Caste
Census and Its Repercussions on Reservations and Politics in India
Shrikant
G. Talageri
Al Jazeera, that preeminent
Arab media spokesperson of Islam and Islamism, never leaves a chance to express
its anti-Hindu and anti-Indian views and conclusions about, and solutions to,
anything and everything that happens in India. In this respect it is the Islamist
representative of viciously anti-Hindu and anti-Indian Western Media
monoliths (I will not call them Christian or Evangelist, since
their anti-Hindu and anti-Indian antecedents spring from a much wider range of
Hindu-hating and India-hating entities apart from the religious ones) like the New
York Times. Washington Post, and countless others
all over America, Europe and Australia.
This time it has
taken up the very divisive and nuclear-bomb-proportioned issue of caste reservations
in India, in an article titled "How a landmark caste census in India
threatens Modi's grip on power":
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/4/how-a-landmark-caste-census-in-india-threatens-modis-grip-on-power?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-intl
Before going into the
real issue of caste populations (as
testified by census figures) and caste reservations,
and the effects on Indian society and on the future of India (and possible "solutions"),
I will deal with the fake issue of linking the whole thing
up with Modi and the BJP or with any particular political party
in general and with electoral politics as is done in the article:
I. Political Parties
and Electoral Dividends.
II. The Ethics and
Logic of Reservations.
I.
Political Parties and Electoral Dividends
The article in
question does not, except in the usual superficial manner, talk about the
ethics of reservations and caste politics: it merely discusses the matter in
the context of political parties and electoral dividends, particularly as a
counterweight to Hindutva. A close examination shows not just the
superficial nature of the article and its conclusions, but its willingness to
resort to outright (and demonstrably) brazen lies in order to push its point.
To begin with, the
article reasons: "After having
been criticised for failing to present an alternative vision for the country,
the opposition parties seemed to have found their mojo, in taking on Modi and
his BJP through this issue. An overwhelming majority of Indians belong to
marginalised castes. A 2021 Pew survey had found this to be at 69 percent of
India’s total population. By championing their cause, the opposition alliance
hopes to woo them, broaden its popular base and defeat the dominant BJP, which
has won two comfortable majorities since 2014". And to buttress this
hope as correct, the article goes on with a brazen and blatant lie:
"History might worry Modi and his
aides, too. In the early 1990s, the BJP’s attempts to come to power through a
communally-charged campaign to build a temple at the purported site of the
birth of Hindu god Ram was undercut by the Mandal movement, which demanded
greater opportunities and affirmative action for OBCs."
As a matter of fact,
the election results of the eighties and nineties show anything but what
the article claims. The BJP in its debut Lok Sabha elections in 1984, when
it had completely abandoned any pretence of Hindu ideology and declared
outright that it was more secular than the other parties, got
only 2 seats out of 543 seats in the Lok Sabha. And the two seats were Mehsana in Gujarat (only because that
seat had never before in its history till then voted for the Congress, and the
BJP was the only major non-Congress party in the fray in that seat) and Hanamkonda in Andhra Pradesh (only
because of an alliance with NTR's party Telugu Desam. In
short, the BJP was completely decimated, and the 2 seats they won were actually
tantamount to 0 seats. In fact, here is a list of the partywise tally in
1984: see the names of the parties which got more seats than, or equal, to the
BJP:
Congress 414
Telugu Desam 30
CPM 22
Independents 13
AIADMK 12
Janata Party 10
Akali Dal 7
CPI 6
Indian Congress
(Socialist) 5
Lok Dal 3
RSP 3
National Conference 3
BJP 2
Other Parties
with 2: DMK,
Forward Bloc, Muslim League, Kerala Congress, (Appointed) Anglo-Indians.
Parties with 1: Plains Tribal Council of Assam, PWP,
Jagjivan Ram Congress.
It was a complete
decimation of the party, and the party would have had to be wound up forever,
if it had not immediately decided to once again become
"Hindutvavadi" for election purposes, and take up "Hindu
cards" like the Shah Bano case, the Assam anti-infiltrators agitation, and
most of all the Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi issue. And in the next elections, in
1989, the BJP got 85 seats.
After picking up the
Ayodhya "card" and strategically aligning with the outright
Hindutvavadi (under Bal Thackeray) Shiv Sena, the fortunes of the BJP were on a
continuous upswing until they managed to capture power in
1998-99. The following are the number of seats won by the BJP in Lok Sabha
Elections till 1998-99:
1989: 85.
