Yogendra Kumar
During the JNUSU elections, I received a pamphlet being circulated titled Dire Need of an Independent Students’ Organization! Disha is the answer to it!!… I know one should not give recognition to an organization named ‘Disha’, which means direction, but is actually directionless. However, I personally felt the need to expose such hypocrites.
In the second paragraph of the pamphlet, it was mentioned that “whether Left, Right, or identity-based organizations directly or indirectly make specific kinds of ideology or identity a prerequisite for their membership.” I have objections to this hollow argument. Having been a part of JNU since 2021, I have never witnessed Leftists asking students to read all three volumes of ‘Das Kapital’ and ‘The Communist Manifesto’ to join any communist organization. Similarly, BAPSA members do not demand that you read all the ’23’ volumes of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches, or the works of Buddha, Guru Ravidas, Jotiba Phule, Savitribai Phule, Thanthai Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, Aasim Bihari, Louis Braille, Babu Jagadev Prasad, Jaipal Munda, Phoolan Devi, Manyawar Kanshiram, etc. to join their organization. Instead, newly enrolled students develop a general understanding of different student organizations and their ideologies through attending their talk sessions and study circles, which leads them to become sympathizers for these organizations.
In addition to this very basic clarification, I would like to help you understand that neither ideology is separate from students’ issues, nor are students’ issues separate from ideologies. Ideology is a tool that provides an ontological sight to analyze phenomena and enables us to understand the underlying causes of the problems. You further mentioned,“One doesn’t necessarily have to be a Leftist, Marxist, or Ambedkarite to fight for bringing back GSCASH on campus.” Your statement is discounting and disregarding the myriad struggles and sacrifices undertaken by feminists and their allies in advocating for women’s rights. It reflects that you are trapped in the ‘eternalistic bias’ syndrome, where you mistakenly assume that because women, dalits, adivasis, minorities, and other oppressed communities now possess constitutional rights, they have always had these rights. However, history reveals that it was the relentless battle of thousands of people against the Brahmanical-patriarchal structure to secure those rights. These rights were earlier denied to them because of the widespread acceptance of oppressive ideologies, which had to be countered by the alternative ideologies that secure the interests of the oppressed. So, it’s important to recognize the significance of ‘alternative ideologies’ in countering the oppressive system, which is by default governed by ideologies.
In the context of the argument I’ve presented, let’s examine the demand for reinstating GSCASH (Gender Sensitization Committee Against Sexual Harassment) over the ICC (Internal Complaints Committee). Why do we not need feminist ideologies to understand this demand? This society is inherently Brahmanical-patriarchal; that is a fact, and neither the administration nor the professors are beyond it, considering the way the administration passes misogynistic comments to the victims. Time and again, we have seen how the administration itself supports the perpetrators and harasses the victims. GSCASH comprises all elected members, including faculty and non-teaching staff, as well as student representatives, while ICC members are nominated by the administration. Therefore, for effective handling of sexual harassment cases and gender sensitization on campus, a body like GSCASH is essential.
Similarly, after centuries of continuous struggle by anti-caste activists, we have achieved minimal representation through reservation in this Brahmanical structure. You might say that now that they constitutionally have their rights, there is no need for anti-caste ideology to safeguard the rights of marginalized sections. However, I want to make you aware that an ideology of ‘Brahmanism’ has existed since three thousand years ago, marginalizing a significant portion of Indian society. I strongly assert that only anti-caste ideology can safeguard the voice and rights of Bahujans, not people like you who advise students to be anti-ideological. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar also writes about it: “Humans are mortal. So are ideas. An idea needs propagation as much as a plant needs watering. Otherwise, both will wither and die.”
Apart from Disha’s ‘non-ideological’ activism, one thing that concerns me a lot is the increased vote share of ABVP in the JNUSU elections 2023–24. In all three central panel posts, including President, Vice President, and Joint Secretary, ABVP was the single largest vote-sharing party, while for the post of General Secretary, it was the second-largest vote-sharing party after BAPSA. It is true that ABVP could not secure victory in any of the central panel posts, but we cannot deny the increasing acceptance of ABVP among students. I am more interested in knowing the strategies and means through which it is appealing to the students.
