Whether we like it or not, reservation is here to stay. If anything, the present political establishment is hell bent on widening the reservation net, even to the extent of including the private sector. Private enterprises will bristle at this idea, and denounce it as a regressive policy that will kill all viable business; but it is almost certain that if the politicians, cutting across party lines, close ranks-and there are already indications that they will-the new proposed policy will certainly see the light of the day.

There are compelling reasons why politicians will hold the common ground on the issue of extending reservation, despite their ideological differences. First, Indian democracy has transformed from being a monopoly of a single national party to a musical chair of coalition politics, a qualitative change that reflects the growing fragmentation of voters' allegiance to political parties. In this circumstance, political parties will promise any populist, albeit insensible, carrots to the unpredictable voters, and win their fickle support in the elections. This trend will become more pronounced as elections approach.

Second reason is that, those political parties who won't support the populist policies will lose votes, and so they will be left with no choice, but to fall in line. If they dare protest against the populist programmes, rival political parties will label them as anti-people, anti-poor or saboteurs, and sadly, the voters will buy that argument. Therefore, any political party worth its manifesto will desist from openly attacking unsound policies of the government, even if they prick its conscience.

One such gimmick increasingly employed by the political parties is to lure target voters into the reservation bracket, in the hope of securing their support in the elections. The crux of the matter is this: quota system will remain in place at least for the foreseeable future, and will continue to play a major role in educational and professional advancement of those who benefit from the system.

With the qualification articulated above, at least 5 myths about reservation policy can be exploded:

1. We, the Manipuris, don't need reservation

This is at best a feel-good illusion that some among us would love to shout from the rooftop. The fact is that ours is a poor state; our education system is in tatters; our economy is a joke; unemployment is endemic; and we all are rearing to lap up any opportunity of employment that may come our way--within the state or outside it. We have no doubt about our ability, but it is stifled by the existing socio-economic realities in our society, the most serious being income disparity and lack of access to quality education. These place us at great disadvantage when competing with our well groomed counterparts from the mainstream.

But, this is not to say that we are intrinsically incompetent--as the many success stories of Manipuris in the Civil Services examinations have testified--but, that our nurture, rather than our nature, is putting brakes on our march forward. This is evident when we look at the profile of the Manipuris who have made it to the top: almost all of them were born into well heeled family who could afford to pay for the best education that is available in the country, or even abroad.

An example would suffice: James Michael Lyngdoh*, the poster boy of anti-reservation Manipuris, who cleared the Civil services examination as a General candidate, is a Princeton and Harvard product; and his father was a reputed Judge in Meghalaya. How many of us have that kind of privileged pedigree? Incidentally, but not surprisingly, most of the people who oppose reservation for the Manipuris turn out to be fat cats of our society themselves. For them, of course, reservation is not necessary.

2. Affirmative action lowers competitive spirit

As increasing number of social groups get included in the SC/ST category, the odds for the beneficiaries of affirmative action have also become higher. Just the fact that a person belongs to a beneficiary group doesn't guarantee him success in life's many challenges-- be it an entrance examination for professional courses, or a public examination for jobs. For every successful ST/SC fellow, there are his other thousand fallen brethrens, all armed with the same quota advantage. And one aspect that opponents of reservation fail to realise is that a beneficiary has the option of forfeiting the quota advantage--if he has the confidence--by competing as a General candidate, which is exactly what JM Lyngdoh did.

Nobody is putting a gun on the head, and ordering the beneficiaries to avail themselves of the quota system if they have the confidence and choose to match their caliber against the General candidates. If some beneficiaries ignore reservation and compete as Generals, sacrificing their chance of securing the seats/jobs as a reserved candidate, they might actually enhance the success rate of their less endowed brethrens. But blind rejection of reservation policy only serves to hurt the interest of the whole community, and denies it of opportunities for greater social mobility, which is the ultimate aim of the affirmative action.

