Nandakumar Chandran,

It is you who said that in the US, even if a community is under-represented, this group would be ineligible for reservations if it cannot be ESTABLISHED that the community was discriminated against in the past.

Don't you think the onus is on you to show that this is the case, as per the US law?

However, let me refer to the court proceedings as at para 311-12 of Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1975):-

In Justice Powell’s view, neither the state’s asserted interest in remedying “societal
discrimination,” nor of providing “role models” for minority students was sufficiently
“compelling” to warrant the use of a “suspect” racial classification in the admission
process.

But the attainment of a “diverse student body” was, for Justice Powell, “clearly a permissible goal for an institution of higher education” since diversity of minority viewpoints furthered “academic freedom,” a “special concern of the First Amendment.”

Justice Lewis Powell's decision upheld diversity in higher education as a "compelling interest" and held that race could only be one of the factors in university admissions.

Source: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rs22256.pdf

I agree with the above view expressed by Justice Powell!

Every case of under-representation has a history of past or present discrimination. But the point is that this aspect need not be "established" for bringing a group under AA. On the other hand, if any identifiable group is not currently under-represented, this group CANNOT become eligible for AA -- even if the group faced discrimination in the past.

You said (about the available seats in the 12 medical colleges in Tamil Nadu), "but the total number of seats is not 100, but 1224 as per the link given. 50 seats is not even 5% of the total."

And 50% of 1224 is not 50, but 612!

Thus, in the situation where there are 1224 total available seats, the candidates (irrespective of community) who manages to attain overall ranks from 1 to 612 are ASSURED of getting admitted in Tamil Nadu. Can you deny this FACT?

The question is NOT what is the percentage of FC candidates who actually sought and got admission for these set of medical colleges. The court directive is NOT about this at all. The point is that in Tamil Nadu, 50% of the seats are ASSURED for candidates with top merit who get ranks from 1 to 612 (when total seats is 1224) -- as stipulated by the SC.

Moreover, the reserved categories in Tamil Nadu (94% of the population) had managed to avail only 77.9 % of all available seats in the 12 colleges as per the link Nandakumar Chandran  provided [http://www.hindu.com/2004/08/23/stories/2004082308900400.htm])

You asked, "when people are fighting to get seats when they have scored 90% and above, isn't this so-called "mimimum eligibility" a joke!"

No, it is not. The 90% cut-off is an undesirable consequence of shortage of medical colleges -- and is certainly not something intelligently "fixed" as the minimum criterion for getting admitted to a medical college to achieve merit. This ridiculously high cut-off is a reflection of demand/ supply mismatch!

Your argument is akin to saying that the high cost of onion is because of its high quality -- and not because there is a demand/ supply mismatch at a point in time. Only a fool would object to increasing the production of onion on the plea that this will reduce the market price of the commodity, and thus its "merit"!

Anand

>Not only is a reserved category candidate REQUIRED to possess minimum eligibility (merit) >to apply for admission, but also is required to achieve the minimum marks (as applicable for >all students) to PASS the final exam to actually obtain the professional qualification.

what's this "mininum eligibility" - 50%? 

when people are fighting to get seats when they have scored 90% and above, isn't this so-called "mimimum eligibility" a joke!

Anniyan Anniyan,

Responding to my poser on whether we may FREEZE the fraudulent nature of the argument of "doctors without merit", that is used to denigrate reservations, you asked:-

"Why should that argument be frozen?  These are facts."

What are the facts? Let me repeat:-

Not only is a reserved category candidate REQUIRED to possess minimum eligibility (merit) to apply for admission, but also is required to achieve the minimum marks (as applicable for all students) to PASS the final exam to actually obtain the professional qualification.

Yes, the FACT is that it is a lie to say that those without merit (as wrongly alleged to be the case of those who avail reservations) go on to become doctors and engineers.

Right?

Your example is IRRELEVENT in the context of reservations! So what if "[e]ven with good marks you can't believe doctors.". What is your point?

May we be spared of your casteist and prejudiced "guesses" on the caste of the "doctor couple". What if your "guess" is right, or indeed, what if your "guess" is wrong? How will it establish the argument of "doctors without merit", cynically used to denigrate reservations?

In your deeply prejudiced mind, the Nathari doctor too "might be a backward [caste] doctor"!  What if he was, and what if he was not?

Your attitude ought to shame anyone who opposes reservations -- that they are in the company of a chap with your immoral attitude....

