The Consequence of Our Convenience

By Vaibhav Parik, (Class of 2020)

Last semester, as I approached the end of my first year at Ashoka, I realised a fundamental change that was inevitable as batches passed, the fact that there was a significant departure in our relationship with this place compared to our senior batches. After all, what we got when we came here was a certain established product, as opposed to them, who saw this place being built from scratch. There is no denying that this has led to a significant change in our relationship with this place.

But it is a bit jarring to see that relationship transform into a rising hostility between the students and the administration. I never thought that the finished product we are getting would create a relationship with the administration such that we hastily generalise and blame them for the slightest of flaws. Instead of contributing to fix any flaw, or pushing our boundaries to reach out to the administration, we hope that everything is fixed for us. In the light of the curfew, what we fundamentally need to realise is that instead of blaming the administration for the manner of the curfew’s imposition, it is far more important to look at the lack of genuine discussion around the culture of substance abuse at Ashoka, as a reason for this fallout. And that lack of discussion is something that can be attributed to our convenience and entitlement, alongside our inaction as a community.

In the beginning, we need to see why blaming the administration at this point of time does not make sense, because in doing that, we don’t realise how we are undermining the idea of the discourse on the culture of substance abuse that needs to happen. The Student Government’s(SG) mail saying that the argument about this action’s manner is not ancillary but rather important*, completely takes the element of the discourse (although not belittling it) and puts it as if it’s not a priority at this point of time. I do not see how this argument and pushing for student involvement as a consequence, given the current constraint, allows them to accommodate for the unheard voices that haven’t come up so far, because this only postpones the discourse mentioned above, that has needed to happen for a very long time.

I understand the concern that the SG might have, that this constant coercion is not something we should give in to. But as a community, instead of just trying to use their argument as a rallying point for more hate towards the administration, what does it mean for us to not engage in discourse creation? Not that I blame the SG, but is it so hard for us to see that we’re totally missing the point with all that distrust towards the administration? If discourse needs to be created, we need to be cognisant of its need and engage with it.

So why has this discourse genuinely been held back? Is there an honest answer for this delay apart from our convenience and our entitlement not to push our boundaries? Do we ever breach uncomfortable discourses beyond our convenience or rather, despite our inconvenience? What we have done so far is try to create a sort of image of the administration as this external threat, ignoring that they’re working to do things for us. We want to make this an us-against-them matter in, something which reeks of convenience. It abhors me to the greatest degree when narratives like “you’re just concerned about the reputation of the university” exist; trying to firstly say as if this is not your university and that its reputation does not affect you, while secondly just trying to show that the cause you are actually trying to fight for is about social justice.

The urgent town-hall announcing the curfew took place in the sports MPH since a large turnout was expected.

That’s the biggest double standard we are setting for ourselves in this case. Breaking the law, but convincing ourselves that the fact that we might be in protest of it justifies our defiance. If that is what satisfies our moral conscience every Thursday night we go out there, then we truly have no integrity. It is undeniable that the protest of the law has absolutely nothing to do with breaking it in this case, and if protest is our main concern, I do not believe it is a concern that shall be reasonably highlighted or understood by anyone at a shack on a Thursday night.

Our convenience has often pushed us to take things for granted and feel that we deserve all that we need. After all, we pay so much. But here again, this is not just about one issue or fix for that matter. This is about the fact that we do not realise that this is merely a five-year old institution that is not perfect and may not have all the right systems in place. There is an implicit sense of expectation that there should exist no flaws in the structure, and if they do, the administration needs to work around them in such a way that it doesn’t infringe on our freedoms. How exactly will students ever be involved, if narratives exist to other the administration and the university from us?

This leads to the idea of inaction amongst us. We complain about the administration’s unresponsiveness. On how many occasions have any of us in the recent times, being unsatisfied with the administration’s response to a certain action, done something about it? The genuine lack of initiative at this point of time seems a fair concern, particularly because there is so much that can be established, but also because our preference for convenience has the tendency to translate to inaction.

I don’t want to limit this inaction just to initiative. It is something that can be extended to the fact that we need to push our own boundaries as individuals, in trying to go out and communicate with the administration. That is one of the biggest inactions I see, particularly within my own batch (the Class of 2020). It is amazing how we at times assume the administration’s inaction, and totally ignore our own.

In fact the administration members at times, push boundaries more than we do, which I think demands for a certain reciprocation from our part. If the VC and the erstwhile Pro-VC have been pushing their boundaries to communicate with us, why can’t we as students do the same? For instance, the Dhaba sessions they have been organising are opportunities where concerns can genuinely be voiced, as they keep asking us about our problems and the issues that need to be addressed.

Just because we have not been using mechanisms to communicate doesn’t mean they don’t exist. The entire curfew shows how the absence of discussion manifested into such a stringent action, and while that isn’t a failure solely on the students part, what I think needs to be made clear is that it is not entirely the administration’s failure either. It’s a collective repercussion of the lack of an inclusive discourse about the culture of substance abuse at Ashoka and deep down, we know that voices do exist on this issue, inside this space. It is our failure as the Ashokan community to create that discourse and sensitise ourselves that is definitely the biggest contributing factor of this fallout.

Fundamentally I do believe that the right way to go about this is through organised conversation early on and approaching this in a constructive manner. But as we approach a finalisation of this policy, let us get this conversation started, because deep down, the narratives we hope would be a mutual point of great deliberation and reason should not recede to take their place as small time conversations between concurring viewpoints anymore. Now is a good time to let them out and maybe that is exactly the fundamental rallying point this place needs right now.

*SG e-mail “Regarding VC’s town hall” Sep 26, 2018, 10:28 am

Curfew Instituted at Ashoka, Contraband Seized in Sonipat

Rohini Sharma, Class of 2020
Zainab G. Firdausi, Class of 2019

In a town-hall held on 25 September, the Vice-Chancellor, in the presence of other senior members of the administration, informed the undergraduate student body about the institution of a curfew restricting student movement in and out of campus at night, starting from the first week of October.

The exact timings of the curfew are yet to be made official, but entry and exit are likely to be restricted from 12 am to 6 am. The document enlisting the details of and the exceptions to this rule is in process of being drafted by members of the administration. They will be communicated to the student body by the following week.

