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

Politics

Browsing
Arts & Culture

Political Discourse and Friendships: How to Deal with the Conflict

By

Last night, I was involved in a heated argument with my school friend over the government’s efforts in containing the novel coronavirus in India. It started off as a healthy discussion as to what can be done to better the current situation but soon turned into a politically charged conversation. Now, that’s not us. Back in school, all that we discussed was cricket and WWE. Politics was never on the table. It was never meant to be but now that it is, learning to live with it is the only option left.

This is not the first time I have come across such situations. India has become a breeding ground of controversies since December 2019 when the amended Citizenship Act came into being. Nationwide protests, gruesome violence, student dissent took the centre stage. All this was followed by the worst riots Delhi has experienced in over 36 years. Escaping confrontations becomes difficult when so much happens so fast. I have had people agreeing with my opinions and others, discarding them. There’s always resistance, but when it is your friend opposing your point of view, it can be a hard pill to swallow. Why are we friends with anyone anyway? Largely because of the similarity in our thoughts and views. But when that common link seems doubtful, conflicts arise. You start doubting your friendship and it adversely affects you, mentally, socially, emotionally. All of this is accompanied by the urgent need to prove yourself right and the other, horribly wrong. A discussion that could have been fruitful turns unhealthy and violent. And to be honest, there’s no way to avoid these conflicts. Either you’ll choose friendship over your beliefs or vice-versa. Irrespective of the choice, you’ll be losing something valuable. So is there a middle ground? How do we deal with such conflicts?

Here are two things that, in my opinion, can put things into perspective:

Respecting Opinions

No matter how flawed their narratives may seem, you must learn to respect their opinions. Their choice of political parties/leaders/policies might not go down well with you but we must realise that everyone is entitled to think and process the way they do. That is exactly what we call a democracy, a concept that is not only fading away from India but many other countries as well. Our friends might support controversial judgements and legislations but rather than indulging in unhealthy and heated discourses, backing your arguments with logic and facts and presenting them with compassion is the way forward. And if this doesn’t work, try the next step.

Acceptance

One can always persuade the other into believing that his/her argument makes more sense but in the end, it’s always better to accept that people think and react differently. And those beliefs are a result of many variables, one of which, is privilege. The more privileged you are, more often than not, you’ll side with those in power. Privilege makes a man overlook the otherwise evident truth. In a nutshell, accept the fact that you and your friend differ in your politics and that consequently affects your bonding.

And all of this is not limited to friendships and can be extended to many other relationships as well. They might be your own relatives or family friends or boyfriends/girlfriends. So the next time you discuss politics with your dear one, do so with kindness and logic, the two cornerstones of a fruitful discussion.

Featured Image Credits: DU Beat Archives

Ayaan Khan is a 1st-year student pursuing a Bachelor’s in Statistics (H) at Ramjas College, University of Delhi. He’s particularly interested in Journalism and Poetry.

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Manipulation of Historical Facts in the Political Realm

By

Looking at recent election campaigns, and the political climate of the country in general, several things come to light, one of them being the twisting of historical facts.

In his novel 1984, Orwell says, “Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” 

Speaking at the Banaras Hindu University, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said, “Putting together our history, embellishing it and rewriting it is the responsibility of the country, its people and historians.”

Of course, efforts to do this have been underway for a few years now-during its first tenure, the culture ministry under the BJP Government set up a fourteen-member committee to present a report that will help the government rewrite certain aspects of Indian History, to prove that Hindu scriptures are not myths and that today’s Hindus descend directly from India’s first inhabitants from thousands of years ago. 

India, unfortunately, is no stranger to such practices. Read Indian school textbooks, and you’ll see omissions of history from the dark days of Indira Gandhi’s tenure as Prime Minister. In textbooks from Rajasthan, you’ll see a watered-down version of Ambedkar’s fight against the oppressive caste system, where instead of representing him accurately as a vehement opponent of the caste system ingrained into the then prevalent structure of Hinduism, he is portrayed as a “Hindu Social Reformer” akin to the likes of Dayanand Saraswati and K B Hedgewar, the founder of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Nehru said that Mahmud Ghazni was a lover of art (the same Mahmud Ghazni who destroyed idols and temples in India). Gandhi is praised and hailed as a reformer and father of the nation but nowhere do we mention his obsession with the caste system

This cherry-picking of facts is incredibly problematic. It is the job of historians to present facts as they are, good or bad. However, politics is a different game altogether, and when contentions in History come into the political realm, things get ugly. Integrity is a crucial part of historical method, except no compulsion is there on politicians to be morally prudent.