As a student of social psychology, I want to make you aware that ABVP is highly dedicated to creating a student community that believes that ‘politics’ is a very negative phenomenon in society, and student politics is the worst form of it. They have convinced many students that students’ issues are isolated from broader social issues. In almost all the councillors’ speeches and central panel speeches, ABVP candidates advocated for focusing solely on students’ issues and criticized all Communist, Ambedkarite, and other organizations for discussing ‘Non-JNU’ issues.
ABVP aims to create a campus where students silently attend classes and do not raise questions to ‘Dronacharyas’, who are infiltrated by the BJP-RSS. They aspire to produce a student community whose political understanding should be equivalent to that of a ‘Pundit’s merit’. They wish that students should only partake in religious and cultural festivals. This socio-political neutral culture is highly prevalent in IITs, IIMs, and other elite institutions, where student suicides and dropout rates are increasing daily, yet no one seems concerned about it. JNU, if I may not overly romanticize, has been the epicentre of many national and international-level movements, alongside its remarkable achievements in research. I pose this question to you: Do you desire a campus where all students are apolitical and silent on monthly suicides (institutional murders), or a campus where students are aware of their rights and actively combat against the oppressive system while excelling academically? If you choose the latter type of campus, then it is incumbent upon us to reach out to those students who are convinced by this false portrayal of ‘student politics’ and ‘apolitical university campuses’.
Restricting discussions, debates, and talk sessions on social issues, can we even imagine students’ issues? Can we make a separation between students’ issues and social issues? The way the private coaching market is run, admission into universities is becoming more challenging. Even Bahujan students who appear for interviews receive very low marks in viva-voca and are systematically denied entry. The so-called students’ issue could have been raised by these Bahujan students, but they were systematically excluded from becoming part of the category of ‘students of JNU’.
Apart from this, a student of JNU, to whom JNU is not able to provide accommodation, goes to Munirka to find a room on rent. The very moment they mention their names, they are denied rooms, with landlords saying, “We do not rent to Muslims.” Do you think Islamophobia and ‘hate against Muslim students’ are not student issues? When students are studying in the library and receive news that their homes are to be set on fire in Manipur, can they study? Do you really think they should be more concerned about the cultural fest than the problems they are grappling with? There can be thousands of examples to quote, but I want to assert that a student is not beyond societal reality. So, we should expose the propaganda spread by the ABVP and their apolitical allies, who contend that students’ issues are isolated from social issues.
Coming back to the debate on the pamphlet, in the fourth paragraph, it is mentioned, “Any identity-based organization equally fails to organize a broad cross-section of the student community due to their prerequisite to belong to any specific identity. This becomes an impediment in forging a broad unity as students become divided by identities instead of fighting together for a common cause. Identity-based organizations may take the correct stand on issues, but we cannot ignore the fact that such organizations solely focus on specific identities, which results in generating friction with opposing identities. Ultimately, they mostly fail to create broad unity among students. For example, BAPSA’s strong anti-upper caste rhetoric makes achieving broad student unity across caste lines very difficult. Practicing caste-based discrimination makes one casteist or an oppressor, but merely being born into any caste does not make one casteist.”
As a sympathizer of BAPSA, I find a factual error in the argument. Neither does BAPSA impose any prerequisites about identities, nor can its politics be reduced to anti-upper caste rhetoric. Time and again, BAPSA has been targeted by so-called progressive organizations, either in the name of ‘identity politics’ or ‘casteist politics’. Although a separate pamphlet should be written on the narratives and propaganda on identity politics, here I want to ask: Do people from Disha have any evidence to present where someone has been denied entry into BAPSA just because of their identity? Do people from Disha have any pamphlets written by BAPSA where they define their politics as ‘anti-upper caste’? And if you do not have any supportive evidence for your claim, what inspired you to write such false stories against a Bahujan organization? It seems like this is inspired by ‘Manu’, who can write anything about anyone without any epistemic source. If that is the case, then you better call it ‘Manu-Parcha’, written to make the ‘Savarna ruling’ possible. I know you are aware of the ideology of BAPSA, but let me reiterate it for the students. BAPSA’s primary idea has always been the ‘unity of the oppressed’ or ‘Bahujan Unity’, which is also reflected in Manyawar Kanshiram’s words: “We will not stop until we unite the victims of the system and overthrow the spirit of inequality in our country.”
I also want clarification that, at one point, you call BAPSA members Ambedkarites, yet on the other, you are not ready to accept ‘Ambedkarism’ as an ideology. Biology says that the human body generally contains 70% water, but I am sure that a Savarna’s body contains more than 70%, but not water; rather, it contains hatred towards Bahujans. Savarnas can never accept a Dalit as a philosopher or an ideologue. Neither can they tolerate the talent of Eklavya nor Shambuk as a guru. For Savarnas, ‘Marxism’, ‘Gandhism’, and even ‘Manuwad’ can be ideologies, but not ‘Ambedkarism’. We reject your Brahmanical judgments, just as we rejected your Manusmriti.
Coming to the question of broader ‘student unity’, which cannot be achieved by ideology but by the common minimum program that you are proposing, I want to ask: When on one side, Bahujan students are leading a movement for the implementation of Mandal Commission recommendations, and on the other hand, ‘upper caste’ students are leading a movement against the implementation of Mandal Commission recommendations, how will you forge broad student unity in both groups? Will you ask them to collectively fight for ‘Chat Sammelan’ through your common minimum program?
BAPSA has always advocated for organic solidarity among the oppressed. Oppressed unity does not invisibilize the differences among people; rather, it is about being aware of the differences. Even with differences, one oppressed section can empathize with the oppression, suppression, and humiliation faced by other oppressed sections. This kind of unity is truly one with dignity. As Malcolm X also said: “Ignorance of each other is what has made unity impossible in the past. Therefore, we need enlightenment. We need more light about each other. Light creates understanding, understanding creates love, love creates patience, and patience creates unity. Once we have more knowledge (light) about each other, we will stop condemning each other, and a united front will be brought about.”
Lastly, you claimed for the mobilization of religious Hindus, and at the same time, you also contended that you would oppose the caste system. Do you think a religious Hindu can oppose the caste system? Not a single anti-caste icon saw the caste system as being separated from Shashtric authority or religion.
To quote some icons-
“जीवन चारि दिवस का मेला रे । बांभन झूठा, वेद भी झूठा, झूठा ब्रह्म अकेला रे ।
पत्थर मूरति कछु न खाती, खाते बांभन चेला रे । जनता लूटति बांभन सारे, प्रभु जी देति न धेला रे ।
पुन्य पाप या पुनर्जन्म का, बांभन दीन्हा खेला रे । स्वर्ग नरक बैकुंठ पधारो, गुरु शिष्य या चेला रे ।
बांभन जाति सभी बहकावे, जन्ह तंह मचै बबेला रे । छोड़ि के बांभन आ संग मेरे, कह विद्रोहि अकेला रे । ”
From these lines, Guru Ravidas’s vision is clear: the caste system cannot be annihilated without questioning the Shastras from which it gets its ideological foundation. Another anti-caste ideologue, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule, also held the same views on the caste system. He says, “If the Brahmans really wish to unite the people of this country and take the nation ahead, then first they must drown their cruel religion, which is customary amongst both the victors (Brahmans) and the vanquished (Shudras), and they publicly and clearly, must cease using any artifice in their relationship with the Shudras, who have been demeaned by that religion and trample on inequality and the Vedanta opinion, and till a true unity is established, there will be no progress in this country.”
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his first article ‘Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis, and Development’, was clear that castes cannot be seen in isolation from religion. Similarly, he said, “Caste is a state of mind. It is a disease of mind. The teachings of the Hindu religion are the root cause of this disease. We practice casteism and we observe Untouchability because we are enjoined to do so by the Hindu religion. A bitter thing cannot be made sweet. The taste of anything can be changed. But poison cannot be changed into nectar.”
If you are not aligning with the views of anti-caste icons on the caste system, I just want clarification on whether you have the same views as the RSS. You pasted the pictures of Mahatma Jyotiba Phule on the walls of campuses. Do you even acknowledge his views on the problem of the caste system? Personally, I found many similarities between the ideas of RSS and Disha and the working styles of ABVP and Disha. Both of them want to work on students’ issues, putting their ideologies aside. I suspect if you both are united, united with the ideology of ‘Brahmanism’.
So, I appeal to all the students to expose such anti-ideological organizations and apolitical people, who are real threats to the ‘ideas’ in general and the ‘Idea of JNU’ in particular.
~~~
Yogendra Kumar has graduated from IIT Kanpur and has completed M.A. in Sociology from JNU
