When Privilege Gets Help, It’s “Networking”; When Others Get Help, It’s “Quota”

 

When Privilege Gets Help, It’s “Networking”; When Others Get Help, It’s “Quota”

Unpacking the Double Standards of Caste Privilege in India

In India, the conversation around social mobility often reveals a stark hypocrisy. For those in the “general category” — a polite euphemism for upper castes — opportunities handed down through family ties, alumni networks, or social circles are celebrated as savvy “networking.” It’s seen as a natural extension of merit, hard work, and personal connections. But when lower castes, including Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC), access affirmative action through reservations or quotas, it’s frequently demonized as unfair favoritism, a handout that undermines true achievement. This double standard isn’t just rhetoric; it’s rooted in centuries of systemic inequality that continues to shape Indian society today.

This article delves into how upper castes justify their privileges as legitimate networking while vilifying quotas for others. We’ll trace the historical factors that built these upper-caste networks from ancient times and explore why lower castes have been systematically denied the same advantages. Drawing from historical context and contemporary analyses, the goal is to highlight how caste operates as an invisible force, often unacknowledged by those who benefit from it most.

The Myth of Merit: How Upper Castes Frame Privilege as “Networking”

Upper castes in India have long positioned their advantages as the fruits of individual effort and strategic connections, rather than inherited privilege. For instance, in professional fields like tech, finance, and academia, upper-caste individuals often leverage family legacies, elite school alumni groups, and informal referrals to secure jobs or promotions. This is praised as “networking” — a skill anyone can supposedly learn. Yet, as discussions on platforms like Reddit point out, these networks are rarely accessible to outsiders, and they’re built on generations of exclusivity.

A key justification is the narrative of “meritocracy.” Upper castes argue that their success stems from superior education and skills, ignoring how caste has historically monopolized access to these resources. In the tech industry, for example, upper-caste dominance in Silicon Valley and Indian IT firms is often attributed to talent, but research shows it’s largely due to early migration waves favoring those with pre-existing privileges like English education and urban connections.

This framing allows privilege to hide in plain sight: when a Brahmin or Kshatriya gets a leg up from a relative in a high position, it’s “using connections wisely.” Meanwhile, quotas are labeled as “reverse discrimination,” eroding standards.

This hypocrisy extends to everyday discourse. Upper-caste individuals might dismiss caste as irrelevant in modern India, claiming society is now “casteless” for the privileged. But as one analysis notes, this invisibility is itself a privilege — upper castes don’t “see” caste because it works in their favor, maintaining homogeneity in elite spaces like universities and corporations.

Studies from higher education institutions reveal that upper-caste students often view their advantages as earned, while perceiving lower-caste peers as undeserving beneficiaries of quotas.

Demonizing Quotas: The Backlash Against Lower-Caste Support

On the flip side, affirmative action programs — designed to counteract centuries of exclusion — are routinely attacked as unjust. The 10% quota for economically weaker sections (EWS) among upper castes, introduced in 2019 and upheld in 2022, sparked outrage from activists who argued it further entrenches privilege by benefiting those already advantaged, while diluting reservations for historically oppressed groups. Critics from lower castes see this as a “violation” of constitutional equity, yet upper castes frame it as a fair extension of economic aid.

The demonization often boils down to resentment: quotas are portrayed as “stealing” opportunities from the “meritorious.” In media and social commentary, lower-caste success via reservations is dismissed as tokenism, ignoring the barriers they overcome. For example, in science and academia, upper castes dominate due to inherited networks, but quotas for lower castes are blamed for any perceived drop in quality.

This narrative conveniently overlooks how upper-caste “networking” functions as an unofficial quota system, reserving spots through referrals and social capital.

In essence, when lower castes get institutional help, it’s seen as charity at the expense of others. But upper-caste networking? That’s just business as usual.

