s

All Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine

The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been awarded 101 times to 196 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2010. Click on the links to get more information.

2010

Robert G. Edwards
2009

Elizabeth H. Blackburn, Carol W. Greider, Jack W. Szostak

2008

Harald zur Hausen, Franoise Barr-Sinoussi, Luc Montagnier

2007

Mario R. Capecchi, Sir Martin J. Evans, Oliver Smithies

2006

Andrew Z. Fire, Craig C. Mello

2005

Barry J. Marshall, J. Robin Warren

2004

Richard Axel, Linda B. Buck

2003

Paul C. Lauterbur, Sir Peter Mansfield

2002

Sydney Brenner, H. Robert Horvitz, John E. Sulston

2001

Leland H. Hartwell, Tim Hunt, Sir Paul M. Nurse

2000

Arvid Carlsson, Paul Greengard, Eric R. Kandel

1999

Gnter Blobel
1998

Robert F. Furchgott, Louis J. Ignarro, Ferid Murad

1997

Stanley B. Prusiner

s
1996

Peter C. Doherty, Rolf M. Zinkernagel

1995

Edward B. Lewis, Christiane Nsslein-Volhard, Eric F. Wieschaus

1994

Alfred G. Gilman, Martin Rodbell

1993

Richard J. Roberts, Phillip A. Sharp

1992

Edmond H. Fischer, Edwin G. Krebs

1991

Erwin Neher, Bert Sakmann

1990

Joseph E. Murray, E. Donnall Thomas

1989

J. Michael Bishop, Harold E. Varmus

1988

Sir James W. Black, Gertrude B. Elion, George H. Hitchings

1987

Susumu Tonegawa
1986

Stanley Cohen, Rita Levi-Montalcini

1985

Michael S. Brown, Joseph L. Goldstein

1984

Niels K. Jerne, Georges J.F. Khler, Csar Milstein

1983

Barbara McClintock
1982

Sune K. Bergstrm, Bengt I. Samuelsson, John R. Vane

1981

Roger W. Sperry, David H. Hubel, Torsten N. Wiesel

1980

Baruj Benacerraf, Jean Dausset, George D. Snell

1979

Allan M. Cormack, Godfrey N. Hounsfield

1978

Werner Arber, Daniel Nathans, Hamilton O. Smith

1977

Roger Guillemin, Andrew V. Schally, Rosalyn Yalow

1976

Baruch S. Blumberg, D. Carleton Gajdusek

1975

David Baltimore, Renato Dulbecco, Howard Martin Temin

1974

Albert Claude, Christian de Duve, George E. Palade

1973

Karl von Frisch, Konrad Lorenz, Nikolaas Tinbergen

1972

Gerald M. Edelman, Rodney R. Porter

1971

Earl W. Sutherland, Jr.

s
1970

Sir Bernard Katz, Ulf von Euler, Julius Axelrod

1969

Max Delbrck, Alfred D. Hershey, Salvador E. Luria

1968

Robert W. Holley, Har Gobind Khorana, Marshall W. Nirenberg

1967

Ragnar Granit, Haldan Keffer Hartline, George Wald

1966

Peyton Rous, Charles Brenton Huggins

1965

Franois Jacob, Andr Lwoff, Jacques Monod

1964

Konrad Bloch, Feodor Lynen

1963

Sir John Carew Eccles, Alan Lloyd Hodgkin, Andrew Fielding Huxley
1962

Francis Harry Compton Crick, James Dewey Watson, Maurice Hugh Frederick Wilkins
1961

Georg von Bksy

1960

Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet, Peter Brian Medawar

1959

Severo Ochoa, Arthur Kornberg

1958

George Wells Beadle, Edward Lawrie Tatum, Joshua Lederberg

1957

Daniel Bovet
1956

Andr Frdric Cournand, Werner Forssmann, Dickinson W. Richards

1955

Axel Hugo Theodor Theorell

1954

John Franklin Enders, Thomas Huckle Weller, Frederick Chapman Robbins

1953

Hans Adolf Krebs, Fritz Albert Lipmann

1952

Selman Abraham Waksman

1951

Max Theiler
1950

Edward Calvin Kendall, Tadeus Reichstein, Philip Showalter Hench

1949

Walter Rudolf Hess, Antonio Caetano de Abreu Freire Egas Moniz

1948

Paul Hermann Mller

1947

Carl Ferdinand Cori, Gerty Theresa Cori, ne Radnitz, Bernardo Alberto Houssay
1946

Hermann Joseph Muller

1945

Sir Alexander Fleming, Ernst Boris Chain, Sir Howard Walter Florey

s
1944

Joseph Erlanger, Herbert Spencer Gasser

1943

Henrik Carl Peter Dam, Edward Adelbert Doisy

1942

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1941

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1940

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1939

Gerhard Domagk
1938

Corneille Jean Franois Heymans

1937

Albert von Szent-Gyrgyi Nagyrpolt

1936

Sir Henry Hallett Dale, Otto Loewi

1935

Hans Spemann
1934

George Hoyt Whipple, George Richards Minot, William Parry Murphy

1933

Thomas Hunt Morgan

1932

Sir Charles Scott Sherrington, Edgar Douglas Adrian

1931

Otto Heinrich Warburg

1930

Karl Landsteiner
1929

Christiaan Eijkman, Sir Frederick Gowland Hopkins

1928

Charles Jules Henri Nicolle

1927

Julius Wagner-Jauregg
1926

Johannes Andreas Grib Fibiger

1925

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1924

Willem Einthoven
1923

Frederick Grant Banting, John James Rickard Macleod

1922

Archibald Vivian Hill, Otto Fritz Meyerhof

1921

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1920

Schack August Steenberg Krogh

s
1919

Jules Bordet
1918

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1917

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1916

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1915

No Nobel Prize was awarded this year. The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section.
1914

Robert Brny
1913

Charles Robert Richet

1912

Alexis Carrel
1911

Allvar Gullstrand
1910

Albrecht Kossel
1909

Emil Theodor Kocher

1908

Ilya Ilyich Mechnikov, Paul Ehrlich

1907

Charles Louis Alphonse Laveran

1906

Camillo Golgi, Santiago Ramn y Cajal

1905

Robert Koch
1904

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov

1903

Niels Ryberg Finsen

1902

Ronald Ross
1901

Emil Adolf von Behring

THE continuing debate on the reservations issue is beginning to reveal a pernicious split among the pro-reservationists on the question of economic Versus caste-based criteria for identifying backwardness. Left and democratic people must reflect on the significance of demanding economic criteria. The arguments of those who advocate economic Criteria seem to be the following: class is more primary than caste. By implication, class oppression comes before caste oppression, in fact the latter derives from the former. The economic base is the determining factor for analysis, not the superstructure, and caste belongs to the latter; only BC and SC/ST elites benefit from caste-based reservations; caste-based reservations reinforce caste difference, and lead to casteism. It is an impoverished and inflexible Marxist model indeed which cannot question the neat division between base and superstructure. This division, discredited at the conceptual level, breaks down even more dramatically when faced with the specific problems of societies like India where caste-relations are part of the so-called base, part of the relations of production and economic organisation. Caste is not merely a social problem separate from the economic, innumerable surveys have shown that caste-ranking is strongly and positively correlated with poverty. We cannot gain access to the pure category of class in isolation from how caste has operated in our context. Even a cursory glance at modern Indian history will reveal that caste and class struggles seldom oppose one another but are closely interlinked, making it difficult for us to view them as completely separate entities or even categories of analysis. Since denial of access to the means of economic as well as intellectual production has operated historically on the basis of caste, caste should be used to identify those who have been so deprived. A reference to the womens question will clarify some of these ideas: gender, like caste, cannot be subsumed under class. Women are not oppressed because they are poor, but because of the way patriarchy has operated. Similarly, the traditional subjugation of certain castes cannot be accounted for only in class terms. As Dalit journalist Gopinath has argued, if there are poor people in all castes, why do only poor Dalits carry garbage and nightsoil on their heads? Why do only poor Brahmins work as waiters in hotels and not the poor from other castes? If all poor people are the same, why are atrocities perpetrated only on Harijans as a group? It should be obvious that a poor Brahmin's social status is higher than that of a wealthy Dalit. Upper castes have a tradition of learning and of rewards for intellectual activity that are not available to the lower castes. Class position, and avenues for upward mobility, are decided not merely by income level but by caste status.

