Demonizing Intellectualism in India is like punishing the youth for being curious
This opinion piece published in "Batayan" recently is about the way JNU specifically and other central universities in general are being dismantled to squelch voices that disagree with the popular political narrative
http://www.batayan.org/Batayan-Vol14-2019.pdf
Pg. 78-82
Has one wondered why there has been such a mass exodus of students from India to other countries? Indian parents who lament that their children are immigrating abroad need to understand the prime reasons behind this tough decision. Those who seriously intend to pursue academics, especially in the social science and humanities fields don’t find too many options in India today. The few good universities remaining are also facing budget cuts and are being forced to align philosophically with the present political leadership in the country, to merely survive.
Higher education in India has seen better days and I was fortunate to witness that myself. I had learnt the ABCs of Political Science in my undergraduate college, studied the technical definitions of a range of political processes and regimes there but what they actually looked like when applied in a society is something I discovered in my Masters at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). For the first time, I was exposed to rigorous methodical investigation of social revolutions and political upheavals in the core courses. And also for the first time, I could ask questions that came to my mind without feeling awkward or self-conscious because I was in an environment where students were not judged because they were curious. My subject became a living, breathing entity, a real-life experience, a novelty in itself, and not just some stuffy textbook material I needed to memorize and print in examinations to acquire my higher education degree.
I remember how the professors at JNU did not generally give us class-room restricted examinations at the end of the semester. Instead we were encouraged to pick topics related to the courses and carry out in-depth secondary research. No one pressured us to finish assignments or attend classes. We simply did all that because we were genuinely motivated to hone our critical thinking. It was challenging at times but also invigorating and made us feel truly grown up, like our thought process and analysis really mattered in the real World.
There were other kind of challenges that irked some of our pampered selves though, like learning to survive in a hostel for the first time, enduring the hot, dry weather of Delhi and being served bitter gourd and lentil that smelled like burnt plastic for dinner, but all that had nothing to do with academics. Some of us would fall ill often, but that was all a part of growing our immunity to survive in the real World outside. Overall, the two years at Jawaharlal Nehru University taught me two important life lessons. First, to think critically and boldly. Second, to be open minded.
Last year, when I went back to JNU after sixteen years, I found myself in the same old dusty campus I had left behind. Much remains the same. The overgrown bushy vegetation crowding the walking trails, colorful posters adorning the walls of the School of Social Science buildings, a relaxed group of students playing gully cricket after class, folks stopping for cups of tea at the rickety food shacks, the usual rush to the libraries to collect or return books, the longish line in front of the Xerox machine, a few lone figures scattered on the steps of the Social Science Department staring at nothing in particular, lost in a World of their own. There has never been anything flashy about the campus or the students in it. Simplicity has been the only ongoing style since its’ inception. Visibly the two things that seemed substantially different was the lack of serpentine lines of students in front of the phone booths, as most students own a mobile phone now and the fresh sprinkling of red brick buildings, added here and there to accommodate the increased number of students in the campus.
As I strolled through the familiar landscape, my mind was extra alert, taking in the details and making note of the energy level in the campus, but nothing extraordinary caught my eyes. I had read so many articles and seen such disturbing videos of the JNU “sedition” row in the last two years that I had foolishly expected some kind of filmy riot to break out at any moment, but that did not happen. The campus remained calm and studious as always.
My initial reaction after reading the media articles about the 2016 row had been like many others. Why did the students have to kick up a useless fuss over Afzal Guru when there were so many other real issues in India? I had wondered. But since then I have had the time to ponder upon the significance of the episode. Perhaps the messaging was wrong, the slogans were somewhat unwise yet none of it was ill-intentioned, I realized over time. Instead of nit picking on the semantics around the event, it could be far more constructive to scrape the surface and try to decipher what they were really trying to examine in the event that gave rise to so much unwanted excitement and presented the entire nation the excuse to ridicule a well-functioning university and reduce it to a petty cliché with “Desh drohi (anti-national)” and other colorful allegations pouring out of the mouths of an ignorant mass of people.
It all started with a cultural event in February, 2016. It was an art and photo exhibition primarily discussing the “struggle of Kashmiri people for their democratic right to self- determination.” It was organized by Kashmiri Indian students, and was supposed to be an important bridge between the two major types of status given to Afzal Guru--- a terrorist or a martyr? It was a thorny topic I agree, full of inflammable sentiments and bitter personal experiences, but the organizers had not predicted that it would snowball into such a major controversy.