From Ancient Roots: The Historical Foundations of Upper-Caste Networking

The origins of this disparity trace back to India’s ancient caste system, formalized in texts like the Manusmriti around 200 BCE to 200 CE. This varna system divided society into four hierarchical groups: Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (traders), and Shudras (laborers), with Dalits (formerly “untouchables”) outside it entirely. Upper castes, particularly Brahmins, were granted exclusive rights to education, land ownership, and religious authority, creating early networks of power.

Over centuries, these structures evolved under various rulers, from medieval kingdoms to British colonialism. Upper castes adapted by aligning with colonial administrators, gaining access to English education and civil service roles. This built intergenerational wealth and connections: families passed down knowledge, property, and social ties, forming closed networks in bureaucracy, business, and academia.

In the modern economy, these networks persist. In Mumbai’s industrial era, upper castes used caste-based associations to secure jobs in mills and factories. Today, in global migration, upper castes dominate tech and professional diasporas because historical privileges like better schooling and urban access enabled them to capitalize on opportunities first. Economic studies show Brahmins enjoy higher education, income, and social connections, reinforcing their networks.

Caste-based segregation in cities further cements this, with upper castes clustering in affluent areas for mutual benefit.

These factors — rooted in ancient hierarchies and amplified through history — have created a self-perpetuating system where upper castes “network” effortlessly, often without recognizing it as privilege.

Barriers to Entry: Why Lower Castes Don’t Have the Same “Networking” Privileges

Lower castes have been systematically excluded from building similar networks due to entrenched discrimination and resource deprivation. Historically, they were barred from education, property ownership, and social mixing, enforced through untouchability and violence. This legacy persists: lower castes face poorer schools, underfunded institutions, and exclusion from elite networks.

Economically, caste restricts access to finance and entrepreneurship. Dalits and OBCs encounter discrimination in hiring, loans, and business partnerships, limiting their ability to form robust networks. In rural areas, landlessness and manual labor trap generations in poverty, while urban migration favors those with prior advantages — often upper castes.

Socially, caste homogeneity in elite spaces makes integration difficult. Lower castes report invisibility or outright bias, with upper castes refusing to collaborate or mentor. During crises like the COVID-19 pandemic, lower castes suffered disproportionately due to lack of safety nets and networks. Macroeconomic analyses estimate that caste discrimination reduces entrepreneurial potential and overall growth, as lower castes are denied the capital and connections upper castes take for granted.

In short, lower castes aren’t just starting from behind; the system is rigged to keep them there, without the “networking” luxuries afforded to others.

Toward a More Equitable Future

Recognizing this double standard is the first step toward dismantling it. While quotas provide essential redress, true equity requires addressing the invisible networks that perpetuate upper-caste dominance. As India evolves, conversations around caste must move beyond denial to acknowledgment — only then can networking become a tool for all, not just the privileged few.By examining these dynamics, we see that privilege isn’t always overt; it’s often woven into the fabric of society. For a nation aspiring to meritocracy, confronting caste head-on is non-negotiable.

Deep dive into Indian Savarna Merit Discussions Online

 

Deep dive into Savarna Merit Discussions Online

Oh man, here we go again with these Savarna upper-caste crybabies whining about “merit” like it’s some sacred cow that’s been slaughtered by reservations. As if merit was ever a thing in this country for the last 3000 years! Let me ask you: where the hell was this precious “merit” when temple priest positions were straight-up reserved for Brahmins? Generation after generation, locked in by birthright, no exams, no interviews — just “you’re born into it, congrats, you’re holy.” Sounds like the ultimate quota system, doesn’t it? But oh no, that was “tradition,” not nepotism or exclusion.

And don’t even get me started on education. Where was merit when lower castes were flat-out denied the right to learn? Beaten, ostracized, or worse if they dared pick up a book. For centuries, knowledge was hoarded like gold by the upper castes, while everyone else was told to clean their shit and stay in their lane. Now suddenly, when reservations try to level the playing field a tiny bit, these folks act like the sky is falling. “Merit is dead!” they scream. Bro, merit was never alive for most of India — it was a rigged game from day one.