When politicians are allowed to twist facts in order to pursue a particular narrative, they not only change what people think happened in the past. The key to the future lies in revisiting history, thus, history becomes an incredibly powerful tool to influence people’s emotions and actions. 

Coming back to the status quo, that is exactly what the current government is doing. Historian Romila Thapar says “if the Hindus are to have primacy as citizens in a Hindu Rashtra (kingdom), their foundational religion cannot be an imported one.” It aims to revisit history in a manner where it establishes the current Hindu majority as indigenous. That, of course, comes at a cost, which here are the core values that make India what it is. That is precisely why it’s best to ensure that History is left outside of the political realm. It is far too dangerous a tool to be left in the hands of people like politicians, who’re guided by principles that primarily benefit themselves.
Image Credits: India TV

Khush Vardhan Dembla

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

To Protest Or Not To Protest?

By

Does your bemused self stand at crossroads, indecisive of whether to join in on vocalising dissent amidst the palpable protest culture or not? Read on to find about the battle that ensues.

You might have been a busy bee drenched with assignments, deadlines, society commitments, parties, tinder dates, self quarantines (if you are introvert) and other youth culture activities, but simultaneously there has been a turbulence which led to class suspensions, teachers’ strike, mass harassment, violent riots and police crackdowns which in turn made ‘Inquilab’ strike a crescendo.

What one may find sudden and superious is aftermath of staying passive and not challenging the existent discourse.

“Without deviation from the norm progress is not possible.” The underlying construct of this quote by Frank Zappa is evident in every little rebellious thing we do. To say someone has never protested about anything in life seems far from veracity. There are no shortages of elements which challenge the social, political, economical and cultural cloak which blankets our existence of being. We don’t dwell in Utopia. This leaves us with the current state of affairs which are results of unchallenged perpetuated norms of behavior.

But is it right to put the onus on small fragile shoulders of people who are unfazed with oppressions, are cocooned in comfort, enmeshed in apolitical stances and have sorted priorities?

These are some of the many reasons also labelled as excuses by active participants of protests. Arunima Tripathi, a B.A. (H) Political Science, first year student from Kirori Mal College expressed her dismay over privilege shaming and said,”Keeping my privileges and political leanings aside, I join in on protests because it comes from my conscience and common sense.” 

There are some who wish to be vociferous but silence themselves from the fear of their parents and society. Some fear safety amidst police crackdowns. Priyanshi Sarraf, a first year B.Com. (H) student from Hansraj College said,”I feel guilty about not being able to mobilise for protests because of restrictions from my parents who fear for my safety, but I try to be active on social media and voice my opinions where I feel relatively safer. I do receive flak sometimes but it’s my space after all.”

Online activism emboldens the cause without any doubts. Protesting is not just mere taking to streets but also cultivating a sphere which encourages more voices to follow. Those active ones continuously try to get the attention of maximum people possible to join in on the mission. This helps in keeping the discourse on the table for discussions and engagement rather than losing it in the winds of oblivion.

Political correctness is ideal when going in protests. There are instances where people are not aware of the anatomy of the protests. Brut India’s short video surfaced which showed a woman alleging her husband and kids who forced her to sit in Shah Jamal demonstrations in Aligarh in the wake of protest tide against Citizenship Amendment Act. Such accounts of incidents weakens the stride of the movement. Pro or Anti, if you feel like you have something to say remember it’s your right to do so and if you sit in silence nothing is going to change the frosted dynamic.

To protest or not to protest is a matter for your indecisive conscience but it also is an obligation to the ones to who have the potential to act in times when crisis befalls. As Martin Luther King Jr said, “There comes a time when silence is betrayal,” you have to be wary of which side you pick because that winter of the times sure has come!

Feature image credits: DU Beat 

Umaima Khanam

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
Features

The Journey of Inquilab

By

It’s been almost 100 years since this revolutionary slogan surfaced in the battle of freedom and over the years the landscape has changed, but the non- redundancy of  tyranny and resistance to it simultaneously, still calls for shouts of Inquilab.

