Saturday, May 27, 2006
Recently (may 28th 2006) I read the "swaminomics" that comes in TOI (pg 12). It was awesome. The "swami" guy rocks !!!!
Here's how it somewhat goes....
"I'm afraid their (anti-reservationists) notion of fairness and merit is dead wrong. Rewarding students with the highest marks benefits the people born in the right families, not the most intelligent or meritorious. I don't want to cast stones at others. So allow me to prove that I myself am an unjust beneficiary of an unjust system. I have a pretty good track record. I got stellar marks in school and topped my college class. As a journalist I rose swiftly to become editor of the Financial Express and later The Economic Times, the country's two biggest financial dailies. I had no political or business godfather: I rose on merit.
Some years ago I did a quickie IQ quiz in a magazine. The result said that I had an IQ of 130-135, a very high score, and that only 3% of people had higher intelligence. That made me feel good of course.
But consider this. India has a population of 1.1 billion, of which the workforce is 400 million. Three per cent of 400 million is 12 million people. So, in a truly meritorious society, 12 million people should have a higher position in the workforce than me.
That is not the case. India has at the most 2 million top managers and professionals. Where, then, are the 12 million super-intelligent people? Many are labourers or street hawkers. The canteen boy who brings me tea may be more intelligent than me and so too may be the man shining shoes on the roadside. But they were born in the wrong family, and never had access to good education or economic opportunities.
We got good marks because we had the most educated parents, the best books, and went to the best schools and colleges."
But Mr. Swami.....i have a question to ask you....
"Is that canteen boy, or the man shining shoes on the roadside, neccesarily be of a SC/ST/OBC class ?? Can't they be the sons of a brahmin ?? If they are....won't the quotas badly affect them ??"
Got an answer ??
Here's how it somewhat goes....
"I'm afraid their (anti-reservationists) notion of fairness and merit is dead wrong. Rewarding students with the highest marks benefits the people born in the right families, not the most intelligent or meritorious. I don't want to cast stones at others. So allow me to prove that I myself am an unjust beneficiary of an unjust system. I have a pretty good track record. I got stellar marks in school and topped my college class. As a journalist I rose swiftly to become editor of the Financial Express and later The Economic Times, the country's two biggest financial dailies. I had no political or business godfather: I rose on merit.
Some years ago I did a quickie IQ quiz in a magazine. The result said that I had an IQ of 130-135, a very high score, and that only 3% of people had higher intelligence. That made me feel good of course.
But consider this. India has a population of 1.1 billion, of which the workforce is 400 million. Three per cent of 400 million is 12 million people. So, in a truly meritorious society, 12 million people should have a higher position in the workforce than me.
That is not the case. India has at the most 2 million top managers and professionals. Where, then, are the 12 million super-intelligent people? Many are labourers or street hawkers. The canteen boy who brings me tea may be more intelligent than me and so too may be the man shining shoes on the roadside. But they were born in the wrong family, and never had access to good education or economic opportunities.
We got good marks because we had the most educated parents, the best books, and went to the best schools and colleges."
But Mr. Swami.....i have a question to ask you....
"Is that canteen boy, or the man shining shoes on the roadside, neccesarily be of a SC/ST/OBC class ?? Can't they be the sons of a brahmin ?? If they are....won't the quotas badly affect them ??"
Got an answer ??