The urgent town-hall took place in the sports MPH since a large turnout was expected.

The curfew is being imposed in order to deter students from visiting establishments outside campus which serve alcohol illegally. The Vice-Chancellor took the occasion to explicate the reasons which forced the administration to take such a drastic step: safety of students and condemnation of a culture which promotes substance abuse and peer pressure.

Dr. Mehta, in his address, alleged that the students possess a “deeply ingrained culture of entitlement” with respect to matters of underage drinking and substance abuse. He claimed,“(students) are violating the law yet (they) are asking for police protection”. The administration reports that after their assessment of the risk students take by partaking in such activities, they were forced to take this measure.

Lastly, Dr. Mehta stressed another form of risk that has also arisen but lies within the four walls of the campus: peer pressure. Students have approached members of the administration and faculty because they have felt “disempowered”, “suffocated”, and “silenced” for not conforming to social standards in matters of substance and alcohol intake. He stressed on the possibility of violence ensuing and creation of an intimidating environment due to the consumption of alcohol and narcotics. He further suggested that there is an urgent need for students to initiate honest peer-to-peer communication about issues such as these and to move away from the culture of silencing others.

Student Government President Condemns Decision-Making Process

After Dr. Mehta concluded his address, student government president Arush Pande addressed the gathering. He asserted that although he agrees with the Vice Chancellor’s arguments, he disagrees with the manner in which the rule is being implemented and “on behalf of the Student Government, (he is) completely against the imposition of the curfew”. He argued that everything that was discussed in the town-hall should have been discussed earlier with the student body being given a more important role in the decision-making process. A number of other students echoed Arush’s concerns and brought forth deficiencies in the method of communication of the administration.

But there also existed differing points of view. For instance, another student asserted,“the administration has been adequate in communicating to the students the intolerance of the university towards the usage and possession of alcohol and drugs”, and “those who break the law regularly ‘have the audacity to stand in front of the same administration that has not just adjusted with their habits but also protected them from the repercussions’”.

The Student Government held an open meeting on the 26th of September to discuss the next steps that the student body must take in response to the curfew.

Flying Squad seizes illegally smuggled alcohol in Sonepat

The imposition of this curfew is especially relevant, since, on 16 September Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar’s flying squad seized “648 halves of different liquor brands, a tank filled with 500 litre of liquor, empty stock of 630 bottles, 2,100 halves and eight bags of empty quarters, a large stock of sealing machine and rolls, labels, covers and other material from a bottling plant from Baiyanpur village in the district”.

The discovery of empty bottles, sealed machines, and labels confirm suspicions that a lot of the alcohol served at these illegal establishments might be adulterated. Spiked alcohol has long-term negative health effects. Eg., Methanol (a very popular off-brand liquor which is sold illegally) can cause blindness.

This crackdown comes after a party in Sonepat involving drugs and alcohol was recently raided by the same flying squad.

This article has been edited since publication for clarity.

Integrity In Times Of Curfews

In light of the recently established curfew, there is an urgent need to have an open conversation.

Sparsh Agarwal, Class of 2019

In 1981, followers of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh set up the City of Rajneeshpuram in the middle of the State of Oregon. It was the utter disregard of the Rajneeshee community for their surroundings and the people that lived in them which sowed the seeds for their protracted conflict with the original inhabitants of Wasco County. Ashoka University is no cult, however, there are stark parallels that we share with Rajneeshpuram. We have descended upon the village of Asawarpur in the Sonipat district of Haryana almost as an alien ship, similar to the Rajneeshees descending on Wasco County. If there is anything to be learnt from the rise and fall of Rajneeshpuram it is that the difference in ways of the people in the area around us requires us to be both logical and sociologically sensitive about the consequences of our actions.

In light of the recently established curfew, there is an urgent need to have an open conversation about the consequences of going to illegal establishments across from the university gates on us, as a community, and on the community that exists outside our gates.

However, the purpose of this column is not to take any moral pedestal on this issue. Its purpose is provide an understanding of the unintended repercussions of going out to the illegal establishment outside the University gates. It also follows from an important Facebook post that was made by a student last year on the Undergraduates group.

“The ancient Indian King after whom this University is named asked the question:

What is Dhamma?

He answered:

It is having few faults and many good deeds; mercy, charity, truthfulness and integrity.

I commit myself to these values, and through them, move from the unreal to the real, from darkness to light and from death to immortality.”

This is the university oath. Following from the tradition and teachings of the Emperor Ashoka, it is the commitment to integrity that has stumbled down from the rock edicts and stares all of us in our faces today. I like to believe that this integrity functions on three levels: the social character of integrity that requires one to stand up for something, the individual level of harmony within the self, and, on a larger philosophical level, having an understanding of one’s moral obligations.

Part 1: Social Integrity

Most people have been first hand witnesses to what happens at SSP, while others must have heard about it in vivid details as well. Nonetheless, it is important to consider the establishment from the point of view of those who inhabit the village, who also happen to be former owners of the land on which this college has been built. When they sold their lands for the construction of a University, they must have had certain notions of what that would entail as well. One does not need to go out and talk to villagers to understand how divorced Ashoka is from the real world around it: one of the most fundamental alienations being in the form of the lifestyle that we as students of Ashoka University (from a particular socio-economic background) bring with ourselves. Besides being subjected suddenly to this absolute change of lifestyles and societal notions, it is also worth imagining whether they signed up to having to bear the burden of listening to blasting music through the night every Thursday and Friday; to see the bottle dripping, the weed burning and (occasionally) blood flowing.

Ashoka is often termed as a bubble. If it is so, then, not being cognizant of the impact that we as an institution have on the surrounding ecosystem is the simplest way of this bubble bursting.

