Skip to main content

Real objection....

Often while debating about controversial topics I have observed people deploying this strategy. They would raise various arguments against a policy or solution or law but their real objection would be something else. The reason that they could not state their real objection is that it is not defensible.
To explain, I will quote from an article written by Ramachandra Guha on 'Reforming the Hindus'. It explores the life of Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedhkar, and the relationship between them. The background is that Ambedhkar wanted to bring out a unified Hindu Personal Laws.
The main features of the law according to Mr Guha is,
“.... (1) For the first time, the widow and daughter were awarded the same share of property as the son;
(2) For the first time, women were allowed to divorce a cruel or negligent husband; (3) for the first time, the husband was prohibited from taking a second wife;
(4) For the first time, a man and woman of different castes could be married under Hindu law;
(5) For the first time, a Hindu couple could adopt a child of a different caste."
There was much opposition to the move and the ensuing delay made Ambedhkar impatient and he resigned from the cabinet. However, the government passed these laws in 1954/55.
The most pertinent quote is from Professor Derrett who said, "the offer of divorce to all oppressed spouses became the chief target of attack, and the cry that religion was in danger was raised by many whose real objection to the Bill was that daughters were to have equal shares with sons, a proposition that aroused (curiously) fiercer jealousy among certain commercial than among agricultural classes".
This is true even now when you look at public debate on affirmative action. For example on debate of reservations for disadvantaged sections of the society. I have found that there are two categories of people who oppose it. First, are the ones who don't want disadvantaged sections to come up and they can't state it openly. So, they come up with several arguments against such measure. Second, are the ones who genuinely feel that these disadvantaged sections need to come up but have objections to policy implemented to benefit the affected group.
I took affirmative action as an example to illustrate my point. I have found this to be true in many arguments on controversial topics.


Ramnath said…
I agree. It's important to see if people have an hidden agenda when they support or oppose a policy.

Often they have, and often they dont reveal that.

That's why it's important for a policymaker to follow Henry Hazlitt and look at 'not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy;' and to trace the consequences of that policy 'not merely for one group but for all groups.'

When policy makers follow this; and when civil society and hopefully all citizens demand this, there is some hope for decent policies.

You are probably right about people who oppose affirmative action. At the same time, I am sure you also see there are two categories of people who support affirmative action.

First, those who don't care a wee bit about the really disadvantaged, but come up with several arguments in support of affirmative action because they have some vested interest.

Second, those who genuinely feel that disadvantaged must come up, but (according to me, and I might be wrong) unwittingly support wrong policies, and end up helping the vested interests, and not those who really need help.

May I repeat? That's why it's important to consider the long term, not just short term effects; and the impact on all groups, not just one.
saumitra said…
Nice article John--insightful. I also liked what Mr. Ramnath had to say.

Popular posts from this blog

How can you support a publication you like

When I shifted to my half completed (more on this some other time) flat in Gurgaon in 2016, I couldn't locate newspaper distributors for four or five months. Suddenly, from consuming four or five newspapers, I was completely dependent on digital media. I was going less directly to the news source (say, or but was getting my news from Facebook and Twitter, and from apps like Flipboard.

It became an experiment, as I was consuming interesting stuff but I was not necessarily getting informed. People whom I have met once or twice, or have never met are influencing what I was consuming via Facebook. If you're wondering why you often see posts by your most popular friends, that's the way Facebook algorithms work, unless you specify who's feed should come first. If Facebook promotes post of your not-so-popular friends, why would you read!

I searched hard to find a newspaper distributor and found one finally, after four or five months. So now I subsc…

What if government schools and hospitals attract people with money

I had this random thought (and I get this often only when I have 1000 important things to finish!)- what if people who can afford private schools and hospitals find state-run schools and hospitals good enough for them. All of my friends in UK and US don't send their children to private schools (its another matter that location matters on quality of state-run schools there) and those in UK, don't spend money on healthcare.

Just imagine if this can happen in India. People will be left with more surplus that they can save more or spend on something else. School fees in major Indian cities can be as high as Rs 2 lakh per child per year. The sheer confidence that we don't have to spend on medical expenses and the state will take care will give confidence to spend more money.

The multiplier effect of this extra money in the hands of the people will hugely benefit the economy, and can spring creative enterprises.

This level of expenditure (even Rs50,000 per child per year) is si…

'koil madu' and myself........

'Koil madu' is a Tamil term used to describe the cows that are tied to the temple. It is there forever. In literal usage, the term can be used on people who spend loads of time at religious place. I might fit that description well. Haven't missed many Sunday church services. If I have to put a number, I would have attended 39 out of 40 years of Sunday services.

Last Sunday, the preacher at my Delhi church was referring to Ecclesiastes 11: 1 and 2. In the last few years, I have started to like the Message translation of The Bible. This version uses modern day language, yet it captures the true meaning of the root language. So I referred to the Message version when the preacher was mentioning these verses.

These verses I haven't heard before and it was sort of like an eye opener on what the Bible says on charity. I have been a 'koil madu' but haven't found this verse for this long. It was profound. Check out the verses:

"Be generous: Invest in acts of ch…