own community. They lose faith in life itself what Jayaprakashji wrote in 1978 still holds true. According to him ‘it also converts them into a parasitic class which perpetuates and even intensifies the poverty of the masses. The system has failed to promote individual growth. It also becomes more of a hindrance than a help to bring about an egalitarian transformation’. If this be true, can we say that we have basically departed from the Macaulay tradition? And, if this is what our education has done to us, one may well ask, is not no education better than bad education?
One may admit—that for this situation education alone is not responsible, During the last forty-three years we have pursued a model of economic development that has led to the creation of two Indias—one of the rich, the other of the poor. A new privileged class has come into being. It holds monopoly over political and economic power and sources. of wealth. It controls culture and education. It is firmly established every where. It is this class whose interests our education is made to serve. The result is that as in economy so in education, two parallel systems have come into being– one for the rich, the other for the poor. No wonder, a divided education finds itself totally devitalised, and incapable of meeting the challenges of independent India's national life. To the rise and growth of this class, holding sway over the whole range of national affairs, can be traced most of the ills we are faced with— the erosion of social and moral values, weakening of democracy, the partisan character of our development,