilnadu are not even literate in the first generation.

Once again you are talking about literacy levels of OBC as a group and not the literacy levels of individual castes. It is this dis-aggregated data that is essential to determine whether members of an individual caste qualify to be an OBC or not.

AFAIK, various state commissions (such as Nagna Gowda Committe, Havanur Commission, etc) took each individual community's literacy levels into consideration. For backwardness of each individual caste, it may be a better idea to wait for the caste-based census of 2011 to be completed -- that should give us an idea of how backward any given community is. All the same, if you are challenging that some communities did not fulfill the criteria to be classified as OBC, then you will need to provide relevant proof.

Is there any commission that collected such data for TN? When I mentioned adhocness in classification of BCs and MBCs in TN, you denied it. You repeatedly asserted that apart from social backwardness, educational and economic backwardness are taken into account in such classification. If that were to be true, where is the data? It is the duty of the govt to provide such data. It appears TN has not collected data regarding educational and economic backwardness of communities classified as BC and MBC all these years. Hence I deem the classification to be arbitrary and consequently unjust.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

The Champakam Dorairajan case was heard in 1950 -- Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan ... vs The State Of Madras, Represented ... on 27 July, 1950 (personally i find it rather ironical that Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer and Srinivasa Iyengar spoke of equality in 1950s. If only such people had existed and argued for equality of 'low-castes' in hindu religion instead of putting down people in the british courts in the early part of 1900s, things wud have been so different)...Just shows how things can change in a couple of decades.

Anyways, the Champakam Dorairajan case does not seem to refer to your claims that a communal GO passed in 1920s provided reservations both in jobs and college admissions. AFAIK, the communal GO of 1927 only gave reservations in colonial jobs. I have not come across any communal GO of 1920s giving reservations in academic institutions. So please clarify which Communal GO passed in 1920s provided reservations for academic admissions?

You provided a link to the case. Thanks! But it appears you have not read it. The case was against communal reservation in medical and engineering colleges. Relevant portions of the case are posted below:

.....she made enquiries with regard to her admission into the Government Medical College at Madras in the M. B. B. S. course, that she ascertained that in respect of admissions into the said College the authorities were enforcing & observing an order of the Govt. referred to as the Communal Government Order, in & by which the admission into the Medical College is to be regulated not by qualification or suitableness of the candidate, applying for admission, but by directions involving the making of discriminations between appct. & appct. on the ground of caste, sex, etc., & that in the face of that order she had little or no chance of being admitted into the said College. She contends that the said Order of Govt. is void as it is inconsistent with the provisions of the Const. Ind. & operates as an infringement of her personal right as a citizen of the State of Madras, & that the maintenance of that order is an infringement of the fundamental rights declared & formulated by the Const. Ind. She, therefore, prays for the issue of a writ of mandamus, or any other suitable prerogative writ restraining the State of Madras & all its officers & subordinates from enforcing, observing, maintaining or following or requiring the enforcement, observance, maintenance or following by the concerned authorities in the State of the Notification or Order generally referred to as the communal Government Order in & by which admissions into the Madras Medical. College is sought or permitted to be regulated in such a manner as to infringe & involve the violation of the fundamental rights referred to in the clauses of the Const. Ind. namely, Article 15, Clause (1) & Article 29, Clause (2).

he learns that the admission in the Engineering College is governed by a Government Order whereby admission is gov erned by communal proportion (the Order already referred to in the previous Civ. Mise. Petn.) that he apprehends that there is no prospect of his appln. being considered on its merits with due regard to his qualifications, ignoring considerations of race, caste & or religion. The petnr. contends that the said Government Order is inconsistent with Article 15 & Article 29(a) of the Constitution & prays that the Govt. may rescind the Order & direct the Committee appointed to select the candidates for admission into the Engineering College to consider his appln. for admission on its rela tive merits without reference to considerations of religion, race, caste, language or any of them & to dispose of the same in accordance with the terms of Articles 29(2) & 15 of the Constitu tion.

