When Queen Victoria was presiding over not just the destiny of the United Kingdom, but over half of the World she was distressed by the old and worn-out coins in circulation in the great Kingdom. Such inelegant coins, she thought, brought down the status of her empire. She ordered new and exquisite gold coins to be minted and put into circulation. To her shock, she found that even after she had pumped into circulation millions of good coins what remained in circulation were only the same old and worn-out coins.

Bewildered she called in her Chancellor Exchequer, Thomas Grasham and asked him why was it that only bad coins continued to be in circulation. He answered her in one sentence "the bad will drive the good out of circulation", as when both bad and good coins are exchangeable, the good hides into hoards - and the bad circulates.Grasham's law operates in monetary economics till today. That is why people retain the good and new currency notes and circulate the soiled ones.

What is applicable to coins and currency is also applicable to humans in politics. This is what has happened in politics - not just in India, but all over the World. When democracy allows equality between good and bad, the society protects the good, and hides and hoards it, while it frees the bad which gains large public space. For, in a contest between the bad and the good, the rules are set by the bad forcing the good out of the contest. Such a process can only throw up mediocrity at the minimum and criminals at worst. That is why there is decline all over the World - with Clintons replacing Lincolns. The process of decline in India is equally visible whether it is TamilNadu in the South, UP in the North, Bengal in the East or Maharashtra in the West.

Yes, good men keep out of politics out of fear of the bad - and like good coins the society hoards and idles them. There are fewer goodmen in Parliament and Assemblies, even lesser in Ministries and positions. Ofcourse, there are few women in politics - fewer in Parliament and Assemblies, and even less in positions of power. This is because of the general conditions driving the good out of circulation - and making the bad circulate.

Only if goodmen can participate without compromise in public life, Women can participate with dignity. Because Women are better than men in equality, and they need better conditions than good men to participate in public life. If fewer women are in Parliament and positions, it is not because men dominate; it is because bad men dominate. Women shy away from politics as even good men shy away from the political process.

No wise father or mother would allow his daughter to participate in public life today - just as he would advise his good son to keep away too. Instead of focussing on how to increase the participation of the good - and reduce the domination of the bad, the issue has been focussed on how to increase the share of the Women and reduce the domination of men - as if the contest is between men and women, not between the good and the bad.

And thus comes the Women's Reservation Bill to provide that a third of the seats in Parliament and Assemblies will be reserved for Women. Will the women's Bill increase the participation of Women; or will it increase the participation of the bad among them so that the good among them, like the good among men, are driven out of polity. There is no answer to it in the Bill - and there can be no answer. And yet the issue has been converted into one between men and women. A Vajpayee and an Advani think that pushing the Women's Bill will fetch them the votes of women - and Mulayams oppose the Bill because it will abridge the public space available for his caste or community. This is the contest at the national level. It is not that some parties want women to be empowered and others do not want. The truth is that some are seeing votes in promoting the Bill - and some see in it loss of seats.

The status of Women in the society cannot rise with the number of seats they occupy in Parliament and Assemblies - any more than the status of men have risen by the participation of Mulayams and Laloos in Parliament. An Indira Gandhi then, and a Jayalalitha and a Sonia now, have not helped raise the status of Women in the society - despite the high political status accorded to them.

Even as the Indian politicians play with the concept of Women for political stakes, what does a nation building thinker like Alexander Solzhenitsyn think of Women ? In his famous work `Rebuilding Russia' (which he wrote even as the Communist Russia was collapsing) Solzhenitsyn set out an agenda for rebuilding Russia. An important part of the agenda concerned what he suggested for women. Solzhenitsyn said "Normal families have ceased to exist in our country - yet families are at the same critically serious maladies for the State, and the family has a fundemental role in salvation of our future. Women must have the opportunity to return to their families and take care of their children; the salary earned by men must make this possible". Because the Indian women have kept the families going, we do not understand their great role - and think that their role outside family is more important. Only if India declines to the level of Russia, Indians will understand the value of Solzhenitsyn's agenda for India. The Women of India have produced Shivajis and Gandhis, as mothers - but as Prime Ministers, and politicians, they managed to produce only Sanjay Gandhis.

In a society whose cream is driven by Anglo-Saxon values, there is no time for deeper contemplation based on what makes India functional; everything is settled by what the West thinks and does. Men of India have made a mess of Indian polity - and the Women of India have lost nothing by participating in it in fewer numbers. Now the flood gate is being opened for Women to dabble in politics. The nation could withstand the decline of men because the Women of India refused to degenerate. Their role models have been outside politics. The Reservation Bill for Women is an invitation for Women to follow men in politics - and deteriorate like men and perhaps given the low level of competition in politics, they may decline even faster than men.

The Women of India have kept the aged old `dharma' and upheld high family values despite the decline of public men. A family can sustain a bad father, but not with a bad mother. The women's Bill may do just the opposite of what it advocates say. Even the few good women in politics will yield their space to the bad among them - as the bad will eventu_ally drive the good out. And those women in politics will set the standards and become the role model for the rest. The Women of India today save India from the role model men in politics; when the very saviour will have the same role models to follow, who then will save India - and the young India which has hope only in the hands of the mothers.

In sum, the Women Reservation Bill is not a measure that will improve the status of Women in society; it is a will erode the dignity and values identified with Indian Women for thousands of years. This single step has the potential to do immeasurable damage to the Indian society - more than what the Moghuls or English could not.

Imagine two decades from now the likes of Mayavatis and Phoolan Devis becoming the role models for Indian girls - instead of Rani of Jhansi or Mirabhai. Will the Indian Women wake up and refuse to be lured by the sugar coated cyanide that is being offered to them by the politicians ? A big challenge indeed for Indian Womenhood.