Latest
DU Beat – Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper
Tag

opinion

Browsing
Arts & Culture

Transgender Bill 2019 and the Concerns it raises.

By

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on 5th August 2019. However, has the negative and ambiguous aspects of the bill really been addressed by the public?

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Bill mandates a two step method for legal recognition of gender for someone from the transgender community. They will first have to apply for a “transgender certificate”, after which they will also have to apply for a “change in gender” certificate, which will get their gender status changed legally. This step seems to require surgery and documentation by a medical authority confirming it. Medical confirmation and surgery was not and should not be a necessary prerequisite for a change in legal gender, as per a 2015 report by the World Health Organisation and the Asia-Pacific Transgender Network, the Governments should “take all necessary legislative, administrative, and other measures to fully recognize each person’s self defined gender identity, with no medical requirements or discrimination on any grounds.”

Furthermore, one of the main clauses of the bill basically says that in cases of acts of sexual, verbal, physical, economic, and emotional abuse against transgender peoples, the penalty will be between 6 months and 2 years and with fine. However, those who perpetrate the same crimes against cis-gendered people have much harsher punishments put in place against them. Essentially, this clause is making a very negative impact on an already marginalized community.

Harish Iyer, a gender-rights activist told IndiaSpend, that the “transgender bill is regressive and half-hearted.” He added that pivotal hardship is that one has to go to a committee or a doctor to get recognized as a trans-person and undergo questioning related to their genitalia which any cis-person would never have to go through.

Prachi Johri, a second-year student from Indraprastha College for Women, when asked for her opinion on the Bill, said that “Going back to the 2016 transgender rights bill where the bill defined transgender individual as “neither wholly female or male”  to the 2019 version of the bill, it still efficiently renders transgender people as second class citizens by providing penal provisions for crimes committed against the transgender community less stringent compared to the crimes committed against women and by failing to keep in place a progressive certification process for transgender.” She also believes that the bill was also suppressed by the removal of article 370. According to her, it was covered and hidden from the masses and media, so, only a few people know about it and are protesting or questioning about it. It was an easy bill to pass for the government.

Esvi Anbu Kothazam, a Mumbai-based transgender spoke with The Print and stated, “What is being done is that the government is trying to legislate without taking into consideration the history of marginalisation and discrimination which the transgender community has faced.” Esvi also noted the absence of any provision for affirmative action. “The main point is that we need a comprehensive reservation policy — in education, employment and political representation, which addresses the needs of all sections of the transgender community,”

The ambiguity of this bill and its clauses makes one question the motive of the government and how it is going to work towards the protection of this community. Furthermore, it is clear that this Bill has many flaws which haven’t been addressed in the political or the public sphere as they should have been.

Feature Image Credits: Feminism In India

Prabhanu Kumar Das

[email protected] 

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

DU’s take on the Zomato Debacle

By

With Zomato delivery executives in Bengal protesting against the delivery of beef by Hindus and pork by Muslims, we see solidarity against the food delivery giant which finds itself in turmoil.

Another day in our secular country, another attempt made to communalise food on the religious grounds while the entire narrative on twitter shifts into countless debates on eating beef or pork.

However, for the students of the University of Delhi (DU), this opens up an interesting arena of speculation.

The majority of the student body considered animal cruelty as the reason for not eating beef/pork and very few considered religion to be behind this. A student stated, “I am against any sort of animal slaughter done for the sake of greed, taste or nutrition. They are sentient beings that deserve to live and we can survive without eating them.”

To further elaborate this point another student added, “I belong from a rural background, I am aware of the significance of livestock and cattle in shaping the life of village folks. Right from the agricultural activities, with the dung cakes used as fuel to cook food, to the dairy products used in everyday life, cattle form an essential part of their lives. I don’t consider religion to be the reason behind my choice.”

When religion comes into this narrative, the views are conflicting. Most of the students consider it as a matter of personal choice. However, it seems evident that family and upbringing plays an important role in influencing and strengthening one’s views. Some of them term it as a “disgraceful sin”, while others don’t associate themselves with this debate.