1991: 121.
1996: 161.
1998: 182.
1999: 180.
On the other hand, VP
Singh, the Prime Minister who revived and implemented in 1989 the Mandal
Commission Report (devised ten years earlier in 1979 by the Janata Party
government of which the Jan-Sangh-BJP was a complicit part), with
exactly identical expectations (based on the percentage of OBCs in the population of India), as expressed in the
above article, has fallen into the dust-bin of history. See, above, the
continuous rise of the BJP seats after 1989.
Does it seem as if
supporting (or not supporting) OBC-caste- reservations has a direct effect on
the number of seats that a party gets, or that Hindutva sentiments and
OBC-caste-reservationist sentiments among Hindu voters necessarily, in any
way, work in opposite directions? That voters voting with Hindu issues in mind
will necessarily change their preferences on the basis of reservation issues,
or vice versa? Hindus by and large are not that naïve or stupid, and this is
shown not only in respect of the BJP (1989-1999) or VP Singh,
but in most other cases as well. Two examples will suffice:
1. The Congress
(in the past, not necessarily now) is perhaps the only party which never made a
major issue out of OBC reservations. The Mandal Commission completed its report
in 1980. the Congress government from 1980 to 1989 simply sat on the report for
nearly ten years, till the new opposition PM VP Singh, unleashed it on the
nation in 1989. But it made no difference to its support base, whether or not,
and regardless of to what extent, its support base consisted of OBC voters: in
1984, for whatever other reasons, it secured 414 seats which is to this day the
all time record for a single party.
2. The Shiv Sena,
the majority of its voters were OBCs, was the only party whose leader Bal
Thackeray opposed the Mandal Commission report in 1989-90. And his party, in
alliance with BJP, was swept to power in Maharashtra in 1995. The following account
of what happened at the Shiv Sena's annual Vijayadashami rally at
Shivaji Park in Mumbai in 1989 or 1990 will illustrate the point: the
newspapers were full of predictions that Thackeray would not dare to openly
oppose the Mandal Commission since most of his Shiv Sainiks were OBCs, and the
important (then) Shiv Sena leader Chhagan Bhujbal (himself an OBC) had openly
supported the Commission report. But Thackeray stunned the media at Shivaji
Park: he asked all the people who were in the massive rally, who belonged to
the "OBC" communities, to raise their hands. A massive number, nearly
80-90 per cent of the crowd, raised their hands. Thackeray explained in detail
that such reservations did not benefit anyone, except for a few elites among
them, and the only result would be a divided and infighting-ridden Hindu
community. He declared: "I am opposing the Mandal Commission. Are you
with me in this?". A huge uproar as the crowd replied: "We are
with you!". And they remained with him, in even greater numbers!
Caste-and-community
politics does have a centre stage role in Indian electoral politics, but not
precisely from the point of view of reservations. Thus, "normal"
caste politics has consisted of giving prime party positions to influential
leaders from different castes and communities (including religious ones),
infiltrating party members into different caste/community organizations, giving
(with much fanfare) special honors (national awards, renaming universities or
districts in their name, etc.) to eminent departed leaders of caste/community
groups, donating money to influential caste/community organizations, and, going
further, having adjustments or alliances with caste-based parties representing
smaller caste/community groups, forming
alliances of caste/community groups (the historic Congress KHAM strategy of Madhavsinh
Solanki in Gujarat, or the AJGAR combination of Charan Singh in UP, for
example): all these have been staples of politics in India. Some of these
strategies have also involved elements of hatred, against certain other castes/communities,
as a cementing force in caste alliances.
The idea fondly
entertained by the writer of this article in Al Jazeera, or by other
politicians or political analysts, that playing caste-reservation cards can
work against the BJP's Hindutva strategies, is extremely flawed, not only
because history (as detailed above) shows that reservation politics does not
necessarily ensure electoral dividends, but because the BJP is the most
ruthlessly unprincipled party in the whole of the history of electoral
democracy, and can adopt any strategy it wants (however lethal and
destructive such strategies may be to the unity or future of the nation) to
grab at and to stick to power. What its critics do not take into account is:
1. The BJP's basic
strategy which brought it to power (in a series of mounting number of seats
from 1984 to 1998-99, see statistics above) in the first place was by playing
the Hindutva card. The only two times it faced setbacks was in
1984 and in 2004, both times when it had decided that the Hindutva card
was not necessary any more, and had gone for elections on secular agendas.
