Solved GDs

Introduction

A good discussion will try to arrive at a solution that shows balance. You need
to demonstrate your understanding of the issue from more than one perspective
alone. The conclusion at the end should indicate a filtration of the more relevant
issues and recommendations for policies / changes that can be made in the
current system. Given below are a few sample topics along with pointers
towards what kind of conclusions can be drawn from the discussion.

Should we allow incurably diseased persons to live or not?

 Points In Favour:
o If we feel sad to kill even an animal or a bird, how can our conscience
allow us to kill a fellow human being just because he is incurably ill?
Moreover he has done no harm to society and his illness is not because of
his fault.Therefore, we must provide him proper treatment and allow him
to live as long as nature has willed it

o God has gifted us life. So, he alone has the right to take it back. No
human being has a right to interfere in His scheme of things.Once on this
earth, every man has a right to live as long as God does not want him to
die.Therefore,the reasoning that just because a man is suffering from an
incurable disease, he should be put to death is untenable and beyond
reason

o It is not always the case that incurably diseased persons spread

contagious diseases as some might argue. Even in those rare cases where
it may be true, these persons are not real health hazards because it is
medically established now that all incurable diseases are not contagious.
However, as a precautionary measure, we should open separate hospitals
or isolation wards for persons suffering from incurable contagious
diseases and thus quarantine them.

o Killing an incurably diseased person will put an end to research work in

medical science. Even otherwise, suffering people have been the subject
of research work quite less. Now new vistas of progress have been
 opened in medical sciences and alternative medicine like Acupuncture,
Acupressure, Reiki Pranik healing, Touch therapy, Herbal therapy, Diet
therapy, etc. hold a ray of hope for the so called incurably diseased
persons. So, why snatch life from them?
 Points against:
o This world is governed by Darwin's survival of the fittest principle. An
incurably diseased person is weak and has no value whatsoever to the
society. Moreover, he has no means to live. Therefore, it would be in the
fitness of things to kill him even against his wish.

o An incurably diseased person is the cause of constant worry to his family,

his demands are unending and notwithstanding the best possible
attention, care and treatment given to him, he always remains dissatisfied
and disgruntled. This adversely affects peace of mind and comfort of the
family members. Therefore, the best way out of such a situation is to put
an end to his life.

o These days we are saddled with the responsibility of reducing our

burgeoning population. The many diseased persons constitute a good part
of it. Even otherwise their contribution to society being nil and burden
great, it would be justified and reasonable not to allow them to drag on
their agonizing life.

 Conclusion:
Defining gray areas is something which any amount of legislation can never
achieve. Our policies need to ensure that the group of people taking a
decision to terminate the life is doing so in the best interest of the patient and
society.

Should Capital punishment be abolished?

 In Favour Of Abolition:
o Man is supposed to be a rational animal. But can a rational being kill a
man for a man? No. Because it would be savage and barbarous. Besides,
by killing a murderer the dead cannot be brought back to life, nor would
he or his family be compensated. So, instead, we should reform the killer,
make him realize his sin and follow a virtuous life.
o If we kill the murderer, his troubles are over. But his family is made to
suffer for no fault of theirs. We should instead give him some other
punishment, say, for example, life imprisonment so that he has to face his
own conscience and repent for what he has done. Alongside, he should be
given psychological treatment and an opportunity to lead a normal
citizen's life.

o Instances are many where instead of being given capital punishment to

even hardened criminals, they were just imprisoned or put in a
reformatory with the result that they realized and regretted their wrong
doings, their terms of sentences were reduced as a reward. Such acts
enabled them to serve their innocent families and they even turned
towards social work. This shows their capital punishment is not the only
remedy to take care of criminals.

o We observe today that in spite of capital punishment being very much

there on the statute, heinous crimes are not decreasing. It goes to show
that capital punishment is no deterrent for criminals. Therefore, we must
think of changing the method of punishment.Over 30 countries in the
world have abolished capital punishment but none has reported any
increase in crime. Therefore, death punishment is not justified from any
angle.

o The reason capital punishment should be abolished is based on the fact

that sometimes judgments go wrong,and,consequently, innocent people
are hanged. This is because of the legalistic juggling of clever lawyers.
Even otherwise instances are not rare when corrupt police officials are
brought over through money and political power to file patently cooked
up charge sheets in the court and magistrates in turn pass doubtful
judgments. The only way to preclude the possibility of error is to abolish
capital punishment itself. “Benefit of Doubt” is an important point of law
and rightly so because law holds that 99 guilty can go unpunished but
even one innocent should not be punished. In the same spirit our
Supreme Court has held that death penalty should be awarded only in
“rarest of the rare cases”.