Another student came forward with a separate angle on this debate. She said, “It would be good if people try to understand why their religion tells them not to eat beef or pork, the idea behind it might still be relevant.” She further added that eating or not eating any kind of meat is a personal choice as long as one is not enforcing their opinions on others. According to her, if some religious institutions have certain rules about the consumption of meat then it should be followed while one is within the premises of that institution out of respect.

On the other hand, a part of the DU student body is much in the favour of consumption of beef and pork. “If it appeases the taste buds, it goes on top of the favourite food list” says a History student. The consensus either leans towards exploring the various delicacies that meat has to offer or rebelling against the societal diktats. As one student puts it, “I eat pork even though nobody in my family does. It’s my life and nobody can force me to not do something if I want to. I don’t eat beef because I never felt like trying it.”

Growing up it was hard to acknowledge the idea that beef can be eaten and God won’t smite you if you indulge in this practice. It was even harder to understand that people consume beef and it is perfectly normal for them as they are not indoctrinated into the belief that cow is a holy animal, the way I was from the age when my senses were not even fully developed. However, your beliefs and practices cannot be imposed on another person.

Like a rusty coin, with two alternative sides, this debate is going to be here for a long time much to the delight of the debating circuit of the varsity. Till then, I am here with my double-decker beef burger with a side of bacon to see how this whole debate moves forward.

Feature Image credits: WSLM radio

Antriksha Pathania


[email protected]  

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Movies versus Morality: Decoding the Rom-coms We All Love

By

Different films have been loved and hated over the years for different reason,s and by different people. What remains standing over the years is the debate over Movies versus Morality.

Movies are called a basic source of entertainment; couples watch Romantic-comedies for their movie dates, families enjoy Dramatic-comedies for their family outings, and a group of friends go out to watch their favourite fantasy franchise films that come out. An average middle-class family spends 200 bucks per ticket for plain and pure entertainment purpose, so in this scenario does morality even play a part?

How does it affect a cinemagoer that the film they are watching is regressive, politically or socially incorrect, and offensive to a section of people, misogynistic or plain problematic? The bitter truth is that it doesn’t. We go watch a comedy movie which uses derogatory slangs, laugh at these “jokes”, have a gala time and come back unaffected. Some films fat shame, some are insensitive towards the LGBTQ+ community, while some just do not evoke a sense of diversity, but they are still loved and famous. Old classics like Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham or Pretty Woman are good examples of such films.

Even recent Bollywood Rom-coms or Dramedies like Lukka Chuppi or De De Pyaar De use derogatory slurs to invoke humour. Many found them funny, they did well on the box-office and the question remained the same, should these films be given the benefit of the doubt for the sake of humour?

The obvious answer is no, some might say otherwise, that comedy requires one to be free of judgement and in doing so,  they perpetuate societal stigmas. But anything that does not respect one’s identity is not funny, it is just problematic. I was six when my family went to watch Partner in the multiplex. It came out in 2007 and the experience was fun: the over-priced pop corn, large screen, the whole family together watching a funny movie. At the age of six I laughed at a grown male pretending to be a transgender to enter into a wedding as a wedding planner and this stereotypical representation engrained in my brain. The process of unlearning began early for me to understand that this representation is problematic but, for many this remains funny forever.

Unlike the popular notions, films like The Big Sick, Always Be My Maybe and Bareilly Ki Barfi prove that simpler narratives can also remain funny and distinct without depicting anything blatantly wrong. The former two get representation of diverse American population right, while the latter uses societal norms to critique the basics of our upbringing while remaining funny.

Many critics comment that not all films can have a moral base, the target audience matters along with the budgeting and production. All that remaining, I wonder why many cannot even try to put an effort to get the basics right. Yes, every film cannot be a Raazi, Piku or a Pink but the basics of being funny without hurting any sentiments, that is not a lot to achieve, specially when many shows, movies, and short films already have.