In the counter-affidavit filed in C. M. P. No. 5255 of 1950 it is stated that the total number of seats available in the four Medical Colleges run by the Govt. of Madras is only 330, that out of these, 17 seats are reserved for students coming from outside the State, 12 seats for discretionary allotment by the Govt. in consultation with the Surgeon-General; that the balance of seats available are apportioned between four distinct groups of districts in the State, that the seats so apportioned are filled up according to the rule intended to protect the weaker flections of the people & to provide equal opportunities to all, that accordingly out of 14 seats 6 are allotted to non-Brahmin Hindus, 2 backward Hindu communities, 2 to Brahmins, 2 to Harijans, 1 to Anglo-Indians & Indian Christians & 1 to Muslims.

 

[happyhindu]

All criteria of Mandal Commission for determining backwardness suggest comparison against average levels only. For eg, criteria for educational backwardness is listed as:

1. Castes/classes where the number of children in the age group of 5–15 years who never attended school is at least 25 percent above the state average.
2. Castes/classes where the rate of student drop-out in the age group of 5–15 years is at least 25 percent above the state average.
3. Castes/classes amongst whom the proportion of matriculates is at least 25 per cent below the state average.

State govts may follow different criteria. But the question is does TN even have any criteria to determine educational backwardness? Do you know? what is it? Does TN govt provide data for communities that it currently classifies as BC and MBC?

Once again you are talking about literacy levels of OBC as a group and not the literacy levels of individual castes. It is this dis-aggregated data that is essential to determine whether members of an individual caste qualify to be an OBC or not.

Which means Mandal commission is going by averaging literacy levels. Well, educational backwardness is determined by literacy levels. But no idea how far this averaging out method will help determine educational backwardness. I think Nara sir can elaborate on this.

This is a country where people make all sorts of claims of belonging to a particular 'caste'. People have claimed to belong to a 'higher' (and different) caste with colonial records full of such cross-overs. At the same time, they want reservations to solve their educational, social and economic backwardness.

I suppose it was cumbersome to check the literacy levels of each and every individual caste / community at a nation-wide level. But ofcourse its now possible with the 2011 caste-based census.

Anyways, it appears that so far it was easier to check literacy (as a whole) for communities that are already designated as SC, ST, and OBC. The literacy levels of OBCs in the DISE--District Information System for Education website are actual literacy levels for OBC designated communities.

Even the caste-wise census of educational levels taken in 1911, 1921 and 1931 took only 4 groups into consideration -- brahmin, non-brahmin, muslim and christian. Only in 1947 a seperate category was created for 'backward' hindus [Refer: Encyclopedia of Backward Castes, Volume 2 by Mathur].

The book "Encyclopedia of Backward Castes" (both Vol 1 and 2, by ML Mathur), describe various commissions and committes appointed by different states who prepared a list of backward classes and recommended reservations. Three states (State of Mysore, Madras Presidency, Bombay Presidency) recognized and granted the demand by NBs for reservations in government service before 1947. In tamilnadu, some commissions before and after independence were

1) 1927 - communal GO for reservation in jobs under colonial government.
2) 1947 - communal GO of 1947 revised the communal GO of 1927.
3) 1969 - Sathanathan Committee which split and gave seperate sections of BC and MBC. It recommended 17% reservation for BC and 16% reservation for MBC.
4) 1982 - Ambashankar Commission - which gave 50% reservations for OBCs in government service.

I do agree that disaggregated data for each individual-community is useful. However, expecting that to be "essential to determine whether members of an individual caste qualify to be an OBC or not" is rather far-fetched. To check that for each single person of each single "community" in a country with the world's largest population is tough. Instead of that, the government seems to have brought in Creamy Layer exclusion. I do agree with removal of Creamy Layer.

Is there any commission that collected such data for TN? When I mentioned adhocness in classification of BCs and MBCs in TN, you denied it. You repeatedly asserted that apart from social backwardness, educational and economic backwardness are taken into account in such classification. If that were to be true, where is the data? It is the duty of the govt to provide such data. It appears TN has not collected data regarding educational and economic backwardness of communities classified as BC and MBC all these years. Hence I deem the classification to be arbitrary and consequently unjust.

Well there is no evidence that communities were categorized as BC or MBC on adhoc basis. Just because the government cannot check each single person (if he qualifies to be OBC or not) does not mean government is categorizing any community as OBC on adhoc basis.

Why only Tamilnadu, there have been movements by 'backward classes' for reservations in other parts of southindia also (like Karnataka dating from 1870s, and this is caste-wise data for literacy levels there - the first backward class commission was appointed in august 1972 ) These are movements by people who want to progress. The government has to accomodate them if their literacy levels, and socio-economic conditions are indeed low.

There have been instances (like Govt of Haryana in 1969) where a "backward class" list was produced without formal enquiry into economic backwardness and social status. But i have no idea if Tamilnadu involved in any such thing. Educational backwardness based on literacy levels for OBCs and for SCs and STs is well documented as explained above.

I have no idea which specific data is used to determine economic backwardness. However, i presume occupation categories (such as 'mariginal workers', etc) which are recorded in census are taken to indicate economic conditions. Caste merely is occupation. The legal freeing of slaves happened in India only in 1843, and until then communities like Pallars were slaves [Refer to "Rural Societies in Southeast India" by Kathleen Gough]. When Haider Ali invaded Thanjavur there was a shortage of panchama slaves. Hence alongside Pallars, other castes were recruited as agricultural labourers.

No matter how much anyone protests Kalabhairava, reservations are here to stay. You are protesting against what is injustice to you now. Injustice was meted out to 'low-castes' for centuries. So today it all boils down to "social justice".

Communities categorized as OBCs were no better off than dalits in the colonial period. Farmers 'claimed' to be Kallars, Padaiyatchis (Vanniars), Konars, Vellalars and Mupanars in colonial times. Just because these people today come under OBC instead of SC / ST does not make them well off. Reservations for such communities cannot be removed just because a section of them are well-off today. Creamy layer ofcourse can be removed subject to conditions.

"Social justice" is ensuring that those who were deprieved got the chance to educate themselves under the colonial rule, and these find a greater voice under democracy. You may call it "tyranny of the majority'. However, others may call it "freedom for the majority".

You provided a link to the case. Thanks! But it appears you have not read it. The case was against communal reservation in medical and engineering colleges. Relevant portions of the case are posted below:

I read the link. They refered to a Communal Government Order. But found no evidence that they specifically referred to the Communal GO of Madras Presidency of 1927. I checked other sources for the Champakam Dorairajan case also.

AFAIK there was no communal GO passed in 1920s for academic reservations. The 1927 Communal GO only gave reservations for jobs in government serrvice.

In all probability the Champakam Dorairajan case is referring to the Communal GO of 1947.

However, I will stand corrected if you can provide info that reservations in academic institutions were instituted in 1920s in Madras Presidency.

Regards.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

I do agree that disaggregated data for each individual-community is useful. However, expecting that to be "essential to determine whether members of an individual caste qualify to be an OBC or not" is rather far-fetched. To check that for each single person of each single "community" in a country with the world's largest population is tough. Instead of that, the government seems to have brought in Creamy Layer exclusion. I do agree with removal of Creamy Layer.

First of all, even Mandal commission, to ascertain backwardness of different communities, only took data on a sample population involving those communties. So it is perhaps not essential for every member of every community to be included. However, if there are X number of communties listed as backward, the sample population must include people from all X communities and provide dis-aggregated data for each of the X communities. That is not very difficult to obtain as you seem to suggest.

Communities categorized as OBCs were no better off than dalits in the colonial period. Farmers 'claimed' to be Kallars, Padaiyatchis (Vanniars), Konars, Vellalars and Mupanars in colonial times. Just because these people today come under OBC instead of SC / ST does not make them well off. Reservations for such communities cannot be removed just because a section of them are well-off today. Creamy layer ofcourse can be removed subject to conditions.

You are giving examples from a certain set of communities to justify reservation for all communities that are classified as backward. That is not acceptable. If Mudaliyar community is classified as backward, you need data for Mudaliyar community. You cannot provide data for Vanniyar community and justify Mudaliyar community's inclusion.

BTW, did you read the news item that I linked before? I am giving it again for your benefit.

SC seeks Centre's stand on dalit creamy layer - Times Of India

What do you think of it?

It is regarding SC/ STs, and I think the situation is much worse for truly backward communities especially in TN.

