Maybe it is so because the argument for reservation is also based on abusing upper castes. Of course there is going to be some bitterness.

“so can someone please give me arguments to make? ”

Not to defend Sandeep but questioning the motives, credibility of reservation seekers whose behavior qualifies well enough to evoke sobriquets that you term abuse is also an argument against reservation. Of course he is capable enough to argue his side so I won’t speculate further on that. Just as the case for merit is seriously undermined by questioning the criterion for judging merit but not merit as such similarly the case for reservation can also be debilitated by questioning its advocates’ motives, which is what Sandeep has done effectively imho.

There are different ways to argue against reservation. Questioning can go along- why is it needed? is/are the reason(s) really true? what are the measures to gauge those reasons? are they fair measures or biased for or against reservations? is the responsibility placed only on one side or do the reservation benfeciaries have any justification for its continual?

The strongest argument I believe is that of equality. Because it directly confronts the fundamental basis of reservation, that being of perceived or alleged inequity. Maybe you should look for writings of Dipankar Gupta, Pratap Mehta for arguments in mainstream media.

And, if you don’t mind, maybe you can share what you’ve been arguing with your peers or friends whom you consider equals and find challenged enough by their positions. I am particularly interested in knowing what their arguments were that you yourself thought or deemed trumping your known.

You are under no obligation to do so, to state the obvious, but it would be nice if you do nonetheless.

Cheers,

You can say something like this:

If the reservationists really believe in their goals that is the upliftment of every person in society and an equality of opportunity for social mobility, then they must accept contrary points of view which have always worked, and do work and will work to secure just that end.
One such scheme is school vouchers…which effectively subsidizes the consumer of education, and not a school. Any economically marginal person should be able to get a loan or grant from the government to choose any school he/she can be admitted to.

I’m jus sayinnnnn son…u havent been looking much have you??

http://www.deeshaa.org

Dig into his archives..he has solutions.

eh? what is the possible connection to reserv debate? why tamil? i want no special consideration for tamil or any language.

> Merit or Poverty are not that strong an argument because
> both of these factors can be fudged and misrepresented.

egg-zackly! that’s why i began searching for articles with worthwhile arguments with substance. unfortunately, too many people who criticize reservs are content only to abuse. like mister sandeep here, good example.

so can someone please give me arguments to make?

Merit or Poverty are not that strong an argument because both of these factors can be fudged and misrepresented.

A strong case against merit is that it is solely judged through objective exams which are aced by urban students who get coached in exam techniques and can score over real genius which should be the only criterion ideally. The sheer numbers overwhelm any western kind of system that we might think of implementing.

Poverty can be misrepresented in several ways due to rampant corruption.

Just curious, would you be saying the same when it comes to language preferences or would you want special consideration for Tamil then?

did that sir-jee. judged for myself that he makes no points, but only abuses. then hoorah, he confirmed the same for me. (”If you want arguments to counter your pro-reservation friends, you need to look at other sites”). i do not remember stopping you and others from making your judgements. please do, sir-jee.

what is lol material? the creative abuse and self-righteousness on this page, what else? “nation-rupturers”? hafta lol at that!

> That’s YOUR interpretation.

sure it is. never claimed otherwise.

your point: “poverty should be the chief criterion for deciding who is backward”.

good. so i just read operative parts of mandal report. poverty is actually a major criterion. got another one?

my case/arguments against reservations? most imp one i think is a trump for evrything else: merit. if we want merit, how can have reservs of any kind? whether for obcs, sts, marathis, anything? i want a country where only merit works, period. in my view there is no stronger argument aganst reservs.

but i told you, i have friends - old ones, good buds, for who i have greatest respect for. some of them argue with me about the necesity for reservs. (in some cases). because its from friends, they made me think to broaden my knowledge of the issue. so via goole and blogs, i visited many sites, and also ended up here.

only to find abuse. (yes, “bootlickers” also). ive read no post here which is anything else.

observing that is “snobbishness”? you are serious? all i can say is, lol again!

You really want to provoke me, don’t you?

>>ie: “i have no arguments. i just wanna call people names.”
That’s YOUR interpretation.

>>but then you mention the “points” you made. but if you have no arguments, what “points” have you made? all you seem able to do is abuse.
Tch tch! I said my intent is to call bluffs, and contrary to what you assume, I DO make points, not resort to mere name calling. What I meant by argument is of the scholarly kind for which I neither have time nor the inclination. Here’s a “point” which you’ve been sobbing for:

>>As I have argued earlier in this blog, poverty should be the chief criterion for deciding who is backward . How backward is for example, a Mayawati and her band of relatives, followers, bootlickers, et al?
I suppose this constitutes as abuse in your lexicon. Like other commenters said, why don’t YOU present YOUR case for a change instead of calling me an abuser.