Universities and the Right to Debate

                                                Universities and the Right to Debate

Do I dare to write this article? My mind has been in a swirl since the JNU row started. I neither have all the facts to display Solomon’s wisdom in judging who is right and who is not nor the courage to take sides on this controversial issue without being flogged by one side or the other. Every conflict, every controversy needs to have two contending issues; otherwise there cannot be any dispute. Hence it is best to leave it to the investigation team to find out the truth as to who was behind the anti-national chorus indulged in by a small group of slogan mongers. Yet the events that are daily reported and shown on the national TV channels create a sense of unease and disquiet in the minds of all those who are patriotic  though they do not wear patriotism on their sleeves. It is surprising that the police was on the dot at the venue from where the anti national slogans were emanating. Did the police have prior information that they suo moto descended on the University campus or did they come on the request of University authorities?  I have served Delhi University both as Principal of one of its constituent colleges and Dean of Students Welfare besides teaching for four decades. Not even once was there a law and order situation that warranted police presence and action. Students who at times engaged in shouting and entering the Dean’s office and resorting to breaking the chairs were treated with good humoured indulgence towards their young and spirited action. I used to call the TV crew into the room so that these young agitators got free photo-ops and they would go away soon after that. There have been many occasions when these students had returned late in the evening after 6 to my room with apologies saying that nothing was intended against us but they had to do so at the bidding of their political masters. “After all, we are the student wing of the party” they would say in defence.

No student is anti national even if s/he were to disagree with the policies of the establishment.  Youth by nature has the tendency to rebel against anything imposed or anything that it regards as anti-youth. But this does not mean they are anarchic or unpatriotic. All of us have gone through that phase when we were university students and  questioned anything and everything that had a paternalistic rigour. We have rebelled against  parental authoritarianism as much as that of the establishment till such time we crossed over to the other side. This is what Aristophanes(450B.C) had written in his play The Clouds where he talks about a Think-Academy run by Socrates who promises the youth to learn to think critically about all norms and conventions and to construct arguments heedless of authority. Socrates was criticized and punished as a heretic to question regimented views imposed in the name of tradition and to encourage independent thinking.

Nearly 2500 years later, we are still on the warpath with youngsters for starting a debate on capital punishment that has kept hanging since Afzal Guru’s execution. That debate has snowballed into an issue related to sedition against the nation.  Once again knives are out as to what constitutes sedition and how is it different from dissent and debate that go by the pejorative “subversiveness”.  Either we suffer from a loss of memory or lack of historical knowledge since we do not recall the  flower power of the late 1960s and the early 1970s that was a symbol of resistance of the American youth  to Vietnam war following the Gandhian path of passive non-resistance. Ten thousand youth from different American Universities joined this ‘Flower Power’movement, which by its name symbolized ideals of universal humanity, peace and harmony. So was the Velvet revolution in Eastern Europe, a student led peaceful pro democracy protest that overthrew forty-one years of authoritarian communist rule in Czechoslovakia in 1989.

Young adults are always in the vanguard of movements that herald a change in society and politics. They debate, deliberate, dissent and out of this churning, they emerge as mature adults. University provides the platform to discuss and interrogate traditions and unchallenged mores of society. But in India universities have become handmaids to politics. Every political party makes use of universities and colleges to influence the young voters. Students’ union elections are regarded as a mini referendum on their party’s popularity but unfortunately they are bereft of  political ideas and ideologies. In some universities party leaders address the student community extolling the virtues of their respective parties. Students have also come to look upon these elections as the stepping stone for their movement upwards in the political hierarchy. The result is universities have become a hotbed for political clashes. The Lyngdoh Committee (Lyngdoh was former Chief Election Commissioner) on University/ college elections has made it clear in its recommendations that student elections and student representations have to disassociate from political parties(6.3). It is this political affiliation that is at the root of all that has happened in JNU and all that had happened earlier in other universities. Having been at Delhi University for forty years, I affirm that student union elections in a majority of  women’s colleges( exceptions are just a few) have always been  fought on issues related to the institution and no political campaigning have ever taken place till date.

