Late on Thursday night (3rd March), as I was surfing TV channels, I noticed all our English news channels were preparing to telecast live JNU Students’ Union President Kanhaiya Kumar’s speech. I heard it in full and noted that it was quite a passionate speech, prefixed and suffixed with a lot of sloganeering. Later, the TV anchors described it as a ‘powerful’ speech. Today, some newspapers rightly recognised it as a ‘political’ speech. As a common citizen, this is my take on it.

Kanhaiya’s speech broadly comprised of 7 themes: (1) He believes in ‘Kranti’ (‘revolution’) which is represented by the slogan ‘lal salaam’; (2) Criticism of RSS, BJP and ABVP; (3) criticism of Modi and Smriti Irani; in particular, Modi and that he made lots of promises during election rallies, but has not fulfilled them in the last 2 years; (4) that he (Kanhaiya) represents millions of youth from backward states (his family income is only Rs. 3000 p.m.), and public universities like JNU provide opportunities for them to study; (5) He and the JNU students sympathise with the families of jawans who die at the borders, but also with poor farmers who commit suicide; (6) JNU students want Indians to have freedom in India (and not freedom from India) and it means freedom from poverty, hunger, oppression, etc; (7) Rohith Vemula is a rallying point for oppressed students.



What he did not talk about were issues like freedom for Kashmiris, abolition of the death penalty, Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon’s hangings. May be, he was conscious of the undertaking he had given to Delhi High Court.

A quick look at the above indicates that the speech shows the mind of an intelligent politician; one making a debut speech live on television. It would be naïve for anyone to see this as the speech of a leader of a university students’ union. Therefore, his speech should be countered, if required, by politicians and not student bodies of either JNU or anywhere else.

Is there anyone in the country who says Indians should not be free from poverty, hunger, illness or oppression? Isn’t that what politicians of every persuasion have said and come to power with, from Indira Gandhi to Lalu Yadav, Mayawati to Mamata Banerjee? Did Kanhaiya say anything new?



As a bright student enrolled in a prestigious university, rather than reiterating the problems that everyone is aware of, he should be suggesting solutions. He has said that the JNU students will work within the framework of the Constitution to achieve their ‘azadi’. He could have said how successive governments – both at the Centre and in the states – have failed to achieve this in almost 70 years of free India, and what brilliant idea do the JNU students have to do so. The ‘lal’ (Communist) governments that ruled West Bengal for more than 3 decades uninterruptedly, or in Kerala where they come to power in every alternate election.

My concern is with the youth in their misguided exuberance raising political issues in academic campuses, saying these are important socio-economic topics, and there should be space for discussion. The incidents of the last few weeks at JNU, University of Hyderabad, etc., (as also past events at JNU like the ‘Dantewada’ episode which have now got wide publicity) have informed the public about the type of discussion that happens, the polarisation between Left, Right and Centre, the inevitable political fall-out of the friction that ensues, and the inevitable spoiling of the academic atmosphere.



Some IIT Madras faculty who expressed their angst at the JNU incident mentioned this too. Students go to universities to acquire knowledge. Debate and discussions are a part of that learning process. Once they come out of these spaces, they get into the mainstream – either as politicians, or bureaucrats, businessmen, employees, or as professionals. Some people choose the social sector. It is through these roles that you contribute to the progress of the country and provide ‘azadi’ to the poor and oppressed. No doubt, they face obstacles in achieving their goals, but they strive to overcome them and march forward.



By vitiating the academic atmosphere in the universities, raising slogans for the right of self-determination of border-states etc., these students are harming themselves and the society.

It is an irony that Kanhaiya is so passionately finding fault with the very system that removed him from a Rs. 3000 per month house-hold, brought him to Delhi, and gave him Rs. 6000 stipend for his research, and allowed him to make his “powerful” speech live on TV!



(The author works for a Credit Rating Agency, and the views are personal)