Currently, one of the exemplary activities that a number of students of Ashoka have been a part of is the Neev program, which aims to make the University more accessible to the surrounding areas. It should not come as a surprise that many parents from Asawarpur have expressed their disillusionment (by wanting to pull out their wards) with the University because of the example that we set for their children every weekend. Moving beyond the sociological, there is also an urgent need to think about this issue empathetically (“mercy and charity” if you remember correctly). Many students at Ashoka have nobly advocated for the rights of the construction workers, the most marginal of all those who are a part of this campus. The rights, the conditions of these workers and the hours of work have all been scrutinized and spoken about ad nauseum. However, it is worth reminding ourselves that it is the same worker who toils during the day to build our campus who has to stay up at night due to the ruckus that is created by us when we go out to party. Does the mere hanging of a painting in the Atrium, to signify their contribution, make up for our utter disregard for them outside the canvas and the frame?

Part 2: Harmony within the self

Haryana comes from the words ‘Hari’ (Vishnu) and ‘ayana’ (home). The Haryana Tourism department would sure like everyone to believe that the state is truly an Abode of the Gods. However, there are dangers that lurk outside the Ashoka bubbles that make it closer to being the Highway to Hell, if anything. I don’t know who the Hades is, but what I do know is that there is no guarantee of personal safety whatsoever.

There have already been documented instances of molestation, voyeuristic videos of women being non-consensually recorded and the frequent occurrence of violence. There have also been reports of suspicious vans circling the area, potentially of men who might have heard of this oasis in the middle of Haryana where young women in large numbers go out to party. Now imagine individuals from neighboring areas or universities coming to the establishment and forcing someone to get into their car at the tyranny of their gun, or worse pulling the trigger. Imagination does not need to run wild; an event of this sort is not even a 6 or 10 sigma event (like the Iranian Revolution or the Financial Crisis). There are serious safety hazards of going out, which go beyond the occasional drunken frenzies that Ashoka students might have with their Jindal counterparts. And surely one can always say that it is wrong if anything of this sort happens, but that would be similar to getting into the cage of a lion arguing that the lion should respect your right to existence. Is a little bit of liquid courage worth entering the lair of the lion!

To take this self interested argument further, let us take a step back and contemplate the larger issues at stake. Another event who’s possibility of occurrence is not tough to imagine is an FIR being lodged against a student from the University. In the event that this happens, the consequences would be severe. It’s not like our University is particularly liked by the current government anyway. One only has to look at the tweets of some of the most influential representatives of the government (Rajiv Malhotra, S. Gurumurthy, Mohandas Pai) to see this. In this extremely polarised political environment, where the government is looking for an opportunity to clamp down on institutions like ours, by terming us as a second JNU, is it truly prudent to continue with our parties at SSP. If the BJP (or any other future government) is to get us, let them at least get us on a noble count rather than something like this (in fact, if as students we are to see the back of prison bars, might it be for something like the infamous article 144 of the IPC than for illegal underage drinking). In today’s day and age when the name of an institution can get very easily besmirched as has been seen with example of JNU, one can only imagine what we would have to go through as an institution as well as individually (in terms of careers).

Lady Prudence was standing by the University gates every Thursday night advising us to mend our course, before it is too late; before an unforeseen event like an accident, or a scuffle with the law enforcement agency happens, before the Administration has a valid justification to curtain our freedoms for safety concerns. And we would have done well to abide by it. Yet, the fact that we didn’t, we only have ourselves to blame today. We can talk about why the administration did not have the Town Hall to discuss this with us before taking this step, but the question can also be turned around: when we knew that this was happening, and the consequences it brought with it, why didn’t we as a community have a Town Hall of our own?

Part 3: Moral Obligations

There is also a moral obligation that we as students have to all that we are studying. Ashokan ideals involve developing critical thinking abilities as envisaged by our founders, shunning our sense of entitlement as I think of it, and having fidelity to some idea of truth as the Vice Chancellor had once outlined. In this campus where we have unanimously maintained a conspiracy of silence, this Town Hall shot from the pistol of truth. Have we been truly applying our critical thinking abilities, what we pride ourselves on, outside the classroom to try to understand the ineffable impact of our actions?

There have also been absurd arguments made about why the law enforcement agencies cannot protect our rights, or why there cannot be a bar inside campus if we aren’t allowed to go out. However, to expect the law enforcement agency to protect the rights of those who are breaking the law themselves or to ask for a bar, reeks of a typically Ashokan sense of entitlement. There seems to be no need to remind people what the law is however, what needs to be explained is a simple Latin legal maxim: “Dura Lex Sed Lex”. The Law is harsh, but it is the Law. And the Wheel of Law depicted on the Ashokan pillar demands of us to abide by it.

The entire SSP story ultimately boils down to a dichotomy of pleasures and principles. We all want to indulge ourselves in the pleasures of going out and kicking back after the end of a tiring week of academic work. And yet all of us know about the consequences on a principled level. Integrity as envisaged by the Emperor in who’s name we get our degrees would expect that we stand by our principles, since those are our true moral obligations. As Jefferson would have said: “In matters of Principles, stand like an Ashokan Pillar.”

This article was a speech delivered by Opinions Editor Sparsh Agarwal at The Mauryan Debates on the topic ‘Are Ashoka students living up to Emperor Ashoka’s Ideals?’

Sparsh’s last article was on Sonipat’s Economies of Vices.

Sonipat’s Economies of Vice

In the first piece by the Research Wing of the Edict, we explore the evolution of an infamous illegal shack outside Ashoka University, and the lure of catering to university students, in the village.

By Urvin Soneta (Founding Class), Sparsh Agarwal (Class of 2019), and Zainab G. Firdausi (Class of 2019).

On 23 August, 150 students from Jindal University were detained by officers from Rai PS in a “rave” party at a guest house called Anjani. Only a few days after the incident, on 28 August, the administration of Ashoka University issued caveats to students regarding venturing to illegal establishments outside campus, and how this maybe grounds for disciplinary action.

Both Ashoka and Jindal are located in and around Rajiv Gandhi Education City, an ambitious project by the previous state government to create a hub for universities in the Delhi NCR region. And although the project is laudable, its creators, perhaps, did not pay much heed to the context and location in which they were going to be placing students aged 18–25. Often feeling shut-up and fatigued within the four walls of their campuses, students have begun venturing out to unwind, and this how they end up in places such at Anjani.

Every Thursday night students start lining up at the gate to leave campus for the shacks outside.

