It is strange to know that a learning centre like the Wharton Business School should falls prey to the dirty politics of hatred and prejudice. Being one of the leading education centres of United States, the Wharton Business School has eminent educationalists, businessmen, politicians, free thinkers and liberals on its Panel. So how come this Panel decided to cancel the Video Conference meet between Narendra Modi and the students. This smacks of pure hypocrisy.
First things first, the United States of America has been a nation of liberated souls right from Abraham Lincoln to the current President Barak Obama. It has opened its arms to many like minded people through out its history. Now it is opening it arms for the Chinese dissidents. It is not granting Narendra Modi the visa due to its internal politics but as a nation state, it is still the biggest centre of doing business and selling ideas. Indeed it is known as the land of opportunities.
It hosts the United Nations General Assembly and the assembly has seen the worst enemies of United States come to its shores and rant about the US policies and atrocities committed by it. Watch this video of Mr.Chavez, President of Venezuela, calling President Bush a devils. Mr.Chavez was entitled to his views as a individual and a head of the state of Venezuela.
No one objected then. No one could object because United Nations General Assembly is immune to the internal laws of United States.
Politics and learning should not be mixed together, they create a potent poison. The politicians will do their jobs and the educationists should do their job. And their job is to impart free and fair education. In the same way like United Nations is immune to the internal laws of United States because it is a assembly of the Nations of the World, the Wharton and other Universities of US and the world should be immune to the internal laws because they are the assembly of the students of the world.
A student is a student, whether he is from US, Canada, China, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. He is a student because he wants to learn. He wants to learn because he wants know what is wrong and right. To know the right from the wrong he should be exposed to both the sides. It is then, through a healthy debate he can form his opinion. This opinion is what makes him a human being, whether he is left leaning, right leaning, capitalist, communist, communalist or just plain liberal doesn't matter. IT is his own right and conscience which guides him in the end.
So as a educational institution, it is the duty of Wharton or for that matter any educational institution to expose its students to all the information it possibly can and then let the students decide what is right or wrong. If it does not do so, it is no better than the Jehadi diktats which pronounce 'Fatwa' without giving a fair hearing to the person concerned.
Having said that, I don't know what problem the Wharton has with Narendra Modi. The man has won mandate for 60 million people of Gujarat which includes 10 % Muslims, thrice. Give him a break. Winning elections once, in states of India is difficult, keeping the anti incumbency factor at bay is the worst nightmare faced by all the Chief Ministers of the various states of India. This man has done that and through a rather handsome majority on all three times.
The other side of the argument is that Narendra Modi has not been named in any of the various charge sheets filed by the law enforcement agencies. It has names of his aides, fellow ministers but he is not named. The Supreme Court of India, the apex body of justice in India, had vaguely hinted his unwillingness to go after the suspected participants for carnage in Godhra. No where has it mentioned him as a co-accomplice or co-conspirator for the progrom of 2002.
In face of above, if the Wharton and its deemed panelists consider Narendra Modi a conspirator or a fundamentalist then they are questioning the legitimacy of Supreme Court judgements and thereby questioning the Supreme Court of India.
By not letting Narendra Modi speak at the conference has done Mr.Modi no harm, but it has damaged its own reputation as upholder of education and freedom of expression. In a paradox of a kind, Narendra Modi has emerged winner due to the hodge podge decision of the business school.
May some sanity return to its panelists. Please post your comments even if you disagree with me.
Vijay Prabhu
A student is a student, whether he is from US, Canada, China, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. He is a student because he wants to learn. He wants to learn because he wants know what is wrong and right. To know the right from the wrong he should be exposed to both the sides. It is then, through a healthy debate he can form his opinion. This opinion is what makes him a human being, whether he is left leaning, right leaning, capitalist, communist, communalist or just plain liberal doesn't matter. IT is his own right and conscience which guides him in the end.
So as a educational institution, it is the duty of Wharton or for that matter any educational institution to expose its students to all the information it possibly can and then let the students decide what is right or wrong. If it does not do so, it is no better than the Jehadi diktats which pronounce 'Fatwa' without giving a fair hearing to the person concerned.
Having said that, I don't know what problem the Wharton has with Narendra Modi. The man has won mandate for 60 million people of Gujarat which includes 10 % Muslims, thrice. Give him a break. Winning elections once, in states of India is difficult, keeping the anti incumbency factor at bay is the worst nightmare faced by all the Chief Ministers of the various states of India. This man has done that and through a rather handsome majority on all three times.
The other side of the argument is that Narendra Modi has not been named in any of the various charge sheets filed by the law enforcement agencies. It has names of his aides, fellow ministers but he is not named. The Supreme Court of India, the apex body of justice in India, had vaguely hinted his unwillingness to go after the suspected participants for carnage in Godhra. No where has it mentioned him as a co-accomplice or co-conspirator for the progrom of 2002.
In face of above, if the Wharton and its deemed panelists consider Narendra Modi a conspirator or a fundamentalist then they are questioning the legitimacy of Supreme Court judgements and thereby questioning the Supreme Court of India.
By not letting Narendra Modi speak at the conference has done Mr.Modi no harm, but it has damaged its own reputation as upholder of education and freedom of expression. In a paradox of a kind, Narendra Modi has emerged winner due to the hodge podge decision of the business school.
May some sanity return to its panelists. Please post your comments even if you disagree with me.
Vijay Prabhu
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق