The recent social media furore – if it can be called that, given the rarefied air academia breathes – over the severe lack of diversity at the philosophy department at Ashoka University was the closest thing to “a tree falling in an empty forest” on Twitter. Forests, of course, are never empty – from the trees themselves to animals, birds, insects — they are teeming with life and non-human observers. But just like philosophers (at least those who do not have the talent or inclination to write self-help books), these observers are considered unimportant.
“The Philosophy Major at Ashoka University,” according to the department’s ‘About Us’ section, “aims to equip students to work beyond the parochialism of either the Indian or Western philosophical tradition: to do philosophy without boundaries.” It is perhaps this high-minded posturing that made detractors on Twitter post photographs of the entire department – all the faculty, except for Head of Department Kranti Saran, appear to be Caucasian.
The attacks on the lack of diversity were predictable: This was Western “wokeism” trying to colonise Indian thought; it exposed the hypocrisy and elitism of the great Indian liberal, who was essentially hankering after the West; that an institution that has sought to portray itself as among the best in India in so short a time couldn’t find more than one “local” to teach philosophy. There are fairly simple ways to argue against this parochialism vis a vis the white teacher – citing “merit”, the universality of ideas or even that the focus on identity can be a part of teaching, “problematising” the idea of diversity for its own sake, among others.
However, both the accusations against Ashoka and the defence elide the fundamental problem with the “elite” private university that espouses liberal values and claims to foster critical thinking. According to its website, “Ashoka University provides a holistic education that is liberal, multidisciplinary, and interdisciplinary, offering a diverse and inclusive space for its students to think deeply and critically, learn across disciplinary boundaries, express themselves creatively, and communicate with meaning to cause impact and change.”
While there is little doubt that every professional philosopher in the department is a fine mind and perhaps a great teacher, their skin colour makes for good marketing. On the other hand, there are certainly philosophers of great calibre, who are an inspiring presence in the classroom, with varying concentrations of melanin. Some of them taught students – from undergraduates to PhD scholars — to do “philosophy without boundaries” in Indian universities and colleges. For years, there have been – and continue to be — teachers of philosophy in India who teach at universities with far more economically and socially diverse classrooms. They do so at the highest level without their students having to pay dollar rates. But maybe, when the prestige and power that feeds into it educating rich “people like us” is at stake – marketing matters more than it should.
What, free-market champions may argue, is wrong with hiring people who are more likely to convince parents that the lakhs they will pay every year are well spent? After all, in the competitive space that is private-sector higher education, every college boasts of its placements, “international faculty”, etc. Ashoka University, though, is just a little bit more elite. Just as the most upmarket of brands carry no logos, the island of privilege and excellence in Sonepat does not advertise in the same manner as Galgotias or Lovely Professional University.
However, the fact is that for a university in India, especially today, “liberal values” must be more than just a brand tagline. If Ashoka defended those values, the nationalities and races of its faculty would matter little. It does not.
It is the university’s bad luck, perhaps, that it was founded in 2014, and has had to sell the critical thinking schtick in New India: In the march of Hindutva millenarism, diversity, debate and dissent are anathema, and education – from school textbooks to the composition of and politics in universities – is a significant theatre of the ideological battle. Equally, though, the (dollar) billionaires, multi-millionaires and distinguished intellectuals and corporate officers that are the founders, trustees, board members and leaders at Ashoka – people of means, power and influence – have done less to stand up for the liberal values they advertise than students of far more limited means from public universities. If they have done anything at all.
In 2017, one faculty member and two managers left the university after a controversy over their having signed a petition – along with 85 students – over condemning violence in Kashmir. Initially, Ashoka University claimed that it did not pressure anyone to quit: But a report in The Indian Express revealed at least two internal emails between Ashoka’s leadership that clearly showed that was not the case. In addition, the faculty body seemed certain that there was some pressure involved.
And, it was not so long ago that one of the most well-respected public intellectuals in India left the university. This philosopher has also been one of the strongest moral voices holding the current dispensation to account. Officially, he resigned. But it was reportedly made clear to him by the founders that he was a “political liability”. And with that, “critical thinking” and “liberal values” became something alien to the deans and doyens at Sonepat.
In fact, even the kind of thinking allowed, how ideas of politics and service are explored, are limited. Students’ and teachers’ unions are not – cannot be – associated with known political parties. But perhaps the right to free association, to practice competitive bargaining is fine for golf clubs and industry bodies, but not for students and teachers.
None of this is to say that Ashoka University does not provide a good education, or that its founders and leaders do not mean well. However, there is a curious conceit sometimes found among corporate leaders that the methods and principles – profitability, efficiency, “excellence”, and an apolitical approach to inevitable conflicts — that facilitated tremendous success in their respective fields are universally applicable. But a university with deep values, whose roots can withstand the winds of a hard, ideological politics, cannot be created merely by throwing money at land and hiring the “best” from around the world. That requires courage and a sense that an institution cannot bend, that every time someone “resigns” under pressure, your university comes one step closer to being just another shop in the market.
In the larger scheme of things, there may be nothing wrong with that. But, if that is the case, spare us the lectures about values and excellence. Let’s talk placements.
aakash.joshi@expressindia.com
Both the accusations against Ashoka and the defence elide the fundamental problem with the “elite” private university that espouses liberal values and claims to foster critical thinking. (File) 
Share