 

[happyhindu]

First of all, even Mandal commission, to ascertain backwardness of different communities, only took data on a sample population involving those communties. So it is perhaps not essential for every member of every community to be included. However, if there are X number of communties listed as backward, the sample population must include people from all X communities and provide dis-aggregated data for each of the X communities. That is not very difficult to obtain as you seem to suggest.

How much of a sample would be considered sufficient? First one has to know the total size of a community. Like, lets say, as of 2011 there are 300,000 Vadama individuals between the ages of 0 to 6. Then one can take a sample size of about 2000 such individuals from this pool to check the literacy rate.

But such a sample cannot be expected to give the accurate scenario. Living conditions can vary from village to village. So the sample must be a well-distributed one, and taken from all economic sections of a given community from every village where such a community is present. To do all this, i think will be cumbersome.

The main problem is that people still "claim" to belong to a different "caste". The example of 'Mudaliyar' below is a classic example of that.

You are giving examples from a certain set of communities to justify reservation for all communities that are classified as backward. That is not acceptable. If Mudaliyar community is classified as backward, you need data for Mudaliyar community. You cannot provide data for Vanniyar community and justify Mudaliyar community's inclusion.

Mudaliyar is a title used by Vellalas, Palli tribes (Vanniyars), etc. Mudali title was used by 'brahmins' also in the colonial period. IMO there is nothing called a "Mudaliyar community". Title names were adopted by several low-castes to get better social standing. If you want data for backwardness of every single person using Mudaliyar title, it will be very difficult indeed.

Data being aggregated into broad sections of OBC, SC and ST is an easier way to go about it. If both Vanniyars and so-called "mudaliyars' are already listed as OBC, it will be easier to give literacy rate of OBC group as a whole. The OBCs do not seem to have problems with such broad-based categorization of themselves.

Even if the government starts checking the 'backwardness' of every single person in every single community, in what way do you think that is going to benefit 'brahmins' ?

BTW, did you read the news item that I linked before? I am giving it again for your benefit.

SC seeks Centre's stand on dalit creamy layer - Times Of India

What do you think of it?

It is regarding SC/ STs, and I think the situation is much worse for truly backward communities especially in TN.

Well, i have no idea how you assume the situation is much worse for truly backward in TN. On the contrary, i feel TN is much-much better off than states like UP who despite Mayawati are not getting any better.

I have no comments on the hyperlink. I do not know how the government will accept any PIL without sufficient evidence and statistics. Anyone can file a PIL seeking a new reservation policy for some communities by claiming they are now wealthy.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Data being aggregated into broad sections of OBC, SC and ST is an easier way to go about it. If both Vanniyars and so-called "mudaliyars' are already listed as OBC, it will be easier to give literacy rate of OBC group as a whole. The OBCs do not seem to have problems with such broad-based categorization of themselves.

This is misrepresentation of ground realities. The OBCs does/did have problems with broad-based categorization. The splitting of backward classes into BCs and MBCs in TN was a result of agitation by communities who were not happy with such broad-based categorization. Of course, now there are creamy layer communities in both BC and MBC. The correct solution should have been to check whether the creamy layer communities continue to meet the criteria set forth for backwardness and removing them from the list if they do not meet such criteria. Instead, additional categories are being created and I think it will end in communal quota, which the supreme court deemed unconstitutional back in 1951.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Even if the government starts checking the 'backwardness' of every single person in every single community, in what way do you think that is going to benefit 'brahmins' ?

It is your assumption, and that of folks like Nara and Kunjuppu, that any person who questions the fallacies of reservation system does so only for selfish reasons. I have already stated the purpose behind my participation in this thread. You can refer to it.

 

[sarang]

I would have thought that any self respecting parent who has come up in life using the facilities provided by the mechanism of backwardness and reservation, will jettison the backward tag and move up the social status ladder. Unfortunately, this does not happen. Wallowing in backwardness is welcomed.

 

[happyhindu]

This is misrepresentation of ground realities. The OBCs does/did have problems with broad-based categorization. The splitting of backward classes into BCs and MBCs in TN was a result of agitation by communities who were not happy with such broad-based categorization. Of course, now there are creamy layer communities in both BC and MBC. The correct solution should have been to check whether the creamy layer communities continue to meet the criteria set forth for backwardness and removing them from the list if they do not meet such criteria. Instead, additional categories are being created and I think it will end in communal quota, which the supreme court deemed unconstitutional back in 1951.

