Reservation Debate: Response to The Hindu Editorial of May 30, 2006.
This refers to the editorial, "Get Back to work" carried in your newspaper on May 30th.
I understand that the health services have remained paralyzed and it is causing immense hardship to the general public. The strike wasn't intended for the said purpose. It is well known that caste based reservations would do no good to the present set up. Merit is a relative term and there is no reliable criteria to assess it quantitatively.
It would be naive to assume that despite "assurances" from the Government, the things would lapse on their accord. Throughout the write up, your biases are clearly reflected in the write up. If they were the same leftists that you love to lionize throughout your publications (in The Frontline/ The Hindu) were carrying out the strikes elsewhere, it would be "affirmative action based on collective principle"; but if doctors are fighting for their and the society's rights, it is "morally indefensible"!
Why these double standards?
The power of the pen shapes up the public opinion. I am not qualified enough to tell you that through your editorial, you have done immense harm to the efforts of Youth for Equality forum.
60 years and the reservations have only helped a certain section of the people instead of being all encompassing. There is a huge drop out rate at the primary school level. The higher secondary schools are in doldrums. The secondary education system doesn't encourage lateral thinking or out of box solutions. It tends to stunt the development of the children. Further, the state level education stresses mostly on the regional languages which by and large leaves out a significant majority who is unable to compete on equal terms with their peers from elsewhere.
In this scenario which is more feasible? Reservations as a short term solution or revamp of education sector for a long term stable solution? The present strike by Doctors also highlights this aspect; which you have not highlighted at all.
I wouldn't be able to comment on the actions of Indian Medical Association because it is a union on the lines elsewhere. I fail to understand the logic given by your editorial that IMA has opposed increase in the Post Graduation medical seats. The local chapter of IMA has always supported us as students whenever there is a demand for increase in the facilities or highlighting the sorry state of hospitals. I am not a member of IMA and not everyone chooses to be one.
Your editorial is contrived against the huge number of people who had taken part in the rally held in New Delhi. There has been support from cross section of the society because it affects their children in the future. This is a fatalistic step because for times to come, the governments would indulge in such short sighted ways to keep their vote bank politics intact. If we don't oppose now, then the future would be bleak.
Perhaps sitting in an air conditioned office doesn't affect you.
This was in response to the editorial that appeared on May 30th 2006, in The Hindu titled Get Back to work