o We have no right to destroy what we cannot create. It is for God to give

or take one's life. Mercy is higher in his eyes than punishment. It is
barbarous to hold the doctrine of “tooth for tooth” and “limb for limb”.
Great soul like Jesus Christ even say “If a man slaps you on one cheek,
 show him the other cheek also”. Our own Mahatma Gandhi forgave the
person who stabbed him and would surely have pardoned Nathuram
Godse who killed him.Nehru ignored the plea of several true Gandhians
for Godse's life by saying, “The law will have its course.” But isn't it true,
as Charles Dickens said, that “the law is an idiot?” 
 Against Abolition:
o The time is not yet ripe to abolish capital punishment. There is no letup
in crimes. Capital punishment is an effective deterrent for would be
offenders and murderers. Those who argue that despite capital
punishment being there on the statute book crime in on the increase fail
to understand that it is because of our faulty justice delivery system
where justice delayed is justice denied, and not the other way round.

o There are certain kinds of hardened criminals who are beyond reform. It
is futile to teach them sanity. Killing others has become their second
nature and they have dozens of murder cases pending against them. It
would only be for the good of society that they are sent to the gallows
and thus their career in crime is stopped.

o If a murderer is not put to death but instead allowed to live on, he is

tempted to repeat the crime in future. It often happens that murderers set
at large through police connivance or legal trickery of lawyers indulge in
more heinous crimes for fun or contract killings until they are caught and
killed.

o In some Muslim countries like Pakistan, Iran, Dubai, etc. where laws are
rigid and even petty criminals are awarded harsh punishments, crime is
rare. Similarly in Fascist countries where death penalty is awarded for
negligence of duty or other offences, efficiency and honesty are found in
abundance. Jawaharlal Nehru once favored capital punishment for
blackmarketeers as well. “I do not want to harm the meanest insect but it
would give me the greatest pleasures of all blackmarketeers are hung up
by the neck till death.”

o Punishment must be proportional to the crime. One who takes a life,

should pay for it with his own life. That alone can have a deterrent effect
on the criminals. It is both ethically and practically wrong to show any
leniency to hardboiled criminals. We would be excusing or placating
criminals only at our own peril because then they would feel emboldened
 to commit further crime. Therefore, though 'an eye for an eye' and 'a
tooth for a tooth' appears brutal but it is the demand of true justice.

o A murdere not only kills a human being but also makes the life of his
victim's dependants miserable, because in most such cases their
breadwinner is snatched from them and in some extreme cases they
might go after the blood of the murderer and might kill them. Therefore,
it is advisable that a murderer is put to death by the arm of the law itself.

o Crime is contagious. Hence quick dispensation of justice and award of

capital punishment to hardened criminals,as they do it in Pakistan,
Bangladesh and in some other countries, can surely nip this contagion in
the bud and prove helpful in improving the law and order situation in our
country.

 Conclusion:
What crimes are amongst the rarest of the rare? Definitions of crime are
subjective. Human life is invaluable both the victim's and the murderer's.
Society needs deterrents to crime. The best policy would be to deter crime
with the lowest possible harm to members of society.

What is desirable - love marriage or arranged marriage?

 In Favour Of Love Marriage:

o Young people should be allowed to choose their own partners because
nature has so made them that upon reaching the age of consent young
boys and girls feel naturally attracted towards the member of opposite
sex whom they find to be Mr. Right or Miss Right for themselves.

o In arranged marriages, parents are not in a position to know the girl well
enough; that is, they may not be aware of her personality traits. In
arranged marriages, we generally get to know about the family
background and outward appearance of the girl or the boy, their
educational attainments, career plans, etc. and in the case of girls, their
interest and proficiency in household affairs cooking, knitting, tailoring,
etc. But success or failure of married life depends on the basic
temperament, nature and compatibility or otherwise of the partner.
Therefore, to make marriage a success, young men and women should be
 supported in selecting partners of their choice suiting each other's
temperament.

o The presumption that love is blind and hence a young girl or boy will just
pick up for a husband or wife, the first boy or girl they come across when
they are grown up is not justified. We cannot say with certainty that a
young boy or girl will not take all aspects into consideration before
embarking on a love affair. They are not Romeo and Juliet of our
Bollywood variety who convert their first love affair into a marriage.
Now we have the concept of dating gaining currency in which a young
man gets engaged to his girl friend only when he has fully understood her
and the same is the case with young girls who now feel more confident to
speak their mind in matrimonial matters. During their courtship, they get
enough opportunity to study each other and can easily break off the
relationship if either side is not found to be as expected.

o Love marriage may have its defects as well, but we must admit that it has
come to stay. Today educational facilities have spread and are easily and
equally available to girls, too. Besides, there are greater employment
opportunities for girls than in the past. These together ensure that there is
more intermingling of members of the opposite sex and the parental
influence is diminishing. Therefore, boys and girls are getting more free
in the choice of their spouses. In these circumstances, it would be better
for the elders to take it easy and not to come in the way of their children's
happiness. Yes, of course, they can still play the role of marriage
counsellers than that of match-makers. Young people, on their part,
would do well generally to respect the wishes of their elders while
deciding to go steady with their boy or girl friend.

o Love is the main factor that binds two individuals. Saints and poets alike
have praised it. Therefore love marriages have more chances of success
because there is pre-marital understanding between the would-be
couples. More often, unpleasant consequences arise only when love is
obstructed or the period of courtship is very short. If love is given way to
and the latter is taken care of, love marriages succeed and nothing else.

