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

'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…

How not to spend taxpayers money

If you're wondering how best your tax money is spent, then you should look at how Telangana's Rythu Bandhu Scheme works. The state government decided that it will give Rs4,000 per acre as investment incentive to all farm owners. The biggest benefit would be farm mechanization by small landowners who otherwise may not have opted for machanisation. So far so good. 

Here is the interesting thing: the incentive per acre is given to all farmers irrespective of how much land is owned, or whether he is actually tilling the land. 

So a farmer with 200 acres of land, will pocket Rs 8 lakh of public money (money that you and me pay as tax), and in all probability, he is filthy rich and is not even tilling the land. 

Anyone with any semblance of knowledge of rural economy will say there are a vast number of tenant farmers (people who don't own the land, but they till and share a portion of the product with the landlord). Telengana government in its infinite wisdom decided not to include…

Happiness, street vendors, and negotiations......

Few days back I was watching a documentary series, "India's Frontier Trains". The three-part series was on trains connecting India with its neighbours - Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal. Yes, there is a train connection between India and Nepal, and that train is the only functioning train for the whole of Nepal.

In the episode on the train between India and Bangladesh, the program documented a life of a chocolate seller inside the train. He boards the train in the Bangladesh side of the route. A sole bread winner for a family of four, he earns by selling chocolates in the train.

He faces a perennial problem: because of hot weather conditions, his chocolates melt. In those hot days, his earnings are meager. A basic cooling device like this costs seventeen pounds and he couldn't afford that.

What moved me was the insensitive nature of some passengers in haggling with this struggling chocolate seller. They would force down the price by 10 pence or more (which is more tha…