But the party has learnt its lessons very well now, and, even after carrying
out anti-Hindu policies and activities throughout its tenure whenever in power,
it has now learnt to suddenly become (with the help of an impressive variety of
tactics) a Hindutva party par excellence at the
time of every election (helped by "enemies" in India and abroad who
never fail to lend a helping hand in furthering this image at these crucial
moments).
2. At the same time,
the BJP has mastered the caste-politics
game in ways which would be the envy of former masters of the game in other
parties: both in respect of all of the "normal"
caste strategies listed above (the awarding of the Padma Vibhushan
to Mulayam Singh Yadav, who was responsible for shooting
kar sewaks in Ayodhya, while Savarkar, who is also utilized for his Hindutva
value whenever required, is yet to get even a measly Padma Shri,
is only one of the more cynical examples of its ruthless and unrelenting caste
politics) as well as in respect of reservations: it must be
remembered that the BJP was a part of the government in 1979 which instituted
the Mandal Commission, and in 1989-90 it became one of the most vocal
supporters of the implementation of the report, especially in Maharashtra where
it held violent demonstrations calling for its implementation and crossed
swords with its electoral ally, the Shiv Sena, which was the only
party to openly oppose its implementation. Its record after that has been in
line with this cynical attitude: it not only fought for and secured
reservations for Jats in Rajasthan, but today it has started a new, dangerous
and anti-Hindu strategy of promoting the idea of OBC reservations for "OBC
Muslims" ("Pasmanda Muslims"). The National Commission
for Backward Classes (NCBC) has been given
constitutional status, and the powers of a civil court, by the present BJP
regime.
3. Apart from
becoming a Hindutva party at the time of every elections, and
becoming the most successful master of caste-centered political
strategies (both "normal" and reservations-based), the BJP of today
is different this time from the BJP of 1984 and 2004 in many different ways:
a) Firstly, it is literally
a different party, not just because it has sidelined many of its most prominent
former leaders and broken off with longstanding allies, but because a very
large and increasing contingent of the BJP leaders, and its new allies, consists
of influential people (often the most opportunistic, corrupt and cynical ones)
from its former "enemy" parties, who were enticed or browbeaten (with
the help of government agencies like the Income Tax Department, CBI,
Enforcement directorate, etc.) into joining the party or breaking their earlier
parties (and of course became ideal and doodh ke dhule
leaders in the process).
b) Secondly, it has
become (after the two US parties and the Chinese Communist Party) the richest
and most powerful political party in the world, and established close and
strong links with most powerful corporate entities in India and the world.
c) Thirdly, it has
acquired a "charismatic" leader who has become the God of millions of
adoring bhakts − a phenomenon formerly witnessed only in states like Tamilnadu
and (under NTR) in Andhra Pradesh (also, remember Indira amma
whose image helped the Congress retain the South at a time when the Emergency
excesses had wiped out the Congress from the rest of India). And religious
adoration and fervor have no parallel, and brooks no doubts, facts, statistics or
logic.
d) Fourthly, it has
become technologically a super-entity (of the Orwellian 1984 variety) which
controls the media narrative in all the ways that matter to it for electoral
and political purposes. Yes, Hinduism is under lethal attack from all sides
as never before in its history, but this is not a matter of any importance to
the BJP except where it can be used to polarize Hindu voters in its favor to
the exclusion of all other issues. On all other narrative fronts, the BJP has
become an unchallengeable behemoth.
So, in short, anyone
who is living in the fond and wishful hope that the BJP will in any way be
adversely affected by caste-based developments like caste censuses
and caste issues like reservations, are living in a fool's paradise. The
BJP is now near-invincible in Indian politics, and will probably sweep the 2024
elections, though let me admit that this is a prospect which terrifies me
beyond words at the thought of all the things which will inevitably follow such
a victory.
Therefore, instead of
wasting any more time discussing these fake issues involving the
question of which political parties will benefit and which will lose
from further caste reservation developments, let us examine the real issues of
the logic and repercussions (on India and Hinduism) of further caste politics
and possible solutions. Again, let me admit that this also is a futile process,
since it is an absolutely hopeless situation, but nevertheless
it is necessary for the record if nothing else.
II. The
Ethics and Logic of Reservations
The two arguments for
reservations are:
A. Righting
Historical Wrongs.
B. Achieving Equality
or Equity among different sections of the Population.