 In Favour Of Arranged Marriages:

o The much talked of understanding in love marriages is not so easy to
have when the two meet for the first time because love takes place at
“first sight” and not after due deliberation. Moreover, love marriages
mainly result in divorce or are the cause of quarrels with parents and thus
 unpleasantness in relationships. As against them, arranged marriages are
based on more solid foundations. Here, experienced people have their
way and they naturally choose a partner who is sure to prove more
faithful, devoted, mature and with predictable.

o Parents are more rational, mature and experienced to deal with such
matters and they are always capable of selecting suitable life partners for
their children. Loves being blind, young people usually do not give a
thought to the suitability and compability of their love. They generally
lack sound judgement and are carried away by passion.

o In arranged marriages, boys and girls are weighed in their totality. Their
family background, character, temperament, compability, all are taken
into consideration, for marriage is supposed to be a union of two families
and not just two individuals. Naturally, girls coming from families which
cherish harmonious relationships are more likely to make better wives
than those coming from broken homes. The latter may have their own
psychological problems.

o All this new-found love for love marriages is because of the influence of
Western films and culture on our life. Whether love or arranged one,
marriage is a gamble either way. Even much trumpeted love marriages
have been seen to be foundering on the rock of reality. Hadn't our fathers,
grandfathers and their forefathers all enjoyed arranged marriages? Is our
culture or society any the worse for it? If we compare both love and
arranged marriages we find that chances of success in the latter are much
more for they are finalized after due consideration of various aspects of a
happy and successful married life.

 Conclusion: 
What is important in marriage is “love”, whether it develops before or after
the marriage.

Is Science a curse or a boon?

 Science Is a Curse:
o Scientific inventions in the field of military technology and hardware
have brought about mass destruction.Previously, only armies would fight
on the front and even unarmed or sleeping soldiers were not killed, not to
speak of civilians. But today, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons,
as also missiles and aircrafts, have extended the area of conflict right into
the heart of the opposing countries. The entire industrial civilization
infrastructure can destroyed in a fraction of a second. Remember the
savagery of World War II when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were
completely wiped out, its citizens physically maimed and mentally
deformed? Also remember what happened in Vietnam, Iraq and
Afghanistan?

o Can we ever forget the avoidable destruction of human lives caused by

leakage in the Chernobyl nuclear plant in the former USSR and by
methyl iso cynate (MIC) gas leakage in Bhopal (India) a few years back?
Aren't thousands of people dying in road, rail and air accidents today,
mostly because of human failure in anticipating disasters or deliberate
sabotage by terrorists?

o Those who regard science as a boon would say the industrialization and
automation have made production on a mass scale possible and less
strenuous, but they fail to realize that it has created large-scale
unemployment.Besides, the immigration of rural workers towards
industrial centers in the cities has adversely affected our joint family
system, not to speak of the psychological problems and diseases it has
spawned in the city based village workers who are uprooted from their
moorings.

o Man in his quest for so-called science aided advancement and

urbanization has destroyed huge jungle tracts thus causing harm to
ecological balance. Toxic gases and biologically non degradable waste
material from factories are causing air and water pollution, blaring
loudspeakers create noise pollution so much so that even out Supreme
Court have to step in to order closure / shifting of factories in and around
Delhi and to fix permissible decibel limit for fire crackers during
Dipawali celebrations.

o Granted that science has enabled us to fight diseases more effectively and
lead a more healthy life but more and more deadly diseases, unknown to
 our forefathers, are affecting us today. Moreover side-effects of several
medicines are more dangerous than the cure, and wrong medication /
diagnosis may render us permanently incapacitated. The recent report
that Dolly, the artificially created sheep is suffering from T.B., is an eye
opener for the defenders of science.

o Today cheap, easy and mechanical transport, scooters, cars, buses, trains
and aeroplanes, has reduced distances for us but the pollution it causes
cannot be overlooked. Besides, our dependence on them has made us
lame. Not only this, other luxuries and comforts of modern science have
made us so soft that we do not want to do physical work and thus suffer
from several ailments and posture diseases.

o Science has taught us to conquer the moon and stars but failed to ennoble
man himself. While machines have been humanized, man has been
mechanized and dehumanized. Starford Wingfield has rightly said in his
monumental book 'History of British Civilization', the trouble with
science is that it has improved the circumstances of man but not the man
himself. So what is the fun of improving the outer surroundings of man if
he himself is not bettered?