My early encounter with the groundbreaking term happened as a kid when my mother would read from the local urdu daily called, The Inquilab. I asked her what the title meant and she smiled and replied with one word- “Revolution.”

Over the years history taught us with the valor and greatness of our freedom fighters against the rules of colonial British. One such was an episode which happened on 8th April 1929 outside Delhi’s Legislative Assembly where an announcement with regards to the Public Safety Bill and Trade Dispute Bill had to take place. This law enforcement would result in protests being labelled as ‘illegal’ and imprisonment of any individual without any trial (present day Kashmir). To impede such draconian laws an explosion happened outside the assembly and “Inquilab Zindabad!” was clamoured in the air by  legendary Martyrs Shaheed Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt. This chapter in history marked the highlight of the immortal slogan.

Many fall victim of crediting the origin of the famous slogan to Shaheed Bhagat Singh himself, however it has its roots in Mexico where people resisted against more than thirty years of dictator Porfirio Díaz with “Viva La Revolution!” which is Spanish for “long live revolution!.”  This travelled across oceans and inspired Urdu poet Maulana Hasrat Mohani in 1921 to give the world it’s catchphrase which was given new heights when used by Bhagat Singh and is very dominantly used in today’s time of protest linguistics: ‘Inquilab Zindabad.’

However some self proclaimed nationalists and others sprew skepticism over the use of this phrase by today’s youth which stands in resistance to the party in power. They claim the present protest culture to be flawed and opposed to true nationalistic approaches. Few arguments extend to mark the use of Inquilab as mere instruments of capitalism and accuse commercialisation of Inquilab amidst the protest culture. With commodified Inquilab on t-shirts, wall posters, etc there’s a taint on the visionary and glorious phrase of revolution.

The people who are worried over the selling of Inquilab although ironically (or hypocritically- which it has a limit) also buy the products which are of the umbrella company which sells nationalism quite openly.

Image Caption: Image Credits: Twitter
Image Caption: Patanjali products endorsing nationalism.                                 Image Credits: Twitter

Big words are so quickly attached to the small scale sellers of the roadside who sell the so called ‘nationalism’ to people and on the contrary big businesses bloom with marketing and manipulation without much hindrances. There also is a possibility that some consumers buy the merchandise to be woke wannabes but nothing can undermine the greater cause that Inquilab has brought in the line of protest culture.

Since its inception about a century ago resistance has flourished from the youth- Inquilab has travelled time, distance, and unfortunately to some extent: Marxism, but undeniably it’s a spirit and motivation to unite and call for in times of change for progress, and in all healthy spirit will echo from the public to counter malign forces of power today, tomorrow and more hundred years of time to come.

INQUILAB ZINDABAD!

Feature Image Credits: Frieze

Umaima Khanam

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB News

LSR’s Department of English Calls for GBM in Light of Political Scenario

By

The English department of Lady Shri Ram College for Women called for a series of General Body Meetings in light of the increasing state of communal violence faced by the city and its people. 

On 2nd March 2020, the English department called for a General Body Meeting at the Peace Centre. The GBM was centered around the issue of increasing state of communal violence faced by the city and its people, and was called in order to decide the extension of help to those affected by the violent environment. Following message was circulated by the English Department Union: “Minutes of Today’s Meeting and Call for GBM. In today’s meeting, we discussed the current political climate and what the department can do to play its part. 2A’s decision to boycott classes indefinitely was discussed, along with similar boycott by the department collectively, as well as collection drives, fundraising efforts, and volunteering at protest sites.

Students suggested the following ideas:

-Freeze attendance in case of classes undertaking boycotts or students unable to attend classes.

-Have one event a week wherein professors can discuss the larger situation creating space for discussion

-Publish a collective narrative of real experiences, use blogs and social media to raise awareness

-Restructure class lectures making classrooms flexible spaces for open ended discussions, if people really want to attend them

-A schedule of extra classes by teachers, or study sessions with seniors, once the boycott is over.

Some students also expressed their reluctance to boycott as they felt it could be a tokenistic gesture. The union has expressed these views to their staff advisors and administration and will be addressing the department about possible ways forward tomorrow at 10:45 in the peace centre before the protest gathering. If you are able to come to college, please attend this GBM. 

English Department Union” 

The action of boycott was first initiated by a section of second year students pursuing English honours. The section decided to go on indefinite boycott of classes in order to join protests and shake the illusion of normalcy on campus. However, differing views did arise. “I feel that it’s a very elitist stance. To go on an indefinite boycott could just hamper the education of the marginalized sections. Some can afford to pay to repeat the semester but can everybody do it? Also, what are we even doing while carrying out a boycott? Do we have a charter of demands? Are we taking any substantial step to improve the situation and actually utilize the time we have because of the boycott? If it’s only about being able to join protests then even a partial boycott on days of protests can fulfill that need. And if it’s only about showing that normalcy does not exist then it can be done while also attending classes. For instance, people could organise protests on campus after classes or wear symbols of dissent like t-shirts or any other such thing that says stuff like no NRC, CAA, NPR.”, said a student from 2A who wished to remain anonymous. On 3rd March 2020 the Union discussed their conversation with staff advisors and possible ways forward with the department. One of the resolutions was conducting online anonymous polls. Two possible outcomes came into perspective. Firstly, total indefinite boycott wherein the “entire department will call for a total boycott irrespective of internals and attendance, in solidarity with students from affected areas”. Secondly, partial boycott in which “the department will call for a boycott of classes post 11am (or suitable time), irrespective of attendance and internals, in days in which protest marches and gatherings are scheduled”. On the same day, the department announced the following: “After repeated GBMs and a vote, the department has reached a tally of 115 votes for a total boycott and 68 votes for a partial boycott. However, after the count was over, 23 students have approached us asking for a revote with a “No boycott” category. Since the option was not expressed by these people or their representatives at the GBMs, and since there is an overwhelming majority for a total boycott, this is the stance that we will be following. Since mid-sem break is right around the corner and questions arise about the situation concerning the same, we will be re-evaluating once college reopens post break.” 

IMG-20200303-WA0040~2

Many students complained about the inability to express their views freely. “I also don’t feel absolutely free to be able to share an opinion that the majority does not support because if someone is speaking of wanting to attend classes, all of them are trying to educate her on how the boycott is important and how they are being insensitive by thinking of classes so they’re trying to just reinforce their opinion all the time when they should try to accommodate everyone’s voices.”, said a second year student from Lady Shri Ram College for Women. Another GBM was called on 5th March 2020 at 11am, to discuss the matter with the department. The following message was circulated by the Union: “Based on the GBM today, the department will be following a partial boycott stance as a collective, wherein the entire department will only boycott all classes on days of protest marches and youth gatherings. However, individual sections are free to follow a total boycott stance provided the entire class agrees to this motion. This decision comes as a result of groups of students feeling bullied and targeted for picking a stance or for attending classes, as well as the confusion in communication between students and their CRs. Note: 

  1. Classes will take place for those who wish to attend.
  2. For students unable to attend college due to safety concerns, the union will be making attempts to ensure that attendance is granted to you all and extra classes can be arranged as well.
  3. For students or classes who wish to boycott indefinitely, some teachers are willing to take extra classes in order to ensure that you do not miss out on syllabus.
  4. If a section comes to a consensus about total boycott, their CRs must communicate that to their teachers and ensure that no student is attending classes on the days of total boycott. 

Further discussions are awaited after the mid-semester break. The department also has its annual conference- Litmus 2020 scheduled on 20th and 21st March 2020. 

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives 

Image Credits: Department of English, LSR

 

Priyanshi Banerjee

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Patel Versus Nehru: The Modern Indian Rivalry

By

Winston Churchill once wrote, “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.” Here’s looking at how history was composed by our leaders at the eve of independence and beginning of self-rule, despite their apparent differences.