Ashoka was set up in 2014 by a coterie of philanthropists and industrialists who desired to create a premier liberal arts University for Indian students. In the backdrop of this aspiring young university, there exist the aspirations of others nearby. The ambitious shadow of Haryana lurks; it’s fuelled by the desire to capitalise on the phenomenal urbanisation and migration taking place in Sonipat; wishing to cash in on any Indian college student’s obvious necessities: “juice, milk, and brownies” (euphemisms used by the owner of the shack to refer to the alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana that was sold by him in our interview with him).

This is a tale of rising “confectionary shops” (another euphemisms used by the owner to refer to his outfit), rival groups, and the economies of vice.

“There’s Plenty of Juice to Keep this Economy Going”

In Sonipat, Thursdays nights are the new Friday nights. “So, what’s the scene?” is now the most popular phrase featuring any conversation post classes on Thursdays. It is with these words that students at Ashoka begin planning their evening of indulgence.

In the Summer of 2017, three years after the University opened, the first “confectionary shop” was set up 400 meters from the entrance of the University near the nearby Asawarpur village by a duo of brothers: Tonu* and Tohit*. Tonu, a former employee at Ashoka is in his early 20s, a student at Delhi University by day and businessman by night. ‘Tonu’s Sutta Point (SSP)’* was the first entrant into the lucrative ‘juice business’ in Sonipat last year. The opening of the campus had already brought a theka (alcohol shop) and a cigarette shop to the vicinity, but as Tonu recounts, “The students wanted to have ‘juice’ and ‘cakes’ late at night at a place that wasn’t far away and offered comfort. I offered it to them”. One can only speculate whether having worked inside the Ashoka Campus transformed Tonu’s entrepreneurial vision or not.

Tonu recounts that the immediate success of his “confectionary shops” was largely because of his own “goodwill” among students. Across the road from Tonu’s shack there’s a police headquarters under construction, and he doesn’t yet have a license for his shop. However, his goodwill extends to the local police as well. Tonu admits that his “juices” are overpriced but that his establishment thrives on the loyalty of his customers. Nonetheless, the loyalty of his customers was soon to be tested with new entrants into this highly competitive market.

Twist in the Tale

Tonu’s success in the “juice” business opened up an unrealised market for the local community of Sonipat — one which had high risks, but proportionate returns. With a small initial investment and not too many costs (mainly rent for the land and the music- speakers and wages for his employees), Tonu had created a brandname for himself. He also created animosity, and jealousy, which was soon going to start a vicious cycle of violence, corruption, involvement of gangsters and ruthless business decisions.

Three months after SSP opened, a local from Asawarpur, Tunil*, decided to open his own “confectionary shop” across from Tonu’s. This competitor had local village support, muscle to flex, and a definite sense of humour (or just poor creativity), as was evident by the ‘original’ name that he picked for his establishment as well: ‘Tunil’s Sutta Point’(SSP)*. With a grand opening, and by offering free “juice, tea, and milk”, Tunil tried to rope in Tonu’s customer base. However, what started as a competitive market of vices where the students were just beginning to gain due to plummeting prices, soon saw an intervention from the village.

About the time of Diwali, Tonu and his brother Tohit were assaulted by a group of local villagers who demanded that they leave. They had found out that Tonu was from the village of Rai; and the relations between Rai and Asawarpur were like “India-Pakistan”, Tonu explained. Tohit was admitted into the ICU, Tonu was only slightly better, and the original SSP shack had to temporarily close its shutters. Tunil now had the monopoly, and he intended to keep it. However, soon another “juice shop” opened up beside Tunil’s- “Tonny’s”*. This time, Tunil faced competition from within the village.

Meanwhile, Tonu initiated charges against his competitors for the assault while completing his education at the Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Khalsa College in Delhi. It was at the time of Ashoka’s annual fest in February that he decided to return to Sonipat. In one move, Tonu had retaken control of the juice business in Sonepat pushing out Tunil and assuaging village animosities.

A glimpse from inside SSP on one of its most lucrative nights: before college shut for the summer.

All Is Not Lost

Tonu has worked out a successful partnership with Tonny, a local from Asawarpur, who has accepted him claiming that Tonu is not really from Rai, since his father was from another village. He now works in conjunction with the village panchayat (with whom Tonny has good relations). Occasionally, the police visit. However, Tonu claims that the sphere of influence Tonny now casts prevents them from creating any problems for him or his customers. However, this newfound legacy hasn’t impressed all. “This is just a mafia group”, as one of the security guards on campus recounts.

Tonu has fought off pressure from the University to close down his “juice and confectionary shop”. He looks upon himself as someone who is creating employment opportunities for the village of Asawarpur while also benefiting those like Taveen* who sells cigarette and tea across the road from his shop.

As the 2018 Spring Semester was coming to an end, the saga for control over Sonepat’s Economy of Vice stood such that Tonu’s Sutta Point was owned by Tonny, and managed by Tonu. The latter’s goodwill was soaring, credibility was secure and margins were increasing. On a good Thursday night he would make profits upwards of Rs. 30,000. For him, business was booming, while he planned to expand. In April, the second branch opened up close to the O. P. Jindal University: ‘SSP WestHouse’.

SSP’s doors remain shut all day and night now

And while he had expressed hopes to open a “chain of ‘confectionary shops” in Rajiv Gandhi Education City, there seem to be no signs of him recently. The SSP shack has not been open on Thursday nights in the past two months, with one exception in July. It has been two Thursdays since undergraduate students have returned to campus, yet there seems to be no sign of shutters going up. The abrupt closure has forced students to party on the road by the theka, something which is not nearly as glamorous as SSP. The closing maybe due to pressure from college authorities, village politics, or sheer fear after the debacle at Anjani. But with a comeback story as daring as his, one can be sure Tonu will return. The real question is how the second act to the saga of the most entrepreneurial business venture in Sonipat will be written.

*Names have been changed.

Urvin Soneta is a former Undergraduate Student who was in the Founding Batch. Sparsh Agarwal is the Managing Editor of the Opinions Section at The Edict. Zainab Firdausi is Managing Editor of the News Section at The Edict.

Based on interviews with ‘Tonu’,Taveen, and Ashoka’s Security Team.

The Bastion Covers Sanitation at Asawarpur

The Bastion has filmed a video essay on the state of sanitation in villages in Haryana, with a special focus on villages surrounding universities in the region. Find below the republished article from Team Bastion:

“In our next video, we look at the pertinent open drainage issue which exists in the villages of Haryana. Despite being among the wealthiest villages in India, poor sewage treatment in these areas has led to diseases such as malaria and dengue becoming widespread. While the government continues to promise intervention and medical aid, nothing has been done to close off the drains. How much longer can the villagers live in such conditions before the government decides to step up?”

For more on The Bastion, their team, and their work, read the Edict’s profile on them.

Bastion Media LLP (The Bastion) is a registered news and media website which provides a weekly analysis in the fields of education, sports, and the environment. It was started by Ashoka University students Sourya Reddy, Swagam Dasgupta, and Chirag Chinnappa.

Ashoka over the Weekend | Newsflash

On the weekend of 6–8 April 2018, two events that had been marked on the Ashokan calender for days took flight. The Ashoka Business and Consulting Club hosted the Ashoka Business Conclave on 6 April.

The Conclave comprised three competitive events: Situational Marketing, Crisis Management, and Best Manager.

The Business and Consulting Club also hosted several eminent speakers who came to deliver talks. The speakers included: Snehdeep Aggarwal (Founder of Bharatiya Group), Kshitij Garg (Founder of Healers at Home), Ashoka University Pro-Vice Chancellor Sankar Krishnan(Ex-Partner at McKinsey Consultancy India), and lastly, Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohammed Yunus (Founder of Grameen Bank).

Pictured: Ashoka Business and Consulting Club

While the Conclave was underway, Ashoka also played host to several debators and adjudicators from Delhi University and other colleges across India. The Ashoka Parliamentary Debate was hosted by the Ashoka Debating Union from 6–8 April. There were five preliminary rounds, from which eight teams made it to the quarter finals.

The final round took place on Sunday evening between Lady Shri Ram College and a mixed team of students from Hindu College and Delhi College of Arts and Commerce. The motion for the final was “This House, as minority communities, will deprioritise experiential understandings of oppression in advocacy, in favour of data driven approaches”. After a gruelling debate ensued, the panel of seven adjudicators announced the team from LSR as winners (6–1).

It was an exciting weekend at Ashoka, which witnessed the hardwork and efforts of both the Ashoka Business and Consulting Club and the Ashoka Debating Union.

Impressions of a First Semester

The second Pro-Vice-Chancellor writes on his introduction to Ashoka University.

My first days at Ashoka are in August 2017. The heat envelops me like a wall whenever I’m outdoors.

I walk past the Dhaba every evening to get to the faculty residences. The tables are buzzing with conversation.

I’m woken up at 2 am one night by the bright lights outside my bedroom window and the muted sounds of cheering. It turns out that there’s a match being played at the football field just adjoining the faculty residence building.

Rushing home from work at 9:45 pm one evening to grab a quick dinner and then rushing out again to participate in a quiz competition at 10:30 pm. My team comes second.

So my first take: the real action at Ashoka takes place in the late hours of the night.

It’s Friday evening, week 2 of my life in Ashoka. I’m told a prominent but provocative politician has been invited to meet the students on campus on Saturday morning. Who’s meeting him? What arrangements have been made, I ask. The students know, I’m told.

Already, some students and activists are staging protests. In the meantime, the politician has tweeted about his visit to Ashoka, so there’s no hope of keeping it nice and low key. I recall being narrated an incident in previous years that left politicians annoyed, the students feeling mutinous, and the administration seriously worried about the potential fallout.

So now I feel the true weight of the responsibility that’s unwittingly been thrust upon me — there’s no senior faculty or admin on campus apart from me, and my experience in reining in opinionated young people is limited to small groups. I work out a strategy with the student committee whom I’ve got to know a little; they communicate to the students that the politician is a guest, an invitee, and we need to show respect even as we disagree. During the actual interaction, students are open and vocal about their differences in opinion, but the incident passes without any bloodshed, and I heave a sigh of relief.

Take number two: I am really impressed that the students have enough maturity to express dissent, yet give due respect to someone with an opposing point of view.

I also need to deal with everyday challenges.
__________________________________________________________________

Everyday challenge: Example 1

An email from a student marked to 20 people ranging from admin to the founders:

Admin,

The hot water on my floor has not been working properly for the last month. Please take up this issue seriously as I have been put to serious discomfort. I am supposed to be focusing on my course and not on the most basic amenity. I have been complaining about this to various people but NO ONE LISTENS!

Please fix it.

A student

__________________________________________________________________

I attend an off-site where each of the departments chalk out their agenda for the year. I’m blown away by the research some of the faculty is currently working on, and their plans for taking it all to the next level.

I see students hanging out with faculty after office hours, discussing, debating, challenging, and listening. It looks like a healthy relationship.

___________________________________________________________________

Everyday challenge: Example 2

A student shows great initiative in writing to, and seeking internship with a thinktank. The CEO of the thinktank forwards his email to us….

Dear XYZ,

I’m deeply interested in the area that your organization is working in and I’m looking for an internship with you.

Of course you must remember that just as you will be evaluating me, I will be evaluating you…

Oops! Looks like some coaching is needed on how to approach someone for a favour.

__________________________________________________________________

People complain about the problem of stray dogs in India. Some of our students have adopted dogs that live on the road just outside the campus. Everyday, they take turns to feed and play with them.

One of these students gets bitten by a dog they’ve adopted. Anxious parents call, worried at what their child has to suffer, and complain about the menace of stray dogs. The student gets an anti-rabies vaccine but continues to look after the dogs. This also serves to make them realize that they need to do more than just feed and pet them in order to ensure that the dogs have a healthy and happy life. The dogs are all taken for an anti-rabies vaccine. Any diseases are treated by the vet. Some problems remain of course, even as I write this, but now the dogs are fed, vaccinated, and petted.

Take number three: that these young people are sometimes reckless, but they are young people with heart.

__________________________________________________________________

Everyday challenge: Example 3

I am on a much needed break somewhere deep in the Serengeti in Tanzania, when I get a panic-stricken phone call:

I have a job interview coming up in 2 hours. After your safari can you coach me?