 Science Is a Boon:
o Science is always a boon for mankind. Ever since man's appearance on
the planet Earth he has endeavoured to conquer the forces of nature to
lead a happy life. Science and civilization are one and the same. A
civilized nation is one which has achieved scientific progress. We call the
African nations uncivilized; they are not versed in the ways of science.

o Fast means of transport like aeroplanes, and trains have made the world a
global village. Telephone, TV and satellite communications, as also,
Internet, have made it possible to get the latest information from
anywhere in the world in no time. This has helped in the spread of
education through satellites and TV networks. Satellite photography has
enabled us to explore new areas of mineral deposits and early warnings
from satellite pictures of an impending cyclone make it possible to take
countermeasures.

o Science has given us new medicines to fight diseases and increase the
span of life. Radiological progress, ECG, CT Scan, MRI, etc. help us in
detecting and diagnosing severe ailments. Transplant surgery and micro-
 surgery have shown hope for the hopeless. Now the human genome
project has succeeded in mapping genes of the human body which holds
the hope of identifying culprit genes for man's diseases and replacing
them.

o From cradle to grave man have tasted the fruits of science: a Caesarian
operation brings him into the world, an electric crematorium disposes
him off and in between his electric lights and fans, washing machines,
fridges and other gadgets ensure that he lives a comfortable life.

o While our forefathers had to live a life full of hardships, we, because of
science lead a luxurious and comfortable life. Even the poor can avail of
fast transport, bio-engineered food, a variety of modern entertainment
and the like. Test tube babies have long become a dream come true for
the issueless couples. Deadly diseases like cancer and AIDS are going to
be completely controlled in the future. Different vaccines have already
been developed for eradication of Hepatitis B, Small pox, Polio, etc.

o Agriculture and farming have been revolutionized by science. Big dams

to channelise water and distribute it to the desert have turned arid areas
into greenery. Isotopes have helped improve the quality of seeds, which
not only increased food production but also caused resistance to plant
disease. Cross breeding of animals and poultry too has increased yield.
Biotechnology has made us self sufficient, even surplus, in food
production.

o Our education system has been revolutionized with the help of science
and technology. Gone are the days of yore when man could rest
contented with learning of only humanities; teaching of science and
technology has opened new vistas before him. He has more job
opportunities. Not only this, he is more and more in command over the
forces of nature and with the aid of science and technology he is using his
resources for mankind. With great strides in paper and printing
technology and the knowledge explosion in general, even an average
person is able to get the needed information and can exercise his right of
choice in our democratic polity.

o Electronics and computers have changed our thinking and living

radically, computerized machinery turns out products much faster and of
better quality. Computers have replaced manual labour with better
 performance and electronics has made it possible for the handicapped to
lead a normal life.

o It might sound ironic but it is a fact that because of thermonuclear

weapons with colossal destructive power in their armoury, the two
superpowers, the US and the erstwhile USSR, could not go to war fearing
MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) and lived with entente during the
cold war era. Even today, post December 13 attack on our Parliament and
not withstanding warning of using nuclear power, both India and
Pakistan are desisting from carrying out their threat because of the
nuclear pressure.

 Conclusion: 
Sustainable development will allow us to benefit from science, yet help pass
the planet to the next generation in the same shape that we inherited it in.

Seniority, Not Merit, Must Be The Criterion For Promotions

 In Favour Of Seniority:
o Entry in a job can be on merit, for that is an objective criterion for a start,
but once a person joins an office, his actual experience alone must count
in allowing his promotions. This experience enables him to gain true
knowledge of the practical working of his office. We cannot deny the fact
that seniority makes a man proportionately experienced while mere merit
takes into consideration only bookish knowledge.

o By merit we generally mean securing high marks in written examinations

and intelligently convincing the examiner or the interviewer. But the fact
is that even duffers can secure high marks by cramming a few important
answers and get through the interview by chance or recommendation. On
the contrary, only practical experience can give us the true knowledge of
theory and practice of a particular line.

o From our own experience in India we find that our old system of
hereditary practice of a particular trade or profession enables young boys
to gain much more experience than today's newly recruited young men
who are given higher position, salary and status. An ordinary mistry
working under an engineer knows more about the intricacies of a
machine than the meritorious engineer. It would be in the fitness of
 things, for us, therefore, to give higher ranks and salaries to the humble
mistries and make new recruits work under them as apprentices, so as to
bring about quick industrial development.

o There being no absolute and infallible test for computing one's merit on
the basis of an objective criterion, the system of promotion by merit
allows for subjective assessment by superiors and thus leads to favoritism
and corruption. On the contrary, seniority being quite obvious,
promotions based on it leaves no scope for corruption or favoritism.

o We must see to it that even a peon after a number of years is made a

junior officer, then a senior and eventually head of the department,
provided, of course, he has gained sufficient knowledge through
experience. This system operates in some advanced western countries
quite successfully for it offers incentive to old hands.