Anand

>They certainly would qualify in such a circumstance. The fact of current under-representation >is SUFFICIENT under the US law to make an identifiable group eligible for AA.. There is no >moral or legal onus to first establish that the group was REALLY discriminated in the past!

pls show me where it says this : that even without any history of discrimination asians or any other minority would be given AA just for the virtue of being "under represented".

every document AA lists historical discrimination as the reason for AA. you can't add your own spin to AA and try to present it as fact. 

> I MUST be right, or else the government would have been hauled up for contempt of court, by >now! What is your explanation on how the TN government manages to remain on the right >side of law?

no, you are wrong. that is the reason the supreme court is coming out against the creamy layer and also asking the TN govt to provide seats for the meritorious.

>You said, "facts and figures are not necessary here".

>Who told you THAT? No group can be nominated by the government for reservations without 
>first getting the facts and figures verified by the the Registrar-General of Census. And even >after this, the notification is subject to judicial scrutiny. 

not if the so called registrar is hand in glove with the politicians and their discriminative philosophy. in tamilnadu it is majoritarian discrimination against a small minority - so pretty much everybody is hand in glove with every body else.

>I do NOT need to be personally in possession of facts and figures to support the principle of  >affirmative action. I am not justfying reservations for any particular particular group. I am >supporting the principle that greater social diversity and more equity lead to the emergence of >merit within society.

it is not about you personally having the facts. but that considering the prevalance of the reservation policy in the country, such facts about this should be clearly in the open.

but it is not because there are too much false presumptions and assumptions and manipulation.

>The situation in TN is that if there are 100 seats, then the candidates (irrespective of >community) who manages to attain overall ranks from 1 to 50 are ASSURED of getting >admitted. Can you deny this FACT? 

but the total number of seats is not 100, but 1224 as per the link given. 50 seats is not even 5% of the total. so that's the prevelance of merit in the system.

the real facts of the FC is this from the article in the Hindu : The final tally (original list with 69 per cent reservation) released by the Directorate of Medical Education however shows that only 28 students from the `non-reserved' or Forward Caste (FC) have got into government medical colleges, representing about 2.3 per cent. 

so that rest 97.7% are from the so-called "backward" sections. ofcourse a lot of them have qualified by merit where by the question arises as to then why they should be classified as backward in the first place.

so again we go back to the same core issue : about people who are not backward in any sense are still being classified as backward.

and that's the relevance of the judiciary's point about keeping the creamy layer out of reservation.

anand, arguing with you brings the dilbert wisecrack to mind : never argue with a fool as he will first bring you down to his level and then beat you at it with experience!

Anniyan Anniyan,

I am sure that if you try a bit harder you will realize how the TN government manages to conform to the court directive that 50% of all available seats must go to those top in the merit list (irrespective of community and reservations).

I MUST be right, or else the government would have been hauled up for contempt of court, by now! What is your explanation on how the TN government manages to remain on the right side of law?

You asked, "Is it not time to do away with reservations as you have shown that so-called OBC and BC are able to compete with FC on their own?"

Based on the principle of gross under-representation, it very easy to identify when a group is no longer eligible for reservations. May we apply this in case of Tamil Nadu?

The reserved categories in Tamil Nadu (94% of the population) had managed to avail  77.9 % of all available seats in the 12 colleges as per the link Nandakumar Chandran  provided [http://www.hindu.com/2004/08/23/stories/2004082308900400.htm])

This was managed only with reservations, and under the circumstance that general category students with above average merit do not find these colleges illustrious enough to try for admission. Even so, the representation of the reserved categories (77.9% of all seats) is grossly below their numbers in general population (they constitute 94% of the population, as per Advocate KM Vijayan's statement on Court -- Source: [http://www.hindu.com/2006/11/01/stories/2006110100801400.htm])

This shows that while reservations are succeeding in Tamil Nadu (unlike contrary claims by detractors that reservations have "failed"), the reserved communities still remain hugely under-represented -- even in the less preferred colleges!

No, it is NOT yet the right time "to do away with reservations" in Tamil Nadu.

Anand

Nandakumar Chandran,

You asked, "but if asians were not discriminated in the past and they are underrepresented today, would they qualify?"

They certainly would qualify in such a circumstance. The fact of current under-representation is SUFFICIENT under the US law to make an identifiable group eligible for AA.. There is no moral or legal onus to first establish that the group was REALLY discriminated in the past!