Feature Image Credits: IMDB

Sakshi Arora

[email protected]

 

 

 

Keep Reading
By
Guest Post

TRIPLE TALAQ: A Battle Against Three Words

By

On 22nd August 2017 came a historic 395-page judgment which was not only a victory for Muslim women who lived for centuries in a constant sense of fear and pressure of this immoral practice, but also a new milestone to women’s right and religion in India.

DIVORCE UNDER MUSLIM LAW AND TRIPLE TALAQ                                                                          Under Muslim law, marriage is a civil contract where the husband enjoys special privileges and the wife suffers certain disabilities as compared to the husband. The husband is given an unchecked power of divorce except for the restraint of the law of dower and his own moral sense. On the other hand, Muslim women must prove the grounds or get the consent of the husband to get the divorce, in which case the husband can escape the liability of paying dower.

There are different modes of talaq under Muslim law such as implied, contingent, constructive, delegated, or express. Sunni Muslims recognise all of these modes of talaq whereas Shia Muslims recognise only express and delegated divorce.

The express mode of divorce has two forms: Talaq-ul-Sunnat and Talaq-ul-Biddat, also known as triple talaq. It is the second form which has been a point of contention for decades.  Talaq-ul-Biddat is the practice under which a Muslim man can divorce his wife by simply uttering “talaq” three times. Interestingly, those who hold this decision as an attack on personal religion should know that Allah never approved this mode of talaq. Even the Shias do not recognise triple talaq.

FROM SHAH BANO TO SHAYARA BANO

The journey of the Supreme Court’s milestone verdicts in regard to religious reform is as old as independence. With regard to Muslim law, a few cases in which the Supreme Court observed such landmark decisions are the Shah Bano Case (1985), Danial Latifi Case (2001), Shamim Ara Case (2002), and Masroor Ahmed Case (2008). It was the case of Shah Bano in which the Supreme Court not only delivered a landmark judgment on rights of Muslim women but also brought the issue into mainstream media.  The judgment faced huge criticism by conservative Muslim groups who presented the verdict as an attack on Muslim personal law. Consequently, vote bank politics and appeasement led to the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights in Divorce) Act, 1986. This act negated the far-reaching effects of the Shah Bano judgment, which led to strong feminist movements against the state. Finally, the constitutional validity of the act was challenged in the Daniel Latifi Case (2001), where the Supreme Court showed an act of restraint and diplomacy. It rejected the challenge but re-interpreted Section 3 of the Act to solve the issue of the right of maintenance of Muslim women.

In the Shamim Ara Case (2002) and Masoor Ahmed Case (2008), the apex Court acknowledged the issues with regard to talaq. The jurisprudence of talaq has since undergone a vast improvement. The court observed the importance of communication of pronouncement and attempt of reconciliation before the finalisation of dissolution of marriage. Finally, last month, the Court gave its judgment on the Shayara Bano case, branding triple talaq as unconstitutional once and for all.

WHY IS THIS VERDICT IMPORTANT?

As Virginia Saldanha, a Mumbai-based theologian stated, we need to accept the fact that all religions have promoted a patriarchal mindset where “men are dominant as recipients, interpreters, and transmitter of divine messages, while women have largely remained passive receivers of teachings and ardent practitioners of religious rituals”. The judiciary of India has shown a progressive approach towards women’s rights, be it Muslim or Hindu Women. The problem arises when these decisions are taken as an attack on one’s religion rather than progressive reforms in religion. We need to take discriminatory practices and notions out of our religion to create an environment of equality and abolish the existing gender bias. This judgment is illuminating and needs to be cherished by people around the country; we need to reform our religions and its practices so that they do not threaten the constitutionally enshrined principles of equality and justice.

 

Feature Image Credits: Olive Green Institute

Guest Post by Krishna Sharma, Third-Year Student at Faculty of Law, University of Delhi

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

How to Win DUSU Elections

By

The Delhi University Students’ Union elections are just around the corner and the election fever is in full swing. In this context, we analyse the finer nuances of what sways the DUSU election results.

