Some opponents of extension of "reservations" in India have voiced a preference for what in the United States is called "Affirmative Action". Historical differences in the two societies, one originating in slavery, the other in castes, explain some of the varied policy preferences. Americans tend to oppose quotas because they were used to exclude Jews in the past. Quotas are rooted in Indian colonial and post-colonial experience. The Gandhian era of the Indian National Movement and American experience in fighting fascism and later communism reduced the resistance of their respective majorities (Hindu and white Christian) to give benefits to the minorities. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked a crucial shift from the negative policy of outlawing discrimination to a positive one of actively increasing minority participation in education and employment in America. Some American businessmen actually aided affirmative action because it lowered wages by increasing the pool of eligible qualified recruits. Affirmative action applied in the United States to both public and private employment from the beginning, while in India it provided quotas only in the public sector until 2006 because of its importance in a semi-socialised economy until 1991. Another reason is the relatively large size of the informal sector in India, to which quotas would not apply.

Both countries have experienced an expansion of various eligible categories, which has stiffened resistance by those who are ascriptively not eligible. "Compassion fatigue" has set in both countries which leads to electoral pressures to undo or terminate both kinds of programmes. Opponents point out the injustice of continuing the benefits to the "creamy layer" of the generally disadvantaged groups. Long duration of such programmes also arouses opposition as they become a vested interest. Since it is a less blatant "zero-sum-game", affirmative action is more likely to persist and produce the desired results.

As India plunges into a debate over another extension of "reservations" for "Scheduled Castes and Tribes and OBCs" into the private sector and postgraduate higher education, some opponents have voiced a preference for what in the United States are called "Affirmative Action" policies on the mistaken assumption that they are purely voluntary. This paper will try to clear up some misunderstandings of the two types of policies and relate them to the differing social and political circumstances of the two countries.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION VS. RESERVATIONS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR: THE UNITED STATES AND INDIA,eligible, sector, United, States, countries, experience, employment, increasing, opponents, policy, programmes, reservations, benefits, categories, voiced, Christian, circumstances, Compassion, communism, affirmative, debate, desired, disadvantaged, discrimination, affirmative, experienced, fascism, Gandhian, Historical, Americans, minorities, misunderstandings, Movement