It is a well known fact that history was composed and looked after by coterie of the Indian National Congress which came to the fore in the leadership fracas in India before 1947, as a consequent result, Indian history has seldom acknowledged the fact that the country is indebted as much to Sardar Vallabhai Patel for its independence and integration as to leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru. The extraordinary leader also known hasn’t been given proper remembrance despite his great sacrifices for Independence, his contributions to issues like Kashmir and Hyderabad, as well as the bureaucratic system and the efforts made by him in unifying the country.
Patel considered himself a disciple of Mahatma Gandhi and conceded to him (even on issues he had a differing view on), while Nehru, who was made the first Prime Minister of the nation, was neither a friend nor an enemy. They both worked together as partners, but also were often at loggerheads on several issues arising from the conflict between Nehru’s principles and Patel’s priorities.
Here is a brief account of their significant collaborations and rivalries wrapped around the modern history of the country;

For Post Of Congress President
Vallabhai Patel was the most favored choice to be sworn in as the President of Congress several times. The majority in Congress looked at him as the most deservingt candidate due to his credentials of being a skillful and hardheaded leader. However, he stepped aside for Nehru upon the request of his Guru, Mahatma Gandhi. “I suggested your name for the crown of thorns (President ship of the Congress). Keep it on, though the head be bruised,” wrote Gandhi Ji to Nehru in a letter dated 15th July 1936.
On Socialism
Nehru was increasingly disposed towards the idea that the developmental model of the nation must be steered by the government. However, Patel was of the opinion that industry must be established in the country before nationalization and also had cited the example of England, where socialism arose considerably on the road to industrialization.
On Hyderabad
A day prior to the entrance of Indian forces into Hyderabad (which was a princely state not part of India at that time) to fight against the Nizam’s
paramilitary force, K.M. Munshi, India’s then Agent General In Hyderabad, had recorded that Nehru “flew into rage and upbraided Sardar for his action and attitude towards Hyderabad.” However, plans didn’t change and the Indian forces rolled into Hyderabad.
On Kashmir Issue
Patel had advised Nehru against taking the Kashmir issue to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and even famously called it the “Insecurity Council”. However, his advice was ignored and this move resulted in the UNSC further complicating the issue by asking for withdrawal of forces and
conduct of plebiscite in the region.

Patel and Nehru’s rivalry and the internal strife between the two strands of the Congress led by them had been finally quelled upon the martyrdom of Mahatma Gandhi. There were heated arguments between Nehru and Patel and Patel had even written to Gandhi Ji to relieve him of his responsibilities. However, upon Gandhi Ji’s death, Nehru wrote a letter to Patel that now everything had changed and that there was urgent need for them to function closely and co-operatively, which Patel reciprocated. Hence Gandhi, through his death, could reconcile both the leaders of the new and fragile country.

Image Credits: Getty Images

Abhinandan Kaul

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

Shaheen Bagh: The Cradle of Hope and Anger

By

Here is an eye-opening first hand account of the Shaheen Bagh protests from the pen of a participating media-person.

I have seen various media personnel visit and report about the protests at Shaheen Bagh. But as media students, we are often told that the more comfortable a person is with us, the more heartfelt the conversation will be. Thus, I made it a point to be without any media equipment and be a part of the protest. The result of this was eye-opening.

As I reached the locality, the first thing I could notice was the posters of the local MLA Amanatullah Khan all along Jasola puliya (bridge), besides which are huge dumps of garbage. The area suffers heavily from lack of sanitation facilities. The Delhi Police have placed barricades at multiple places around the demonstration. 

Dissent and fulmination form the basis of a vibrant democracy. In neoteric times, a demonstration which has become the flag bearer of these rights are the protesters of Shaheen Bagh. These protests have, for antipathetic and sympathetic reasons, been the hot topic in national politics as well as media for over two months. 

One can’t help but notice several roadside shops selling, in simple words, protest merchandise. These include shirt pins, mufflers, head wraps and t-shirts. The shopkeeper tells me that he, a class 7th student, along with his father can make around Rs. 200 to 300 each. On being asked about his schooling, he gives me a sad shrug. When I ask him about his meals, he tells me that just twenty metres ahead, a ‘Sardar Ji’ and his wife, both advocates have started langar and they feed everyone. “They both get pensions every month as they are lawyers. What a life they have. I wish I could also just do nothing and earn a lot.” The point of doubt in this statement was that advocates do not get any pension, so where was that money coming from? Even after multiple tries, I couldn’t get the answer to this question. The whole area is witnessing the rise of a gig economy which survives on the protests and if the protests stop, this economy will also crash. 