What followed was pure political drama, aided by some irresponsible Indian news channels. Soon after JNU Students Union President Kanhaiya Kumar was arrested, slammed with Sections 124A (Sedition)[1] and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code. Investigations into the incident were carried out by the Delhi government and the University administration. Neither could find enough evidence against Kumar and declared that the controversial slogans came from outsider participants and not the students in JNU.
It was a lot of sound-bites, a half year of free picnic for journalists and aspiring politicians who milked the event and the university to the extreme. For those who are not aware of the politics around it, this event could seem to have arrived oddly out of the blue but, in a way it signaled the beginning of an end. The sedition row controversy brought JNU to the national limelight, but the process of disrupting the university from within had already began two years ago in 2014.
Romila Thapar, eminent historian and one of the founding members of JNU stated in a Frontline magazine interview[2] earlier this year that the founding Vice-Chancellor of JNU, G. Parthasarathi was clear about the function of the university. Its’ purpose was to impart broad-based knowledge, and even more importantly, to teach students to think independently. Furthermore, the founding VC had taken a stance that the university must be accessible to all those that aspire to be its students and are qualified to be so. These guiding principles in the founding of JNU were followed in subsequent years and gave it a somewhat different orientation from that of most other universities in the country.
The system worked mostly as I have personally experienced. There were no compulsory attendance rules, yet the classes happened on time and were well attended. The exams were held regularly, the grading system was transparent and fair, the relationship between the professors and the students was based on mutual respect and the willingness to collaborate rather than maintain a formal teacher student dichotomy.
It was not perfect always. There was bad infrastructure for the students to endure---lack of water and at times no electricity in the hostels, but the students learnt to shrug it off by saying, at such a subsidized rate, no accommodation will be perfect.
There were some sexual harassment cases, but GSCASH, the University’s Gender Sensitization Committee against Sexual Harassment acted as a tough watch dog and a strong deterrent for all those elements who thought they could get away with disrespectful behavior. The lesser known fact is that GSCASH was equally supportive of men who made complaints against women. Its’ agenda was to prevent and punish sexual harassment. It was neither feminist, nor radical in essence. Students on campus felt safe enough to venture out whenever they wanted, wearing whatever they chose. They could socialize with others without being attacked verbally or physically. Delhi did not feel safe, it still does not feel so, but JNU did.
The academic bodies in JNU like the Academic Council and the Executive Council were previously coherent. The decision-making process regarding the curriculum, the admission criteria etc., was democratic with open participation from students and professors alike.
The composition and the activities of these academic bodies have transformed in the last four years. Ever since Professor M. Jagadesh Kumar, the current Vice-Chancellor has come to office lots of such changes have come about. The JNU Executive Committee last year dissolved GSCASH and in its place appointed the Internal Complaints Committee. More recently, the Academic Council passed the resolution to start a new department called Center for National Security Studies to teach courses like “Islamic Terrorism”. The student union representatives were not allowed to participate in this council meeting and the teacher’s union office bearer who protested against the title “Islamic Terrorism” and suggested that at least they should rename it “Religious Terrorism” was told by the chair that his “objection” would be considered “later”.
There was an attempt earlier this year to make attendance compulsory not only for the Masters students but also for the MPhil and Doctoral candidates registered at JNU. That met with a strong resistance from students and professors who found the rule absurd as the university never really had any attendance problem.
The university has been constantly bombarded with change in rules without any academic logic and now with Kumar’s arrest and the following harassment of the student’s union, it is clear that JNU is being attacked in every way possible, given the slightest excuse.
The agenda is clear.
An institute that helps free thinking, makes students bold enough to criticize the government actions, is a threat to the authoritarian regime the country is heading towards. And if you are thinking that it is just Delhi, the center with a particular party in power that is stamping on the right to freedom of expression, think twice. If you rake history you will be surprised to find that such atrocities have taken place in regional states too, that too in those states that have had a very different political orientation than the present party in power at the center.
Anti-nationals, Terrorists, Naxalites, Maoists---these are just few of the common terms used arbitrarily for intellectuals who have spoken up against the government excesses and unfairness from time to time. And the root of all intellectualism, seem to be the universities, especially those that have strong social science departments. So, what does one do to stop them? Reduce them part by part in a hushed clandestine manner and then finally destroy them altogether.
The thought that might pop into your minds at this point may be on the lines of
“I understand why you feel a certain amount of attachment to your alma mater and would indulge in a passionate rant like this, but I did not study there, no one in my family did, so why should I care?”
One should care. If one is interested in nation building and the safeguarding of democracy, one should care. If one is interested in keeping their children from migrating in large flocks away from India, one should care. And here are the reasons why.