Students come to the University to learn and they learn as much from the classroom as from the debates and dialogues within the campus. The argument that students are the future leaders makes sense if they are allowed to study, learn and are exposed to different points of view to arrive at their own mature conclusion. Universities are often labeled ‘ Liberty Halls ‘ where the right to express is recognized as the inalienable right of the student. Only after completion of their graduate programmes can they attach themselves to a political party of their choice. What is happening today is students are not given the time and opportunity to think and mature, but are lured into joining political outfits to enhance their future prospects. It is a moot question as to how many new ideas are germinating from the universities whose primary function is to generate ideas.  We are back to pre-Socrates world where students had no choice but to implicitly pay obedience to what is told rather than question, argue, debate and accept or reject it.

 I make this plea to the universities to adopt Lyngdoh’s recommendation in letter and spirit and disallow entry of political groups to contest elections. The mass youth movement against Vietnam war was the result not of any political influence of the Democratic or Republican parties, but of a natural surging of protest in the name of humanity. So was the Velvet Revolution. Vaclav Havel became president only after Czechoslovakia was liberated. Let our universities take the lead in nurturing young minds and protecting them from being brainwashed and prejudiced for or against a political party. If political leaders stop interfering with the academic institutions, the university remains true to its objective to enable students to develop critical thinking which forms the basis for discerning judgement. The Universities should aim at building thinking skills which, according to John Dewy would benefit the individual learner, the community and the entire democracy. In the UK school system, critical thinking is offered as a subject at the A-level examinations, to make students think critically about, and analyze issues on their deductive or inductive validity, and bring forth their own arguments. It also tests their ability to analyze certain related topics such as credibility and ethical decision-making.

JNU row can prove an important milestone for higher education in India if Universities implement Lyngdoh’s caveat against political interference in the university elections. Some of the women’s colleges have organized open debates on the model of American election debates  and this is a healthy practice where the students are told not to descend to  low levels of name calling and name bashing, and where they are expected to address the genuine difficulties faced by the student community. It is time for our universities to set a model code of conduct of elections and enable the contestants to focus on issues relevant to the students with respect to curriculum, examination system, reforms in pedagogy, facilities in the campus for self development, placements etc.

Liberal Arts course as a compulsory course in the second and the third years ( and not in the first year)should be introduced where the study of political ideas, ideologies, economic theories that stress on equity and development, historical narratives, sociological concepts, study of world religions, Literature and Humanity  and the relevance, influence and negative fall-outs of Science and Technology will enable students to have a breadth of understanding of issues that have a bearing on Man and Society. Our universities have to come forward to provide quality education cutting across disciplines to make a wholesome individual of the student. General lectures should be in place for an hour and a half thrice a week either before lunch break or at the end of the day by leading academicians and these should be supplemented by uploading these lectures along  with additional study  material and reference books to enable students to study on their own. Debates, discussions, paper presentation and seminars on related topics should be a part of evaluation of the students. This calls for a dynamic curriculum on Liberal Studies. The lectures can be arranged in different colleges on specific days and specific time to enable students from cluster colleges to attend.

We are sitting on a goldmine which is our youth force. Let us not mistake it to be a powder keg to explode. If the goldmine is kept under lock and key,it will be of no use. There will be no power to drive us in the future. If it is properly nurtured and utilized, it will be our future asset. By working on impressionable minds, by appealing to their emotion and clouding their reasoning faculty, we will be destroying our future asset. University is a place that allows for diversity and through free exchange of contesting ideas and ideologies, it promotes catholicity of thought and a high degree of multipolarity in social and economic order. But if we incite it and set aflame the powder keg, we are in danger of intellectual, liberal, social and emotional extinction. Hope Universities wake up to usher in a new order of thinking, opening up of deep and sweeping vistas of the future and a well informed and knowledgeable youth force that will be truly and meritoriously a “made in India” product.