What about our right to dissent? A response from two students of Jawaharlal Nehru University
JOHN THOMAS & NILANJANA SENGUPTA The Indian Express : Saturday, November 19, 2005
It is unfortunate that the peaceful protest staged by the students of Jawaharlal Nehru University during the prime minister’s visit has been portrayed by a section of the media as “disruption”. Not only has there been a misrepresentation of facts but the interpretation of events has towed the standard line followed by the administration and those who believe in restricting dissent to token forms of expression in seminar halls and high priced publications read by a select few.
No one denies the prime minister his right to free expression. In fact millions of Indians, whether they like it or not, live out lives shaped by the will and whim of the prime minister and the ruling clique, expressed through their policies and programmes. The question here is whether the people — in this case the students — have the right to dissent. And dissent, not only in secluded corners allotted to them, where there is no one to hear them anyway, but right there, face to face with those with whom they disagree.
On November 14, at JNU, it was not Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s right which was ‘disrupted’. It was the right to protest — the cornerstone of any democracy — that was violated and brutally disrupted. Not just the editorialising, but the facts too were incorrect. When, on that day, a group of students raised black flags and slogans against the neo-liberal policies of the Congress government, there was no ensuing scuffle between students. The protesting students were brutally beaten up by National Students Union of India and Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad lumpens from all sides and the police actively aided and abetted the attack.
When peaceful protesters were being beaten up right in front of his eyes, it is indeed ironical that the prime minister was quoting Voltaire — “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it.” Truly, the point is not whether you agree with the protesters, but it is time someone speaks out in defence of their right to dissent. Both writers are students at the School of Social Sciences, JNU
Your comment[s] on this article Read comment[s]
Take time to choose your philosophy
The students are half my age and hence need to know that the political ideal they are espousing is primarily because of association, i.e., to please the peers or superiors, and not out of any rational conviction. They are not enough into life for having a balanced view towards money and economy.Dissent need not be a spectacle or mob-anarchic. The democratic freedom we have earned should not be a cover for the Protest industry. Now that we are into the media-era, more sophisticated tools of canvassing should be employed. But for that the dialogue process requires to be transparent and honest, as Habermas would emphasize, and not the irrational zeal of recruiting cadres by hook or by crook. Fraternally, Tusar N. Mohapatra, Posted by: Tusar N. Mohapatra, India, 20-11-2005 at 0243 hours IST
The students are half my age and hence need to know that the political ideal they are espousing is primarily because of association, i.e., to please the peers or superiors, and not out of any rational conviction. They are not enough into life for having a balanced view towards money and economy.Dissent need not be a spectacle or mob-anarchic. The democratic freedom we have earned should not be a cover for the Protest industry. Now that we are into the media-era, more sophisticated tools of canvassing should be employed. But for that the dialogue process requires to be transparent and honest, as Habermas would emphasize, and not the irrational zeal of recruiting cadres by hook or by crook. Fraternally, Tusar N. Mohapatra, Posted by: Tusar N. Mohapatra, India, 20-11-2005 at 0243 hours IST
No comments:
Post a Comment