 In Favour Of Merit:
o Promotions in offices and factories should be based on merit alone, for, it
seniority were to be given weightage in promoting one to higher posts ,
every Tom, Dick and Harry who has put in a specified years of service
would start claiming promotions just because of his duration in service.
Can we grant promotions to a peon who dusts books and carries files in a
library without even caring to read their contents? Can his seniority make
him more able or capable? The fact is that only time applied in useful
purposes has educative value. In this respect, we have the shining
example of Gangadhar Yadav, a gardener in his early 20's at IIM,
Lucknow. He so involved himself in doing some extra work in the office
there, that in the year 2000 a visiting Vice President of a reputed
multinational got impressed with him and offered him the job of Sales
Executive!

o The greatest progress in nations of the world has been achieved where
promotions and honours have gone to the meritorious alone. Here we
have the most spectacular case of China and the former Soviet Union. In
China, they followed Confucian teachings since ancient times and
recruited their government officers accordingly on the basis of a
competition. Today we know where China stands! In the case of the
Soviet Union too, their greatest progress in science and technology was
made possible by encouragement given to merit. That is why they could
put first Sputnik in the orbit and build a huge military industrial complex.
An ordinary factory worker could hope to become a manager one day.
 o Granted that people with seniority are sometimes more knowledgeable
than new recruits who come on the basis of examinations and
competitions but they are exceptions. Majority of them do not make any
serious attempt to know or learn more and do better. However, the few
who improve themselves do get an opportunity for promotions,on the
basis of both merit and seniority.

o The requirements of the present day make old people outdated, because
of rapid technological advancement in factories and new work culture.
Therefore, if merit alone is taken into consideration while promoting, the
knowledge of the latest devices and design can be meaningfully tested in
a candidate who keeps himself abreast of them.

o We now witness worldwide skill upgrading, computerization,

government downsizing, more mechanization and automation. What does
it indicate? Only that we are moving towards meritocracy- a kind of
government where all jobs is available on the basis of merit and academic
qualifications alone. In such a situation, seniority is bound to be left
irrelevant and only merit as proved through technical and practical
knowledge will count.

 Conclusion: 
Loyalty and Genius both need to be rewarded. Policy needs to ensure that
there are exceptions for the career paths of exceptional people, without
making so many exceptions that it gets converted into a “rule”.

Are Reservations In Jobs Justified?

o No, They Aren't:

 The very idea of providing reservations to any segment of the population
is based on negatives. It allows for preferential treatment without a
thought being given to the caliber or eligibility aspect. Just about any
individual from the reserved castes scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and
backward castes can get a Government job or admission in an
educational institution on a much lower eligibility criterion for
 percentage of marks and a higher age. This lowering of standard breeds
inefficiency, discourages the really meritorious and negates the very
concept of quality of opportunity. 49.5 percent reservation means that
half the administrative machinery has inbuilt inefficiency, while Article
335 of our Constitution lays down that reservation should be consistent
with the maintenance of efficiency of administration.

 By rejecting people of higher competence from general category and

accepting the reserved category with lower competence, the reservation
policy acts as a disincentive to the meritorious and more capable. Thus
inhibits healthy growth or development of an individual. Such brilliant
students, victims of unfair favouritism of our reservation policy, get
frustrated and leave for foreign countries which favour merit alone. This
brain-drain adversely affects the intellectual capability of our country.
Not only this, the system of reservation, says Justice Chinnappa Reddy,
has in many cases paradoxically generated “a spirit of self-denigration” -
each community of caste competing to be more backward than others.

 Private enterprises, being interested in efficiency alone, do not follow the

retrograde policy of reservation. Their sole criterion of selecting people is
merit and ability to deliver the goods. This is why they are doing
extremely well.But, of late, demands for introducing reservations in
private sector has been raised in some influential quarters.Should this
come about, God save whatever efficiency we still have in at least a few
segments of our administration and economy.

 It is a shame that in this computer and space age we, by institutionalizing

our reservation policy, admit that we are a decadent society based on
caste. What image does it convey in the international field? Can casteism
be done away with by having caste based reservations? Should we not
follow economic criterion instead so that only a few families do not
benefit perpetually by this unfair policy? The criterion of creamy layer is
patently humbug, for it is so applied that even those with sufficient
means and standing in society succeed in getting the benefit of
reservation. All this breeds discontent and occasions social unrest.
Therefore, the sooner we do away with reservations the better for the
nation.
 Reservations were supposed to be an interim arrangement for 10 years as
per our constitution so that the low caste people could come up socially.
But encouraged by our shortsighted politicians with their sights fixed on
this sizeable vote-bank, its beneficiaries have formed it into a habit to
claim reservation as a matter of right. Instead of striving hard to excel,
they seek the shortcut of reservations and the vested political interests
perpetuate it. This vicious circle can be broken by the Government by
having a firm cutoff year for reservations and spreading education among
the depressed classes on a priority basis. But can we do so by assigning
low priority to education with a mere 4 percent budget allocation for it?