You continue to ask the foolish question, "if the reservervation is 69% how can the above be true?"

I have explained several times already how the TN government manages to conform to the court directive that 50% of all available seats must go to those top in the merit list (irrespective of community and reservations). I MUST be right, or else the government would have been hauled up for contempt of court, by now! What is your explanation on how the TN government manages to remain on the right side of law?

The point is that many things can be true even when the "logic" of this is beyond the  limited comprehension of some people.

You said, "facts and figures are not necessary here".

Who told you THAT? No group can be nominated by the government for reservations without first getting the facts and figures verified by the the Registrar-General of Census. And even after this, the notification is subject to judicial scrutiny.

I do NOT need to be personally in possession of facts and figures to support the principle of  affirmative action. I am not justfying reservations for any particular particular group. I am supporting the principle that greater social diversity and more equity lead to the emergence of merit within society.

It is you who have no respect for facts and figures. What is your basis of suggesting that the Government, the Registrar-General of Census and the Courts of the land are in conspiracy to subvert law? Aren't you simply resorting to falsehood to denigrate the principle of affirmative action?

Anand

May we FREEZE that the argument of "doctors without merit", used to denigrate reservations, is fraudulent?

Why should that argument be frozen?  These are facts. For eg:- Even with good marks you can't believe doctors. In Tamil Nadu one doctor couple (I guess he might be a backward doctor with so high % of  reservation in that state) let their 10th standard son do C-section in one of their patient and video taped the operation. Public should not put their life with incompetent and greedy doctors.

Repeating falsehood hundred times over doesn't make it the truth. What is happening in tamil nadu is that the Govt there is reserving 69% seats and NOT 50% seats. May be you were taught by a Math teacher who became Math teacher by virtue of his caste. Whatelse can I say?

And you haven't answered my second question. What is the need for reservation if OBC and BC people can make it without reservation in entrance exams and jobs? Is it not time to do away with reservations as you have shown that so-called OBC and BC are able to compete with FC on their own?

>In the US, Asians too were victims of descrimination in the past -- and they continue to >discriminated today to a lesser extent. The Japanese were particularly discriminated against, >and were even jailed in large numbers without proper trial during the days of the 2nd world >war. Yet asians are not eligible for AA benefits in any of the campuses. Because they are >today not grossly under-represented in the colleges. 

true. but if asians were underrepresented they would qualify for AA? yes they would. but if asians were not discriminated in the past and they are underrepresented today, would they qualify? No, they would NOT qualify for AA. so discrimination in the past is the point here. the lack of representation of women/blacks etc is condiered due to the effects of discrimination in the past and that's why AA is given.

>In Tamil Nadu, 50% of the seats are ASSURED to those (irrespective of community) who >achieve the top 1 to 50 ranks in the merit list (when total available seats are 100). Don't you >feel ashamed to repeat lies over and over again? (It would seem that perhaps, you lack the >moral merit to partake in honest debate...)

if the reservervation is 69% how can the above be true?

>And even among those who achieve ranks below 50 (when total seats available is 100), not a >single person who gets in through reservations lack the minimum "merit" criterion specified >for course or job! In fact, many candidates with the acceptable minimum merit do not get in >because seats are insufficient to accommodate them despite possessing the minimum >merit. 

what's this so called "minimum criterion" - 40% or 50%? that's just junk.

>please go to court, and contest the government notification on this. It is not legally or morally >essential that I (Anand Nair) should have the numbers to prove this to you or any one else. It >is sufficient that government notification survives judicial scrutiny!

people have to be given reservation?

why?

because they were discriminated in the past and because they are under represented in "elite" institutions.

what are the figures to prove this?

facts and figures are not necessary here!

what kind of an argument is this!

Krishnan Bala,

You said, "The percentage of admissions to passes [among reserved category students], still after another decade  remains abysmal. What is your take on this?"

That shows that it is a lie to say that those without merit (who avail reservations) go on to become doctors and engineers. Not only is a reserved category candidate REQUIRED to possess minimum eligibility (merit) to apply for admission, but also is required to achieve the SAME minimum marks (as applicable for all students) to PASS the final exam to actually obtain the professional qualification.

May we FREEZE that the argument of "doctors without merit", used to denigrate reservations, is fraudulent?

You asked, "Is that the way you desire the scarce resources of our nation be expended?"

My answer is yes. Civilized nations ought to be happy to expend scarce resources to widen social diversity.

Anand