I do agree with removal of creamy layer. But i do not agree with the broad generalization of income ceiling used to determine creamy layer, since cost of living varies from place to place. I especially do not agree with applying creamy layer to those who have become literate only now in the first generation.

Since the issue has become far too politicized, with the largest sections seeking "social justice", i think its all set to become more complicated with additional categories.

IMO, the 'low castes' feel insucure with any talk of removal of reservations, just as much as they fear hindutva as a ploy to implement the old varna system.

Regards.

 

[Yamaka]

Dear ALL:

From the debate going on here and elsewhere in the Forum, I come to know of the so-called "Creamy Layer" (defined as "rich or affordable people" among SC/ST/MBC).

This Creamy Layer has been nagging me for quite some time whenever I think of SC/ST/MBC.

My questions are

1. Is this Creamy Layer REAL? Or a fiction manufactured by the anti-Reservation people?

2. If it is REAL, then what % of SC/ST/MBC people belong to this Layer?

I can imagine that there may be Creamy Layer of substantial quantity (about 25% of the total BC) among BC... but I have difficulty imagining it among the SC/ST/MBC..

Some of the BC people engaged in Small Businesses grew to be "rich and affordable" after 50-60 years! Many of these people didn't finish school and didn't go to college... their "monetary success" came because of hard work and some luck, I believe.

Cheers.

 

[Nara]

.... folks like Nara and Kunjuppu, that any person who questions the fallacies of reservation system does so only for selfish reasons.

KB, I have no idea why you question the "fallacies" of the system, that would require looking into your mind. All I am trying to do is point out the fallacies in what you say are "fallacies" of the system. I request you not to make assumptions about what I assume.

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

Dear ALL:

From the debate going on here and elsewhere in the Forum, I come to know of the so-called "Creamy Layer" (defined as "rich or affordable people" among SC/ST/MBC).

This Creamy Layer has been nagging me for quite some time whenever I think of SC/ST/MBC.

My questions are

1. Is this Creamy Layer REAL? Or a fiction manufactured by the anti-Reservation people?

2. If it is REAL, then what % of SC/ST/MBC people belong to this Layer?

I can imagine that there may be Creamy Layer of substantial quantity (about 25% of the total BC) among BC... but I have difficulty imagining it among the SC/ST/MBC..

Some of the BC people engaged in Small Businesses grew to be "rich and affordable" after 50-60 years! Many of these people didn't finish school and didn't go to college... their "monetary success" came because of hard work and some luck, I believe.

Cheers.

Yamaka,

My own impression is that so much of cribbing about (against) the reservation system exists only among the TB community in T.Nadu. The FCs in T.Nadu do not seem to be so much emotionally charged in this regard; the immediate answer for this from the TB side is that the FCs change their caste to some OBC, get caste certificates and get the reservation benefits, but I really wonder whether each and every FC of the various hues is able to get such (untrue) caste certificates, granted that such a course may be open to some people. The TBs settled in Kerala, as also the Namboothiris, the highest caste in Kerala, also do not have so much animosity towards reservation, imo.

It therefore appears to me as if the TBs are continuing their age-old opposition to job reservations which started in the end of the 19th. century and continued till Independence and reservations for a large groups of people became a reality and this is not showing any sign of going away. And now, more than job reservation, it is the admission to professional courses which has become more crucial since the govt. job market has shrunk and has been overshadowed by IT sector jobs.

My solution will be to try to oppose the reservation system politically; may be now the All India outfit for Brahmans can probe and find out if Anna Hazare will be ready to launch an "Aandolan" to bring in radical changes to the system The various state associations of brahmans like *******, KBA, etc., can pass resolutions incorporating their views and suggestions and forward copy to the Supreme Court which is to take up the question of "Creamy Layer" shortly.