 Instead of facilitating spatial growth of education and development

among the depressed classes, reservations have spawned a new elitist
group a mere 5 percent among them, which has cornered all the benefits
meant for 22.5 per cent. The same is going to be the fate of the most
backwards among backward classes.

 A further reservation of 27 percent to the other backward classes has

aggravated the employment problem and has formed caste animosities
and hatred. This retrograde step is not going to do any good to the nation.
In the name of social justice, an injustice of the worst type is being
perpetrated because of the accident of birth in a higher caste.Moreover,
the argument that since the new reserved categories have suffered
injustice through centuries at the hands of upper caste people, the latter
should atone for that, is beyond comprehension. How could a young boy
or girl be held responsible and guilty for an alleged crime supposed to
have been committed by his or her forefathers? Two wrongs do not make
one right?

 The only hope of the children of ordinary families for a better future is
through education and open-to-all competitive examination. This has
been shattered by the additional 27 per cent job quota for other Backward
Class (BC) candidates following acceptance of the Mandal Commission
Report. That is why they resorted to agitation and even self-immolation,
but to no avail. It has further fractured our caste-ridden society. The
 author of the Mandal Commission Report himself admits that the system
followed by the Commission in compiling the list is unscientific.

 It is really damaging to the nation as a whole that instead of tackling our

population problem largely due to the illiterate, backward and
superstitious people of backward classes, we give them the lollipop of
reservations! In spite of their wretchedness and poverty they produce
more children and make the life of these innocents more miserable than
theirs. Therefore, if at all reservations are to be given they must be linked
with adoption of family-planning methods. This will prove to be an
effective deterrent against population explosion and will also benefit
these classes themselves.

o Yes, They Are:

 The obnoxious caste system might have served some purpose when it
originated centuries ago but now it is a hindrance to our social progress.
The claim of the apologists of caste system that caste was changeable
according to merit and competence of the individual and was not strictly
hereditary is disapproved by the story of Karna in the Mahabharat who
inspite of being equal to or even more in valour, skill, warfare and charity
than the Kshatriyas was made to suffer humiliation for being a Sut Putra
(Son of a Shudra) till his death. Again we have the story of Eklavya, a
low-born. Dronacharya, the teacher of Arjun, the great archer of the epic
Mahabharat, demanded his thumb as Gurudakshina (Fee), even though he
had refused to teach him archery fearing that he might surpass. Thus
centuries of oppression and untouchability cannot be undone in just a few
years of honest and sincere efforts. Therefore, the makers of our
Constitution stipulated reservation for scheduled castes and tribes for a
period of ten years but it had to be extended again and again because they
could not come up in such a short time. It is only fair and just to reserve
some seats for these deprived and oppressed people, who could not enter
even temples and educational institutions. The question of any
inefficiency creeping in or harm or injustice being done to others does
not arise because one, these classes too must fulfill certain basic
minimum educational or technical qualification, and, too, some states like
Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka have over 50 percent
reservations yet their efficiency is second to none. Again, no hue and cry
of lowering efficiency or standards is raised when a son of a rich father
 gets admission in a technical or professional course in spite of lower
marks. Then why these double standards?

 Our constitution lays down equality among equals and not among un
equals. Through the policy of reservation, our depressed and backward
class people are sought to be brought to the status of equality with others.
It is really shameful for a modern civilized society like ours that even
after 55 years of independence, a scheduled caste barat party is not
allowed to go through a Rajput dominated village near Agra, young
lovers belonging to higher lower caste are hanged in village panchayats
in broad daylight without a whimper of protest! Hence, reservation is an
affirmative action to bring about socio-economic betterment of these
classes and must, therefore, continue.

 Being a Welfare State, we owe it to the weaker sections to ensure their

well-being through governmental action.Their economic backwardness,
poor state of education and social deprivation are all due to our society
which even at this late hour should not prevent their upliftment. It is
because of this oppressive, humiliating and torturous caste system and
resultant deprivation that has led thousands of scheduled castes people
(From Dr. Ambedkar to Ramraj now Uditraj) to get converted en masse
into other religions. Resort to such conversions as a means of escape
from caste-based oppression is a shame on the entire society.

 If the Brahmins can work as pujaris and act as agents of God for all
auspicious occasions like births, marriages,deaths, etc. as a birthright,
why should the Hindu society not view some reservation for backward
class people with charity and generosity.

 Even now the total reservation is only 49.5 percent for about 76.5 per
cent of the population while over 50 per cent seats are available for about
23.5 per cent candidates of higher castes. Besides, true social justice can
come with a price and reservations are the prices that are privileged
classes should be willing to pay so that the accident of birth is no more
used against their lowborn brethren.
  Mahatma Gandhi once said, “Swaraj for me means freedom for the
meanest for our countrymen. I am not interested in freeing India merely
from the English yoke. I am bent upon freeing India from any yoke
whatsoever.” It goes to prove that Father of the Nation would ensure
individual freedom for one and all. But can such freedom be possible for
the exploited and oppressed weaker sections?

