By Ananya S Guha
There is a crisis in one of the country’s leading universities. People are talking about it, writing about it and of course reading about it. Many are not sure what has happened as there are different versions and interpretations. There is talk about videos being doctored with prime television channels as they are wont to do quickly capitalizing on the happenings in JNU for some of our gullible masses to swallow. The debate by and large is sharply divided. One group is castigating an entire university known for its great teachers and social scientists? The second category also very vociferous says that all who raised anti- Indian slogans must be punished by the law, JNU or no JNU. No one is quite sure as to what exactly these slogans were, and thirdly the interpretation of the word sedition is being furiously debated.
Now this raises pertinent questions as to the functions of a university, its pivotal role in enhancing learning, research, cultural activities and enhancing the much touted teacher student relationship which has remained in India at least an arcane myth. It is very well known that college and university campuses are highly politicised. It is a known fact that many students’ unions are affiliated to political parties, it is also proven that during students elections, politicians hobnob with their ring leaders openly in campuses- a practice which must be done away with. But the point is that if the teachers and Heads of Institutions openly, and shamelessly flout their political allegiances, how can the situation be different? Why blame the students only? Selections in university campuses are biased. Most of them take place after some recommendation either of a political leader, or someone who has got political clout.
Campus unrest in the country is nothing new. In fact a Vice Chancellor was shot dead in Jadavpur University almost four decades back, if not more. There have been unrests in Calcutta University, Presidency College, colleges in Delhi, more recently in Hyderabad and Jawaharlal Nehru University. But the ominous sign is that they are getting more and more politicised: caste issues, ideological issues, loyalty to political parties, and now if it really happened, the warning signal: Anti Indian slogans. The question is why? Who are at the helm of this? Are they politicians, are they student leaders, are they naxalites, extremists or what? Or to circumvent this, did this actually take place, or even if it did, does it reflect the mindset of students and teachers?
The teachers and students of JNU see this entire thing as a game plan to dishonour a University, where getting admission is tough, where there are eminent social scientists and thinkers, and a university which has a distinguished alumni. So a university as a whole cannot be tarnished because of that episode. But the fact is that even from last year public innuendoes were made against this university, calling it a den of iniquity and so on and so forth. This is patently unfair. Over the months this must have riled students and teachers and climaxed into something like what recently happened. We have to remember that herd mentality works in any community: religious, ethnic, and in this case the teacher student community, loosely an academic community.
The solution as I can see it lies in the extirpation of political behaviour in campuses, but this can happen only when appointments of academic staff is apolitical. And, if university campuses are made virtual battle fields to settle scores between political parties, and students join the fray, then the latter loses out most sadly. The political machinery can grab them, arrest them and make all kinds of charges against them, seditious or not seditious, as it happened in this case. A university or a college is a seat of learning, exchange of ideas may not always be acrimonious, nor should it only be, ideological ‘ based. Bertrand Russell proposed free thinking in universities and in abodes of learning where there is exchange of ideas ( not heated). In India there is too much of heat everywhere, no point of view is unacceptable, if it is not one’s own. There is no inclination to see another’s point of view mostly among politicians and sadly enough among the educated and even the academics. Surely many of India’s intelligentsia have not read the letters of Nehru, Vivekananda, Subhas Chandra Bose and his exchange of views with Mahatma Gandhi, or Tagore’s exchange of ideas with the latter. Dissent as we are all speaking of now is fine, but dissent also means assent- to accept another’s point of view, to see it, may not be necessarily to accept it. But there is no ‘ assent ‘ in India, it is only acrimony, hateful revenge and sullied attacks against individuals and groups. Sad, but true.