The Creamy Layer concept has imo two aspects; one, skim off the creamy layer of the existing reserved categories from those benefits and make them compete along with others in the general unreserved pool and, two, take away the creamy layer of all the unreserved groups and allow certain % of seats/jobs to the poorest tiers of the FCs. As is clear, the definition of creamy layer has to differ in the two scenarios. Bringing more people under the open category seems to have been sensed as a threat to the FCs because competition will be more, and so what the FCs are now asking for is that the poorest sections of the FCs be given reservation on proportional basis. But imo the govt is most likely to carve out this reservation window by reducing the existing open quota and not by cutting down the % of any of the existing reserved categories SC, ST, OBC, MBC.

We have to decide what is best for us. But I feel this BPL quota is not what our TBs really want because the Associations do not generally exhibit such concern for the poorer sections among us.

 

[ShivKC]

Dear ALL:

From the debate going on here and elsewhere in the Forum, I come to know of the so-called "Creamy Layer" (defined as "rich or affordable people" among SC/ST/MBC).

This Creamy Layer has been nagging me for quite some time whenever I think of SC/ST/MBC.

My questions are

1. Is this Creamy Layer REAL? Or a fiction manufactured by the anti-Reservation people?

2. If it is REAL, then what % of SC/ST/MBC people belong to this Layer?

I can imagine that there may be Creamy Layer of substantial quantity (about 25% of the total BC) among BC... but I have difficulty imagining it among the SC/ST/MBC..

Some of the BC people engaged in Small Businesses grew to be "rich and affordable" after 50-60 years! Many of these people didn't finish school and didn't go to college... their "monetary success" came because of hard work and some luck, I believe.

Cheers.

the counter argument for creamy layer is quite interesting.

late PM Indra gandhi was not allowed in to puri temple sanctorum, just because she was not eligible by birth, though mrs.gadhi by default would come under creamy layer.

i heard this interesting story , when i was having a holiday out in puri-bubaneswar trip 4 years ago.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

*******... cribbing....breast-beating....

failed to summarize some other qualities ... cunning, hate-mongering, bigoted, prejudiced, twisted...

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Perhaps, this will be considered a rhetorical question.

A. Dravidian party rule in TN is being vouched as a period of golden age. Several claims made, some statistics quoted to buttress this point.

B. It is also claimed that 88% of TN population remain backward (BC+MBC+SC+ST), socially, educationally and economically.

If HDI is one of the important factors to assess development in the modern age, is it probable that both claims are true?

 

[sangom]

Perhaps, this will be considered a rhetorical question.

A. Dravidian party rule in TN is being vouched as a period of golden age. Several claims made, some statistics quoted to buttress this point.

B. It is also claimed that 88% of TN population remain backward (BC+MBC+SC+ST), socially, educationally and economically.

If HDI is one of the important factors to assess development in the modern age, is it probable that both claims are true?

Shri KB,

I well understand where your sympathies lie. HDI calculation has changed its basis, as you may know. The backward groups in TN continue to be backward, despite the Hazhakam Govts implementing many developmental schemes. That will be the apparent conclusion to be derived from what you state. But kindly see this:—

"New Delhi: Tamil Nadu has improved its position in terms of human development index (HDI) and has entered the category of the top five states in the country, according to the Handbook on Social Welfare Statistics-2007, released recently by the Union ministry of social justice and empowerment. Maharashtra, however, has slipped from rank 3 to 4, but, in value terms of the HDI, the state has improved from 0.363 in 1981 to 0.452 in 1991 to 0.523 in 2001. All the top five states in HDI in 2001 -- Kerala, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Haryana -- recorded a gradual improvement in their position in value terms. However, Gujarat, which ranked 4th in 1981, slipped to the 6th position in 1991 and 2001 despite an improvement in its value terms.
Among the poorest performing states, Bihar was the lowest among 15 states, followed by Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa. In fact, Assam..."
(TN makes its way to top 5 states in HDI)

So, your impression is wrong or HDI is an inaccurate instrument. You may like to choose and comment.

 

[sarang]

Single index will never give a true picture. Multiple indexes with cross correlation factors, and parameters which will highlight the weakness in other tests are necessary to get a balanced picture.

 

[sangom]

Single index will never give a true picture. Multiple indexes with cross correlation factors, and parameters which will highlight the weakness in other tests are necessary to get a balanced picture.