But nowadays? It’s peak absurdity. These idiots blame EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM in India on reservations. There’s a pothole on the road? “Reservations did it!” Bridge collapses? “Damn those quota hires!” Someone leaves India for better opportunities? “Reservations pushed them out!” Hell, some poor soul tweets about going abroad for higher studies, and boom — some genius retweets it with “See? Reservations are killing talent!” Or lands a foreign job? “If not for reservations, more ‘meritorious’ people would stay!” Like, what? Do these people even hear themselves? It’s like reservations are the ultimate scapegoat for corruption, incompetence, and systemic failures that have nothing to do with it.

And let’s talk about what “merit” really means, because these clowns never stop to think. They peddle this fairy tale that merit is just pure hard work, like we’re all starting from the same line. Bullshit! Merit is shaped by privilege, plain and simple. Lakhs of rupees poured into coaching classes, fancy private schools, high-speed internet, world-class textbooks, tutors, libraries — stuff that lower castes and marginalized folks often can’t even dream of. Your “merit” is built on a mountain of resources handed to you on a silver platter. Ignore that (which is stupid AF), and what are you even implying? That only upper castes/Savarnas are hardworking and talented enough for success? That the rest are somehow inferior, lazy, or undeserving? Sounds suspiciously like what white supremacists spew in the US about Black people being “inherently lesser.” No difference, folks — these caste supremacists are just brown versions of the same toxic ideology.

Wake up, India. Reservations aren’t the villain; they’re a band-aid on a gaping wound caused by millennia of oppression. If you really care about merit, fight for equal access for everyone, not just your echo chamber. Until then, spare us the tears. #CastePrivilege #MeritMyth #EndCasteism

The Hidden Inequity in Reservation: Why Bihar’s Backward Classes Face the Toughest Competition

 In a country where debates around reservation policies are often politically charged and emotionally sensitive, hard data can be the clearest guide. A close look at Bihar’s recently released caste survey and its 2023 reservation policy reveals something surprising, even counterintuitive: despite receiving the largest share of reservation, Backward Classes (OBC + EBC) in Bihar are actually the most disadvantaged when it comes to per capita access to seats in jobs and education.

Meanwhile, General category, Scheduled Castes (SC), and Scheduled Tribes (ST)—despite having fewer total reserved seats—actually face less competition per seat within their respective categories.

This article breaks down the numbers to explain how and why this happens.

This data shows that nearly two-thirds of Bihar’s population falls under the OBC/EBC umbrella, forming the majority.

---

🪑 Reservation Breakdown (Bihar, 2023)

In November 2023, Bihar passed a landmark law increasing total reservation to 75% in public employment and education. 

This means General (unreserved) category students are competing for just 25% of total seats—yet that’s still more per capita access than any other group.

---

🧮 Let’s Do the Math: Seats per Person

To understand which category is most competitive within itself, we compare each group’s percentage of population to the percentage of seats available to it.

🎯 Interpretation:

• A ratio > 1 means more seats per capita than your population share (easier competition).

• A ratio < 1 means fewer seats per capita than your population share (harder competition).

So, despite having the largest share of reservation, the Backward Classes collectively face the toughest odds simply because they have to share it with a huge chunk of the population.

---

🧠 Why This Feels Counterintuitive

The public narrative often assumes that reserved seats automatically mean advantage—but this ignores how many people are competing for those reserved seats.

A General category candidate might be competing for fewer seats overall, but they’re also part of a much smaller population group (15.52%). Meanwhile, a BC candidate is fighting for more seats (43%) but against more than 4 times the number of people (63.14%).

---

⚖️ A Broken Equity?

This leads us to a simple but overlooked conclusion: seat distribution does not automatically mean equity unless it’s proportional to population. While Bihar has gone further than most states in trying to align reservation with caste numbers, the most populous category—Backward Classes—still ends up short.

Unless the seat-to-population ratios are brought into balance, meritorious candidates from backward groups will continue to be under more pressure to outperform their peers, even within the quota system.

---

🛠️ What Could Be Done?

• Subcategorization of OBC/EBC: Breaking them into more granular quotas, as suggested by several commissions, could balance internal disparities.

