Home

Crowdfunding Countercurrents

CC Archive

Submission Policy

Join News Letter

Defend Indian Constitution

#SaveVizhinjam

CounterSolutions

CounterImages

CounterVideos

CC Youtube Channel

India Burning

Mumbai Terror

Iraq

Peak Oil

Globalisation

Localism

Climate Change

US Imperialism

Palestine

Communalism

Dalit

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

Kandhamal Violence

Arts/Culture

Archives

About Us

Popularise CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name


E-mail:



Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web

 

 

 

 

Mother India And Her Infantilization Programme: Taming A Recalcitrant Son

By Mithilesh Kumar

04 March, 2016
Countercurrents.org

April is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers…
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

T. S. Eliot - The Wasteland

Our courts decidedly have a penchant for quoting literary pieces in their precedent shattering path blazing judgments. Learned as our justices are Shakespeare, Milton, Hume, Rousseau and others come tumbling down their pen nibs to immortalize the piece of paper on which a citizen’s life (or death) permanently etched. However, when a bail verdict begins with that most iconic song of the most patriotic film made by the champion of that nationalism which only sees black and white then we know that particular verdict is going to change our hard held views on nation, patriotism etc. It must be mentioned here in passing that this iconic filmmaker had the audacity to make Saira Banu a French blonde.

Yes, of course, the bail verdict is of the JNUSU president arrested on charges of sedition and the song mere desh ki dharti. The president came back to JNU accompanied by a rousing reception and then went on to deliver a speech that moved one and all. It was a consummate performance. It was delivered by someone who has attained the status of a hero and if his supporters are to be believed on facebook; a messiah. Now, we should always be wary of these twin phenomena of hero and messiah. This article is an exercise to look into a little more detail this rise of heroism in relation to the bail verdict.

Since the learned judge made a reference to spring and blossoms just after her bollywood inspiration I was reminded of The Wasteland by T. S. Eliot. In the opening passage, quoted above, Eliot gives this excruciating account of how difficult regeneration is during the spring as a long period of inaction during a hostile period has created a feeling of pessimism. Something akin to this was happening with the student movement in India which no matter how hard it tried could not break through in terms of its politics or in the consciousness of the masses.

All changed, changed utterly when FTII movement started. It galvanized people, academics and artists who were either dormant or looking for a cause. This movement started the debate of institutional autonomy and its saffronization. Then came the tragic death of Rohith Vemula. It shook the conscience of an entire nation barring those who have a rather suspicious and surreptitious love for the colour khakhi. This brought to the fore all the fissions of our society. Caste, atrocities on dalits and how even those institutions that are supposed to be modern and spaces for free inquiry and questioning in fact muzzle its spirits. Then came JNU, sedition, nation and patriotism. It is no one’s case that these movements led to each other in a teleological way but they did in a political way. It was that moment when similar but separated grievances in time and space find their consummation. Or if we want to use an insurrectionary metaphor then these form a potent Molotov cocktail which can then be thrown at the state. Here in JNU because of the naked state intervention everything precipitated from past to the present. Caste, freedom of speech and thought, the idea of nation and future of our institutions everything resonated and each of this found a charged mention in the speech of our hero. But did this really happen? Did we put the state in its place and told them to back off from where they had no business? Or is it the case that the state came dyed as a sheep or, in fact, as a shepherd who cares about his flock?

The document of the bail verdict is a document that reminded me of the books of moral science which we were made to suffer. In that book the attempt was to make a productive, patriotic and pliant citizen of the country. It would have lessons on how to respect teachers, parents, pray and once in a while sing mere desh ki dharti sona ugle which had several rather coarse and colourful versions within us unpliant students. Anyway, let us see what the bail verdict asks of the petitioner. We are merely interested here in the conditions of release and not the criminal case which is sub-judice. We are also not interested in the surgical lessons on limb given by the honourable judge because frankly this surgery business sheds a lot of blood precisely the situation both the state and the petitioner want.

In point 41 the judge goes on to great length to emphasize that it is the soldiers who protect our borders that we could even think of shouting anti-slogans. The judge does not stop here and remind us that “our forces are there at the battle field situated at the highest altitude…where even the oxygen is so scarce that those who are shouting anti-national slogans holding posters…may not be even able to withstand those conditions for an hour even.” This is an instructive piece of observation. The demarcation is unambiguous the soldier is strong, he is resolute, and determined and can brave nature and most importantly he is HE. Contrast the agitators, they are physically weak, indulgent and need to be protected more problematically they could be both HE, SHE or NEITHER. We now have an unequivocal characteristic of nationalism, patriotism and citizens. Clearly, the petitioner erred in the duties but it is not beyond redemption.

In point 51 and 52 the ‘justice’ of the state is delivered. It is noted that the petitioner comes from a poor family and hence cannot furnish the personal bond and surety bond if it is too high. The balance of justice now becomes balance of the shopkeeper and there is a trade off. The petitioner “will not participate actively or passively in any activity which may be termed as anti-national. Apart from that, as President of JNU Students Union, he will make all efforts within his power to control anti-national activities in the campus. His surety should also be either a member of the Faculty or a person…that…can exercise control on the petitioner…to ensure that his thoughts and energy are channelized in a constructive manner.” (emphasis mine). That the individual person will not indulge in anti-national activity is a personal decision but if the JNUSU President becomes eyes and ears of the state on the lookout for criminal/anti-national activities we are setting a dangerous precedent. I am sure that the president was not elected to fulfill this duty. It leaves the JNUSU to permanent intervention by the state. I do not know if that can happen legally. That even future JNUSU office bearers have to take on that role assigned by the organ of the state. This is for the jurists to explain. However, on the face of it it looks very dangerous and something that needs to be brought up and discussed at appropriate forums both inside and outside JNU. Similarly, the faculty member or the person who files the bond has to teach the petitioner lessons in “constructive manner” which is presumably like my moral science book.

In conclusion, the point I am trying to make is that with this bail verdict the judiciary has sought to infantilize a movement that had and still has the potential to redefine radical politics away from the usual and routine strategy and tactics. This is being done through defining the subjective forces of the movement as non-martial, weak and effeminate. While we can joke about the MLA who was counting condoms the morals at display was not very different. We need to be taken care of by the state and the elders who know best. And of course, we will have a class monitor who will look out for recalcitrant students and reports the teacher. The bail has now been signed and there would be enough time to think if it could have been dealt differently. But he is an honourable man.

Mithilesh Kumar is a PhD Candidate at Western Sydney University, Australia. His interest is in the issues of logistics, migration and labour, political philosophy and theory. He wants to work on the nature, evolution and innovation of the Indian state with respect to social and political movements in India. Email: [email protected]



 



 

Share on Tumblr

 

 


Comments are moderated