 The depressed and backward class people cannot fare well in an open
competition because of centuries of suppression and deprivation, and,
hence, they cannot develop themselves. In this modern age of knowledge
explosion through mass media, they may get alienated from the main
stream of our society. This can generate dangerous consequences for the
nation as a whole. Therefore, to avoid such an eventuality, we should
accept our downtrodden brethren with an open arm and give them a
helping hand in realizing their potential. This way only we can achieve
our common destiny, for didn't our ancient seers proclaimed “Sarve
Bhawantu Sukhinah ma Kashchid duhkh bhag bhavet”. (Let all be happy,
let no one be miserable).

o Conclusion: 
Inequalities will always exist. Society will always try to set right these
inequalities in some ways. Policy checks here should be to see if the solution
is working in the long term or not.

What form of Democracy is better parliamentary or presidential?

o Parliamentary:
 India adopted the Parliamentary form of democracy after getting
Independence in 1947 because India had been familiar with its working
during the days of the British rule. Since then 13 general elections have
been held to the Lok Sabha on the basis of universal adult franchise, and
barring a few violent incidents during the polls, there has been peaceful
transition of authority from one political party to the other. Moreover,
 while in a parliamentary democracy, the Executive is responsible to the
legislature and therefore, the opposition always keeps it alert. For it
“always lives in the shadow of a coming defeat.” As Laski points out, in
a Presidential democracy the President does not have to fear any
opposition because he is not responsible to the legislature. It can make
him autocratic. Hence Esmein calls the system “autocratic, irresponsible
and dangerous.” So, would it be advisable for us to hand over the destiny
of our vast country with abundant resources and population to the whims
and caprices of a dictatorial President?

 Since the majority party or a majority coalition of several parties comes

to power in a Parliamentary democracy, there is bound to be co-operation
and harmony between the Executive and the Legislature. It ensures easy
implementation of plans and policies of the ruling party for it can have its
own way, no matter what the opposition parties in the Lok Sabha say.In
the Presidential form, on the contrary, the system of separation of powers
between the Executive and Legislature often leads to conflict: more so, if
these two wings of the government are controlled by different parties.
This leads to delay, confusion and procrastination. Therefore, it is
advisable for us to continue with the present system which has unity of
responsibility, direction and power.

 It is always possible to remove a failed Prime Minister and replace him

with a new competent and acceptable individual as per the wishes of the
people. This happened in the United Kingdom during World War II when
Chamberlain proved to be a timid Prime Minister and Churchill replaced
him without any commutation taking place. But a President cannot be
thus removed before the expiry of his tenure except by an extremely
difficult process of Impeachment. Thus this system being rigid does not
mould itself easily to abusing circumstances. Therefore, there is no point
in having a Presidential democracy where even a persona non grata has to
be tolerated for the remaining tenure of his office.

 Bryce maintains that the Parliamentary form of Government secures

swiftness in decision and vigor in action because cabinet can easily get
the measures it deems essential passed through the Legislature. In the
 Presidential form, inordinate delay is caused in arriving at decisions, for
the Legislature is to be convinced of major policy decisions.

 “Power corrupts, Absolute power corrupts absolutely” says Lord Acton.

This applies to the position of a President vested with the entire
administration and absolute power who might on his own take drastic
action at home and in foreign policy and bring about great suffering to
the people. We should therefore, maintain the status quo of Parliamentary
Government, notwithstanding its shortcomings and faults, which has
several heads to solve national problems in the form of the cabinet.

 Parliamentary democracy suits us because here persons fit to be members

of the Executive make known their sagacity, political acumen, grasp and
common sense, and the Prime minister will always be one who has
undergone a long and strenuous period of political apprenticeship. This
state of affairs does not obtain in a Presidential democracy in the United
States any person without adequate political experience can hope to
become the President. He very often comes from obscurity and goes into
obscurity again after his term of office is over and he is 'a leap in the
dark.'

 If the ruling party fails to deliver and carry the majority with it in a
Parliamentary democracy, the opposition more than merely exposing its
drawbacks, loopholes and blunders, tries to step into his shoes without
necessarily having to force the ritual of a fresh election. A fixed tenure of
office for a President does not make this possible in a Presidential
democracy.