• Dynamic seat allocation: Using a model that adjusts seat percentages based on real-time population and demand data.

• Horizontal reservations within OBC/EBC to ensure representation of the most marginalized (e.g., Muslim OBCs, Most Backward Castes).

---

📌 Final Thoughts

This data-driven view forces us to rethink assumptions about reservation and merit. Equity is not just about allocating seats—it’s about fair access per person. And by that measure, Bihar’s reservation system, while progressive on paper, still leaves its largest and most disadvantaged population group at a competitive loss.

The system isn’t unfair because it gives “too much” to some—it’s unfair because it doesn’t give proportionately enough to the ones who need it most.

The Myth of Merit in India: Unpacking the Reservation Debate

 In India, the concept of "merit" is often wielded as a weapon in debates over caste-based reservations, particularly by those from the general category. Critics argue that reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) undermine merit by prioritizing caste over hard work. The underlying assumption is that general category students succeed solely through diligence, while reserved category students are "lazy freeloaders" who benefit unfairly. This narrative, however, ignores the structural inequalities that shape access to opportunities. Merit, as popularly understood, is not a neutral measure of hard work but a product of socioeconomic privilege, access to resources, and systemic advantages. This article explores why merit is not what most Indians think it is, using data to highlight disparities in wealth, education, and access to resources.

The Misconception of Merit as Hard Work

The popular notion of merit equates it with individual effort—hours spent studying, discipline, and perseverance. General category critics often imply that their success in competitive exams like JEE, NEET, or UPSC is due to superior hard work, while reserved category students rely on "undeserved" quotas. This framing paints SC, ST, and OBC students as inherently less capable, ignoring the broader context of their circumstances.

In reality, success in competitive exams is not solely a function of hard work. Access to quality education, private coaching, and socioeconomic stability plays a massive role. As the Supreme Court noted in 2022, “Merit cannot be reduced to narrow definitions of performance in an open competitive examination” and must be “socially contextualized” to account for systemic inequalities. The court emphasized that competitive exams do not reflect the “social, economic, and cultural advantage” accrued by privileged groups, which significantly boosts their performance.

The Resource Gap: Private Schools, Coaching, and Wealth Disparities

One of the most significant factors shaping exam performance is access to resources, which is heavily skewed along caste and class lines. General category students, who are disproportionately from upper castes, often benefit from better schools, private coaching, and tuition—resources that are financially out of reach for many SC, ST, and OBC families.

Private Schooling and Quality Education

• Disparity in Access: A 2024 study in Tamil Nadu revealed that 62% of upper-caste students attend private elite schools, compared to only 16% of SC and 25% of Most Backward Classes (MBC) students. Meanwhile, 60-70% of SC/ST students study in low-quality government schools, where English is often introduced only in the fifth or sixth grade. This early educational divide creates a lasting gap in foundational skills.
• Impact on Outcomes: Private schools offer better infrastructure, trained teachers, and exposure to English, which is critical for competitive exams. The National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) data shows that scheduled castes are the most educationally backward, followed by STs and OBCs, with large gaps in higher education enrollment compared to upper castes.

Coaching and Tuition

• Cost of Coaching: Preparing for exams like JEE or NEET often requires enrolling in expensive coaching institutes, with fees ranging from ₹1-2 lakh per year. General category students, with greater financial resources, dominate these programs. In contrast, SC, ST, and OBC students, who often come from economically weaker backgrounds, are less likely to afford such coaching.
• Wealth Disparities: The 2011-12 India Human Development Survey showed that upper-caste households have a median income nearly twice that of SC households and significantly higher than ST and OBC households. This wealth gap limits access to supplementary education. For example, a 2023 post on X noted that Dalits own only ~5% of rural land, reflecting their limited economic resources.
• Coaching Impact: Coaching institutes provide structured preparation, mock tests, and exam strategies, giving students a competitive edge. Without this, even hardworking SC/ST/OBC students face a disadvantage, as their preparation relies on self-study or subpar resources.

