Not so long ago, the idea of buying packaged drinking water was widely considered preposterous. It was believed that water and air were in abundance and one would never run out of them, let alone have to pay for them. Clearly, people were wrong. If the reports are to be believed, our country is exploring the market for air purifiers that is set to touch 39 million dollars by 2023. Delhi, known for its ever increasing pollution levels, already has an “oxygen bar”. But the question one is wondering is that will commodifying breathable air, one of the preconditions of life on earth, not make it more inaccessible? After all, not all people can afford to pay to breathe.
The proposal to hike the hostel fees at Jawaharlal Nehru University, if implemented, will make education unaffordable for students from economically poor backgrounds. Over 40 per cent of the students at JNU hail from families that have an income of less than Rs 12,000 per month. It is sad that some of them might have to drop out of this prestigious institute if the fee hike comes into force. The protests by the students thus have to be understood from their perspective as they are the ones who will be affected by the fee hike. People must extend moral support to them. The vice-chancellor of JNU, M. Jagadesh Kumar, should also sympathize with the students. It is quite unfortunate that he allegedly showed reluctance to meet the protesting students.
The crucial question here is whether education should be subsidized and made affordable for the poor or should it be the exclusive preserve of the affluent? The government cannot shirk its responsibility of providing quality education to those without the wherewithal to pay for it themselves. It is hard to understand that government is strapped for cash when it comes to students’ hostel fees but could cut corporate tax to the tune of Rs 1.45 lakh crore.
Also, students of JNU are not the only ones protesting a proposed hike in hostel fees. Several universities across India are facing similar problems. A few months back, there were massive protests by students of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Hyderabad because of the raise in hostel and mess fees. The most common argument in favour of such hikes is that it will help improve infrastructural and educational standards. But if that were true then the government would not have been systematically targeting reputed universities that encourage critical thinking in their students.
It is strange that the State, which should be providing education to its citizens, is doing the opposite by discouraging meritorious, but poor students from taking admission in prestigious institutions by hiking the hostel fees. Is the government turning increasingly capitalist or is it trying to make way for corporates in the field of education?
Other government-funded institutions of higher education have also been raising their fees. What is the point of studying in government universities that are funded by tax payers’ money if they cannot take responsibility for educating the poor? Given the government’s apathy, who will the citizens turn to?
Explaining how the government is making its case for the privatisation of education, Akash Raha, alumnus of JNU and a Consultant to IIM, Indore, says “Today, the government keeps putting forth ruses of ‘liberal education’ and ‘autonomy’ in an attempt to defund public higher education in India. While there is an attempt to curb democratic autonomy within spaces of higher education in India, there is also an attempt to enforce economic autonomy sought by the forces of neoliberalism.
“For instance, the recommendations of the 1968 National Policy of Education suggested that educational spending be raised to 6 per cent of the total GDP; however, 50 years ever since, there is no political will to raise the educational spending. Instead, as seen in the case of JNU and other public universities, much of the funds remain unspent.
“Perhaps the reason for this lies in the neoliberal economic policies India has subscribed to. For instance, through the WTO-GATs agreement of 2015, wherein, India opened business to 160 member countries to establish universities in India as a commercial venture. These glorified private and foreign universities will have to be created at the cost of public education system in India, since, to create a ‘level playing field’ for these commercial ventures the subsidies to the existing and prospective public education systems have to be dismantled.
“Explaining neoliberal policies and how systems such as education are privatized, Noam Chomsky says, “First defund it. Then, it won’t work. People will be angry, and they’ll want something else. It’s a standard technique for privatizing.”
“In such an education system that favours the one with most capital and sway in the society, what claims can citizens have to Right to Education?
“Public education in India is already deeply underrepresented by those coming from marginalized sections of the society – the Dalit, the Adivasis, the Muslims, and the poor amongst others. With no concrete reservation policies in the private educational institutions, what claims can the marginalized citizen make from the government that imposes neoliberal policies on education, and austerity measures in an already lopsided education system that pushes the marginal outside the periphery? In such a system how can a democracy protest for its rights when its government has relinquished its power to concede?””
Socio-economic divide
Governments at the Centre have always been at loggerheads with JNU: If in the past it was the Congress governments that were at the receiving end, now it is the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The university’s predominantly left-leaning politics has been a major reason for this. Another reason has been the presence of a politically-active and socially-conscious student community, which has constantly scrutinised the actions of the administration and various governments. At times this has been with bipartisan consent, as is the case now. Both the Left-led JNU Students’ Union and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) are protesting against the fee hike. Given this, the governments’ displeasure towards JNU, though not justified, is understandable.