s
Experiments with income and occupation-based reservations, as in Karnataka from 1963-1977, show that the main beneficiaries were the forward castes - Brahmins , Lingayats and Vokkaligas. These reservations are compelled to operate on the principle of merit, which, as defined in our society, is possessed historically only by the upper castes. The fear that BC elites will appropriate all the benefits of reservations seems to stem from the anxiety that they will not have the same priorities as the forward caste elite, who have a long tradition of how to behave in the 'proper manner. Why is it that existing reservations for scheduled castes have not been effectively implemented? Is it not a legitimate question to ask, says Justice Chinnappa Reddy in the Report of the Karnataka Third Backward Classes Commission, whether things might have been different, had the district administrators and the state and central bureaucrats been drawn in larger numbers from these classes? The near complete monopoly by upper castes of all positions of political and administrative power needs to be challenged by a new body of officials who will also transform the lopsided agendas of our present-day ruling class. Again, leftists will agree that in the context of women we cannot argue against gender-based positive discrimination on the basis that only upper class women will benefit. To make this kind of argument is to argue against much-needed special treatment itself, and to tacitly consent to gender oppression Like womens subjugation, caste oppression too cannot be comprehended only in terms of class analysis. The charge of caste-based reservations reinforcing caste and leading to casteism comes out of an obliviousness to the necessary strategies of political struggle. Surely we do not want to say that the working classes in nineteenth-century Europe, instead of living harmoniously with their masters, fomented classism by engaging in class struggle. Neither would we argue that the sole accomplishment of the women s movement has been to reinforce gender-difference. When we can agree on the historical necessity of emphasising class or gender at particular moments, how can we condemn the deployment of caste? To recognise the validity of an emphasis on caste at the present juncture is not by any means to suggest that caste is a fixed, unchanging entity. Rather, it is to recognise that caste, like gender and class, is continually re-inscribed and re-articulated. At this specific historical juncture, caste points to particular structures of inequality that class does not take into account. Mobilisation of progressive forces on the basis of caste will help us work towards a society where caste will not be allowed to operate as a means of negative discrimination. TEJASWINI NIRANJANA Hyderabad

Not on any system. What is the need of a reservation? If a student has ability, let him prove and climb the steps. If a student has got some education thru reservation, how could he get the reservation in life? not possible.. If a student is financially weak, then we have the competitions of scholarship. clear them and go ahead... But reservation in any manner... No. i cant accept

I think that it should be based on qualifcation and acedemic status no matter of what race you are. I mean by reserving seats you are hindering the growth of other people. I mean why can't just people do good on the entrance exam and then get admission without having any seat reservation

Reservation should be on the basis of class not caste. There are many middle class(but lower caste) people in our neighbourhood who get reservation for no reason at all. Reservations should be given to people who really need it however it should not exceed 33% or else it would lead to a drop in standards. Indian economy is doing well recently so the govt. should focus on bringing poor people out of poverty instead of dividing the society on the basis of caste. No, not at all. Reservation should be on the basis of class not caste. There are many middle class(but lower caste) people in our neighbourhood who get reservation for no reason at all. Reservations should be given to people who really need it however it should not exceed 33% or else it would lead to a drop in standards. Indian economy is doing well recently so the govt. should focus on bringing poor people out of poverty instead of dividing the society on the basis of caste. Nothing is bad or good in its own stead. It is the way it is used, implemented and taken up which makes it bad or good. In India reservation was and is used to please some people and get quick votes, be it SC&ST provisions in constitution which was original for 15 years or implementation of Mandal commission after years of lying in bag. There are many aspects of reservation. It is fact there are some strata of society who need support to rise from their current status of poverty or backwardness.

However there is opposition for reservation because the benefit of it are not going to actual people rather they are taken up by some people of these society who are already in up class are taking up these benefits whereas actual needy people are

s
still at the same place. No one will object if a really needy get the benefit, You and all are furious since it is someone who is not needy who is reaping benefit.

