Role of students in politics
Answers
Answer:
Explanation:
The question of the participation of students in politics has always evoked a lot of discussion. It has been a very controversial subject. Two contrasting opinions have been expressed by the two groups of people. Both the groups are equally convinced of the merits of their cases. The discussion goes on between the students, teachers, politicians and other well-wishers of the student community. In spite of their best efforts, no satisfactory or convincing solution has so far been found out.
Those who oppose the participation of students in politics put up a strong case. They argue that politics is a dirty game. It creates groups and parties and leads to permanent enmities. It disturbs the peace of mind of the students. The primary duty of a student is to pay single-minded attention to his studies. He is supposed to lead a life of penance or “Tapasya.” He cannot and should not afford to take part in the luxury of politics.
Politics causes a great interference in the studies of the students. Interest in politics leads a student to an active participation in strikes, demonstration and processions. At times, it brings him into serious clash with the college authorities or the police. May be, he lands himself in jail. All this disrupts his studies and he is pushed off the rails. He loses his real purpose in life and goes astray. Participation in politics, thus, spoils a student’s career and makes him useless for any purpose other than strikes, demonstrations and slogan shouting.
Those who support the participation of students in politics make out an equally strong case. They argue that education does not mean were literacy. It means a total and all round development of personality. Participation in politics leads to harmonious development of a student’s personality. It makes him aware of what is happening in his country and in the world around him. It also develops in him the qualities of leadership. Instead of being a timid, shy book-worm, he grows into an aggressive, dominating and alert young man who knows how to fight the battle of life.
Some people are of the opinion that students can really change the shape of things in the country. The old generation has miserably failed to deliver the goods. Rampant corruption and unprincipled politics have brought the country to the brink of disaster. Why should the students not rise to the occasion to stem the rot? They have given a lead in several countries and have proved to be the harbingers of revolutions. They can certainly bring change in the sad state of affairs prevailing in the country at present.
Participation in politics trains a student to be a good citizen. It gives him training in the democratic way of life. He grows into a responsible and cultured citizen who is an asset to the nation. It creates in him a sense of patriotism. He knows his duties towards his country. HE has a fair knowledge of the affairs of the world. He develops a debating skill and he can always put forward his point of view with force and conviction. He develops all the qualities of head and heart. He is trained for leadership. As a leader in the making, he develops such qualities as courage, sincerity of purpose, a spirit of service, sympathy for the fellow men, self-discipline and a devotion to duty.
Student period is the formative period in his life. A student must develop all such qualities in him during this period as enable him to lead a successful life. If he kept totally away from politics, he is likely to grow into a lop-sided personality. If we study the lives of our great leaders, we shall find that most of them did take an active part in politics even during their student days.
Now, it is difficult to pronounce any verdict in favour of one or the other point of view. The golden mean would probably be the best way out. A student should take part in politics but it should not be an active participation. All activities are good if one remains within reasonable limits. Students should, therefore, pay primary attention to their studies. They should, at the same time, keep themselves informed about what is happening around them. They should not hesitate from jumping into politics if the situation threatens the unity and the freedom of the country.
Answer:
Explanation:
“All power to imagination.” In the late 60s, the walls of the factories and streets in France were covered with slogans like this. These slogans, mostly leftists, were chorused by one-fifth of the French population against capitalism, consumerism and traditional institutions. Interestingly, this unrest was stemmed by a few campus students for sexual liberation in dorms, but it led to snap legislative elections.
The same year, in 1968, students in Poland, Germany, Spain and across the globe protested especially against authoritarianism and imperialism. These protests collectively resulted in the social revolution in these regions. As a matter of fact, having realized the strength of students from these global phenomena, our own history of organized student protests in 1947 and students’ participation in the 50s rebellion against the Rana regime, the Communist Party of Nepal and Nepali Congress formed students’ unions, namely ANNFSU and NSU respectively.
These narratives are relevant because unlike its impact in history, the role and future of student politics in Nepal have become questionable. The core of politics is to discourse on agendas and find political solutions to problems. However, our student politics is still far off these agendas. In recent years in the political stalemate of Nepal we have witnessed the utmost passiveness and reluctance of our student leaders towards socio-political and global issues. As a result, our universities and campuses have become a breeding ground for intellectual, moral and emotional failure. And this is why the necessity of student politics in our campuses and universities has been questioned from time to time.
Many argue that the purpose of attending colleges and universities is to pursue a degree and get a good job. This is more apparent in middle-class families who want their children to study well and secure their livelihood.
People don’t want students to engage in political activities due to its connection to money, violence and muscle power. Others argue that educational institutions should make students politically conscious and teach them to ask questions. The purpose of an educational institution is not only to instruct the curriculum but also to produce equally responsible and aware citizens by facilitating dialectical research. The student unions, on the other hand, act as a link between students and the campus administration, make the administration accountable, help them organize events and address grievances faced by students. So it is almost contradictory to the practices of democracy and liberty to expect apolitical campuses and universities.
However, the incompetence of our student leaders and several other anomalies in student politics cannot be neglected. The political storm that India witnessed last year after the suicide of a ‘Dalit’ scholar at the University of Hyderabad and episodes of events in Jawaharlal Nehru University have several lessons. In these rows, students used their political platforms, under the norms and values of democracy, to take political stands and questioned their laws and policies, advocated social justice, and also sought the definition of nationality. It was seen that the student leaders had clear policies and strategies based on their political inclinations – the progressive left or the traditional right.
Contrary to this, our student unions are mere sister organizations of mainstream political parties. Many of the leaders in the working committee of the student unions have come into power from the favoritism of political leaders. This is why their actions and strategies are frequently dictated by their parent political party. For example, during the Madhesh agitation in 2015, no student unions played a proactive role in ending the political deadlock. Student leaders acted as an audience and relied on their leaders for their on-record statements in the political crisis.
Unfortunately, student politics today is diluting the legacy of youth leaders such as Gagan Thapa and others who tirelessly fought for progressive principles such as republicanism, federalism, and inclusive democracy.
The organizational structure and the activities of the students’ unions seem obsolete in context to the social and political reforms in the country. Many students’ unions don’t reflect inclusiveness and wider participation from all sections of the society. Many student leaders make politically-incorrect statements publicly underestimating the basic values of pluralism. Student leaders have to realize their responsibility in social transformation and nation building. The members of student unions are mostly youths. In the current situation of the demographic dividend, the role of youths to spur economic growth cannot be ignore