Now Ashoka travels with me wherever I go.

___________________________________________________________________

Amidst all these different student concerns, there’s no escaping the fact that 70% of what I do is on other, equally urgent, issues. Apart from the routine administration, admissions, communication and finance, I work over the best part of two weeks, together with colleagues, both junior and senior, in administration as well as faculty, on the strategic plan for the university over the next five years. Then there is the process of preparing a plan to increase the diversity of the student population: to bring in students who may be facing some challenges, and thinking through how best to support them. I work on putting together a new organizational model to increase collaboration, but also greater performance orientation, while increasing the transparency of assessments. We evaluate an algorithm to calculate the number of classrooms needed. I work with the architects and project team in the context of the look and feel of the new block and campus coming up.

I start working on career support to students and am a little alarmed, first, at the pickiness of the students, and second, contradictorily, at the same time, at the overarching sense of worry among the students, that they would not get placed.

The admissions process at Ashoka is painstaking and the students are hand-picked; on campus, they are encouraged to question received wisdom and follow their own path. Which is a wonderful thing, but it does mean that sometimes jobs that are perceived to lack zing don’t excite them. One of India’s large prestigious companies turns up for a pre-placement talk where only 6 students show up. We are red-faced with embarrassment at the fiasco.

I find that many of the best companies in India, once we communicate with them, are quite keen to interact with the students, given their quality and the reputation that Ashoka already has. The question is how do we translate that keenness to them actually coming down to campus, and when they come down, how do we ensure that students show up for these interactions, and the companies understand from the enthusiasm of the students that in fact, hiring from Ashoka is a great idea.

I then work closely with a few volunteer/chosen students from the ASPs and YIFs to plan recruiting by companies. During the process of our interactions, there is an ‘aha’ moment when they realize that we need to work together on placements, make sure we know which are the most preferred companies that the students want, and go actively after them, and since it’s not going to be easy to persuade the companies to come, make sure that when they do come, we put our best foot forward to convince them to hire from us.

One of the more favoured companies suddenly announces that they would come for a discussion with the students in the middle of the Christmas holidays. It’s a much earned break for the students, who’ve been working hard all semester long. The placement committee takes charge. They get people to delay their break and to show up for key pre placement talks, even though many had already booked tickets. Even students who were not keen on the company or had already got placed turn up to make sure the companies carried home a good impression of the campus.

Yet another take: It’s inspiring to see the selflessness of the PlaceCom students in trying to get jobs for their peers, going well above and beyond the call of mere duty.

When I look back at the last semester, I realize that I am floored by the students. They’re an argumentative, opinionated bunch, sometimes with no sense of perspective, I think, when I get a long chain of emails on some trivial issue. But their hearts are usually in the right place.

They certainly are the most interesting part of my day.

Mr. Sankar Krishnan is the second Pro-Vice Chancellor at Ashoka University. He assumed the position on 16 August 2017. Prior to joining Ashoka University, Mr. Krishnan was a partner at McKinsey India and then later a private consultant.

Fake Lies | Of Fests & Fantasies

Rohan Parikh (Junior Correspondent at Free Press Pvt. Ltd.)

Fake Lies is a satire series about Ashokan life and culture (or lack thereof).

Illustration by Ketaki Mathur (For representational purposes only)

It is late February and lovelorn Hoshak University is eagerly awaiting the second edition of its beloved annual fest- Ranjaana. Conceptualised two years ago as a solution to the ‘stagnation crisis’ that has engulfed the campus, the fest is expected to help retain a sense of normalcy in the student body.

Two years since the inception of Hoshak University, the Administration noticed an increasing difficulty for the students to remain satiated with life on campus. The extravagant facilities, the vast range of food options and even the fluid residence access policy seemed inadequate, for students sought the ultimate freedom — the kind one finds only on the other side of the electric fences.

A staff member of the Administration put it succinctly, “Ever since its inception, Hoshak has been painfully aware of its seclusion from the real world. Everything stagnates, and predictably. Everything ‘is the same’ here — the buildings, the trees, the people, the conversations, even the form and content of outrage. You can definitely have too much of this place.”

This stagnation gave birth to several problems. Chief among them was the erratic attendance for lectures, reluctance to stay for the ‘fourth year’ (the Almost Settled Programme, ASP), haphazard graffiti on walls and perhaps most notoriously, the birth of two local distilleries (allegedly run by twins) situated right outside campus.

The administration even received an anonymous note from an English Major who was evidently fond of Yeats. It simply said, “Students are falling apart; the Administration cannot hold.”

After long deliberation, a solution was devised, one which would effectively burst the bubble without actually having the students leave campus.

Put simply, Ranjaana is one big metaphor. The fest secretary explained the driving idea behind the fest. “It’s obvious; Hoshakans are adventurers by heart. They want to be free. And what better way to realise that freedom when you’re stuck in a tiny campus than to organise an entire fest that conjures the illusion of travel?”

Genius.

On a twenty — five acre campus, Ranjaana’s Organising Group (OG) marks out ‘zones’ — various spots around the Frisbee field that students can travel to in order to experience different foods, games, and people — giving the campus a whole new feel where students can ‘discover passion and explore purpose’ — as the Hoshakan motto spells out.

The implications of this are far-reaching. On the first count, the Administration believes Ranjaana can help minimise the problem of the ‘weekend dissidents’. These are the people who leave campus on the weekends, causing those who stay behind to feel exceptionally trapped. The OG, if successful in creating a strong and lasting metaphor, could persuade the weekend dissidents not to leave, since, after all, ‘travel is right here’.

Secondly, Ranjaana is expected to be a great outreach endeavour. “The indicator,” says an OG member, “of the success of the fest will be the number of applicants from other universities who apply for admission here, convinced that the ‘real world’ is not in the grimy streets outside, but right here, in Hoshak.”

The ‘outsiders’, in fact, will only fuel the illusion, since Hoshakans will not only see new faces on campus, they will do so as they travel. The possibilities of chance encounters, a concept almost alien despite the size of the campus, will be rekindled.