As far as making economic condition as criteria is concerned, there is always good and bad of all thoughts. Good about this will be that this should be the correct way of deciding giving help however there are too many lacuna in this as getting certificate for economic background is very easy to get since no one file income tax return and there no proof of incomes for people other than salaried people so what will happen ultimately is again people who do not deserve the benefit will get it and needy will remain eluded with this.

So mantra for anything to be good and successful is honest implementation of the same.

I agree with you that when it comes to job then what we need is competent people in jobs to provide proper service and let our country grow. It is wrong to say the people who need help to rise first time are not competent but what is required is that we bring them up and educate and train them so that they are competent enough to take up the challenges. Now if we talk about getting a doctor without enough skills. This is often repeated example but what we fail to understand that a person cannot be a doctor just by getting admission in medical college. S/he became doctor after passing out from the college. If we say that college examination system is such that they will pass person without knowledge then problem does not lie in reservation in admission but in examination system which required to be looked into. Having said that if education system is not good and it will allow person without skill to get the degree then what is guarantee that a person who has come by other route let us by paying higher fees or something and for that matter what is guarantee that a person who have scored 90+ marks is good in medical study. So then we are running risk of many doctors without skills operating on us. So this argument that if the person has come with reservation will be not competent doctor is not correct. If a person has passed MBBS (s/he can be anyone reserve one or other) and do not know how to use scalpel and then we should

The Supreme Courts recent judgement to uphold reservation of seats in educational institutions for OBCs (Other Backward Classes) has understandably stirred the pot. Opinions and arguments from both camps have been coming thick and fast, whether in private conversations or through the media. There is jubilation in one side, despondency on the other. I do not have anything against the need for some kind of affirmative action to ensure that a level playing field is

created for the under-privileged millions in our country. However, where I do have a problem is the manner in which every government in the past 30 years or so has been trying to convert this important socioeconomic issue into an issue of vote-bank politics. So what are my reservations (pun intended) about the reservation policy? The underlying premise of the philosophy of reservation is that all members of the backward classes are disdavantaged, while all members of forward castes are deemed to be good enough to get admission under ther own steam. I do not think this is a valid assumption; neither is it fair. Economic considerations cannot be ignored in arriving at who needs extra care in our society. 1. A policy of reservation especially in institutions of higher education- per se does nothing to promote access to primary education. Millions of children will still be denied access to even basic schooling- and it is this lack of primary schooling that often denies acces to future education and employment oportunities. 2. Reservation should explicitly include economic criteria. In my view, a rich person (irrespective of caste) can access and afford education for his/her children and does not need the protection offered by the reservation policy. It is the poor who need such protection- again, irrespective of their caste. 3. Does this policy not reinforce and ecnourage corruption? Rather than study and work hard, it will be tempting for people to spend a few thousands of Rupees on procuring a certificate that states that they are an OBC (or SC/ST for that matter). Again, those that have the money for this will benefit; genuine OBC aspirants without the financial resources will be denied. 4. Where does one draw the line on reservation? Why the furore when Raj Thackerays MNS is asking for 80% reservation of private sector jobs in Maharashtra for sons and daughters of the soil? And what gets precedence- son of the soil or caste? And how do you categorize someone that is a second-generation son or daughter of the soil? 5. Extending the above point, what happens when the products of a reservation policy enter the job market? Performance evaluation/management is part of every companys HR mandate.

