In the 2014 general election, there will be around 100 million new eligible voters. That is almost the equivalent of throwing the entire population of Mexico into India’s electorate.
Almost all of these new voters will have been born after the three major milestones that have defined the nation’s politics for the last two decades: the 1991 economic reforms; the Babri Masjid riots; and the first Mandal reservations’ drama.
What does this new, “post-liberalization” generation value? What are its ambitions, its political impulses, and its socio-economic outlook?
The latest National Youth Readership Survey conducted by the National Council of Applied Economic Research and National Book Trust provides some interesting answers.
Almost 76% of youth surveyed (they were all literate) considered themselves to be “religious.” Biodiversity and pollution are serious issues for them. Their awareness of the Right to Information law is very low compared with their awareness of the Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Act and the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan elementary education program.
Similarly, the urban-focused Hindustan Times India Youth Survey 2011 found that almost 30% of those surveyed described themselves as right-wing, while only 8% described themselves as left-wing (the rest were moderate/apolitical). More than half said that having pre-marital sex was not a concern, yet almost two-thirds said divorce is not an option. About half want to work in the for-profit sector, while one quarter wants to be a government servant. Only 6% want to work abroad. And about 7% want to be politicians.
About half the nation is below the age of twenty-five, but many of our “tallest” political leaders are above the retirement age in most private firms.
This is because those who genuinely want to be honest politicians face roadblocks such as lack of campus democracy as springboards, and lack of internal democracy in our parties even if they somehow get a foot in the door.
We at the Liberal Youth Forum conducted our own research study in collaboration with a think tank, Civitas Consultancy, on student participation in campus democracy and governance in India. The study takes into regard various aspects of campus democracy by dissecting and analyzing the opinions of students, student leaders, student organizations, faculty, management and other stakeholders. The study covered 77 institutions (both government and private) across various disciplines, including arts, science, commerce, management, law, medical and engineering.
Most of the institutions in the study (especially government colleges) have statutory provisions for the formation of student councils through an election or nomination. In reality, we found that arbitrary nomination systems are often implemented by college authorities as a measure to curb political activity around campus elections.
Nearly half of the colleges surveyed used nomination systems as opposed to elections. Contrast that with another finding: That 69% of students and 52% of faculty surveyed said they preferred elections and democratically-elected student representations.
There is an urgent need to provide young leaders platforms for voicing the youth’s concerns. Campus democracy empowers them as stakeholders rather than as anti-establishment agitators. Through the active involvement of young people in the democratic process, the nation can mould its future politicians from a stage when they are energetic and idealistic rather than cynical and corrupt.
And more youthful voices are needed in our political system. Currently, out of 543 elected members of Parliament there are 30 MPs below the age of 35 and another 30 MPs between the age of 36 and 39.
To “politicize” something is seen as uncouth and opportunistic by the Indian elite and this mindset is mirrored in India’s higher educational institutions. Campus politics is perceived to affect an institution’s smooth functioning. Far from being in an enabling environment that hones their leadership skills and sharpens their political acumen, students remain squeezed between indifferent college administrations and, sometimes, goons.
As it stands, students are unable to take the first steps toward political leadership. In any mature democracy, clean and effective campus elections are incubators for dynamic leaders and fomenters of people- power. In India, we observe that strikes often become the first resort of university protesters and on-campus violence between political groups is a reality.
The true colors of democracy fade away because most student organizations are patronized by national political parties, which do not address students’ issues but focus on propaganda. Though there is direct funding from political parties to student candidates during campus elections, no transparency is maintained regarding election funding and expenditure.
The Lyngdoh Commission was appointed by the Ministry of Human Resource Development to address issues of financial transparency, democratization and decriminalization of student elections. Our research findings suggest that the committee’s recommendations have only been adequately implemented in major universities like Hyderabad and Delhi.
Moreover, with many states like Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh imposing an outright ban on student elections, the prospects for campus democracy appear quite grim.
While students want a proper organization for airing their grievances, at present they do not feel truly represented when it comes to protecting their interests. Our survey found that a mere 19% of respondents felt that existing student councils and unions were working for the development of their institutions. A mere 4% of respondents thought that student issues could be solved by such councils.
Increasing use of the RTI law has forced some institutions to be more transparent and accountable in their admission and evaluation processes but such success stories remain few and far between.
India needs genuine democratic processes within its higher education system. We need participation in student organizations to restore the vibrancy of campus democracy and to encourage young idealists to adapt the ballot, not the bullet. A new generation of educated, motivated and young leaders from all walks of life can transform the prevailing connotations of the “P” word.