  • The name game

While campaigning, candidates often change how their name is spelt. Posters and hoardings will often bear the names of candidates with one or more letters misspelt. This leads to the following benefit – if there are any pending cases or FIRs against them, it would be harder for the average Joe to look it up. The second benefit allows them to manipulate the ballot number they received by adding “A” at the beginning of their name as a prefix. For example, the 2015 DUSU President Mohit Nagar filed his nomination as “AAA Mohit Nagar” which resulted in him getting ballot number 1. The ballot list is made in alphabetical order which means that the candidates with the maximum number of As at the beginning of their name would get 1 as their ballot number. Since a lot of people in DUSU elections vote just for the sake of it, the probability of them voting for the first candidate on the list is considerably higher. To combat this, in 2015 the Delhi High Court described this practise as “flawed” and finally put an end to it.

  • Money matters

Freebies ranging from movie tickets, chocolates, t-shirts, pens, notebooks, water park tickets, and what not are distributed during the election season. But it does not stop there. Major student political parties also go to large PGs to promote and campaign for their candidates. An anonymous resident of Aparna Girls Hostel, a private PG that houses around 300 girls, says, “Last year both the ABVP and NSUI came to our PG to campaign. They spent around 20-30 minutes there and also sponsored special food for the day”. These freebies are aggressively thrown around as the election day comes closer in order to sway the maximum number of voters until the very end.

  • Graffiti

Without any regard to either public and private property or to aesthetics, candidates spray paint their names over walls, buildings, pavements, hoardings, and any flat surface which catches the eye. The idea is to familiarise the maximum number of people with a certain name before election day. If the rival party has already put up their logo on a particular wall, instances have shown that political candidates are not above throwing black paint all over it. Every year, in the name of elections, these walls are besmirched with black spray paint and posters.

  • Personal touch

Any politician worth the salt knows how important personal touch is. Vox populi vox dei is an ancient Latin phrase which means that the voice of people is the voice of God. Candidates in DUSU elections are more than aware of this philosophy.  Once people want a particular candidate to win because they think he/she deserves it, there is little that can stop them. As soon as the logistics are dealt with, door-to-door campaigning begins. Personally helping people, reaching out to them, acquiring  goodwill, and building up a network of loyal friends are keys to unlocking the puzzle that is DUSU elections. On the day of the elections it is this goodwill acquired across months of rigorous campaigning and a band of loyal supporters and friends that ensures victory.

  • Party lines

Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, student politics does sync with national politics. DUSU elections are a playground for major national political parties. Most DUSU presidents acquire a certain degree of political relevance and end up with successful careers working with their parent organisations or parties. Delhi University is also a recruitment pool for these parties. A considerable number of today’s political leaders started their careers in Delhi University itself.

As far as the DUSU election results are concerned, the stakes are extremely high. It is a matter of immense pride to win the student elections in one of the largest universities in the country. The pivotal driving force in these elections – perhaps the sole factor that makes it so very grand – is the involvement of national parties. When Delhi University becomes the battle ground for the biggest political parties in the country, one can expect a magnificent showdown.

 

Image Credits: Kinjal Pandey for DU Beat

Kinjal Pandey
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

Hollering for the wrong kind of Azaadi: That one, tiny, essential point skipped in P.M. Modi’s Independence Day speech

By

Independence Day began with the TV blaring much earlier than usual in the morning at several homes, as it usually does every year, when the upbeat Modi fans and some of the plainer, curious souls like me were unable to catch the Prime Minister upfront at the Red Fort. So we resorted to half-heartedly watching him live on our personal screens in the end. For me, at least, a smattering of vibrant saffron, that colour which has taken on a furious new meaning in the past year, came to overshadow the ‘red’ in the Red Fort this time. And so the speech began. In a typical, conciliatory fashion, the Modi-esque rhetoric was employed as if to simmer the heat under all burning issues. “Bharat jodo (connect India) should be a popular slogan”, he said, like Bharat Chhodo (Quit India). International problems and Kashmir and the Goods and Service Tax and everything in between, including the staggering ‘natural calamity’ at Gorakhpur, were quickly addressed and laid aside like sizzling meat off the grill. The speech was careful not to delve into any topic in too much detail. One got the sense that there was much to say and too little time. But a singular theme kept reverberating over and over — digitisation.