Further down the street is a vendor who is selling kufis. Talking to me, he reiterates his anger towards the establishment, “The government is doing nothing. Modi and Shah along with the RSS are onto us. Sometimes, I feeling like burning the whole parliament down. They are not doing work anyway.” Just beside him is an old lady or as she was being addressed ‘Dadi’. She tells me about her son working in the Delhi Metro as an engineer. She emphasises on the fact that no one can defy ‘Allah ka Farman’ or God’s order, “These people in the government are just humans and they can’t defeat Allah.” On knowing that I was a college student, she gives me her best wishes. 

The place was full of buzz as the arrival of Supreme Court lawyers was due in a short while. Even though the people there are protesting for the same cause, still everyone’s views are different. And without a leader, these views clash. While some wanted to talk to the lawyers, others were steadfast on the fact that the Apex Court itself is a ‘slave’ of the government. 

The stretch which is being used by the protestors for the sit-in is home to many big showrooms. And due to the protests, the business of these shops has crashed. The streets also had the rumour that these showroom owners are bribing the authorities to clear the road and get their businesses running. Annoyed by this rumour an attendee says, “These people won’t understand. If they won’t earn for some time, what bad can happen? But if the protests finish our future generations won’t be able to live, they’d become slaves.” 

As opposed to the common narrative, people here were genuinely scared of the trio – National Register of Citizens (NRC), National Population Register (NPR) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). This fear was also a result of mongering as most of the people didn’t know everything about the bill. The hoarding put up in the area, which did try to explain the matter was itself fallacious. This explanation connected the Aryan theory of Friedrich Schlegei and William Jones to the present scenario – where misconception goes on and on based on such assumptions and tries to force a particular interpretation of the trio rather than letting people using their sense.

The protestors themselves know the fact that the moment they unblock the road, nobody will care for their protesting anymore. Apart from this, the organisers also do not allow men to sit in the front, only women are allowed to do so. On being asked why, a bystander tells me that they only have these two factors – the roadblock and the women, as leverage for the protest. If they lose either of them, the protests will fail. 

This has resulted in the popular opinion of the place to shift from ‘saving the constitution’ to ‘saving the kaum’ or community. The protest is being led by the women of Shaheen Bagh but several men around the area do not want to accept this empowering symbol. “Are we wearing bangles that these lawyers will ask the women for their views? These women are just being given too much importance”, said a man when the Supreme Court lawyer asked for the views of women on the matter. After a short while, the so-called ‘volunteers’ barged into the sitting area and blocked the view of many women. When confronted they started pushing and heckling the women. Since these boys were locals and knew almost everyone, not many confronted them and they continued to stand wherever they wanted. 

Just a few days back so-called activist, Gunjan Kapoor tried to film the protests without consent while wearing a burqa and sitting among the protestors. After a while, she was caught by the protesters who reportedly had a hard time ‘saving’ her from the locals before handing her over to Delhi Police. Mentioning this, a dadi trying to give proof of the peaceful nature of the protests to the lawyers, said, “We handed over Gunjan Kapoor to the police. Even though she was a Hindu, we did not harm her.” These lines forced me to rethink about the secular nature of the protests. 

The Shaheen Bagh protests are facing the grave dangers of conflicting views and unclear narratives. If the protestors do not understand and address this, the whole protests will be delegitimised, thus breaking the protestors. 

Image Credits: Aniket Singh Chauhan for DU Beat

Aniket Singh Chauhan

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

ABVP’s Game Play With Anti-Left Posters at North Campus

By

ABVP-led DUSU slams the Left for 5 January JNU violence and anti-CAA protests with hoardings all over North Campus. ABVP and NSUI exchange words regarding no official meetings, securing permission and wasting union budget. 

University’s North Campus has been covered with hoardings put by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidhyarthi Parishad (ABVP)  led Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) blaming the Left for the January 5 violence inflicted at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). They have also blamed the Left for protesting against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. 

 Akshit Dahiya, President, Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) has accepted that the provocative hoardings have been installed by the ABVP. “They (the Left) are speaking about breaking India and slogans and banners seeking freedom for Kashmir have sprung up at their protests. There are attempts to project students’ protest in a negative way,” said Dahiya. 

The DUSU sits on an unbalanced note as three of the members are affiliated to ABVP while the post of Secretary comes from a rather different ideology; led by the Congress-led- National Students’ Union of India (NSUI). Dahiya added that three hoardings have been put up near Law Faculty after attaining the required permission from authorities. The hoardings have messages such as “CAA ke naam par desh jalana bandh karo” (stop burning the country in the name of CAA) and “Left attacks JNU,” carrying pictures of ABVP members injured in the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) January 5 violence and those injured due to anti-CAA protests all over the country. One of the hoardings also shows mob pelting stones.

