Student Politics : Time for Reform
Student bodies and unions have been in the news for all the wrong reasons of late. The thuggery on display in Ujjain took the life of a professor who was opposing holding student body elections. The intimidation and eventual assault on the professors was covered by the media and one got to see first hand the ugly side of student politics. Student politics came of age in the seventies with many movements demanding rights and for socialist causes. Over the years the ‘student’ in student bodies was replaced with politicians of all colours and hues. With all major national parties having their student bodies, the politicization of student unions is complete. The national parties are using student politics as laboratories to extend their influence and also delve into a young vote bank for electoral gains. They have also in the process inculcated the sterling qualities of politicians – voter intimidation, violent confrontations, booth capturing, horse trading and of course corruption and the use money power.
A case in point is the Delhi University elections, which have been reduced to a farce with candidates each year proclaiming to do the exact same thing in their manifestos year after year. While many may argue that the one year tenure is too little to achieve anything concrete, the question arises that all these years could the student leaders not concentrate on this single issue and get a more workable time frame rather than fight over petty issues? Also, would it not be better if students raised issues on say the right to access the Internet or introducing newer courses etc. rather than indulge in arm-twisting and false promises?
The utter degradation of student politics was not exactly a hidden truth, but recent farcical election campaigns and violence has given it the necessary scrutiny. Student bodies are meant to represent student’s rights; at least that is what they claim. But when issues of student welfare and the very future of students is in question, all student parties are found wanting. During the recent reservation demonstrations, not one student political outfit came out in open support of the movement. It was left for umbrella groups to raise the concerns and demonstrate their angst. The government on its part had appointed former Chief Election Commissioner, J.M Lyngdoh, to propose election reforms for student bodies and statutory regulations on them. Lyngdoh recommended a cut in election spending and bans on posters etc. These steps work well for the election procedure itself, but the essence of the argument lies in what is the role of student politics and bodies in the first place? Is their role to be testing ground for a future in politics? Is it a fast way to grab power and legitimize thuggery? Is it to make the years spent by a student in college fruitful? Or is to voice student rights? To find one answer to that may be naïve, but the answer sure lies somewhere in between. Despite the fact that one may be critical of student bodies one cannot deny their role in a democracy and especially in a democracy involving young people. So one can also argue that the politics of today is now being reflected in the student version of the same as well. What student leaders see on television screens, with mud slinging and chair throwing, they feel is what politics stands for. So in an ironical sense the student leaders behavior is a creation of the politicians themselves.
One would be happy to see mature and reason based student politics but at the same time it is the job of the ‘big’ politicians to show them the way. Surely, one cannot be critical of students and not of the politicians who are pumping money and absurd notions about politics into these leaders. But with the tragic death of Prof. Sabbarwal there is a clarion call for reforming student politics, who does this – the government, the students, or college administration is debatable, but the time has come to rid ourselves of manufacturing goons and criminals in the name of student empowerment.
A case in point is the Delhi University elections, which have been reduced to a farce with candidates each year proclaiming to do the exact same thing in their manifestos year after year. While many may argue that the one year tenure is too little to achieve anything concrete, the question arises that all these years could the student leaders not concentrate on this single issue and get a more workable time frame rather than fight over petty issues? Also, would it not be better if students raised issues on say the right to access the Internet or introducing newer courses etc. rather than indulge in arm-twisting and false promises?
The utter degradation of student politics was not exactly a hidden truth, but recent farcical election campaigns and violence has given it the necessary scrutiny. Student bodies are meant to represent student’s rights; at least that is what they claim. But when issues of student welfare and the very future of students is in question, all student parties are found wanting. During the recent reservation demonstrations, not one student political outfit came out in open support of the movement. It was left for umbrella groups to raise the concerns and demonstrate their angst. The government on its part had appointed former Chief Election Commissioner, J.M Lyngdoh, to propose election reforms for student bodies and statutory regulations on them. Lyngdoh recommended a cut in election spending and bans on posters etc. These steps work well for the election procedure itself, but the essence of the argument lies in what is the role of student politics and bodies in the first place? Is their role to be testing ground for a future in politics? Is it a fast way to grab power and legitimize thuggery? Is it to make the years spent by a student in college fruitful? Or is to voice student rights? To find one answer to that may be naïve, but the answer sure lies somewhere in between. Despite the fact that one may be critical of student bodies one cannot deny their role in a democracy and especially in a democracy involving young people. So one can also argue that the politics of today is now being reflected in the student version of the same as well. What student leaders see on television screens, with mud slinging and chair throwing, they feel is what politics stands for. So in an ironical sense the student leaders behavior is a creation of the politicians themselves.
One would be happy to see mature and reason based student politics but at the same time it is the job of the ‘big’ politicians to show them the way. Surely, one cannot be critical of students and not of the politicians who are pumping money and absurd notions about politics into these leaders. But with the tragic death of Prof. Sabbarwal there is a clarion call for reforming student politics, who does this – the government, the students, or college administration is debatable, but the time has come to rid ourselves of manufacturing goons and criminals in the name of student empowerment.
1 Comments:
At 11:14 AM, Anonymous said…
im saddened by the very fact that students themselves dont understand the meaning of " students union" and get carried away by the politician.Violence is all what students learn out of it so might as well ban it.
We go to institutions to study and become better citizens and not become hooligans!!!!!!!
amrita
Post a Comment
<< Home