The changing contour of student politics in BHU

This is an appropriate time to think about the changes BHU has witnessed and incorporated, if any, in the last one year.

WrittenBy:Bishnu Mishra
Date:
Article image
  • Share this article on whatsapp

September 2017 has a special place in the history of Banaras Hindu University. On September 21, 2017, a student was sexually assaulted while returning to her hostel inside the BHU campus. The next morning, the enraged students of the women’s hostel gathered at the main gate of BHU at Lanka and protested peacefully for the over 40 hours, wanting to share their demands with the vice-chancellor. Instead, the district administration, on the suggestion of the BHU administration, used police force to disperse the students.

subscription-appeal-image

Support Independent Media

The media must be free and fair, uninfluenced by corporate or state interests. That's why you, the public, need to pay to keep news free.

Contribute

In this backdrop, on September 23, 2018, the female students of BHU decided to celebrate the students’ struggle and resistance and commemorate the day as “Outrage Eve” against state and university repression on civil liberties. They planned to perform a street play at the famous Vishwanath Temple inside the BHU campus and an open mic session at the round-about near the women’s college. However, Right-wing students belonging to the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad—the student wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh—disrupted the event and manhandled some students in the passive presence of security personnel. Again, almost exactly a year later, female students felt betrayed and cheated on the issues of their freedom of expression and civil liberties.

This is an appropriate time to think about the changes BHU has witnessed and incorporated, if any, in the last one year. Is it still ideologically stagnant? Does the dominance of one particular ideology have more power over the nature of student politics in the campus? Has there been any democratisation of university administration, or is it still anti-student? What space exists for voices of dissent?

It is difficult to present a clear picture of the scheme of things in the BHU campus right now, but careful observation can help put things in perspective.

Clash of cultures

A dark shadow of provincialism and parochialism has hung over BHU for many years. The university has remained beleaguered by conservative forces, gender inequalities and the administration’s callous approach towards women issues in the name of Hindu traditions and values preached and practised by BHU founder Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya. Ironically, the burden of tradition is celebrated here as an achievement.

At the same time, some students have been struggling and intervening to make the campus democratic and progressive, where dialogues of ideology and politics can take place. These students are working on the culture of progressive politics where there must be scope for political dialogue and dissent. They belong to different political groups and their methods may differ but they have a single wish—to make BHU campus democratic and politically vibrant. The September 2017 event was one milestone in that journey where students led by women decided to question the administration.

A small band of students work consistently on issues of gender, social justice and rights-based politics despite continuous physical and psychological threats. These students are the harbinger of a culture which cherishes democratic spirits and principles and strongly believes in what philosopher Immanuel Kant called “categorical imperatives”. The progressive students of the BHU campus—despite their own differences regarding modus operandi of intervention and activism—believe in the democratic values enshrined by the Constitution and take pride in the history of the freedom struggle of India.

At the same time, there is an absolute majority of students who have surrendered before regressive ideas and beliefs like feudalism and patriarchy. Entrapped in the vicious circle of conservatism and status-quo, they find any change—physical or mental— to be a threat to Indian traditions. These students claim to be the last defenders of Indian culture and tradition.  So in the student body, one side is driven by the conviction of ideas, while the other takes motivation from majoritarianism politics and anti-reason.

On “Outrage Eve” held on September 23 this year, both sides were representing their culture. It could have been a great opportunity for the dialogue of ideologies but by their brazen display of machismo and masculinity, the ABVP students lost an opportunity to engage with other students and lost political currency in the campus. They have reduced themselves to hooligans who do not care about the sensitivities of gender. The lack of female students’ membership could be a potential reason behind their insensible approach towards gender causes in the campus, but it was apparent that they were driven by so-called nationalistic feelings and narratives rather than local causes and concerns of the BHU campus. They could not tolerate even songs and poems cited by girl students. By using offensive slogans, sexist abuses and physical attacks on students and journalists, the ABVP showed they only believe in the performance of patriarchy.