However, the National Students’ Union of India slammed the rather cheap move by ABVP. Ashish Lamba, Secretary of the DUSU questioned the ABVP’s decision to put up such posters as there was no official DUSU meeting regarding the same. Dahiya countered the claim by stating that DUSU Executive Council which comprised 15 members, including the four DUSU office-bearers who came to the conclusion with the consensus of 10 members.  

The Delhi President of NSUI, Akshay Lakra, criticised the wastage caused by ABVP-led DUSU of the Union’s budget. Accusing the ABVP in indulging in dirty left-right politics in free university spaces, Lakra continues, “Despite being exposed many times by media and JNU students, ABVP still hasn’t accepted its defeat in its own propaganda. The NSUI strongly condemns any sort of hate campaign run by political parties on university campuses. It’s high time that we restore peace and harmony on campuses,” he said. To counter this claim, Akshit Dahiya, DUSU President, denied using the budget for putting up the hoarding rather the Executive Council contributes 200 INR per member. 

January 5, 2020, went down quite unfortunate on JNU as masked men and women barged into the campus with weapons, vandalising and injuring people as the Delhi Police observed in silence. Media debated and conspired to blame the Left for inflicting violence on the left, thus perpetuating the idea of ‘Left Terror’. However, within a few days, Pinky Chaudhary of Hindu Raksha Dal took to video to claim responsibility for the merciless attack on unarmed students. In the video, Chaudhary says, “For several years, JNU has been a bastion of communists and we will not tolerate it. Hindu Raksha Dal, Bhupendra Tomar, Pinky Chaudhury take the responsibility of what has happened in JNU…all of them were our volunteers. Those who cannot do such work for Mother India don’t have the right to live in this country.” The violence instigated on students was deadly as over 30 injured students and professors were admitted to AIIMS Trauma Centre on the night of 6th January. 

Featured Image Credits: Jaishree Kumar

Anandi Sen
[email protected] 

 

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

Having ‘the Talk’: Family vs Politics

By

Have you ever faced a situation when your opinions don’t resonate with the masses? It gets worse when your kith and kin are loggerheads with your opinions, and personal relationships suffer.

The political scenario has heated up like never before in the country, where we can see everyone having an opinion about the current events in the nation. While protesting is everyone’s legal right, it becomes very difficult to dissent when your own family and friends disregard your political opinions, which might turn personal relationships sour. The current scenario can trap one into their own spiral of silence.

Many students struggle to explain to their parents the reasons behind them protesting. Lashed as ‘immature’ and ‘brainwashed’, many are disregarded for having a certain political opinion which builds up to spoil personal relations.

Anandi Sen, from Kamala Nehru College, DU said, “Several school friends and flings have parted ways solely because of my political opinions. I am no longer in touch with them, both online and offline. However, my family still, sadly, remains that one community which cannot be parted with due to my opinions, this simply results in an eerie silence on the dinner table and awkward gazes at the newspaper headline.”

While it may not be worth losing friends over politics, as politics is unpredictable, but we can try to convince the other party and come to terms with the situation. “The Personal is Political. I can only laugh at people who want to keep politics out of their conversations and relations, remember, their ideology reflects who they are and what they think, their ideology is their thought. Why would you acknowledge anyone who believes in the systematic oppression of a different community?” continues Anandi.

A lot of us are surrounded by families who lack empathy and peers who lack cognisance, and often we find ourselves in situations of administration clampdown over peaceful protests. When a healthy democracy falls to rot, the pillar of dissent stands tall and braves its way through the mayhem of destruction. Dissent puts forward our ideas of patriotism on open roads for us to claim back, braving a ‘mobile addicted’ generation to fight back against malicious lies being peddled on the internet.

What concerns us, more than ever today, is the permeation of dissent in our lifestyle and apolitical spaces. We cannot allow our families to bask in their problematic politics anymore, one that encourages blatant injustices and discrimination against communities. Initiating uncomfortable conversations in our own homes is necessary to combat the years of propaganda that has been fed in our lives.