The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi addressing the Nation on the occasion of 69th Independence Day from the ramparts of Red Fort, in Delhi on August 15, 2015.
The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi addressing the Nation on the occasion of 69th Independence Day from the ramparts of Red Fort, in Delhi on August 15, 2015.

Should the word ‘digitisation’ bother me and you?

As a student, my ears perk up almost by some innate instinct at words like ‘technology’, ‘digitisation’, ‘Digital India’, ‘science’, ‘demonetisation’, ‘Internet’, etc. which get thrown about in the air casually like playthings these days. This 15th of August proves just how far we have come in our journey of naturalising these terms and carving out a space for them into our everyday lives. These are also the terms we take forward into our new dictionary, stepping into the P.M.’s ‘New India’ of 2022. One does not stare at his or her phone, look at the plethora of payment-making apps, and go ‘Oh!’ anymore. Tapping on smartphones comes naturally to us millennials, and the government plans to utilise this trait of ours to the max. We leave a stylish impression on the global platform – that the India paraded in front of the United Nations and elsewhere is fun, hip, and keeps up with the times. The truth is slightly more complicated.

For every new word having to do with digitisation, which this Independence Day speech embeds in our minds, there are several others which get replaced without a whisper. One of these major terms is ‘education’. Precisely for this reason, the new words bother me to no end, especially since I happen to hail from a minority — my loyalties lie, unconventionally, with the Humanities. When the P.M. talks of the ‘Badal Sakta Hai’ (It Can Change) attitude in this country, I know that it cannot stand the test of time where the education system is concerned. Forget about change, education does not even score a hit in his speech. It finds no mention. As university students, what should make sparks fly in our minds are not those claims and promises which the speech consciously makes, but rather the things he leaves out. God is in the details. And if anything, the recent case of changing the content in the History textbooks of Maharashtra is but a miniscule example of how rotten the macrocosm under the current government is. What about the plight of ad-hoc lecturers in universities? Why were there even talks of shutting down centres, including that of Women’s Studies, in the Tata Institute of Social Sciences? What about the lack of funding in the University of Delhi and cutting down of seats in our universities? What about the Vice-Chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University requesting that an ostentatious military tank be placed within the campus? What about the lack of job prospects?

It makes me believe more and more that we are scared of educated citizens and the Humanities somehow. Politicians avoid talking about it on the national platform because it is that one field which can blow the lid off of human injustice. It is also the most effective weapon with which to target the shortcomings of governments. Yet, I am a student and a girl child who will manage to have received a university degree by 2018 — nothing short of a mean feat in itself, especially in India — and I can attest to the fact that the P.M.’s Digital India will crumble into a heap of ignorance, violence, and atrocities without the basic foundational pillar of that very education.

Education swatted away like a fly on the windshield

When the P.M. says, ‘Our resolve is to build a New India by 2022’, it is very clear that he targets a certain section of the population which is blind enough to the state of education or uneducated itself so much so that it gulps down the speech without a pinch of salt. That leaves out university spaces, and unfortunately for students of the Humanities, me and you. Even if I had an orientation towards the I.T. or banking or all those wonderful sectors that the P.M. always chooses to focus upon selectively, the latest International Labour Organisation findings point to the fact that I might still be staring dead into the face of unemployment.

Right from school, we are exposed to a toxic mix of jingoistic patriotism, saffronisation, disregard for any subject other than the Sciences, and then a complete disregard for university spaces: unfortunately, this will be the India of 2022 if careful attention is not paid. And I, for one, sincerely believe that though India may be ready to ‘tackle any kind of change’, this is not the one on anybody’s mind.

Jai Hind!

 

Image Credits: Indian Express

Deepannita Misra
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

I’m Your Average Anti National

By

We are celebrating our 70th Independence Day in a time when terms like ‘independence’ and ‘azaadi‘ have become stigmatised. Our public discourse has been simmering with vivid debates about loyalty, freedom, and jingoism, and from the JNU row  to the recent Ramjas College protests, we can identify that it is from the epicentre of universities that narratives of nationalism have been (and are being) shaped. As a college student for the past one year, I was directly exposed to new ideas on a daily basis. After hours of contemplating over them, I’ve discovered that I’m an anti national.

