Politics has positive as well as negative connotations. The proponents of Nov 29, Students Solidarity March, mostly sees it through its positive spectacles, neglecting completely the negative aspects. Where the ‘servent-leader’ does not necessarily conform to the idea of the ethical use of power and authority.
Usually, in this ongoing scenario, the demand for student’s rights comes in the form of restoration of ‘unions’. These ‘unions’ will become consolidarity voices for the grievances of students. Here, the depiction of unions is believed to use power and authority for helping other student’s issues, and not for ruling the campuses. Here, the administrative pyramid is represented as upside down, where the need of students becomes the most important reason for the union’s existence.
The unions and the leadership of unions keeps themselves at the bottom of this administrative pyramid. Which sounds ‘good’. Whereas, in reality, the pyramid is always upwardly erected, and the leadership always presides above the ‘others’.
In an environment, where there is a stratification between students of the same campus, envy, fear, greed, ambition and desire to surpass comes into play. Thus adding another layer of barricade into the channel of communication between students and the administration. Without the teacher and student cooperation, a pure student’s union would give rise to ‘Campus demagoguery’ instead of ‘Campus democracy’.
Here, the negative connotation of politics is mostly taken for granted, which in turn could prove much more disastrous than what prevails in the current predicament. It is in these negative connotations, that the fear of these unions getting hijacked by mainstream political parties resides. In a country like Pakistan, where even bureaucracy and other top-notch institutions are not secured from political expansionism, it is doubted that student unions would remain aloof from the influences of mainstream political parties for their own political agendas.
Moreover, the accommodation of students of diverse ideologies under the banner of current ‘Student Solidarity Marchers’ seems ambiguous. The marchers in their very nature are adherents of ‘communist’ ideology, as evident from their slogans and banners. This is not a matter of concern, considering we live in a free country. What the matter of concern really is, are the students who believe in the same demands, but are not staunchly affiliated with communist ideology. It literally excludes students of ‘Islamic, liberal, neo-capitalists’ and other ideologies, leaving space only for socialists and communists.
Which in turn in itself is a display of intolerance towards’ students of ‘other’ ideological thoughts, mainly conveyed through the slogans such as, ‘Asia will become Red’. It contradicts the very purpose of the march itself, which is to promote ethnic, religious, and racial tolerance on the campuses.
The country needs not only to produce good politicians but understandably also needs to produce efficient human resources in other fields, for instance, physics, technology, economy, etc. Thus, the rights of students include teachers attending the classes and delivering lectures, instead of investing that particular time in participating in such rallies and circles. Also, ‘with rights comes along duties’. It is the duty of these very students to attend the classes on campuses, and work on their potentials to become productive for the country. Shouting and abusing the guards of the university (who are just performing their ‘duty’), in front of the university gate standing atop a truck through bullhorn, and generalizing all professors while pointing out to few is a show of intolerance and undisciplined attitudes seen in November 29th march, which will later translate into unions ‘if restored’. The mall road littered with banners and flags after the march proceeded, narrated yet another story.
There is no skepticism about the authenticity of demands and concerns on the behalf of the marchers. The demonstration of it, is, however, troubling in a way that it fails to realize the realities of the practical world and human nature. ‘Nostalgia of the past’ proves good when it is used in improving the failures of a system. But ‘innovation’ lies at the core of this improvement. And this innovation is always continuous, steady, and not abrupt. While presenting the case for the restoration of student unions, examples from the past may help, but the present circumstances of today’s Pakistan or the world for that matter must be acknowledged.
What the campuses really need are not ‘unions’, but more societies with more student’s representation within the circle of teacher-student cooperation. That will prevent the radicalization of such organizations and will encompass a broader range of students belonging to different ideologies. Such societies always come under the university’s charters, which allot rights to students and make the faculty directly accountable to the students, and vice versa. Also, it will prevent the hierarchization of students within their own campuses.
Students of the world must unite, but under the more inclusive banner of human rights; talking about rights as well as duties of everyone.
The writer is currently enrolled in Mphil Political Science at the Government College University, Lahore.