The protests over the proposed fee hike are a testament to the growing socio- economic divide in India. Viju Cherian, Editor at moneycontrol.com explains this divide very aptly. He says “At its core the JNU protest is a students’ demonstration which has now snowballed into a ‘face-off’ with authorities, and has turned into a complex socio-political hot potato. This has happened because of government/ administrative apathy, media misrepresentation and the economic chasm that divides India. A beef many people have with the protesting students is the low rents they pay for their hostel rooms — the lowest being Rs 10 per month. The questions are: How can the rent be so low? To have such cheap accommodation in South Delhi is unimaginable! Why should rents be subsidised for every student? Those who can pay, must pay, and so on. A positive takeaway from this is that it could lead to a discussion on the nature of current subsidies in the higher education sector. Another could be that through this episode the urban middle and upper-middle class will realise that beyond its city or town limits there is an India, an economically weak and underprivileged India, where life and realities are starkly different. Just outside the JNU main gate is Budh Vihar, Munirka, where relatively affordable housing (by South Delhi standards) and eateries can be found. In JNU, of course, food and accommodation is subsidised. Near the faculty quarters and just outside JNU’s west gate there is a foot over bridge which connects the campus to Vasant Kunj — to three shopping malls, of which one is a luxury shopping mall where a leather belt or a shoe could put you behind by Rs 50,000. Thus, in a metaphorical manner, the JNU campus is the bridge between the two realities we see around us. The JNU protest and the surrounding controversy has showed that more than seven decades after Independence, the socio-economic chasm in India is as wide as ever.”
Revised JNU Hostel Manual: Fact Sheet
Role of media
The country has once again been on the boil due to the ongoing protests by the JNU students over the proposed fee hike.. We have had highly emotive reportage on the incident and all the subsequent action that has followed. At the time of writing this, the issue remains open to heated debate between all stakeholders. But it does raise one important question on the role of media in all this.
The issue isn’t about the protests by the students of JNU but how it was reported and by who, for it has an impact on people’s opinion and reaction. In a country as large as India, which happens to be a cauldron of socio-cultural-religious diversity, there is possibility of dissension and conflict from time-to-time, and democracy remains the best platform to discuss and debate all contentious issues and come up with acceptable solutions through consensus. So, when the media – the fourth pillar of democracy – reports an incident like what happened in JNUSU protests, it is not the issue itself but the manner of reporting that becomes critical. Reading about an incident can have a very different impact than watching a highly charged and emotional coverage on TV, which can trigger a reaction among people leading to a serious law and order problem.
This can be seen clearly in the JNU coverage and one can witness that media is shifting its role from mere ‘reporting’ from a neutral perspective to offering a verdict on incidents as they happen. Explaining this trend in the ongoing issue Viju Cherian writes “While almost every media outlet reported the JNU protest and the partial rollback of fees, it is to be seen as to how many have taken time to explain the nature of the rollback and why it is too little or, as the students say, ‘cosmetic’ or ‘nothing but headline management’. How many have cared to highlight that while the partial fee hike rollback is aimed at students in the Below Poverty Line (BPL) category and that the authorities are yet to decide on how to identify eligible students. How many have reported that the fee hike was one among the many reasons for the protests?
In this context, it must be remembered that it was almost four years ago, while reporting another protest in JNU, sections of the media used fake news and aired doctored protest videos to brand protesting students ‘anti-national’.
In the current case, rather than clearing the smog of misinformation and disinformation that was surrounding the protest, senior journalists took to social media skewing the debate and furthering myths about ‘never-ending PhDs’, or equating the protests to the ‘next thing after Bengal famine to hit Indian shores’ or portraying students as a bunch of freeloaders. This proved that facts are not always sacred, and that many of the journalists who strolled through the power corridors of Lutyens’ Delhi were far removed from the reality where for a majority of Indians spending Rs 6-7,000 a month on education is unthinkable.
The ones most impacted from the coverage of JNU controversy have been the students of the university. They have been vociferous in demanding their right and freedom to protest, as has been the tradition at JNU since inception. The students have also been protesting the trial by media that has made them all seem like anti-nationals. The international media has been widely covering the JNU story and they don’t paint a rosy picture for India. They have widely written on rising intolerance to views that are contrary to the ruling party’s. These have all dented the image of the country internationally and it is time media should do some serious introspection.
Last but not least
In any part of the world, universities are the place where the voices from within are listened for the course correction of the nation. Universities have historically been the space where anti-segregation movements, women’s rights movements, indigenous rights movements and closer to home, the Independence movement, have taken shape. Universities have been the crucible in which nations have been mobilised in their quest to change the structures of unfair societies and states. Imagine the trajectory of these movements if the right to protest and dissent was not accorded to university students.
Students (and faculty) on the JNU campus across party-lines contribute to change by asking critical questions that are important for nation-building. The university is literally the universe for raising these very questions and expressing these dissenting ideas and opinions, regardless of how different and difficult they are.
The crackdown on dissenting opinions has deteriorated to the point where police entered campus to try and intimidate the dissenting voices. It become obvious just how the sanctity of academic institutions has been degraded when we remember that during the Independence movement, student activists took solace within universities since the police were not allowed to enter the autonomous space (a rule that exists even today). By calling for a shutdown of the university, by declaring its diverse and critically thinking students as anti-national, it is evident that those who enjoy the status quo are avoiding the very real questions being raised within the bastion.
By Nilabh Krishna
Leave Your Comment