The coming weekend is expected to be one of fun, frolic, and adventure. Hoshakans will realise that lives of people of the outside world and their Instagram feeds (unlike the average Hoshakan’s), are not necessarily consistent. This is expected to create a sense of ‘authenticity’ among the students, as opposed to the ‘fake-ness’ of the outside world and its people.

In sum: the Hoshakan spirit will soar.

Every fest deserves a good run-up to the event. Anticipation and excitement is largely a product of good marketing. The organisers of this fest know this all too well. This season, they managed to create an air of great mystery around it to garner curiosity. So much so that up until two weeks ago everyone was left wondering if the fest was even happening?

The OG, however, has promised us that it is. Several students have ‘begun packing their backpacks’ in eager anticipation of the fest. They look forward to taking a trip down memory lane and rediscovering the campus. Evidently, the metaphor is a success.

An excited first-year undergraduate excitedly told us about her excitement about the fest. “Like, everyone said it was great last year. Apparently, it was like a private party. Very few outsiders. But, like, they say this year will be different. I don’t mind much, I guess. I could get used to having a bunch of people on campus. I’ll know what it’ll be like when the new batch comes in. God, I can’t even imagine…”

The undersecretary of the fest revealed her hopes for the successful execution of the fest.

“As of now, Ranjaana is our one hope to maintain peace of mind on campus. Such adventure — crazed behaviour, if not channelled properly, can be disastrous. It’s alright if Hoshakans think outside the box and whatever, but they must eventually learn to be content with the box they’re living in.”

The Free Press hopes Ranjaana proves to be the force that settles the matter once and for all.

Rohan Parikh is a humble creation of society and its many conventions. He has followed norms ardently and to the best of his abilities- so much so that sometimes the banality of the world feels all too real. He can’t help but laugh; He wants others to get in on the joke.

Opinion | A Review of Ashokan Politics

Revolution is overrated. Ashokan politics needs a new way to associate itself with the voters.

Rohan Parikh, Class of 2019

The fourth year of the election cycle at Ashoka University, and already the candidates are promising a zestful return to the politics ‘of old’, where students had faith in the House of Representatives (HoR) and elections shone with the halo of honey and sunshine.

As is the case with each election cycle, this time too there was talk about a ‘stunning lack’ of representation, accountability, transparency, and efficiency. Candidates are convinced there is ‘something’ at stake; unfortunately, they seem unable to articulate it. So they resort to beating the tired old drum of revolution, of a utopian Ashoka that lives by utopian Ashokan ideals.

Inferno

The Election Commission had promised the audience a riveting first debate. And they delivered. The Candidate Debate was a mess. President of Bringing Justice to the People (BJP), Srishti Bansal, lost her composure and abused the Election Commission (EC). Members of other parties, the Independent Bloc and independent candidates took cheap shots at BJP. The EC repeatedly either forgot to acknowledge independent candidate Kanan Gupta’s presence or mistook him for independent (and absent) candidate Vihaan Singh.

Whether BJP was a joke or not was the central concern addressed in the debate. A host of other issues were brought onto the table (admittedly in a sincere spirit but received with mockery), the most memorable one being the introduction of mini-thalis, proposed by independent candidate Akash Kumar. A community solution to allowing students to consume alcohol illegally without getting into trouble was proposed by BJP. ‘Ethnic day’ was Moksh’s solution to a concern about the lack of knowledge of people’s diversity and backgrounds on campus.

There was a poignant moment when Shivam Sahu raised the question of inclusivity and pointed to the caste and economic discrimination that undergirds relations between individuals on campus. Unfortunately, but expectedly, the moment was cheered, appropriated into a few remarks, and then forgotten, for the show must go on.

Halfway through the debate, it seemed the winner of the night would not be those who attempted meaningful debate; rather those who stayed more composed than BJP. In that respect, Prakrit owned the night. It maintained a dignified silence through most of the debate, speaking sparsely and only to the point. But this negative victory only conferred to them the moral high ground, which is a far cry from displaying actual ability.

The audience too was as much part of the problem as were the candidates. Precious time was wasted in getting them to calm down. Rhetorical battles ensued and were quelled. Election Commissioner Anirudh Pisharam summarised the dominant sentiment of the night when he bid everyone a good night and promised an even more interesting event three days hence- the Presidential Debate. He may not have meant it in a disingenuous spirit, but the message that came across was painfully clear: It was the dusk of Ashokan politics.

Purgatorio

Come Monday night, Dr. Reddy’s auditorium was packed with people ready for what many feared would be a reenactment of last week. The new moderator Apuroop Sethupathy stepped up to the role with one purpose: to make this debate as informative and comprehensive, in other words, as boring, as possible.

Perhaps some people were disappointed by the lack of fervor in the speeches. Candidates actually spoke intelligibly. They raised issues of varying importance and when asked about the conduct of their parties in the previous debate, were surprisingly (and thankfully) insightful and penitent. Let’s try and forget that night, they said. The old adage- nothing ever happens on campus- is to be preferred if the alternative is the embarrassing event they orchestrated.

The Presidential Debate, moderated by Apuroop Sethupathy

What followed in the Presidential Debate, however, must not be judged in comparison to the first debate. Our umeedwaars spoke of a host of administrative issues, ranging from air purifiers to sports equipment to an improved structure for sex education for students. Critical issues like mental health and sexual harassment were mentioned.

Yet, all of this was not quite adequate. Pervasive ignorance on some critical issues was brought to light. The most uncomfortable five minutes of the debate was when fourth-year undergraduate Akash Megh Sharma bluntly asked the candidates about their stance on affirmative action regarding caste-based admission at Ashoka.

The fact that Sethupathy had to repeatedly explain what exactly the question intended to do, and even what affirmative action amounted to, said a lot about the candidates’ knowledge of the problem itself. The answers/solutions proposed ranged from ignorance about the issue to a flat-out rejection to an acknowledgment of not having discussed the issue before to be able to do justice to the question.

There were other times in the debate when candidates were ignorant of the policies that were already in place. Provisions of the Committee Against Sexual Harassment (CASH) were not well known among the candidates; they had simply forgotten to do their homework.