Should there be reservation based on irrelevant, nonperformance criteria such as caste? Should it be mandatory for 20% or 30% of the top-performers in any company to be determined based on caste? When the world is moving to ensure equal opportunity by legislating against discrimination on the basis of age, colour, creed, religion, gender, sexual preference and so on, why should we in India promote a culture of discrimination? And what will such policies do to our countrys overall competitiveness- say in a knowledge intensive industry such as IT, consulting or financial services? Should a client have to accept lower standards just because the work was done by someone who got the degre and hence job because of a certificate stating that s/he is of a certain caste, and not because s/he was the best the company could hire? Will you trust a doctor or lawyer if you knew that s/he got her/his degree simply because of her/his caste? This is not to say that everyone who benefits from the reservation system is not competent- but the odds are higher that someone using the policy will have it easier than someone who cannot. And that can cause distortions in professional competency and skills that in turn, can impact our society at large. As I said before, I am all for leveling the palying field. My recommendation is to make primary education free for the econmically weaker sections of society, independent of caste. Those that come from economically backward sections of society (irrespective of caste) should be given additional facilities such as healthy food/nutrition, free books, extra coaching, access to extra-curricular opportunities and so on. Let there be a common public examination at the end of 10 years of schooling- and let those that qualify be awarded scholarships for higher education- again, only if they come from economically weak families. Rather than quibble about what constitutes the creamy layer and how it is to be defined, give everyone a chance.And may the best boys and girls, men and women be given opportunities commensurate with their performance in an otherwise level playing field. Otherwise, I fear that the much-hyped India story will only remain a pipe dream. Worse, a real opportunity

for sustainable progress will have been squandered, nay sacrificed, at the altar of political convenience. There will be many who will quote the case of Tamil Nadu with its ridiculously high % of reserved seats as an shining example of why the policy works. But look at the number of migrants from that state to other parts of the country/world just to pursue education. It is because of such policies that other states are now feeling the pinch and demanding reservation for sons and daughters of the soil. And while there is no official statistic, it would be an interesting study to find out how many thousands of bright students from Tamil Nadu have been denied the opportunity to pursue the field of their choice just because of pernicious policy. Admittedly, the underlying problem of social oppression and inhuman denial of human rights is very real. It is a slur on our country and a solution must be found to redress those that have suffered. But if 50 years after such policies were first introduced, there is still huge disparity and the need is felt to perpetuate the policy, clearly something is wrong- or has not worked the way it was supposed to. Any which way, its time for a change
CASTE AND RESERVATION The Gowda Saraswath Brahmin (GSB) community supported providing discriminatory reservation when it was introduced by the government of India, to those belonging to SC, ST, and OBC categories in the fields of education, jobs, and many other spheres of life. But now after more than five decades of such positive action by the Government of India, the GSB people have become weary of this reservation policy. Although it is true that the GSB people enjoyed many benefits because of their caste in the past, the GSB community is no more placed at an advantage because of their caste at present. GSB caste is not a Schedule Caste nor a Schedule tribe. It is not even an OBC i.e. Other Backward Caste. It is included in the general category which means

s the people belonging to this caste do not need the benefits of reservations. Often the people belonging to general category are 'Forward people'. Although GSBs are included in the general category there are many members in this community that are economically backward. The reservation policy pertains only to the economic backwardness and not to the racial backwardness. The race and the caste are inter-related if one goes deep in the history of evolution of different castes in India. The important castes in India were Brahmin, Kshathriya, Yaishya and Shoodra. The Kings who were from the Aryan race and many of the soldiers were included in the Kshathriya caste. The merchants and the landowners who belonged to Aryan-like races were included in the Yaishya caste. Brahmin caste people also were from the Aryan-like races but the families belonging to the Brahmin caste were poor in terms of material assets but rich in knowledge. Shoodra is not a caste at present. Those belonging to the erstwhile Shoodra caste are now recognised by names which are included in the Schedule caste and Schedule tribe lists. The reservation policy was initiated in India after Independence and not before. After Independence in 1947, the Indian Parliament passed resolutions and made amendments to the Constitution passing Acts to facilitate reservations for backward people in education and in jobs. The government of India identified the names given to groups of people based on their occupation as the castes. These names were recognised as caste names. Most of the people who belonged to non-Brahmin and non-Kshathriya castes are in the list of Schedule castes (SC). Those groups who had avocations like live-stock breeding, forest produce business, black-smithy, washer man, oil-man, pot-making, hauler,