First, universities with strong social science programs are an asset. What many don’t realize is that they prepare the next generation of social work practitioners, policy makers and researchers with competencies to address our society’s multiple needs. Before the media and the ill-informed Indian public attacked the JNU students and researchers, calling them leeches living off public money while soldiers died defending our borders, they should have done their homework well (perhaps they did not do so because it was not “compulsory” just like the attendance in JNU). That could have informed them that JNU alumni are everywhere. They have been representing India nationally and internationally as civil servants, diplomats and renowned journalists. They have been participating energetically in social activism[3] and in the electoral process. Many have become elected officials and several have been the driving brain behind important national projects. A fun fact is that even the man behind the present central government’s “Make in India” campaign is a JNUite.
Second, central universities like JNU are special as they enhance diversity and teaches tolerance which is the exact opposite of what the popular brand of nationalism in India is propagating now. JNU welcomes all students, whether they are from metropolitan cities or small villages and that is much needed in a nation that has so many cultures and religions coexisting. It teaches young citizens empathy and compassion which is the only way to proceed in a multicultural nation like India. To proliferate a narrow definition of nationalism in a complicated mix of cultures and to close down universities that try to understand such a complex mesh of ideologies will only worsen the regional uprisings that have raised their heads repeatedly and result in an ugly civil war in the country.
Third, in today’s world where a barrage of information hits us in waves regularly through conventional media, social media and WhatsApp, it becomes difficult to separate authentic information from misinformation. Social science teaches one to see through conspiracy theories, rumors and political propaganda by asking the right questions and builds the ability to analyze the answer objectively.
Fourth, it is not just JNU that has been facing the heat, other universities like Delhi’s Ambedkar University, Hyderabad University, the Tata Institute of Social Science are all facing tremendous budget cuts. Political appointments at the level of Vice Chancellors have already started in many of these universities. Soon there will be no value of a teacher’s merit and competencies and that can only mean sub-standard higher education for an entire nation’s youth.
Fifth, another disturbing proposal is the revival of the Central Universities Act of 2009 which asks the central universities to follow a common admission procedure, common syllabus and transferable faculty which does not fit the needs of the large, heterogeneous population it is supposed to serve. “This proposal will minimize autonomy, narrow the space for innovation and create a teaching culture where creativity and critical thinking will be curbed,” said Zoya Hasan[4]. She is one of my favorite professors from JNU and is currently the ICSSR National Fellow at Council for Social Development in New Delhi. Gradually but surely, the country’s entire education system is changing as the textbooks get re-written and the syllabus is filled with mythology and religious texts. The central government has already quietly appointed a committee of scholars a year ago. The intention of this committee according to Reuters[5] is, “To use evidence such as archaeological finds and DNA to prove that today’s Hindus are directly descended from the land’s first inhabitants many thousands of years ago, and make the case that ancient Hindu scriptures are fact not myth.” This sounds as scary as the Nazi use of the “perfect Aryan child” propaganda to control Germany that ultimately led to the nation’s terrible downfall. The universities are the last bastion upholding freedom of thought and speech. Once they come down, the rest of the slide will follow soon and it will affect all of us calling India our motherland, whether we live there or outside.
While so many Indians are striding forward, contributing significantly to World politics, science and economy, back in India the education system that bolstered this generation of successful Indians, honed their skills and set them intellectually free, is being shackled in regressive chains. Ultimately, nationalists of all stripes in the nation must realize that India’s borders need to be defended not just against the enemies outside but also against alienation within the borders. To call the idealist youth engaged in building crucial cultural bridges as anti-national is not only legally absurd but also politically dangerous for a nation in constant ideological flux. Parents and concerned Indian citizens should note that the future of our country is the youth. By alienating and banning the youth for their ability and will to think independently just to serve the cheap needs of a political party is an act of “sedition” in the process of nation building, by itself.
[1] Sedition Law is a colonial law dating back to 1837, used to suppress Indians when they were protesting against the British rule before Indian Independence. Today it is loosely used to arrest anyone who makes any critical comment against the government. Previously, social activists like Binayak Sen, Arundhari Roy and cartoonist Aseem Trivedi have also been slammed by this law.
[2] “JNU’s questioning minds a problem for indoctrinators”-Interview of Romila Thapar by Ziya Us Salam for Frontline magazine, April 27, 2018
[3] “15 Noted JNU Alumni Who Have Proudly Represented India Nationally and Internationally” by Sampada Sharma, scoopwhoop.com, Feb 26, 2016
[4] “No ache din for higher education” by Zoya Hasan, The Hindu, April 2, 2016
[5] “By rewriting of history, Hindu nationalists aim to assert their dominance over India” by Rupam Jain and Tom Lasseter, Reuters Investigates, March 6, 2018