And then there is the issue that goes well beyond manifestos and ‘party ideologies’, (whatever that means when all the parties take the same stand on issues):

Moksh suffered from the problem of inexperience and airy rhetoric that senior undergraduates saw right through as reminiscent of each freshman batches’ fantastical approach to politics at Ashoka. BJP for all its promises and hopes succeeded in marshaling a string of rhetoric that amounts to little. How the Independent Bloc is not a political party was not entirely clear- something they have been at pains to define, but somehow failing at. Prakrit stood on the safer side of revolution. It said all the right things at all the right times in all the right ways. No more, no less. But also: no farther, no deeper.

Independent candidates Sumedha Suresh and Kanan Gupta raised concerns about sexual harassment and breach of online privacy respectively. Akash Kumar proposed plantation drives and lunch carriers, among other things. When questioned how these problems required the HoR specifically to solve, only Suresh and Kumar chose to respond. They said it was simply the case that issues were ‘taken more seriously’ if the government raised them. Seriously.

Paradiso?

Ashokan politics could be at a fork in the road, and the road less traveled will make all the difference. But that would presuppose it to have left home in the first place. The path would be ill served if it is paved with rhetoric.

The question of ‘reviving’ ideals does not arise when they’ve never been implemented in the first place. Neither the zealous yet inexperienced freshmen nor the ‘wise’ but indifferent senior undergraduates can do something meaningful for themselves and the campus if they do not cooperate.

If there is one thing that each candidate mentioned in different ways, that goes to the heart of Ashokan politics, it is that for real and effective solutions, real knowledge about life on campus must be sought. The experiences of all eleven hundred undergraduates must be heard. Solutions don’t necessarily have to be revolutionary- they can simply be concise and helpful. “Uprooting the system” and being “done with this s*it” requires knowing what the aforementioned s*it is actually comprised of, how it came to be defined in such unpropitious terms and whether we’re interested in solutions; or is it merely a political platitude, to be used over and over and over?

To the voters: There are real issues and there are real solutions. There are good, hardworking people across party lines. They’re not perfect, but they can be molded. The onus is upon you to choose representatives who will run the long mile. Knowing that, the first mistake you can make is to not vote. The second mistake you can make is to vote frivolously. The third mistake you can make is to not hold accountable those who do get elected.

Better a cynic who voted than a rebel who abstained. Everyone is involved in this job — let’s do it right.

Rohan Parikh is in his second year at Ashoka University. Views are personal.

The Election Circus

I had previously thought of writing a critique of all candidates’ manifestos except the events of last night don’t deem that effort worthwhile anymore.

Aarushi Aggarwal, Batch of 2018

After last night’s less than impressive and rather disappointing Candidates’ Debate, one thing has become quite clear: Ashoka’s politics looks a lot like Indian politics. Apart from the shoe hurling, all else was accomplished: shouting, screeching, unparliamentary language, crying, storming off and an awkward walk/dance/jumping jacks — I can’t figure which — across the stage. Needless to say, it was no elegant affair; the element of solemnity that marks the event of elections was grossly amiss — and missed — replaced by a mockery of the election system and very obviously of the candidates themselves.

**Presidential Candidate for the ‘BJP’, Srishti Bansal, in the midst of her outburst at the candidates debate ‘Aap ke Umeedwar’**

I had previously thought of writing a critique of all candidates’ manifestos except the events of last night don’t deem that effort worthwhile anymore. After the show put on last night, who can say that manifestos, or even these elections are a serious affair. The rationale, or lack thereof, that has gone into the candidates’ campaign has me baffled. While some resort to trolling, the others quite literally started as a joke and imagine that somehow by co-opting a present serving member of the House as their Presidential candidate, they will magically be everyone’s primary choice for the House. Even this Representative, if I may, was less than respectful to the process. In last year’s debates, the candidates were not known to hold their tongue. Apparently the success of the methods last year warranted a greater show this year, much to the chagrin of a lot of audience members. The said representative trolled their own party, claiming that before they were brought in, it lacked organisation and seriousness. Perhaps, a book or two on campaigning strategies will not be placed for the worse in their party meetings.

I will not limit my criticism to the appalling behaviour of the candidates. A greater lack was perhaps that of intellect. The debates were devoid, completely bereft of, any organised thought whatsoever (save a couple of candidates) to the extent that a group of individuals who have organised themselves into a party, with a party list, in an election designed on a party list system, claim that they are merely independent candidates who are giving the electorate the chance to elect six individuals — not a party — by actually voting for their party. Their reason for this odd political setup is based on the false claim that the House votes along party lines. If they had shown up for even one House meeting, they would have seen otherwise.

Prakrit put up one of the more stable presentations last night. Although the speakers are novices themselves, they have the benefit of the aegis of some older members of not just the House, but also the Undergraduate community. Moreover, the two speakers from the party — the only two candidates that I can account for — have actually attended House meetings and therefore understand what it entails. Unlike Prakrit the other new party around the block, in many ways, mirrors the other party that had come up just before the elections last year, which is now defunct and whose members lost interest in being representatives less than half way through their term exemplified by their abysmal attendance records and lack of attention (being lavished on course readings instead) during meetings. While I cannot make predictions for Moksh, I certainly hope that their service in the House will be of a higher quality than their memes.

The independent candidates, on the other hand, completely misunderstood the purpose of elections. I suppose nobody gave them the memorandum of what House of Representative elections, campaigning and speeches are. While only two candidates had clear agendas, everybody’s speeches were mired by inaccuracy and passionate rants with less than credible solutions. Somehow, there is a misplaced view that entry to the House is a means for candidates to push forth their personal agenda, and not what they believe to be the requirement of the undergraduate community. However, elections are not about choosing a person with the best vision or ideals, it is about choosing a person with realistic goals and a work ethic that can achieve them. This is perhaps my greatest worry from yesterday’s debate: apart from the general lack of quality, the very conception of democracy has been muddled with some weird form of humor and aimless political drama.

Following the example of the American elections from 2016, all we have can do is choose from among the lesser of the many evils. Responsibility is on us, as the electorate, to find the 15 candidates who can somehow constitute a House that maintains some semblance of responsibility, seriousness, intellect and hard work.

Aarushi Aggarwal is in her third year in the Undergraduate Program at Ashoka University. She was a part of the 3rd House of Representatives and stood as an independent candidate.