3. It's humiliating, and dents self-esteem of the beneficiaries

For the beleaguered Manipuris, who have been reeling under a long spell of unemployment, what can be more moral boosting, uplifting and a better reason for pride than getting a secure, decent job, and finding their own place under the sun? Though similar statistics is not available for our subject of analysis, a 1995 Gallup poll in USA revealed a particularly vital fact that debunks the myth of inferiority complex of the beneficiaries of affirmative action. The poll asked employed Blacks whether they had ever felt others questioned their abilities because of affirmative action. Nearly 90% of respondents said no. There remains a big chasm between what opponents of affirmative would like to believe--or would have us believe--and the stark reality.

4. We should scrap the reservation policy, and instead, address the real socio-economic issues

As has been already pointed out at the outset, reservation policy is not going to go away anytime soon. Wouldn't it be more pragmatic, then, to embrace and reap its benefits than to attack the system with affected scruples, which will cut no ice? Addressing the real social-economic root causes of inequalities in the society is the best solution, but this is a proposition of Utopian proportion. That venerable gentleman, Karl Marx, propounded his theory of socialism and communism to solve this problem of inequality in society by redistribution of wealth--or rather having the State control the means of production and the surpluses.

Russia was the only nation that implemented this theory with a semblance of success for some time, but soon collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. China cannot be called a communist state; it is neither capitalist, nor pure socialist, but straddles the best of both the world. Look at Indian democracy, it is run by greedy politicians in cahoots with criminals, rapists and illiterates; her Parliament and state legislatures shelter several hundred people with criminal antecedents. Neo-liberal forces are gaining more ground and power. Poor Karl Marx, his daydreams will become true only in the realm of fantasy. What is not fantasy is this: affirmative action will level the field in educational admissions and employment. Secondly, it was not intended as the permanent/cure-all solution for all the problems of our society. Its brief concerns only with education and employment.

5. Quota system hasn't delivered the desired results

Passing judgment on something that we have no direct involvement can be tricky. How can we gauge the efficacy of a pill without having tried it ourselves; second hand inference is misleading and is the favourite preoccupation of arm-chair analysts. How can the Meiteis know the potential impact from accepting the SC/ST status? Nevertheless, there is a legitimate fear that the benefits of quota system will be appropriated by a few people among us belonging to the crème la crème of our society, thereby reducing the system to a sham that leaves those actually deserving the benefits with the same disadvantage.

This is a minor loophole in the reservation policy in its current form that needs to be plugged. "Creamy layer" should be categorically defined and excluded from the purview of the quota system so that interests of the target group are safeguarded and benefits trickled down to them. If at all we have to strain our voice at its shrillest peak, then we should raise this issue of reform, instead of drowning the voices of the underprivileged for justifiable state support. With this small alteration in the present form of reservation norms, the Meities will gain significantly in terms of jobs and access to prestigious institutions. And maybe, after a generation, we will be in a position to dispense with the preferential treatment of the state, and carve out our future on our own and in style. Even in the US, where the anti-affirmative action sentiment is widespread, the courts have recently ruled that affirmative action will remain in place for the next 25 years (Grutter v Bollinger, 2003).

So, for a disinterested analysis of the pros and cons on reservation for the Manipuris, the first requisite is that we should shed our pride and ego, which often comes disguised in one form or the other in the discourse. Opponents of reservation for the Manipuris should thank their luck for their confidence and royal upbringing, but it is unbecoming of a true Manipuri to ruin others' chances at greater social mobility. Since we are not cabinet ministers in the Union Government who have the powers to scrap the policy altogether, any meaningful discourse on reservation issue should be conducted on these two aspects: will the benefits of reservation be real, and if so, shall we press for our inclusion in the beneficiaries' list? I have no doubt that the hardened anti-reservation snobs would say "no." I vote "yes" on both the questions. Cast your vote too.

*James Michael Lyngdoh, the CEC of the Election Commission of India, is a Khasi from Meghalaya.

Browse through the ongoing debate in Manipuri Diaspora about this issue here