s cleaner, copper-brass utensils making, gun and gun-powder manufacture, and sundry labour usually belonged to the Schedule tribe (ST) list. Those non-Brahmin and nonKshathriya castes who are not listed in the SC or ST lists are now proposed to be listed in the Other Backward Castes. The reservation policy of the government brought in a significant economic upward movement in the lives of SC, ST and OBC people. There was reservation introduced in the election of legislators for the central governing body known as the parliament and in the state governing body know as the state assembly. Later it was introduced in the lower governing bodies such as those of district, town, and village. This reservation policy resulted in the power of governance pass on to those people who belonged to SC, ST and OBC categories since they formed the majority among the population of India. Therefore the Brahmin and Kshathriya caste people retained their higher status only in name. Very few Brahmins or Kshathriyas were able to get the top posts in the central or state governments. Thus the Brahmin caste people had to compete with SC, ST and OBC people for seats in educational institutions, for jobs in government and for election as office bearers in local governing bodies. They commonly lost because of the reservation policy and not due to lack of merit. Although the SC, ST and OBC have risen to higher levels, and do not appear to need affirmative action, the reservation policy has not been discontinued. The policy-making is on democratic methods and therefore the SC, ST and OBC majority in policymaking bodies such as the parliament and state assemblies voted for continuing the reservation policy

s decade after decade. There is no chance that the reservation policy will be ended in future, even after a century, it seems, i.e., even in the year 2100. Now it is common knowledge that the Brahmins and Kshathriyas are not all 'forward people'. Only a name of the caste does not signify if there are any weaker members within the community. There are many weaker members in the GSB community and if a survey is taken it will be realized that there are more weaker members in the GSB community now than there are in the SC, ST or OBC communities. Only a survey using the same parameters of living standards for all people regardless of their caste can reveal the truth. The members in our GSB community now need support in the manner that SC, ST, and OBC communities are given. We take pride in being called a forward community and do not wish to seek reservation on the basis of our caste. But we do not want to be discriminated because of our caste, and not be counted for admission in educational institutions or for providing jobs, in spite of being eligible and being economically and educationally backward. The present generation of SC, ST and OBC communities have sufficiently advanced ahead of GSB people to compete with in seeking seats in educational institutions and in jobs, etc., owing to the reservation the former communities are granted. For example a SC student will get the seat if she or he has obtained 75% marks while a GSB student who has obtained 90% marks will be denied a seat because of reservation. Therefore instead of increasing quotas for those people who were formerly backward and weak, the reservation policy should be gradually tapered off and ended within a specified period of time. As I said before, it is unlikely that the majority of the SC, ST and OBC

s legislators and others who want their votes to stay in power will not scrap the reservation policy for years and years to come. ed (Conclud

My reservations about reservations

1
Share

The Jat community in Haryana is back on the streets demanding reservations in government jobs and educational institutions. Apparently, the situation got so worse that curfew had to be imposed and the army had to be called in to stem the violence and maintain law & order. This is definitely not the first time, and sadly wont be the last time, such demands are made by some or the other caste, religious or gender group in India.

There have been many arguments in favor of reservations and many against them. But since this subject has been discussed to death in the past, this article will not go into the pros and cons of reservations themselves. I do see the logic behind reservations at the time they were proposed and I dont contest the fact that these reservations have definitely helped many people from backward communities realize their potential. At the same time, I also see a point in the opposing view after all, even with the most honest intentions, reservations are not the best advertisements for equality and are on many occasions unfair to the open category. But my objections to reservations are neither based on my idealism of equality nor on any sense of victimhood. Obviously, not all people are born equal and the society would have to help those left behind get up to speed. I also accept that there are some communities in India that have been unfairly discriminated against for centuries and uplifting them and integrating them into the mainstream is the right thing to do. Wasnt that the central reason for introducing reservations in the first place?

And thats exactly where I have a problem with reservations. My problem with reservations, or at least with the current reservations policy, is that they dont seek to uplift and integrate the backward communities; in fact, quite the contrary. Otherwise, how is it that after enforcing reservations for over a century now, the people demanding, and getting, reservations is increasing instead of decreasing? How is it that instead of eliminating castes and ghetto communities, the reservations are giving birth to newer ones? From where I see it, the reservations are disintegrating the nation instead of integrating it. And that iss defying its main, and perhaps the only important, objective!

Beyond that, the reservations policy has literally gone berserk. In the name of proportional representation, we see a mindless doling out of reservations. Reservations for women, Muslims and Christians, local domiciles apparently there are also reservations for people born from inter-caste marriages* (*sourced from Wikipedia but cant be validated independently!) Such reservations defy all logic and common sense. Take the womens reservations in parliament. There are now constituencies reserved only for women candidates and if you happen to be from one such unfortunate constituency, you dont have the option to choose the most suitable candidate for the job, if theres one! We were told that reservation for women in parliament would lead to gender equality in parliament but no one bothered to tell us how it will improve the parliamentary functions and decision making. A parliamentarian supporting the bill argued that this bill would change the culture of

the country because women today are still caught in a culture prison. In the name of tradition, stereotypes are imposed and we have to fight

these every day. In that case, why stop at gender equality? How
about offering parliamentary reservations for people with different sexualities? Do you see how nonsensical it sounds? Why didnt it dawn upon our lawmakers to reserve seats instead for post-graduates, MBAs, lawyers and so on? Why dont our lawmakers understand that we need competent parliamentarians, administrators, engineers, doctors, business leaders, academicians; irrespective of their caste, religion, gender or sexual orientation? But perhaps thats exactly what they dont want. Our politicians benefit not by eradicating our differences but by building newer walls between communities. They use reservations and quotas not to empower the people but to exploit them. After all, if dalits cease to exist (the caste, not the people), would people like Mayawati have any place under the sun? Its not difficult to figure out that for many politicians to remain in business, millions of Indians must remain backward! Its because of these reasons I have reservations about reservations. I think its about time we stop fooling ourselves with this romantic idea of social uplift through reservations. Thats isnt going to happen; in fact, quite the contrary

Discussion after Prof. Guptas speech

The audience raised several interesting comments and questions to Prof. Gupta after his speech. A few excerpts: Q: On the continued representation of landlords in the parliament and whether the policy of reservation has resulted in

some political elevation. Dipankar Gupta: If you talk in terms of what happened in the last five decades or so the rural scene has changed a lot. In my view there is hardly any substantial landlords of that kind today in rural India. Even the government in India says that 85 p.c. of landlords in this country are below 5 acres and 65 p.c. below 3 acres of land... The scene has changed a lot. If you talk in terms of implementing land reforms. Where is the land to reform? You see, there is not much land lying around, that you can take away and give to the poor. Q: On reservations for OBC:s, other backward castes, and the role of the Mandal commission Dipankar Gupta: The reason I chose to speak on reservations as aspects on cultural politics is simply because this is raging in our country and has the precautions for most democratic societies across the world want to attain a modicum of, should we say democratic participation, between different classes and communities in their societies. One important aspect of the reservations put in the constitution in the early years was to get rid of cast on a public plane. And people who suffered from caste disprivileges were to be given a hand. Now in the case of Mandal, as I mentioned what happened was that one kind of asset was substantial economic wealth, and more than that political power, was being leveraged for jobs in urban areas and that I think is against the spirit of affirmative action. And I am not at all surprised that certain castes are much more adept of taking advantage of this than other castes. This is not only true of Tamil Nadu, this is true of almost every part of India. Who would have thought that certain castes would like be called backwards? It is almost impossible to conceive that some years ago. The politics of backwardness is at those communities who is indeed well-to-do, that are the fore front of politics of backwardness. And they are using the other people for their advantage. The majority of rural people in the country do not income pay tax. No one in rural India pay income tax. But a majority of the rural country would not have to pay tax, even if they were asked to, because they fall below the line. And yet who takes advantage of this? A very small section, 5 p.c. of the rural rich take advantage of this by pointing at the rural poor.... they dont have to pay tax. The politics of backwardness is very similar to this. Some people who are powerful use the rest to

their advantage, that is the politics of backwardness. The matter of the fact is that reservations cant do everything. You cant remove poverty or remove prejudices. You cant do it! To give some economic support, to ensure acquirement of some socially valuable skills so that they can stand up on their own in the future, that is the most reservations can do.