Socioeconomic Barriers

• Financial Strain: Many SC/ST/OBC students come from families with limited means, forcing them to balance studies with economic responsibilities. A 2016 study highlighted that SC/ST students often drop out between school and college due to accommodation costs, travel expenses, and lack of family support for higher education.
• Cultural Capital: Upper-caste students inherit “cultural capital”—social networks, communication skills, and familiarity with elite institutions—that enhances their confidence and performance. The Supreme Court in 2022 noted that this capital, including “access to quality schooling and tutorials,” is a privilege not available to marginalized groups.

The Structural Reality: Merit as a Product of Privilege

The “merit vs. reservation” debate often ignores how privilege shapes outcomes. Michael Sandel, in The Tyranny of Merit (2020), argues that meritocracy can exacerbate inequalities by rewarding those with pre-existing advantages. In India, this is evident in the dominance of upper castes in elite institutions:

• Faculty Representation: Only 6% of faculty in Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and 9% in Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) are from SC/ST/OBC categories, with 98% of academics in top IITs belonging to upper castes.
• Systemic Bias: A 2011 study by economists Ashwini Deshpande and Thomas Weisskopf found no evidence that reservations in Indian Railways reduced productivity, suggesting that diversity does not compromise quality. Meanwhile, private sector recruitment often favors upper-caste surnames, indicating caste-based discrimination.

The Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling on OBC quotas in NEET emphasized that “reservation is not at odds with merit but furthers its distributive consequences.” It argued that merit must account for “fortitude and resilience” in overcoming deprivation, not just exam scores. This reframing challenges the narrow view of merit as individual achievement.

The Reservation Reality: Addressing Historical Injustices

Reservations were introduced to correct centuries of caste-based exclusion, not to reward laziness. The Indian Constitution, drafted under Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, recognized that SC, ST, and OBC communities were denied basic rights, including education and employment. Data underscores the ongoing need for affirmative action:

• Poverty and Caste: Five out of six people below the poverty line in India are from SC, ST, or OBC communities.
• Educational Gaps: The Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER) in higher education for SCs (25.9) and STs (21.2) lags behind the national average (28.4).
• Discrimination: A 2023 article in Nature highlighted implicit casteism in academic institutions, where SC/ST students face derogatory labeling as “reserved” and experience mental health challenges due to discrimination.

Reservations provide a pathway for marginalized groups to access opportunities, but they do not level the playing field entirely. SC/ST/OBC students still compete in a system stacked against them, with fewer resources and greater social barriers.

Reframing Merit: Toward a Fairer System

The criticism of reservations as “anti-merit” stems from a flawed understanding of merit as an individual trait divorced from context. To address this:

• Economic-Based Criteria: Some argue for replacing caste-based reservations with economic criteria, but the Supreme Court in 1992 ruled that economic backwardness alone cannot define backwardness, as caste-based discrimination persists.
• Strengthening Access: Increasing scholarships, free coaching, and quality government schools for SC/ST/OBC students can reduce the resource gap. Programs like those for ST female students, which led to a 47.6% enrollment increase from 2017-18 to 2021-22, show the impact of targeted support.
• Challenging Narratives: Public discourse must move beyond the “merit vs. reservation” binary. As a 2023 post on X stated, “Merit is a myth” when social capital determines outcomes. Recognizing privilege is key to understanding true merit.

Conclusion

The idea that reservations undermine merit ignores the reality that merit itself is shaped by access to resources, wealth, and privilege. General category students, often from upper castes, benefit from private schools, coaching, and socioeconomic stability, giving them an edge in competitive exams. Meanwhile, SC, ST, and OBC students, despite facing systemic barriers, demonstrate remarkable resilience and achievement. Data shows that reserved category students often meet or exceed general cutoffs, debunking the myth of their “inferiority.” By reframing merit to account for structural inequalities, India can move toward a more equitable system where hard work is truly rewarded, regardless of caste or class. Reservations are not the opposite of merit—they are a step toward making merit accessible to all.