Will you kindly elaborate? What are the other indexes, cross-correlations to be considered and how to find out the weaknesses in other "tests"?

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Perhaps, this will be considered a rhetorical question.

A. Dravidian party rule in TN is being vouched as a period of golden age. Several claims made, some statistics quoted to buttress this point.

B. It is also claimed that 88% of TN population remain backward (BC+MBC+SC+ST), socially, educationally and economically.

If HDI is one of the important factors to assess development in the modern age, is it probable that both claims are true?

(TN makes its way to top 5 states in HDI)

So, your impression is wrong or HDI is an inaccurate instrument. You may like to choose and comment.

Sometimes I wonder whether some people deliberately misunderstand...

It is not my claim that 88% of TN population is backward. That is the claim of TN govt.

My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

Anyone?

 

[Nara]

...My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

KB, TN having achieved tremendous strides since the rule of the Dravidian parties, and that it is among the top 5 states, does not mean we have arrived at Shangri La. We still have a long way to go. The only thing we can safely infer with these statistics is we are on the right path.

Cheers!

 

[கால பைரவன்]

My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

I did not expect honest answer from any dravidian party apparatchiks; so no surprises there.

Silence, perhaps, points to moral weakness of these apparatchiks!

 

[Nara]

I did not expect honest answer from any dravidian party apparatchiks; so no surprises there.

Silence, perhaps, points to moral weakness of these apparatchiks!

KB, you dissapoint me with this post. Please stay on message.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Sometimes I wonder whether some people deliberately misunderstand...

It is not my claim that 88% of TN population is backward. That is the claim of TN govt.

My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

Anyone?

Hello KB:

What's YOUR answer to these questions?

Do you believe the HDI data? If you do, will you say you were or weren't surprised by it?

Let's talk.

 

[ShivKC]

My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

Anyone?

literacy rate in tn is fairly good.

though it ranks 11 of the 28 states, those above are smaller north east, goa or kerala.

it will be surprising to see, the glorified states like IT karnataka/andhra, modi's gujarat, intellectual bengal are all ranked below t. n

 

[sangom]

Sometimes I wonder whether some people deliberately misunderstand...

It is not my claim that 88% of TN population is backward. That is the claim of TN govt.

My question is: How can TN be among the top 5 states in HDI but also have a large percentage of population who are socially, educationally and economically backward? TN tops in the percentage of people classified as backward.

Anyone?

Shri KB,

HDI as you perhaps know is an index which is at present based on 1. Life expectancy, 2. Income and 3. Education.

When it is said that TN is within the top 5 ranks of the Indian States according to the HDI, the simple message is that the all the rest 23 or so states are way down in this respect. This has no other implied meaning that the percentage of backward population has to be below some level.

Secondly, the "backwardness" of some community or caste is not based on the above three factors taken for calculating the HDI; imo, it has to do very much with the social neglect and ostracization to which those communities have been subjected for many centuries. This is a subjective factor which cannot be measured by any index. Perhaps we TBs will be able to get a very momentary glimpse of this when we land among say, white supremacists in some conference or something and they pass snide remarks degrading us within our hearing. I have experienced this a few times but the next moment those people will put on their civilized mask and so there will be no trace of what actually transpired minutes before.

I have also known parents who left their lucrative careers abroad and returned and permanently settled down in India so that their dark-skinned child does not grow up with psychological distortions.

Now, these backward castes are those whose shadow was even supposed to be polluting to a brahmin and the punishment for such pollution was cruel. Even people of Ambedkar's caste had to tie a broom behind their backs so that the polluted earth (caused by their impure feet) will be purified automatically. It was such utterly hated and ostracized people who joined the military under the British rule so that at least in the military cantonments they can move and live freely.

You will also be probably aware of the fact that some of the lowest castes had been "slaves" of the upper castes, including brahmins and the British govt., had to pass enactments to put a stop to this heinous practice by the middle of the 19th. century.

The setting right of all such social inequalities and their resultant effect on the psyche of these castes/groups will require a long time of egalitarian social milieu.

Last but not least, please try to refrain from casting aspersions on others (whom you do not know), and label them as "aparatchiks of ... party" etc. It only goes to show you in a very poor light, and probably as uncivilized too.