The Moral Case for Reservation
After more than seventy years of Independence, India is still debating how to uplift its most marginalized communities. For decades, the state’s answer has been reservations. But have they genuinely helped the state uplift the marginalized group?
It is certainly true that SC/ST communities have faced historic injustices, both before and after Independence. The case for reservations was morally compelling, aimed “to correct centuries of exclusion and injustice.” In theory it was a “noble intervention”, an attempt to level the playing field.
However, over time, this idea has been reduced to a political tool. This was intended as a temporary measure to promote equity, but it has become a permanent feature of electoral politics. Instead of enabling true empowerment, reservations have been used to secure vote banks and thus entrench caste identities. Rather than dismantling the system, the reservation-based approach has kept it very much alive, as it benefits those in power far more than it helps those who are in need.
The system of caste based reservations in our nation traces back to the colonial and pre-independence era. The Government of India Act of 1935 introduced the concept of separate electorates and special representation for the “Depressed Classes” as an early acknowledgment of inequality in society. However, as we all might know, it was Dr. B.R Ambedkar, architect of the Indian Constitution and a Dalit himself, who gave us the strongest moral and legal foundation for reservations.
Dr. Ambedkar argued that political democracy without social and economic equality would remain hollow. Therefore, Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Constitution explicitly allow the state to make special provisions for the advancement of socially backward classes. Initially, reservations were only introduced for a period of ten years, with the hope that they would bridge the gap and make it unnecessary over time.
Real Outcomes of Decades of Reservation
Despite more than seven decades of pursuing affirmative action policies, the real-world outcomes of these policies and the communities targeted remain disappointing. They unfortunately have not produced anything significant or transformative.
To start with, the dropout rates at the secondary level remain extremely high
- SC- 18.6%
- ST – 24%
- General Category – 11%
What these numbers say to us is that, even before entering higher education or the job market, a significant proportion of SC/ST students exit the system early.
In higher education, though, the enrollment for SC/ST/OBC students was significant over the past decade. The students’ dropout rate in elite institutions is higher, too. Between 2016 & 2021, over 13.5K SC/ST/OBC students dropped out.
Many SC/ST students who enter elite institutions through quotas often come from under-resourced schools with poor foundational education. The academic gap becomes apparent once they enter highly competitive environments like IITs & IIMs.
If we consider the economic indicators, they are equally grim too. According to NSSO estimates
- SC Households Average Monthly Per Capita Consumption – 3859
- ST Households Average Monthly Per Capita Consumption – 3260
Why Reservation Perpetuates Caste
One of the most overlooked consequences of the reservation system is that it has deepened caste consciousness, rather than dismantling it. Quotas have unintentionally kept caste identities politically and socially relevant in our modern society, where ideally, people should identify themselves by their professions or class, not by the caste they were born into. Caste should have at least faded from relevance in urban spaces, but caste-based voting remains one of the most reliable tools in Indian electoral politics.
Instead of working to dismantle caste hierarchies, many leaders capitalize on them, creating a system where identity is more valuable than ability. Each election cycle, parties compete with each other to appease specific communities with promises of reservations or new inclusion under the backward umbrella. This has led to a race to the bottom, where castes are weaponized for political gain.
Why Reservation Fails
Reservations are not only technically flawed, they are fundamentally flawed too, as they violate two core principles, “individualism & equality under the law”. In a free society, each person should be judged based on their merit, capability, and character, not on an identity assigned at birth. Caste-based reservations do the opposite: they institutionalize group identity over individual autonomy, making opportunity a matter of inherited category rather than earned competence.
By allocating benefits based on group identity, the state interferes with voluntary, merit-based systems. It undermines the moral legitimacy of success for both the beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries alike.
As Rothbard writes in For a New Liberty:
Any redistribution of wealth or privilege by the state is morally illegitimate.
Real empowerment comes not from state intervention, but from economic freedom. When individuals are free to start businesses, learn trades, or enter jobs based on ability, they gain dignity, income, and independence.
The state often slows this down with red tape & state interference. Instead of expanding reservations, the focus should be on removing barriers, which in almost all cases are the state. Remember, the market doesn’t care about last name. It rewards you for what you bring to the table.
Conclusion
Reservations were meant to help, but they haven’t worked for most people. They are now used more for politics than for real change. What we truly need to focus on is reducing the state’s authority, which is the true burden on our shoulders.