The many meanings of patriotism

When I say that I’m an anti national, it doesn’t mean I do not harbour love for my country. It’s just that my idea of what constitutes patriotism is different from the version portrayed in popular media. As Abhinandan Sekhri puts it, “Patriotism is not something that can be easily universally defined even by the most eloquent and evolved minds.” For some it is an expansive love for the territory of the nation, the laughter of its people, and their languages. For others it is an idea that is so narrow and flimsy that merely singing the national anthem is considered nationalism and attacking someone who does not stand for it in a cinema hall is considered an act of nationalistic passion. Whatever your idea of nationalism may be, the notion that there can be only one concept of what constitutes a nation, and that every other view is anti national, is intellectually void at best and authoritarian at worst.

For me personally, a nation is a free society where someone’s right to dissent is not questioned by those who disagree with them. Today when Gurmehar Kaur is trolled for espousing peace, and college plays are being censored because they talk about Indian insurgencies, it makes me wonder what people would call Ambedkar, whom the so-called nationalists are eager to appropriate when he supported the demand for plebiscite in Kashmir. What should we call Ambedkar then? Anti national?

Or for that matter, Gandhi, who in his meeting with a Naga delegation in 1947 said, “You can be independent. You are safe as far as India is concerned. India has shed her blood for freedom. Is she going to deprive others of their freedom? Personally, I believe you all belong to India. But if you say you don’t, no one can force you.”  What do we call such a thought? Seditious?

Appropriating the Army

These days when the sacrifices of the armed forces are revoked at every instance and TV news panels have given space to retired officers, there is one observation that I would like to point out. Contrary to what prime-time news would like you to believe, there are armed forces personnel who don’t consider critique of the army as seditious.

When Major General G.D. Bakshi vehemently advocated that JNU students be booked under sedition, Admiral Ramdas (Vir Chakra awardee) and Retd. Colonel Laxmeshwar Mishra supported the students at JNU and espoused that sedition has no place in a democracy. In April when Major Gaurav Arya, now a prominent face on Indian television, was lauding the army for tying Kashmiri youth to an army jeep as a human shield, Param Vishisht Seva Medal awardee Lieutenant General H. S. Panag condemned that very act. I wonder if that makes these men anti-national.

The reason I’m making these comparisons is because even within the armed forces there are differences of opinion. Situations develop into problems when only one person is touted as the sole representative of the armed forces.

Soldiers are not holy cows

As students of social sciences, we all know that history is an important discipline and that our today is a product of our past. So, I would like to go back a little bit and talk about 15th June 2004 when 12 elderly women in Imphal stood naked behind banners proclaiming, “Indian Army, rape us” as a protest over the killing of Manorama. I would also like to mention 2nd November 2000 when  Sinam Chandramani, a National Bravery Award winner, was killed alongside 10 other people when Assam Rifles personnel opened fire at Malom village in Manipur.

On 15 July 2004, women stood naked in front of the Kangla Fort in Imphal with a banner that read "Indian Army Rape Us" to protest the killing of Manorama Devi. Image Credits: Outlook
On 15 July 2004, women stood naked in front of the Kangla Fort in Imphal with a banner that read “Indian Army Rape Us” to protest the killing of Manorama Devi.
Image Credits: Outlook

In these contexts, with these histories, would you not question the men in uniform? The accusations of human rights violations are not imaginations of “liberal-sickular-minds”, but observations that the  Supreme Court itself has made.

In July 2013, the Santosh Hegde Commission highlighted the rampant misuse of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) for fake encounters by the security forces in Manipur. Earlier in January 2013, the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee had recommended the suspension of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act on account of being “too sketchy” and “inefficient”. Other than this, the Justice Verma Committee also took cognise of the sexual harassment of local people by members of the armed forces.