II.A. Righting Historical Wrongs:
This argument, made in this context, is fake, fraudulent and
dishonest.
To begin with, it is perfectly true that historical wrongs
have to be righted. The wrongs of stealing or destroying goods and
properties can be righted by returning the goods or properties to the original
owners or providing full compensation. The wrongs of killing someone cannot
really be righted in any way, but it can be punished − although various
cultures have devised different ways (involving
"blood money") by which the wrong can be deemed to have
been "righted". The wrong of spoiling someone's name with lies can be
righted by apologizing and admitting the truth in public. The wrong of
eulogizing and glorifying historical tyrants and evil-doers, or vilifying historical
heroes, can be righted by publicly apologizing and accepting the truth. In all
these cases, it is of course expected that the goods/properties are still in
the wrong hands, or that the perpetrator of the crime (if murder or torture) is
still alive.
[And yet, in actual cases, when the victims have been Hindus or
some other similar targeted groups in the world, the righting of the
historical wrong has itself been treated as a historical wrong: e.g. the
destruction of the Babri Masjid structure, which was built on a deliberately
desecrated and destroyed Hindu temple on one of the holiest sites of Hinduism.
The recovery of the site by Hindus is regularly treated, in the predominantly
left-controlled international media and academic discourse, as a monstrous
historical wrong on the proportions of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki!].
[Again, newer and newer historical crimes are being committed all over
the world even as fake discourse on "righting historical wrongs" is
in fashion. In India alone, thousands of acres of forests, and millions of
trees are being completely destroyed, and people who have been living on their
land for hundreds or thousands (in the case of the Andaman islanders, the figure
runs into tens of thousands) of years are being uprooted from that land because
politicians and their Capitalist cronies want to commercially exploit that land
and make money].
But this dictum, when applied to issues such as reservations, is
actually based not on the principle of righting historical wrongs, but on
the principle of punishing descendants for the real or alleged crimes and sins
of their ancestors. This is a typical Abrahamic principle
central to Christianity, which has been the basis of all the historical anti-Semitism,
and all the Inquisitions, pogroms and massacres in
Christian history. One cannot right historical wrongs by punishing the
descendants for real or alleged ancestral wrong-doings, but this is actually
the "historical" basis of anti-Semitism in
Europe, as well as of caste reservations in India.
In the Bible, we have the concept of
Original Sin, a concept apparently established in the fourth century of the
history of the religion. As per the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Original Sin,
in Christian doctrine, is "the condition or state of sin into which
each human being is born; also, the origin (i.e., the cause, or source) of this
state. Traditionally, the origin has been ascribed to the sin of the first man,
Adam, who disobeyed God in eating the forbidden fruit (of knowledge of good and
evil) and, in consequence, transmitted his sin and guilt by heredity to his
descendants". Only belief in Jesus and baptism can free any human
being from the responsibility for, or consequences of, the "original
sin" committed by "Adam" (of eating an apple)!!
Likewise, Numbers 14:18 tells us: "God
punishes the children for the sin of the parents to the third or fourth
generation". And Matthew 27:24-25 tells us
that Pilate (representing the Romans) washed his hands of the responsibility
for having Jesus crucified, when he found that the Jewish mob in front of him
continued to clamour for his crucifixion, but the Jews relentlessly called out:
"His blood be on us and on our children"!
Clearly, this barbaric principle cannot be a sane justification for caste-based
reservations. What if similar logic was used to rake up every historical
wrong committed by every race, nation and community in the world, and entire
masses of people all over the world were expected to suffer punishments and
deprivations to atone now for the "sins" of their ancestors in
the past?
The most amazing aspect of this argument is that this vengeful "punish
the descendant for the ancestral actions" logic is not applied
everywhere even within India, but only against selected targets,
i.e. against the usual bakras whom it is always safe to attack:
i.e. Hindus. It is a matter of massive historical record that Muslims
started invading India from the west more than a thousand years ago, and, in
the course of almost 1200 years of invasions and rule, killed literally
millions of Hindus, took millions more as captives and sold them in the
slave markets of West Asia, destroyed lakhs of temples and replaced them with
mosques, and forcibly converted many more millions to Islam− these converted
millions now proudly considering themselves to be descendants of these
invaders and glorifying them as heroes! Is there no need to right these
historical wrongs? Can we right these wrongs by wreaking vengeance on
the present-day Muslims of India for the actual recorded-in-ruthless-detail
wrongs of their ancestors?
