http://www.business-standard.com/common/news_article.php?leftnm=10&bKeyFlag=BO&autono=318163


T C A Srinivasa-Raghavan: Affirmative action and "non-identity"

OKONOMOS

T C A Srinivasa-Raghavan / New Delhi March 28, 2008

In India the inter se distribution amongst different groups of the
burden of righting historic wrongs has not been worked out properly.

One thing has always puzzled me in the debates about affirmative
action: how would economists deal with 'historic injustice', where
such injustice means systemic, persistent and socially sanctioned
discrimination against groups such as the blacks in the US or the
dalits here?

Would they assume it as a given? Would they, when asked to rectify
such wrongs, set about measuring the extent of such harm? Would they
break down the data after inventing it? Would they run regressions to
put forth some theory or the other? Or would they seek empirical proof
of such injustice, you know, "don't talk in the air, show me the data"
sort of thing?

An interesting variant of this approach is that slavery, for example,
did not harm the descendants of slaves. Proponents of this view argue
that but for slavery there would have been no descendants as they
would never have been born. So the question of historic injustice does
not arise.

This is known as the "non-identity argument", and is used by those who
argue, without malice or prejudice, that the idea of historic
injustice is all rubbish and that policy should not be based on it.
Since this view is not widely known in India, which has assumed
historic injustice to be a fact, I thought I would bring it to the
attention of readers.

The idea is rooted in the work of a British philosopher called Derek
Parfit who has specialised in issues relating to identity. One of
these issues was the distinction between personal identity and
psychological identity. Which would a person choose?

Parfit postulated that it was a mistake to view the former as being
more important. According to him, psychological connectedness of
memory and character was more important. I take it he meant that the
sense of being wronged as a group was different from actually being
wronged as a person.

In a recent paper*, a young scholar of law called Ori J Herstein of
the Columbia Law School has examined the non-identity proposition that
has flowed out Parfit's work. He poses the problem thus:

"We can affect the identity of future people, and many of our acts and
choices have this effect. This fact gives rise to the non-identity
problem, according to which acts that determine the identity of those
born in the future cannot harm or wrong those individuals since, had
the choice not been made, the individual at stake would not have
existed. Future people are better off existing as they are than not
existing at all."

So the issue to be decided really is whether historic wrongs can in
fact harm members of subsequent generations and if future people ever
have rights in relation to past acts. He says that "historic injustice
and the harms it generates are best understood as group harms. Claims
for historic justice can be grounded in harms currently living
individuals suffer as a function of the harms their group or community
currently suffers as a consequence of historic wrongs."

This is all very well. But perhaps some Indian scholar should apply
the ideas contained in Parfit's work and in this paper to the Indian
context. Here the idea of righting historic wrongs has been fully
accepted, internalised and legislated upon.

But the inter se distribution amongst different groups of the burden
of righting the wrongs has not been worked out properly. Thanks to
political pressures that arise from group politics, the burden has not
only been unevenly distributed, the tendency for uneven distribution
has become more accentuated as former historic wrongers, if you will,
claim to have been wronged and demand justice.

But what does this do to equity? Will some Indian scholar please find
an answer?

*Historic Injustice, Group Membership and Harm to Individuals
Defending Claims for Historic Justice from the Non-Identity Problem
http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=columbia/pllt

Reply via email to