Full many a flower is born to blush unseen, And waste its sweetness on the desert air. (Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard) .Background to Reservations in India Since the establishment of the Indian Constitution special provisions were created for those castes that were earlier called untouchables. These castes are now called scheduled castes on account of the fact that they are listed in the schedule of the constitution. Over a number of years provisions regarding positive discrimination favouring these castes gradually took shape in the form of reservations. These reservations exist in the form of quotas and they pertain only to government jobs and educational institutions so far. The percentage reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC) is 17.5 % in these state institutions, which is roughly proportional to their demographic presence in the country. The SCs were, and still continue to be, preponderantly rural based. Barring rare exceptions, the SCs do not own land but till the lands of others as agricultural labourers. Within the village they are humiliated on a daily basis in a number of ways. Their children find it difficult to attend schools, they are not allowed to visit the main village temple, and on many occasions are barred from gathering in the village square with other castes. Though there has been a marked decline in the persecution of rural SCs today, one of the reasons is

Recently, I was explaining to a French friend of mine on how the concept of caste reservation works in India. He was quite amused. And thats when I was explaining my side of the argument why the recent census should definitely record the caste information.

s
Not more than a century ago, Indian societies were divided into various castes. A persons caste decided his/her occupation, education, intellectual level and most importantly the social status he/she enjoyed in the society. Obviously post independence, the new India wanted to shy away from all these things. Reservations were introduced, which was a logical choice and indeed the right one to empower the backward classes.

Its been sixty three years since Independence and 20 years since the economic liberation. Things have changed drastically. While one naturally expects the reservation system to be fading away, the government drops the bombshell in 2007 and implements reservation system in all IIMs and IITs, the premier institutes of the country. The interesting point to note here is that Supreme court, the most respectable and autonomous legal body in the entire country, sided with the government. Why? Frankly, they just had one set of data to refer to - provided by the Mandal Commission. No other reliable data was available to disprove the fact that reservation was not needed. The last caste based census was done during the British rule in 1931!

The actual fact is, nobody knows what is the current state of affairs with respect to the caste system in India. We can argue for and against the reservation system for hours, but most arguments are subjective which would either address the injustice meted out to the forward classes or how the backward classes are still in the phase of development. But, is a growing economy good enough metric to conclude that the backward classes are no more backward? Are they enjoying social equality in terms of education and job opportunities? We cant say anything about it unless we have the data. Lets say that, in a few years from now, the issue crops up again and public interest petitions are filed in Supreme court. What could the court do?

This is why recording the caste information, in my opinion, is of utmost importance. Because, it will give an idea on whats happening around the country. Does caste correlate with the education/job of a person? What are the classes that needs to be recategorized as General category? What should go back into backward class? Are there any improvements to the SC/ST sections? And most of all, is the reservation system working? So many questions could be answered.

s
The people who opposed recording caste in the census fear that people may downgrade their caste to get government benefits. While a few people would misreport their caste information to exploit this opportunity, most Indians are too proud of their castes to actually disown it. So, the number of such happenings might not be that significant. There is no place for sampling errors as well since it is a complete population sampling. Also, the NSS data sampled every few years hasn't been of much help either.

We can also rule out the possibility of having a reservation based system based on economic conditions. There is too much irregularity in reporting household incomes in this country which makes it totally senseless to implement a reservation based on economic background. May be a couple of decades later.

Caste based census is an excellent opportunity for analysis. It may not change things immediately, but it is a decent start to figure out what the problem actually is. Well have enough data to make critical decisions on the future of reservation systems in this country.

My $0.02 We should accept with shame that majority of the marriages in India are still based on caste system (even the most educated are paranoid about this). Unless inter-caste, interreligion marriages are becoming the order of the day to a level where the parents get confused to which caste the child belongs to, caste is not going to go away so easily. Periyar, an activist who fought the caste system, once said that the only way to remove caste system from this society is through inter-caste marriages.

By the laws of nature, reservation is a crime. Ideally Survival of the fittest should be the mantra. The person who deserves something should definitely get it and should not be denied the chance since just because he belongs to a forward class. But it was us humans who created the caste system and it is our duty to clean the mess