Countering lies with facts, and calling out the lack of journalistic objectivity by prime time news channels that are owned by corporate and political overloads is important. We need to consciously invest in artists who don’t enable an authoritarian government, and who let the masses bleed in a bid for fame. Do not co-opt another communities’ story, it’s important for the movement to be intersectional in nature, one that allows every community to have a voice that is not snatched in a bid for the populace.

We are also going to learn things that make us question ourselves, our place in the world, and our beliefs. We’ll be confronted with a reality that hurts, which makes us defensive, and even angry. Dissent helps us realise and recognise the facets of our environment that were inherently problematic but went unnoticed. The aim has to be included by the virtue of our dissenting spaces, and not to create an exclusionary dialogue that is at odds with the very idea of a flourishing democracy.

Featured Image Credits: Sriya Rane for DU Beat

Sriya Rane

[email protected]

Paridhi Puri

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

Politics and Protests: It’s Complicated

By

India has had an illustrious history of protests. Be it the pre-independence times or the post. But nearly every time, these protests are accused of being mere activities of political agendas and activities.

Whenever we see something going wrong in the social or political sphere in the nation, we take to the streets. Be it the recent Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) agitations or The Bihar Movementof 1974, the students along with political leaders wanted the nation to change. But both these agitations till some extent had a political flavour within them. The Leftist parties for the latter and Jana Sangh(Later Bhartiya Janata Party) for the post, and it is these political ideologies that have made many of these protests a victim of political rivalries, thereby weakening their credibility. Though politics in protests has helped protests to become effective but this effectiveness always comes with a price.

Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams, writers of the book Inventing the Future: Post capitalism and a World without Work, question the power of marches, protests, and other acts of what they call folk politics.

They said, “These methods are more habit than solution. Protest is too fleeting. It ignores the structural nature of problems in a modern world. The folk-political injunction is to reduce complexity down to a human scale.”

This impulse promotes authenticity-mongering, reasoning through individual stories (also a journalistic tic), and a general inability to think systemically about change.

Take the example of the DTC bus burning near Jamia Millia Islamia. Every time the protestors want to raise a valid critical point over the CAA and NRC legislation, they are shut out by the pro-legislation groups on this violent act. Though the protestors claim that they weren’t a part of the act which was later proved to be true but their credibility was compromised using fake news and propaganda.

Violence has always been part of the political process. Politics does not merely encompass the actions of Legislative assemblies, political parties, electoral contests and other formal trappings of a modern Government. Protest activities of one form or another, efforts to dramatize grievances in a fashion that will attract attention, and ultimately the destruction or threatened destruction of life and property appear as expressions of political grievances even in stable consensual societies like India.

In one sense, to speak of violence in the political process to speak of the political process itself; the two are inseparable. The ultima ratio of political action is force. Political activity below threshold of force is normally carried on with the knowledge that an issue maybe escalated into overt violence if a party feels sufficiently aggrieved. So be it Hindutva for the Bhartiya Janata Party, the dynastic politics for the Congress or the worker and trade union politics for the Left parties.

Medha Patkar, an environmental activist, who was a leading figure in Narmada Bachao Andolan, was able to stall the Narmada Dam project. She was successful as her lobbying made the World Bank withdraw its funding from the project. Still the project was completed with the help of public funding and the dam stands tall on the Narmada River. This tells us that protesting is a right of citizens of a democratic nation but protesting responsibly is also a duty.

We protestors have to be rational in our demands or otherwise protests get intermixed with politics. Like the students’ union protested against the change of names of Aligarh Muslim University and Banaras Hindu University into Aligarh University and Banaras University in the 1970s. Just think about the level of communal harmony this simple name change could have done.

If we look at the protests today as an exercise in public awareness, they appear to have had mixed success at best. Their messages are mangled by an unsympathetic media smitten by images of property destruction—assuming that the media even acknowledges a form of contention that has become increasingly repetitive and boring. Therefore we should always protest whenever we want to see change but always be responsible and rock hard on our goals.

As in recent times many student politicians have started protesting, not for student problems but for popularity, which is not only catastrophic now but also in the future.

One of my close friends told me that hearing about JNU students protesting has become so common that now people don’t even care. Though I have my own interpretations but still I can’t help but agree with him on a great extent.

 

Feature Image Credits:The New Yorker

 

Aniket Singh Chauhan

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By