Untitled

India! I dare you to be rich

My strong opposition to the Women’s Reservation Bill

Today is Womens' Day. I applaud the work done to bring liberty to women, commencing perhaps from the work of J.S. Mill. I have written extensively on this subject in the draft manuscript, "Discovery of Freedom" (http://discovery.sabhlokcity.com/) and won't write much about it here.

However, I chanced upon the following extract from my book, Breaking Free of Nehru and I think this short paragraph ought to be highlighted to emphasise that this Bill is ANTI-FREEDOM. Reservations of any sort are NOT the way to freedom. It is a shame that there are no proponents of freedom left in India.

EXTRACT

There is another problem brewing on the horizon. In addition to caste-based affirmative action, gender-based affirmative action is gathering momentum, namely, reservation of seats for women in elected bodies. This, once again, is primarily a matter for social reformers to deal with. There can never be any justification for a government to legislate quotas for women. Reservations for women (or any other group) in Parliament or any other elected body goes against equality of opportunity. Sweden doesn’t have any reservation of seats for women, but its political parties have a voluntary norm under which 50 per cent of their candidates are women. As a result, women constitute 45 per cent of Swedish parliamentarians. The way out for India would similarly be for political parties to take the lead and not to have the government do things which are none of its business.

ADDENDUM

In India, Politics Is Often a Marital Affair

 

If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email:

Breaking Free of Nehru

Join the Freedom Team of India or become a Freedom Partner.

Google
Print Friendly

Sanjeev Sabhlok

View more posts from this author
9 thoughts on “My strong opposition to the Women’s Reservation Bill
  1. Anonymous

    Yes, this is a valid point indeed. But you are expecting this level of maturity from Political parties who dont even have inter party democracy. It will never work. India is not Sweden. Doing good for women is legitimate even if it is forced.

     
  2. Sanjeev

    Dear Anonymous

    The maturity of political parties is a function of your maturity (i.e. of citizens in general).

    Are you mature enough to form a political party that does such things? Please consider joining the freedom team as a start: http://freedomteam.in.

    Blaming politicians is a classic spectator sport of non-citizens. Who are you to be a spectator in your own country?

    Regards
    Sanjeev

     
  3. Anonymous

    I too strongly oppose this evil bill, for following reasons
    1. Reservation of any kind is basically wrong. We should strive for a merit oriented society & not a reservation oriented one.
    2. We can give equal opportunity but not equal outcome. Now women have equal opportunity. They are asking for equal outcome.
    3. Our democracy has become dictatorship by party high commands. MPs/MLAs should voice the opinion of their constituencies, whereas they have to follow whips from high commands.
    4. Women’s voice in politics, media & elsewhere is dominated by hardcore, male hating feminists
    who are out to strip men of their constitutional
    rights & turn them into near slaves at the mercy of women. This is evident by enactment & implementation of laws biased against men & their family members.
    5. Families, the basic units of society will suffer. Bonds of love & care may be replaced by those of selfishness, fear & hatred.
    6. Common people will suffer.

     
  4. Anonymous

    dear Mr. anonymous,
    when if you seek to draw a correlation among families well being and women being restricted to the household to promote that end, let me humbly point out that this goes against your own prescribed maxim of equality of opportunity. a families well being should ideally be as much a concern for the man of the house as that of the woman’s folk. and as far as reservation is concerned, let me cite an interesting fact. our constitution actually allows for one third reservation of seats for women even within the quota for socially backward classes. so this means that it really isn’t the question of merit based judgement at all. practically no matter how much we shout about women’s equality and the associated gibberish, it remains a plain fact that women are at a marked disadvantage when compared to their male counterparts in every field irrespective of meritoriousness. this bill has a simple aim to neutralize the gap in footing.it is not anti-men, it is pro female….(unless of course you draw a direct inference of the latter implying the former! pardon me if i am breaking into the male bastion of egoistic chauvinism.)

     
  5. Sanjeev

    Now we have two anonymous posts! To the one immediately above let me suggest that this whole business has nothing to do with male chauvinism or any other such facet of society (no matter how real it may be or appear to be).

    My principle in opposing womens’ reservation is simple: There is only ONE way to equalise opportunity: through education. All other ways are anti-freedom. I have written extensively on that, and suggest that it should be our key focus. Once opportunity is equalised let the best people be rewarded in each field. I find all reservations totally incompatible with a free society.

    Why not have women join that political party or group that gives them priority (e.g. Freedom Team of India)? Why continuously seek reservations? Why be a beggar, a supplicant. To get through a reservered post is demeaning. I would like everyone to have resepct themselves first. Stand up on your own feet.

    Change the world on your own merit. Join those who respect you ON YOUR OWN MERIT. Join the Freedom Team of India.

     
  6. Surya

    Reservation is immoral in itself for sure. But political reservation is even worse in that it violates a crucial contract of democracy. A citizen of a democratic country should be free to elect whoever he wishes to represent him. If there is a person whose views I admire and who I wish to represent me, how can an arrangement that refuses me a fair chance of sending him to the Parliament, just on account of his gender or caste, call itself democratic?

     
  7. Raj

    Your freedom policies tend to be liberal, even to potential harmful aspects of the society as well. If the people of a particular section of the society are hindering in some or the other ability as others, such inability should be seen as gaps and faults, which aid to their further degradation. Thus, the only way to let them be free is to give them the powers which they, in the general platform, lack. On another matter, your freedom policies for individuals apparently is only meant for only those who already are powerful enough to strive alone with little external support.

     

Leave a Reply

p-4j9aGt2RSyXeB