II.B.
Achieving Equality or Equity among different sections of the Population:
Now this is logical:
it is certainly always good to try to achieve equality or equity among
different sections of the population. It is actually a bit hypocritical to talk
of equality and equity in a society which is based on ruthless Capitalism and
exploitation, and in which the gulf between the rich and the poor, and the
privileged and the under-privileged, is widening every day by leaps and bounds,
but nevertheless it is in itself a valid goal.
But how exactly do reservations
achieve that goal? It is interesting to note that the people who pontificate on
the need for caste-based reservations are themselves most often people from
privileged castes and classes who have made it good in their life and have
nothing personally to lose from caste-based reservations, and who find it
profitable to show their fake objectivity and generosity by fake "self"-flagellation.
A look at the caste and class background of most woke leftist and secularist
writers of this genre will make this clear: in the case of this particular article
(from Al Jazeera) itself, the writer is Kunal Purohit
(the name certainly sounds like that of a Brahmin), and one of the three
people he quotes is Sudha Pai (another Brahmin) and
another is Rahul Gandhi (one of the most privileged of the
privileged). I don't know about the possible caste identity of the third, a Yashwant
Zagade, but he occupies an academic position at the prsetigious TISS.
These are the kind of persons orchestrating the discourse on caste
reservations!
As at this point, we
have disposed of the "righting historical wrongs" argument and
are examining the "equality or equity among different sections of the
populace" so let us not go into history here and only speak
about present-day equality and equity.
It is definitely a
social and ethical necessity to have as much equality or equity as possible and
feasible among different sections of the population. But how exactly does one
achieve it? It would require a totalitarian and authoritarian state like Nazi
Germany or the Communist USSR or Communist China (or the nations in Orwell's
world of 1984) to be able to control millions of people, tabulate them
into groups, and then distribute things equally or equitably among them, and
there would be all kinds of practical problems of resources, logistics and procedures.
And how does one
decide how privileged or under-privileged different caste/community groups are,
and the exact degree or extent of this privilege or under-privilege? Committed
propagandists from woke leftist organizations are always churning out figures
to show what they want to show, and it is a total mystery how they arrive at
these figures. Take the following article, for example, in the Indian Express,
14 February, 2019:
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/upper-caste-hindus-richest-in-india-own-41-total-assets-says-study-on-wealth-distribution-5582984/
This article talks about a "two-year-long study jointly
undertaken by the Savitribai Phule Pune University (SPPU), Jawaharlal Nehru
University (JNU) and Indian Institute of Dalit Studies" (the
institutions are the usual suspects in the Breaking India coalition)
which reveals that "The top 1 per cent (in terms of wealth) of the
total households own 25 per cent of the country’s total assets, while the top 5
per cent owned 46 per cent of it. In stark contrast, the bottom 40 per cent
households were found to own just 3.4 per cent of the country’s total assets".
Fair enough: these, or similar, figures will be representative of any and every country in the
world, ancient or modern, and they reveal the grossly unfair and
inequitable distribution of wealth in any society at almost any point of time
in world history or the history of the human race. There is nothing
specific in this to India or to the caste system.
However, the above is revealed in the second paragraph. The first
paragraph shifts the focus on to caste, and tells us
"Caste continues to play a significant role in the educational and
professional choices available to an individual, and the resultant income and
assets....Only 22.3 per cent of the country’s higher caste Hindus own 41
per cent of the country’s total wealth and form the richest group, whereas 7.8
per cent of Hindu Scheduled Tribes own only 3.7 per cent, or the lowest wealth
share of the country’s assets", and the article itself is
provocatively titled: "Upper
caste Hindus richest in India, own 41% of total assets; STs own 3.7%, says
study on wealth distribution".
The logic (apart from the very way in which this "study"
arrived at these figures) is a complete mystery: if the figures show that "The
top 1 per cent (in terms of wealth) of the total households own 25 per cent of
the country’s total assets", how does this tally with the fact that
the figures also show that "Only 22.3 per cent of the country’s higher
caste Hindus own 41 per cent of the country’s total wealth"?
Tally the two figures: if the "top 1 per cent"
consists exclusively of "higher caste Hindus" (or doesn't it?)
who own "25 per cent of the country’s total assets", then
doesn't this mean that the rest of the "22.3 per cent of the country’s higher
caste Hindus" = 22.3 minus 1= 21.3 percent, own just 41
minus 25 = 16 per cent of the country's total assets?
