PASSAGE-1

 While tribal areas have been ‘preferred investment destinations’, given that they are rich in natural and mineral resources, ironically, tribes have been considered obstacles to development. The high demand for natural resources in tribal areas has inevitably meant the expendability of tribes and their way of life. This demand for one and the vilification of the other may seem contradictory. However, a deeper analysis reveals the embedded logic of instrumental rationality that objectifies nature and humans as a means for furthering capitalist accumulation.
The tribal question is inextricably tied to the demands of instrumental rationality, of how to extract tribes from their way of life and assimilate them into the industrial fold. In this mechanistic view of the world, nature and humans are not sovereign entities but the means to a predetermined course of human evolution and progress that substantiates the superiority of the western mind and civilization. Tribes have been at the receiving end of this form of thinking and acting upon the world that has been the bedrock of industrial growth and expansion. The larger end is the ‘disenchantment of the world’, of capitalising on everything and desacralizing nature and humans of any sublime quality. The focus is on eliminating all conceptions of life and ways of thinking encumbering this realisation. This process of elimination has been a protracted one. It involved colonising territories and people but, more importantly, universalizing fallacies of various kinds that deprived them of any redeeming quality and attributes.

Q1) Based on the passage and passage alone, which of the following are not  responsible for the dispossessing and marginalisation of the tribal communities  ?

What is the main paradox discussed in the passage regarding tribal areas and tribes?

According to the passage, what does the process of elimination involve?

PASSAGE-2

In the Indian context, it is crucial to recognize that ‘digital bodies’ (images, information, biometric data) of poor children are at greater risk of being used as biocapital for large datasets, globally sold for profit. There are serious concerns of dataveillance becoming a central motive of international aid for health and education to the Global South, where vulnerable children can become objects of sympathy for humanitarian intervention. Funding agencies pitch these as technical innovations for accelerating digitization of beneficiary bodies, for accuracy of digital records in rural locations, with no attention to issues of social justice or collective action. ‘Khushi Baby’, a digital necklace for infants, promoted with prestigious innovation awards by UNICEF and other international organizations, influential universities,  international media and corporate foundations. It was trialled in rural Udaipur and modified for enlarged technical dataveillance of infants, mothers, care givers, and health workers, also in other countries. A host of advanced technologies added on, has morphed it into a huge system of surveillance with facial biometrics – for tracking child and maternal health, attendance of health workers, data about chronic diseases, and even ‘conditional cash transfers, ration cards, emergency medical response and hospital re-admissions’. Concerns have been raised recently on the weaponization of digital health records by the police making sweeping arrests in Assam for child marriage. The unequal power dynamics of these technologies and agencies intruding on children’s bodies, exacerbate the dangers of data colonialism and the lack of data privacy.  There is an urgent need to stop this mining, disposing and morphing of little selves, in the name of education, health or digitization.  One must  question the ethics of unpaid labour of the tiny wearer carrying the device for free, while the archives capitalize on its enormous commercial value. Curiously, the technological innovation revels in its capitalizing of people’s lack of knowledge, with the savvy description of ‘a culturally tailored piece of jewellery’ where the black string of the pendant is believed by many tribal communities of India ‘to ward off evil spirits’.

 Q4) According to the passage, what ethical concern must one raise regarding the digital necklace for infants, 'Khushi Baby'?

How does the passage describe the technological innovation behind 'Khushi Baby'?

What is the main concern raised about international aid for health and education in the Global South?

How does 'Khushi Baby' capitalise on people's lack of knowledge, as mentioned in the passage?