There’s no transparency
Can you explain why the student coordinators surrounding Dr. Yunus aren’t publicly expressing their ideologies? How can we know their plans for Bangladesh’s future? They want to change the constitution, but have they consulted the masses? I understand the forceful historical imposition of an Indian-hegemonic, Hindu-Bengali Renaissance culture through Mujib’s BKSAL (which was later enforced by Hasina through BAL), but is replacing it with an extreme form of another theology/ideology the solution? There’s talk of “inclusiveness”, yet have you seen Mahfuj Abdullah’s latest post? Why aren’t the coordinators clarifying their individual stances? Is this a communication failure?
Public uprisings involve the people, not just the students—17 crore citizens’ opinions matter. If all power is placed in the hands of a few people, we risk spiralling into authoritarianism again, right?
I recently visited Dhaka University and saw not just posters and banners representing some very questionable organisations, but also their flags and leaflets. This is fine in terms of freedom of expression, but here’s an instance of a problem: Maulana Bhashani’s famous slogan, "শুনো, ধর্ম আর দেশ মিলাইতে যায়ো না। পরে ফুলের নাম কী দিবা? ফাতেমা-চুরা?" Now, I understand a particular religion is being singled out here. But in a majority-Muslim country, was Maulana Bhashani really wrong?
Look at what’s been done to the artwork on the TSC walls. They’ve started a campaign to remove secularism under the guise of inclusiveness. Fine, I can accept that, but they’ve erased the word "Fatema" from the city’s artwork. I see this as an attack on democracy and freedom of expression. Are the student coordinators tolerating this? If yes, then how do they plan to implement "inclusiveness" in politics? Self conflicting?
nb. This post is not only about the attack on the artwork and freedom of speech rather about the whole concept of Democracy under contentious circumstances.
Can you explain why the student coordinators surrounding Dr. Yunus aren’t publicly expressing their ideologies? How can we know their plans for Bangladesh’s future? They want to change the constitution, but have they consulted the masses? I understand the forceful historical imposition of an Indian-hegemonic, Hindu-Bengali Renaissance culture through Mujib’s BKSAL (which was later enforced by Hasina through BAL), but is replacing it with an extreme form of another theology/ideology the solution? There’s talk of “inclusiveness”, yet have you seen Mahfuj Abdullah’s latest post? Why aren’t the coordinators clarifying their individual stances? Is this a communication failure?
Public uprisings involve the people, not just the students—17 crore citizens’ opinions matter. If all power is placed in the hands of a few people, we risk spiralling into authoritarianism again, right?
I recently visited Dhaka University and saw not just posters and banners representing some very questionable organisations, but also their flags and leaflets. This is fine in terms of freedom of expression, but here’s an instance of a problem: Maulana Bhashani’s famous slogan, "শুনো, ধর্ম আর দেশ মিলাইতে যায়ো না। পরে ফুলের নাম কী দিবা? ফাতেমা-চুরা?" Now, I understand a particular religion is being singled out here. But in a majority-Muslim country, was Maulana Bhashani really wrong?
Look at what’s been done to the artwork on the TSC walls. They’ve started a campaign to remove secularism under the guise of inclusiveness. Fine, I can accept that, but they’ve erased the word "Fatema" from the city’s artwork. I see this as an attack on democracy and freedom of expression. Are the student coordinators tolerating this? If yes, then how do they plan to implement "inclusiveness" in politics? Self conflicting?
nb. This post is not only about the attack on the artwork and freedom of speech rather about the whole concept of Democracy under contentious circumstances.