[If the "top 1 per cent" does not consist exclusively
of "higher caste Hindus", but includes Hindus of other castes
as well as non-Hindus, then the percentage of the Indian population of "higher
caste Hindus" who own 16 per cent of the country's total
assets, becomes marginally even worse: it becomes 21.3+ per
cent]
Note again: the actual fact shown by the actual
data in the above "study" (falsely and fraudulently
misrepresented in its title and first paragraph) is that upper caste people who
constitute 21.3 per cent of the total population own only 16 per cent of the
country's total assets: i.e. a distinctly lesser share of the
assets than warranted by their share in the population!! This hardly shows that
the ""Upper
caste Hindus (are the) richest in India" as the fraudulent
title announces! But then this is the magic of fake "studies" which
can say anything and get their fake conclusions propagated as
statistically proved conclusions in the eyes of the pedestrian readers only on
the strength of the "prestige" and "eminence" of the
crooked "academic scholars" pushing these divisive caste agendas and
who can grossly misrepresent the data and conclusions to show that white is
black and black is white.
The fraudulent caste games of the Breaking India forces
present an ugly and nauseating part of the political scenario in India. What is
the solution to this whole mess? We have no control over what is happening,
since Hinduism and Hindus and the future of India have no saviours (except
fraudulent vote-hungry politicians) to turn to, but, speaking objectively,
there are only two possible alternate endings in sight:
1. The worst and most likely ending: We should agree to allow
things to continue in this way, and let politicians and the Breaking India
forces continue to stir the caste cauldron, until India finally explodes into a
thousand mutually antagonistic parts, and the name "India that is
Bharat that is Hindustan" becomes a mere name in the pages of history
like Mesopotamia, Sumeria or the Aztec Empire.
2. The best and least likely ending: Everyone who loves this
country should keep aside all their political agendas and get together to close
the ugly chapter of divisive caste politics, agree to an end to caste-based
reservations, and set up an effective system (with a thousand effective safeguards)
which will ensure equality, equity and justice to every citizen, regardless of
caste and community. [Anyone who has read Anand Ranganathan's book "Hindus in Hindu Rashtra −
Eighth-Class Citizens and victims of State-Sanctioned Apartheid"
will see how hopeless it is to expect anything like this to happen in India].
A third possible compromise solution (it is a mad and
almost-impossible-to-implement solution), if reservations are to continue, is
to go the whole hog and give (as far as humanly possible) complete equality
and equity to all castes and communities. This can be done by
allocating fixed caste/class identities to every Indian as part of his ultimate
Indian identity. First, a complete caste-and-community based census
should be undertaken all over the entire country where every single person
should then be identified (whether he/she likes it or not) firstly as Hindu,
Muslim, Christian and Other and then in the following
twelve categories:
Upper Hindu
Middle Hindu
Lower Hindu
Upper Muslim
Middle Muslim
Lower Muslim
Upper Christian
Middle Christian
Lower Christian
Upper Other
Middle Other
Lower Other.
This should be a fixed and unchangeable category: every citizen, once
he/she is fixed into one category, cannot change it.
And once the census count is taken, and the state-wise
percentage of each of the twelve categories of Indians is fixed, it will be
counted as the final percentage and no changes will be made if the populations
fluctuate in future due to different birth rates. [This clause is necessary in
order to avoid future problems, as are potentially being caused today in case
there is re-allocation of the state-wise number of Lok Sabha Seats as per the
newest population figures: see article below]
https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/politics/story/heres-how-many-lok-sabha-seats-uttar-pradesh-may-gain-and-tamil-nadu-lose-after-2026-398962-2023-09-19
Then every single thing in the country (state-wise) should be divided
among the "twelve different categories of Indians" in
proportion to their percentage in the population of each state: not just government
jobs but also private-sector jobs, land, houses,
two-wheelers and four-wheelers, gold, licenses
in every field (for example the allocation of petrol-pumps), seats
in elected bodies (in the houses of Parliament and
state legislatures, zilla parishads and village panchayats, municipal
corporations and councils, etc. and in ministries and administrative
committees) and in the police, defence and paramilitary
forces, and the judiciary. And so on: no inequality or
iniquity should be allowed to remain or arise in any field of life.
Does all this sound mad? It is mad. But this whole issue
of caste reservations is mad. But we live in a mad world, and, as our
scriptures tell us, this is kaliyug, the Age of Evil.
NEWS FLASH:
