Is Ashoka a Safe Space for Political Discourse?

By Devika Goswami, Undergraduate Batch of 2022

As a first-year, I was curious about the political culture here while also feeling strangely guilty on part of my personal political apathy. In order to form some semblance of my own political belief, I wanted to listen to all sides of the political “spectrum” but one side was vaguely missing- I would hardly come across people with right-leaning and conservative ideology. Apart from a few posts on Facebook supporting the BJP or other conservative ideas, I was surprised to see that this section of the political spectrum was almost missing from discourse on campus.

Thinking that this was just limited to my daily interactions, I decided to open up the question to as many people as I could. I released a survey to the student body which got over 147 replies. It became increasingly clear to me that Ashoka does have a general political identity which is more left leaning. However, it also dawned upon me that this majority political inclination has alienated several groups on the spectrum- especially those who are right inclined. Without passing any qualitative judgements on the merits/demerits of right wing politics, the very fact that this group feels alienated is testimony to the lack of a safe space for free political discourse on campus.

Before we delve deeper into this topic, we need to realise that he terms ‘right wing’ and ‘left wing’ are all contentious and there have been long academic debates about what they might mean. However, for the purpose of this article I am using these terms in a more colloquial sense than academic.

The Political ‘Culture’ on Campus, as told by the student body
It doesn’t take more than a few weeks on campus to roughly sense its political sway, for this oasis of liberal education in Sonipat comes with its own political stereotype. However, it is still difficult to truly determine a dominant or presiding political view. I gave it a shot by asking the student body what they thought this view could be: 

Maybe Ashoka set in a Utopian alternate universe fraught with productive political discourse could have an equal representation of political views, but that’s not entirely realistic. It wouldn’t even be a problem if different or opposing views could be accepted and discussed, but like I said, we’re not in said Utopia and not many of our respondents were under this impression either: 

It is difficult to feel satisfied with these opposing views at least being “sometimes” accepted. This is especially true when there have even been reported instances of backlash (a negative reaction that goes beyond just disagreement): 

What could be the reason behind this kind of reaction? It is important to make the distinction here that these opposing views are assumed to be non-bigoted, and it goes without saying that not all views within any political wing are. “There’s a general stereotyping of right sided people being homophobic and sexist” said one survey respondent while another signalled to a “deep prejudice against those who have right wing or conservative views”. Some described this backlash to be ranging from “name-calling” to being asked to “fuck-off by a close friend” after revealing their political views to them. 

It is one thing to be understood as morally regressive, but it is entirely another thing to be left with your views completely unheard and put away. I believe that there needs to be an attempt to logically understand opposing views and provide constructive criticism that way, instead of resorting to stereotyping or classifying nuanced ideas into extremely subjective categories of “right” or “wrong”. As one student put it: “To be a good critic, one should acknowledge the good among the bad. If there is any praise for something actually good done by the BJP or Trump, there is SEVERE backlash”. More than just conceding to this “good”, maybe we can also start by understanding where such views come from in the first place? 

“Speaking Out” 
Most of the people who believe that there isn’t any room to freely express contrary views also do not believe in this political “spectrum”. Being either “left” or “right” wing do not signify the entirety of an individual’s beliefs. One person can believe in conservative economic policies while agreeing with leftist social policies, and vice versa. It is this kind of typecasting that those with even slightly conservative views do not want (just like most people). A first-year respondent relates this to his own views sometimes being entirely dismissed as “hateful” or the “voice of dissent” – resulting in them being discarded without much afterthought. 

Kaustubh Misra (UG20) feels that “campus does not let you have political discourse unless you think a certain way which in my opinion happens to be very elite-oriented” which results in it becoming “an elite echo-chamber of sorts”. This can invariably lead to social exclusion by a process of ‘otherisation’. Vidipt Dhasmana (UG22) thinks along similar lines in his experience at Ashoka so far: as many of his friends feel “cornered” and don’t feel comfortable expressing their political views in groups. It is interesting to note how this experience isn’t all that different for a first year and a third year. There is clearly a lack of attentive and non-judgemental listening in day to day conversation, and more than that: a lack of any open space or forum on campus to acknowledge and understand opposing ideologies. 

Theory vs Practice
To my knowledge, it is not lost on anyone that a large part of the student-body comes from upper-class and upper-caste families. Gaurav Nandan Tripathi (UG20) believes that there is a distinct gap between the idealistic approach to problem-solving he sees on campus and the practicality that he wishes to see more of: that much of the “on-ground reality” is sidelined. 

This ‘reality’ can range anywhere from understanding just why someone on campus could support a policy from an opposing political party, or why someone from our neighbouring Asawarpur would go out and vote for that very party. It essentially (and maybe ironically) boils down to the debate on ‘Theory vs Practice’ wherein one side tries to throw abstract academic concepts at a problem while the other dismisses such elite academic knowledge.

“I’m called a ‘Commie’ at home and a ‘Sanghi’ at college” Gaurav went on to say with a laugh. This just shows how this ‘debate’ can easily translate into a link between the personal and the political for some – and how it then ends up being a strange and somewhat amusing line to walk. 

Into the Lecture Halls and Beyond
In the larger debate over the ‘left-wing bias’ breaking out in Western universities, there has been a recent investigation into how academia tends to tilt left-wards. Could this be true for Ashoka and what does it mean if it is? In general, most people interviewed were of the opinion that the Ashokan faculty does a good job in facilitating open political discussion unsullied by any outward political biases. For instance, professor Vinay Sitapati’s classes were unanimously seen as accepting of different views. However, what happens when there is no moderator encouraging this kind of discussion?

Conclusion
“I was told by a person: ‘I cannot tolerate intolerance’” said one of our respondents. The goal is to not let our political discourse descend into this irony. Not seeing that personal histories are inextricably linked to political views can lead to a forced harbouring of unheard, unchecked views that can then manifest into hatred when they maybe weren’t even “hateful” to begin with.

So why is there a need to hear someone’s political stance out? If for a second we consider the Ashokan political culture true to my portrayal of it then there are definitely individuals here who feel underrepresented and unheard. If we do want to challenge and change some of those truly regressive views, then it’s a good idea to first understand the context that they come from. A great starting point for this is to first recognise the range of political views on campus and to hear them out before judging them.