By today’s standard when many civilians regard soldiers as holy cows and accusing the armed forces of atrocities is equated with infidelity, the truth remains. In Barkha Dutt’s words, “Sacrifices of the military, of which I am a huge admirer, have coexisted with unforgivable human rights violations of which we all must be outspoken critics.”

Tank Man vs. Tanks

Now that the University of Delhi and Jawaharlal Nehru University have inaugurated the “Wall of Heroes”, chances are that soon army tanks will also be installed in the campus to instill nationalism in students. I don’t know how inspiring the tanks will be, but I know for sure that the picture of Tank Man, an unidentified person who stood in front of a column of tanks during the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, is awe-inspiring. It teaches me to respect strength and not power.

tianasquare-1
An unidentified man stood in front of a column of tanks on 5th June 1989 after the Chinese military had suppressed the Tiananmen Square protests. Image Credits: Jeff Widener

In 1908, Tagore wrote that  “It is my conviction that my countrymen will truly gain their India by fighting against the education which teaches them that a country is greater than the ideals of humanity.” Even after 109 years, Tagore’s words remain relevant. It’s time we evaluate what we prioritise as a country – our nationalism or our humanity.

 

Feature Image Credits: Tsering Topgyal

Niharika Dabral
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

Questions and Answers: The Great Indian Media Debate

By

On 3rd November, 2016, the government’s announcement that NDTV would be banned for a day hit the airwaves. And along with this news came a barrage of everything from mild criticism to vitriolic comments, pointed and shot straight at the I&B ministry. It was decided by the authorities, in turn, that not even a Twitter hashtag must be spared. #BringBackNDTV came under attack for garnering Pakistani support, with one media outlet going so far as to call the ban a ‘blow to Pakistan’ by Modi. Amidst this litany of comments came another stroke of genius. Minister Venkaiah Naidu himself came out to publicly condemn all “belated criticisms” against the ban (that is, the ones not made on the exact date of 3rd November, 2016) as being “politically inspired”.

Political farces always make a moot point. But let us have the sense and courage to acknowledge that while this may be a farce, Pathankot was not. That would be a crucial starting point. If it had to come to a ban anyhow, then why the ministry would delay its decision would be another beginning. And it is a beginning which only leads further into the maze. Leaving aside the question of whether NDTV is being ‘singled out’ amongst all the other channels to be made into an example, the ban also brings up a lot of questions left unanswered.

What you and me are relying upon in this debate are clearly a set of perspectives. They are the Achilles heel of this debate, the flip side of asserting that we are living under a surveillance state. By sheer assumption, then, NDTV may or may not be an anti-nationalistic channel just as the prime minister may or may not be a Hindu fundamentalist. Each perspective is guided by a set of assumptions. But what if the debate were above all these questions?

Even before the ban came up, NDTV had had its own set of supporters and non-supporters. The great debate will serve to increase its TRP manifolds this week. Also, the news of the ban has been showcased, firstly, by other media outlets. It was they who projected it as an impediment to freedom of speech. It was later that the decision to call it a violation of free speech became ‘ours’. It is only now that something akin to a threat is being perceived by the masses. And this is exactly the problem with authority identifying our problems for us.

So really, some would say that the most valid starting point lies in the most highly ignored questions. These are being ignored not only by the opposition, but also by the media. Why did no one raise a hue and cry when the actual reporting of the Pathankot incident was aired, and did NDTV, in fact, hurt the nation any worse than other news channels reporting the incident? There are channels which could be accused of being communal and therefore anti-nationalistic. Why are they not being accused at this very moment? There, too, political parties have divided the masses. In other words, they have decided upon a definition of “nationalism” for us and made this decision without consulting us.

The larger politics of what unknown agenda propels which news channel to do a “specific” type of reporting is the larger issue here, one in which NDTV finds itself today. And the last word in this regard does not come from the us, the real masses. The questions posed by the media against the authorities are made by the media too. We think that the restrictions of an “authoritarian” regime are truly the worst, not realizing that we have allowed our questions to go unanswered while someone else makes up “questions” for us. And in all reality, what could be worse than that.