 India has been the most stable nation of Afro Asia. The main factor
contributing to our stability has been the holding of periodic general
elections. Government seeks to correspond to the desires of the
electorate. Members of the Legislature who represent prevailing
tendencies and opinion of the nation apprise the cabinet of them.Cabinet
or the ruling party can ignore or brush aside them only at its own peril.
Presidential democracy, on the other hand, has nothing much to care for a
shift in public opinion because the fixed term of office of the President
 makes him secure in office for the stipulated number of years. This may
make him unresponsive to the wishes of the people and rule as a dictator.

o Presidential:
 The time has come for us to switch over to the government of experts, as
the Presidential government is called instead of the government of
amateurs or the Parliamentary democracy. The President is authorized to
appoint the members of his cabinet irrespective of party affiliation. He
can even obtain the services of nonparty experts. A Prime Minister, on
the other hand, is bound to appoint only members of his party or of
parties supporting him. And he has to take into consideration their caste,
region, religion and their following, notwithstanding their otherwise
unsuitability for the post. In India, we have had, in the past and have even
today, several persons as ministers not because of their intrinsic quality
but due to parochial considerations.

 Presidential system ensures that the President has a national image. He

does not belong to this or that group or faction in the Legislature. Since
he is elected for a fixed term of office, stability is inbuilt in this form of
government because he is not dependant on the vagaries of the
Legislature. In Parliamentary Government, on the other hand, the Prime
Minister has to please both his party men and the opposition to continue
in office. The instability of this form of government becomes more
obvious when a single party does not hold a majority in the Legislature
and a coalition government is formed, as was the case in France prior to
the inauguration of the 5th republic, and in India during the Janata Party
rule (1977- 80), National Front Governments in 1989-91 and in 1996-98.
The BJP led coalition government had to resign in just 13 days and 13
months respectively and the NDA Government had to put up with the
tantrums of this or that coalition partner.

 In a Presidential democracy, the Legislature is less likely to be dominated

by party spirit and the individual members can vote independently on the
issues presented to them, as the fate of the government does not depend
on them. This phenomenon is so much in evidence in the classic case of
United States that the two main parties the Republican and the
Democratic are called 'same wine in different bottles'. Contrary to this the
Parliamentary system “intensifies the spirit of party and keeps it always
 on the boil” says Lord Bryce. Even if there are no important issues of
policy before the nation, there are always the offices to be fought, for one
party holds them, the other desires them and the conflict is unending for
immediately after defeat, the beaten party begins its campaign to dislodge
the victors. While the opposition criticizes Government policy regardless
of its merits, the ruling party avoids putting unpopular measure, however
important they may be, and resorts to populism ignoring the need of the
nation. Don't we witness this happening here in India? Should, then, we
still continue with this irresponsible state of affairs?

 The fusion of executive and legislative functions in a parliamentary

democracy like ours has made the cabinet usurp the functions of
parliament, for the Union Legislature is now in session for about 3
months in one year while during Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru's time it used to be
in session for more than 4 months. Moreover, rule by ordinance tends to
bypass the authority of Parliament. In the Presidential system, on the
other hand, there is separation of the Executive and the Legislature.
Hence, no wing can usurp the powers of the other. This ensures that no
legislation is enacted in haste or without, in-depth deliberation.

 In a presidential democracy, a continuous and consistent home and

foreign policy can be followed because the chief executive enjoys
security of tenure and cannot be easily removed. This fact is established
by the Rooseveltian era in USA. Contrary to this, in a parliamentary
democracy, there is no continuity or consistency of policies because of
instability of Government. A new cabinet may even reverse the policy
followed by its predecessor.
 In a presidential system, bureaucratic appointments are made by the
president, and in some cases, with the approval of the legislature. They
are responsible for their acts of omission and commission. In the
Parliamentary Government, on the other hand, there is a fixed tenure for
bureaucrats who thrive under the cloak of ministerial responsibility. In
India, we witness an over bureaucratization of the entire administration,
which causes red-tape and avoidable delay. Bureaucracy even hijacks the
well meant policies of the government.
  With a multiplicity of political parties spawned due to personality clash
of egoistic leaders and helplessness of even anti defection law, floor-
crossing and horse-trading have become the norm in our parliamentary
practices. The politician-bureaucrat-businessman-criminal nexus has
debased the parliamentary institution, interfered with the judiciary,
created law and order problems and encouraged terrorism and separation
on a wider scale. Even violence inside the legislature has bought them
into disrepute. Instead of being a government by discussion,
parliamentary democracy has descended to the low level of
pandemonium and bedlam in the houses of the legislature.

 Low calibre, casteist and communal elements, able to exploit the illiterate
and poor masses a considerable vote bank, get elected to the legislatures.
Thus with their immense bargaining power they are able to get
ministerial berths? The result? Jumbo cabinets unmanageable in States
like U.P and Bihar where ministers have practically no work to do in
some cases but are a burden on the Exchequer. Thus we are caught in a
vicious circle of all-round deterioration. It is, therefore, high time that we
abandon the Parliamentary system and adopt the Presidential democracy
where ministerial posts need not be given to elected representatives, the
candidate is more important than the party and, hence, corruption,
inefficiency, vested interests and paralyzing interference from politicians
can be easily removed.

o Conclusion: 
The form of government is specific to a cultural and social context. Aspects
that aid efficient government need to be reinforced, irrespective of the form
of government.