If politicians genuinely stand by the principles of social justice they often preach, it would only be fair for them to embrace the system they defend so passionately personally. One way to do this would be to seek medical treatment exclusively from doctors who secured their seats through reservation quotas, regardless of their marks or ranking in medical entrance exams. If they truly believe that merit is secondary to representation, then their own lives and health should reflect that conviction. This would demonstrate not just words, but a living example of the equality they wish to promote.
However, in reality, we often see the opposite. When it comes to their personal safety, the education of their children, or their healthcare needs, many leaders quietly choose the very best—private hospitals, elite schools, foreign universities, and highly qualified specialists. Merit, skill, and proven track records suddenly matter a great deal when their own well-being is on the line. This contradiction exposes a troubling truth: while the public is told that representation is more important than competence, the policymakers themselves rely on competence when the stakes are personal.
The larger point here is not to attack the principle of social justice, but to highlight the hypocrisy in its selective application. Suppose the leaders who design these policies are unwilling to subject themselves to the same standards they impose on the public. In that case, it raises the question—do they truly believe in these policies, or are they simply political tools? If merit doesn’t matter for the nation’s critical jobs, then it shouldn’t matter for their own lives either. Anything less is a double standard that undermines both public trust and the credibility of the cause they claim to champion.
However, in reality, we often see the opposite. When it comes to their personal safety, the education of their children, or their healthcare needs, many leaders quietly choose the very best—private hospitals, elite schools, foreign universities, and highly qualified specialists. Merit, skill, and proven track records suddenly matter a great deal when their own well-being is on the line. This contradiction exposes a troubling truth: while the public is told that representation is more important than competence, the policymakers themselves rely on competence when the stakes are personal.
The larger point here is not to attack the principle of social justice, but to highlight the hypocrisy in its selective application. Suppose the leaders who design these policies are unwilling to subject themselves to the same standards they impose on the public. In that case, it raises the question—do they truly believe in these policies, or are they simply political tools? If merit doesn’t matter for the nation’s critical jobs, then it shouldn’t matter for their own lives either. Anything less is a double standard that undermines both public trust and the credibility of the cause they claim to champion.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel