Long before the Rohith hung himself in Umma Anna's hostel room in the University of Hyderbad campus, a relatively docile agitation had taken place in the IIT Chennai campus, some 6 months before. Though the instigator there was related to banning of the group (following the distribution of panphlets for a talk having divisive and political undertones, link here) it appeared as a miniature demo for what damage environments that allow such activities to flourish could do. During a casual discussion while cooling heels at a hotel, a friend of mine (now an officer with the IPS, so quite surely a better informed person that everyone including me) said that universities and educational institutions ought to be the place where young citizens (fresh from school) needed to acquire political understanding and maturity. It is the word maturity on which I'm in full agreement with. For it is political maturity which would enable to put forth political opinions and debate without resorting to divisive agendas or stark accusations against establishment/government. The latter is dangerous as it may lead to inflamed passions and cause uprisings leading to disruption of otherwise functional social ecosystem (university/outside society). Uprisings are not de facto a bad thing. It is well justified in situations of extreme oppression that intrude a persons basic needs and dignity. In this context it is not difficult to see why the pattern of outrage, not the outrage itself, following the occurrences at IIT and UoH is grossly disproportionate.
Firstly, such oppressive situations are not present in such institutes or any of the urban centres or mid tier towns in India (even the freedom of expression which is what these groups usually claim is denied). Next, most important, is telling evidence that political maturity is worryingly lacking in these groups. They tend to take their right of way and venture into questionable activities, and then grab the claim of oppression when measures are taken to prevent untoward incidents. Which is where the garb of peaceful agitation falls flat. The extreme polarisation inherent in society was sadly again witnessed through the two contrasting reactions in nationwide reactions to the hanging of Yakub Memon ( also sad that there is a sympathy group for accused in a deadly terror attack). Thus conducting a formal opposition inside such a campus for Yakub Memon was always going to be a sticky wicket. Not even on the question of its dubious colour of glorifying a terror accomplice. But on the question of it inviting a clash with the opposite unsavoury group of hooligans, ABVP. Naturally, it is for such reasons that such activities are typically disallowed in national and state level institutions (though there are formal provisions for it in some universities of arts. law etc).
The inevitable scuffle that happened revealed once again the biased, twisted and opportunistic mindset of the intellectual group and media houses. The point of contention was no longer the presence of anti social elements in campuses but rather that the human resource ministry (MHRD) had, in its view, shown peculiar urgency in recommending action on the complaint by labour minister Dattatreya (letter link) and the vice chancellors follow up action on the MHRD letter. They seethed with anger because the MHRD had sent 5 letters as a rseponse to the complaint brushing aside the possibility that all complaints need not necessarily be concluded in a single letter. ("why send 5 letters?", "why send 5 letters?" screams a visibly unbalanced Nidhi Razdan on NDTV). A pointed grouse was that the letter termed the activities extremist and anti-national. The extremist part can be kept aside given that the other half of the problem, ABVP are no less extremist. But the glasses of the intellectuals and media are so tainted that since the opposing group was the ABVP, the ASA (to which Rohith belonged) now transformed to noble revolutionaries and Rohith, a martyr. Nonetheless, glorifying someone responsible, at least partly, for the death of 257 common citizens and sorrow for India's most shining city, can be termed anti-national without too much error (" Who is Dattatreya to call him anti-national?" screams the same hag on NDTV). Whether Dattatreya's nationalist RSS extreme background aroused a misplaced urgency for him to take up this issue is a different matter, and I do not have a good opinion of him or most right wing Hindutva leaders even in the slightest in any case. But oxford dictionary defines anti-national as "Opposed to national interests or nationalism". And condemning the sentencing and execution of Yakub is by every stretch opposed to national interest i.e. national interest in that it goes at least a fraction, if only a very minor fraction, of the way towards some justice to the families and martyrs (yes, the word martyr is more appropriate here) of the 1993 blasts. Ironically, it is these same intellectuals who cry hoarse over the failure to deliver justice for such loss of innocent lives, when say the govt fails to override the stonewalling by Pakistan.
They wanted reasons why the scholarship was cancelled and the students were stifled and suffocated. A basic open-ness to have university norms clarified would have informed them that scholarships are cut for much softer reasons such as failure to maintain minimum attendance or show sufficient progress in the program. While the expulsion from hostel might have been punitive for the attack on a person belonging to ABVP, the termination of scholarship was by no means unprecedented, and would have actually been a bit unprecedented had that action not been taken. The discourse going on in national television and print (largely the english bourgeois) is therefore a huge, biased and pre-meditated attempt to distort the whole unfortunate episode to suit sinister motive of playing up the victim-hood. Because in their belief, it brings TRP.
Infact the only valid and necessary question raised in all this hullabaloo is why the vice chancellor had not acted on a clearly depressed letter by the victim where he pleads for sodium azide, a long rope and euthanasia for all Dalit students. Even if it were assumed to be an empty threat, it still points to serious brewing disillusionment among a certain group, for whatever reasons. The callous attitude of the VC is deserving of him being booked. Dattatreya is logically not, however. Writing a letter to complain cannot be termed a crime. Ignoring a tell tale sign of impending disaster however is a crime of omission. And it is with the VC that the hoarse cry against should have been directed by the intellectuals and media. And it is with him it should have stopped. Because it is with him the buck stops in this episode. But as long as the media refuses to be the 4th pillars of democracy but paid termites that just want to rot the whole system, they will continue to mislead and misrepresent. God save!
Food for thought: Arvind Kejriwal termed it a murder and not a suicide. He is right but however he got the murderers wrong. The murderers are the leftist groups who keep alive such caste and communal issues just for the sake of keeping alive their political relevance. Groups such as SFI of which Rohith was associated with earlier (before he quit) influence young minds to take up activism through groups such as ASA. From modest and humble background (pictures of his mother's sewing machine were sweet to look at) to pursuing a doctotare, Rohith had it all going for him. Until the left and the intellectuals who back their despicable hidden motives killed him.
P.S. - for those of you who think our TV journalists are biased but actually have some iota of hidden rationality and progressive mindsets (especially given that they love to call their detractors regressive), just watch Bhupendra Chaubey interview with porn star-turned-bollywood star Sunny Leone. Enjoy, laugh, cry, boil in rage, do whatever as you watch his depraved attempts to defame Sunny and make her uncomfortable backfire badly thanks to her balanced, sound and poised replies. You are also free to make dirty jokes about his insecurity in the face of independent, beautiful and successful women. When this is the quality of our journalists, is it at all wise to listen to anything they say?
The inevitable scuffle that happened revealed once again the biased, twisted and opportunistic mindset of the intellectual group and media houses. The point of contention was no longer the presence of anti social elements in campuses but rather that the human resource ministry (MHRD) had, in its view, shown peculiar urgency in recommending action on the complaint by labour minister Dattatreya (letter link) and the vice chancellors follow up action on the MHRD letter. They seethed with anger because the MHRD had sent 5 letters as a rseponse to the complaint brushing aside the possibility that all complaints need not necessarily be concluded in a single letter. ("why send 5 letters?", "why send 5 letters?" screams a visibly unbalanced Nidhi Razdan on NDTV). A pointed grouse was that the letter termed the activities extremist and anti-national. The extremist part can be kept aside given that the other half of the problem, ABVP are no less extremist. But the glasses of the intellectuals and media are so tainted that since the opposing group was the ABVP, the ASA (to which Rohith belonged) now transformed to noble revolutionaries and Rohith, a martyr. Nonetheless, glorifying someone responsible, at least partly, for the death of 257 common citizens and sorrow for India's most shining city, can be termed anti-national without too much error (" Who is Dattatreya to call him anti-national?" screams the same hag on NDTV). Whether Dattatreya's nationalist RSS extreme background aroused a misplaced urgency for him to take up this issue is a different matter, and I do not have a good opinion of him or most right wing Hindutva leaders even in the slightest in any case. But oxford dictionary defines anti-national as "Opposed to national interests or nationalism". And condemning the sentencing and execution of Yakub is by every stretch opposed to national interest i.e. national interest in that it goes at least a fraction, if only a very minor fraction, of the way towards some justice to the families and martyrs (yes, the word martyr is more appropriate here) of the 1993 blasts. Ironically, it is these same intellectuals who cry hoarse over the failure to deliver justice for such loss of innocent lives, when say the govt fails to override the stonewalling by Pakistan.
They wanted reasons why the scholarship was cancelled and the students were stifled and suffocated. A basic open-ness to have university norms clarified would have informed them that scholarships are cut for much softer reasons such as failure to maintain minimum attendance or show sufficient progress in the program. While the expulsion from hostel might have been punitive for the attack on a person belonging to ABVP, the termination of scholarship was by no means unprecedented, and would have actually been a bit unprecedented had that action not been taken. The discourse going on in national television and print (largely the english bourgeois) is therefore a huge, biased and pre-meditated attempt to distort the whole unfortunate episode to suit sinister motive of playing up the victim-hood. Because in their belief, it brings TRP.
Infact the only valid and necessary question raised in all this hullabaloo is why the vice chancellor had not acted on a clearly depressed letter by the victim where he pleads for sodium azide, a long rope and euthanasia for all Dalit students. Even if it were assumed to be an empty threat, it still points to serious brewing disillusionment among a certain group, for whatever reasons. The callous attitude of the VC is deserving of him being booked. Dattatreya is logically not, however. Writing a letter to complain cannot be termed a crime. Ignoring a tell tale sign of impending disaster however is a crime of omission. And it is with the VC that the hoarse cry against should have been directed by the intellectuals and media. And it is with him it should have stopped. Because it is with him the buck stops in this episode. But as long as the media refuses to be the 4th pillars of democracy but paid termites that just want to rot the whole system, they will continue to mislead and misrepresent. God save!
Food for thought: Arvind Kejriwal termed it a murder and not a suicide. He is right but however he got the murderers wrong. The murderers are the leftist groups who keep alive such caste and communal issues just for the sake of keeping alive their political relevance. Groups such as SFI of which Rohith was associated with earlier (before he quit) influence young minds to take up activism through groups such as ASA. From modest and humble background (pictures of his mother's sewing machine were sweet to look at) to pursuing a doctotare, Rohith had it all going for him. Until the left and the intellectuals who back their despicable hidden motives killed him.
P.S. - for those of you who think our TV journalists are biased but actually have some iota of hidden rationality and progressive mindsets (especially given that they love to call their detractors regressive), just watch Bhupendra Chaubey interview with porn star-turned-bollywood star Sunny Leone. Enjoy, laugh, cry, boil in rage, do whatever as you watch his depraved attempts to defame Sunny and make her uncomfortable backfire badly thanks to her balanced, sound and poised replies. You are also free to make dirty jokes about his insecurity in the face of independent, beautiful and successful women. When this is the quality of our journalists, is it at all wise to listen to anything they say?