Feature Image: Your Story

Deepannita Misra

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

The prison of the semester system

By

When I came to DU a year ago, my bag was heavier with ‘to-do lists’ rather than books. Seminars, fests, assignments, attendance, exams, forms— there was just so much balancing to do and only so much I could manage. It has been a year now, but things remain the same. There are no conspicuous differences between the lives of a nine-to-five corporate workaholic and an average DU student, trapped in the semester mode. We are all prisoners. We are all turning into stereotypes.

The semester system was introduced with plenty of good intentions. Last year, CBCS hopped into the bandwagon too. There are now multiple courses to complete in a single semester, regardless of the fact that most of them are not a “choice”. Teachers are wiping their anxious brows on one hand, and students on the other. The former clench their teeth because students do not have the time to interact with them, or form a concrete perspective at the end of three years. Meanwhile, the latter must deal with clashing entrance exams and semester exams, tiptoeing precariously on the line in-between.

“I don’t have the time to study and enjoy events simultaneously during the semester. We all get incredibly busy. But the moment a semester ends, we have absolutely nothing to do,” claims Neha Nara, a second year student from Sri Venkateswara college. This is a common problem faced by many. The capitalist structure denies time for leisure. When we must and do get accustomed to being ‘busy’ every second of every single day, how much of ‘free’ vacation time can we truly handle? For some, taking a long, uninterrupted break can become an unbearable thought.

Societies demand the kind of dedication which only a few can manage in a whirlwind of regular internals and exams. Additionally, it becomes an uphill climb to maintain that spotless attendance record. It fetches marks at the end of a semester, after all. There is hardly any time to fall sick, let alone ‘bunk’ a few classes which may not hold our interest. Student life has ceased to be idyllic. This is what I realised at the end of a year.

From a bird’s-eye view, it is possible to get a degree from a reputed college today. But how much ‘knowledge’ does someone like me truly gain in three years? In fact, what sort of graduates are we churning out in this system? We are mutely witnessing one semester after the other fly out of our reach, college-life coming to an end, while a seemingly unsteady future awaits us outside the gates.

Featured Image Credits: www.candidcovers.files.wordpress.com

Deepannita Misra

Keep Reading
By
DUB News

Auto Strikes Paralyse the Last Mile Connectivity for Students

By

Travelling by autos is an integral part of college’s commuting process for a large number of students. Be it door-to-door travelling or as a connector between metro station and the college. These autos usually operate on a sharing basis and drop you at your college gate for a small fare of Rs 10-Rs 30, acting as a crucial medium of last mile connectivity.

However, with app-based cab services like Uber and Ola, the business of these auto drivers seems to be in jeopardy. Especially with Uber giving promotional discounts of up-to Rs.50, a large number of students have started taking these cabs instead of the autos.

These cabs are air conditioned, the drivers do not demand more or less than the meter-generated amount, they do not refuse going someplace else just because there is traffic and you can find a cab for yourself anytime and anywhere by just moving your finger on your phone – giving students plenty of reasons to use these cabs.

Therefore, the auto-rickshaw associations, feeling threatened, decided to have strikes and demanded the government to ban these app based services in return. Besides this, these associations weren’t even letting the cab drivers enter many of their areas leaving the last mile connectivity system in a mess. As a result, the students could neither get an auto nor a cab. Many of them were even seen walking miles or asking for lifts to their college.

The idea of going on a strike doesn’t seem to be justified from the consumer’s perspective as this entire thing is all about evolution of business. The one who provides better services at lower prices, survives in the market. Even though India is a mixed economy, the transportation sector has already been opened for private players and besides that, their operation, too, would be well-regulated by the government making sure they do not exploit the customer. For instance, surge pricing by Uber and Ola was asked to be removed during the odd even days.

Thus, the possibility of getting these app based cab services stopped seems quite bleak. Still, it’s for the time to tell how things would unfold. Meanwhile, students should be prepared of standing at the metro station and being absolutely clueless about how to reach college.

Image Credits: Hindustan Times

Aditya Narang

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By