A large section of media (perpetual abusers of ABVP) as well as political parties have praised the speech delivered by Kanhaiya Kumar on March 3, 2016. We welcome this newly found faith in the ‘Constitutional Machineries’ as well as ‘Constitution of India’. Demagogy and rhetorical flourish cannot hide the truth for long. Azadi from hunger or interference was not the slogan raised ever on the Campus or on February 9. It’s a ploy to dilute it by de-contextualizing its use and distract from core issue so that the left bastion remains secure after a short tremor. In case, if it is a result of introspection in Jail as well as conclusion objectively ‘Primary Data from the field as per him’, we welcome it. We also support many ‘Azadis’, positions adopted by him on March 03 and promises to stand with him in struggle for them.
However, to borrow Kanhaiya’s terminology, it is a ‘DHYAN-BHATKAU PRAYAS’ from the gory day of February 09. This is an excellent speech to understand how to make speeches full of rhetoric and sham. It, however, suffers from inconsistencies of fact, logic and reasoning. JNUSU pamphlet issued on Feb 10 undersigned by him as well as his interview on several channels prior to his arrest contradicts position taken by him on March 03. His parliamentary language as well as address to ABVP as opposition is actually a complete reversal from his speech in Presidential Debate,2015 where he has referred to us as ‘Sanghi Sapole’, ’56 Inch ke Pille’, ‘Bhediya ki aulade’. This is his true colour beneath the theatrics and dramatics over-played yesterday.
Azadi Slogans raised on March 03 are situated in different context from the context it was raised on Feb 09. It had slogans which we all categorically recognize as different. In the pamphlet of Feb 10, he has called for the Protest Demo on Feb 11 in defence of Freedom of Expression and recognized the cancellation order for the event ‘against the Judicial Killing of Afzal and Maqbool and in solidarity with struggle of Kashmiri People for their democratic right of self determination, a protest against occupation of Kashmir’ as an undemocratic assault. The pamphlet has not criticized the Feb 09 event. It actually calls the cancel of permission as fascist assault on democratic space. [We wish to point that this cliché of ‘fascism’ is used when ABVP was opposing an event which opposed the Constitutional value of Sovereignty, Integrity and Unity of India][ If this is definition of fascism for Kanhaiya, we will take the abusive terminology of ‘Fascism’ as a badge/honour]. It infact recognizes that ABVP has opposed it at earlier points too. As per the Pamphlet, ABVP has been opposing similar programs for Afzal Guru. This is also an admission that it has been happening for last three years and was never opposed or criticized as he does in his 20 min speech on Feb 11 and later. We have some questions as well as assertions:
1. ABVP stands vindicated in its opposition to the Feb 9 activity as an anti-national activity. The Delhi High Court verdict has recognized our position and opposition. We thanks nation, media and youth to compel the Coterie of Left to hold Tiranga, show allegiance to Constitution, respect the role of military, mellow down their extremist voice. Some of media persons have mocked us through recognizing themselves as anti-national. Some made fun of ours as emotional fools. This is our ideological victory. The coterie of left has burned the Tiranga last year on Feb 9. They have desecrated national emblem. ‘Ashok Stambha’ has been shown under Foot in a pamphlet. Durga had been shown as a women of easy virtue(prostitute) in this campus.(You can certainly celebrate Mahisasur as Raja, but you cannot show Durga as prostitute)
2. Whether the ‘Afzal ke Arman’(dream of Afzal) was to claim freedom from brahamanvad, manuvad, jaitvad, garibi, antakwad.
3. What’s your stand on Mahisasur Diwas? Whether denigration of Durga is allowable? If not, please criticize it. Is it not a patriarchal narrative?
4. Do you think, freedom of speech and expression includes the right to seek secession? If no, condemn DSU propaganda at Library, and not just Feb 9 event.
5. Babasaheb stood for Parliamentary Democracy and was the strongest voice against the Gandhian Idea of Decentralization. However DSU(Khalid, Anirban and Company) was making Afzal-responsible for the Parliamentary attack- a martyr. On March 03, you have not criticized the cultural event of Feb 09 and only on March 04 you said that Afzal is not your hero, Rohith is your hero. Will you condemn Umar and Khalid for celebrating Afzal and Maqbool as Martyr?
6. Will you criticize the CPI(M) and SFI in keral for murder of RSS cadre as well as the ABVP cadre. Will you criticize SFI for treatment meted to T.P.Srinivasan in Kerela when he was man-handled.
7. Will you criticize the Kashmiri separatist for the torture, mass-killing and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits.
8. Since you pretend to live by the Constitution and have even quoted some of values of Preamble, we intend to remind you that it also declares India as ‘Sovereign’. The ‘people of India’ gave to themselves - ‘Unity and Integrity of India’. This is what WE give to ourselves. Baba Saheb supported this idea. In view of this, we wish to know whether you will criticize and disassociate from DSU(its poster in Campus) and other organization which demand for secession of Kashmir, Nagaland, Manipur and Elam. Prof. Nivedita Menon in her lecture has said that ‘India is illegally occupying Kashmir’; ‘India’s imperialism and exploitation in Kashmir’, ‘ridiculing and trivilisation of the martyrdom and dedication of the Indian Army as mere employment’.
We demand that you must bring a resolution in JNUSU condemning such statements and demanding an apology from DSU as well Prof. Nivedita Menon. We promise to vote in favour of it.
9. If you believe in Parliamentary democracy, will you criticize Maoist and Naxalities who are doing exploitation in Left-Wing Extremism area? The treatment meted to Dalits as well as children, use of girls as sex-slaves is reflective of what they shall do if the revolution takes place. Will you criticize AISA and DSU for making the war cry of Naxalbari- the only way ahead?
10. Since you say Kan-Kan mein Ishwar hota hai, to phir Mandir banana ki jarurat kyun; then will you say that Masjid is also not needed and it is not required to be made?
11. We welcome your call for Azadi from Jatiwad, Manuwad and Brahmanvaad. In this regard, we wish to know why the fight against these diseases translates into the fight only against RSS, BJP, and ABVP etc. We wish to know how we are solely responsible for this. We wish to know why you fail to utter a single word against the other political organizations including Left Parties as well as Ultra-left. The history as well as present of Polite Bureaus of CPI, CPI(M) as well as CPI(ML) unequivocally tells us about the under-representation of Women, Minorities, Dalits and tribals in these political parties. We wish to know why do you selectively forgot the Brahamanvad,, Jativad, Manuvad in Congress, CPI, CPI(M), RJD, Samajwadi Party. Why do you wish to forget and criticize the rising Dalit atrocities in form of murder, rape, humiliation and institutional discrimination in the States run by these political parties? We wish to know how the Sangh Parivar can be solely responsible for the collective fault and responsibilities of Indian Society and Political System. It is the Congress and the left which have controlled the power across India in a relatively longer reign.
12. We wish to tell you that during the long rule of CPI(M) what has happened to W.Bengal. Why do you fail to point out that it is in their rule that Dalits, Minorities (esp.Muslims) as well as poor suffered most. Their situation went worse over the period of time. The exploitation of Dalits multiplied, the poverty of poor increased.
13. We stand with Kanhaiya’s fight against corruption and nepotism. However, we again need to remind him that all the major scams in form of 2G, Coal, CWG etc. took place during the UPA-1 tenure when we were witnessing the alliance of Congress with Left political parties as well as the RJD. We wish to gently remind him that if his fight is a fight against the Constitutional Wrong, why you have failed to criticize them. Didn’t you fail to criticize nepotism in Congress (Gandhi Family), RJD (Lalu and Company), and SP (Mulayam Singh and Relatives).
14. If you think that the student studying in Kashmir University or a degree college in Dantewada, or a college in Nagaland, or a University in Kanyakumari or in Jaisalmer or in BKT district must have same standard of Facility as we have in JNU, should you not support the idea that the professors must be transferred to different regional centers and Universities. Another option - Teachers to spend a minimum of 3 months in a year in other Universities This will bring a revolutionary change in the academic environment in the country and shall also have a demonstrative effect on the Facilities at other Universities. When Narendra Modi Government brought this proposal, the left organizations in the Campus collided with the Faculties in opposing this. We wish to know, why you have opposed this.(You may have supported this clause and could opposed other points.)
15. Coming to JNU, riding on the teacher-student solidarity, you have made a false statement that in JNU, reservation policy is fully followed. You have never raised a movement against the proper enforcement of the reservation policy. You have failed to oppose the Brahmanvadi Faculty, especially in some centers of SIS and dominantly in SSS. One of the office-holder in JNUTA, whose support you relish, was given the responsibility to implement the reservation policy in direct admission to Ph.D. in Executive Council. But it has not been implement in letter and spirit in Winter Semester 2016. As a matter of record in the JNU Entrance 2015, in the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, only 1 mark was given to 21 candidates and their categorization goes thus- SC-08 seats, OBC-08, ST-4. Many involved in the VIVA evaluation are part of the section of JNUSU-JNUTA solidarity. The students’ organization need to answer this dichotomy. Further this year again there has been systemic discrimination in the Direct Ph.D. process whereas Executive Council had passed it last year. The cumulative data for 2012, 13, 14 goes thus: OBC (13%), ST (3%), and SC (7.5%) in direct admission to Ph.D. The Delhi High Court in January 2016 has declared the reservation policy in Direct Ph.D. Admission as unconstitutional. Whose support is Kanhaiya demanding?
16. In the year 2010-11, when as per Central Govt. directive reservation was to be implement at all the three level of Faculty- Professor, Associate Profess and Assistant Professor , it was opposed by a Congress-leaning Leftist Professor(whose name was widely reported in the newspapers then) in name of merit and quality of research. This issue remained unresolved till the First Academic Council meeting during the reign of Prof. S.K.Sopory as Vice-Chancellor. At that time, Prof. Ashwini Mahapatra, SIS vociferously argued for implementation of this reservation policy. We wish to ask the left student organization s as well as Kanhaiya, why they fail to bring out this institutional discrimination in JNU while claiming Azadi from Manuvad and Brahamanvad.