September 23 should be declared as a day of mourning and embarrassment for ABVP students since this narrative exposed themselves on their understanding, or lack thereof, of women’s movements and people’s movements. They need to understand that celebrations of struggle and resistance have their own significance in the history of emancipatory politics—a remembrance of what has been achieved, and what needs to be done. The ABVP’s lack of empathy can be traced by their sense, contribution and participation in the politics of freedom and emancipation. Instead, they took pride in the muzzling of dissent, so much so that they even physically assaulted female students.

The irresponsibility of the BHU administration

Inefficiency is the middle name of the BHU administration headed by the vice-chancellor. After the students’ protest last September, the administration found two new faces in the form of the vice-chancellor and chief proctor: Prof. Rakesh Bhatnagar and Prof. Royana Singh, respectively. But if the last few months prove anything, the BHU administration has been a monumental failure as far as governance and administration is concerned. The vice-chancellor relies too much on inputs from the chief proctor, who is insensibility personified. The present chief proctor is first woman chief proctor in the history of BHU, and had been celebrated by some as a victory of the female students’ protest because they did not know the nature of hegemony.

But Royana Singh has a terminal propensity to remain in the limelight and presents herself as a media-friendly administrator—to such an extent that she does not hesitate to tell a lie on a propaganda news channel about last year’s protest being sponsored by outside people and ideological groups. Singh relentlessly misses the sense of justice and this hampers the whole procedure of administration. She slaps murder charges on students for asking questions and becomes part of the standing committees which have the responsibility to inquire into the incidences in a free and fair manner. She influences the whole decision process using sophisticated language and articulation. Her sheer arrogance has jeopardised the academic environment of BHU.

The university administration takes no curative measures against the hooliganism and physical violence committed by few students but shows promptness in muzzling any dissenting voices of the students. Sometimes, it seems as if the administration plays hand-in-glove with the campus’s anti-social elements. Last month, when the ABVP students started manhandling and disrupting the open mic session, one member of the proctorial board was heard saying, “They cannot touch any member of ABVP, because there is the rule of ABVP in India.”

If the university administration is so scared of a political group, there cannot be any confusion regarding the condition of common students and other ideological student groups in the campus. The performance of the university administration in the past year can be summarised in four words—arrogant, unjust, irresponsible and inefficient.

Hope in times of despair

If we’re looking at any achievements over the past year, the first is that the tone of politics has changed. Now, students don’t present their demands as requests, but they assert them as their right. During the September 2017 protest, female students were talking only about safety; now they’re more aware of the issues about gender justice and civil liberties. They’re participating in political debates and showing interest in the political socialisation inside the campus. They’re shrugging off patriarchal rules within and outside the campus. An obvious change that took place after last September is the relaxation of curfew timing in the women’s hostels, whose gates now remain open till 10 pm.

At the level of facilities and governance in the university campus, the situation is improving very slowly. Interestingly, these students are taught the Constitution, the civil disobedience of Ruskin, Gandhi and Zinn, the class struggle of Karl Marx, and the social justice of Ambedkar in their courses—but the university administration expects the students to remain submissive and obedient based on outdated rules and overemphasised values derived from the patriarchal mindset. When students understand that disobedience has profound legitimacy from the Constitution and it can have a political purpose as well, it is impossible for them to remain obedient. Although the numbers of politically charged students are still in countable proportion, the situation is changing.

At the same time, the majority of students, especially girls, are not prepared to talk about a students’ union. When probed, they cite the hooliganism and violence will take place if a students’ union is formed. And so the ideological face-off between ABVP students and progressive students of BHU has clearly provided an opportunity to understand the nature and narrative of student politics in the BHU.

subscription-appeal-image

Power NL-TNM Election Fund

General elections are around the corner, and Newslaundry and The News Minute have ambitious plans together to focus on the issues that really matter to the voter. From political funding to battleground states, media coverage to 10 years of Modi, choose a project you would like to support and power our journalism.

Ground reportage is central to public interest journalism. Only readers like you can make it possible. Will you?

Support now

You may also like