Two issues that have generated widespread controversy in recent months are the Private Sector Pension Bill and the so called ‘Leadership Training’ programme recently launched at military camps for university entrants. Several trade unions have voiced protests over the proposed Pension Scheme, expressing suspicions over the motives for its introduction and claiming that it negatively affects workers’ benefits. The military camp programme introduced as a new requirement for university entrants has also met with opposition for many reasons, not least because students had no knowledge of it at the time they sat the university entrance exams.
Some have petitioned the Supreme Court for violation of fundamental rights. Opposition political parties have been vociferous in expressing their disapproval of both schemes.
 |
| University students at a protest, surrounded by the police. File photo. |
It is interesting to note that the Higher Education Minister in his remarks on ongoing disputes relating to universities constantly refers to the uncooperative students as ‘daruwo,’ or ‘children.’ This term might suggest an attitude of benign paternalism on a superficial level. At another level this repeated reference to university students as ‘daruwo’ would seem to imply they are being looked upon as minors and they are still the responsibility of their parents.
This is not quite in key with the expectation held by most people that universities are places where students ‘grow up,’ learn to think independently and to question accepted beliefs and practices. Besides, as we all know, when they engage in protests and demos the ‘daruwo’ have, at short notice, been subjected to tear gas, water cannon or worse, by the powers that be. The use of this terminology is thus misleading, if not insulting to the students.
Had the Labour Minister taken a leaf out of the Higher Education Minister’s book when he also recently referred to the several thousands of Free Trade Zone workers who demonstrated against the Pension Scheme Bill as ‘lamai’ (children)? The minister blamed the trade unions for lying to workers in order to get them onto the street (“boru kiyala may lamaiyinva paarata bassanawa”). Nevertheless the ‘lamai’ were allegedly attacked by police at the end of the protest.
A common feature in both the Pension Scheme and the ‘Leadership Training’ course - and one that no doubt has ignited much of the anger over them - is the fact that they are compulsory. Shortly after the commencement of the university entrants programme on May 23, a Higher Education Ministry source announced on radio that those who did not attend – reportedly around 20 per cent – are required to give “valid” reasons for their non-attendance, such as “exam, funerals or illness.” Clearly the message is that students must compulsorily attend this course or expect to be penalized in some way.
The 80 per cent course attendance that has been reported need not necessarily indicate that the majority of students welcome this programme. It is very likely they have weighed their options and concluded it is preferable to submit to the dictates of authorities at this point, rather than put their future in jeopardy.
There are many reasons why students and parents may be mistrustful of this peculiar new ‘course requirement.’ It is unheard of in university history.
It is problematic not only on account of the perceived injustice inherent in suddenly thrusting a new hurdle in their path, but because it is suggestive of a new style of regimentation that seems to be expected of undergraduates. How else can one interpret the fact that the course is being conducted at military camps, apparently by military personnel? If the idea is to help new entrants to orient themselves to university lifestyle or even, as the minister claims, to ‘prevent ragging,’ it remains a puzzle why the programme could not have been conducted on a location at the universities.
Apart from signals that may be (accurately or inaccurately) transmitted to students by the military trappings of this programme, there is little to indicate what is in store for them, as the curriculum is not known. Media reports have cited the following array of vague objectives and diverse subject matter in the past few weeks:
- “Military assistance for daily activities such as waking up early and attending to daily chores …”
- “Preparing graduates to meet the standards and demands of the developed world,”
- “Modern history, crisis management, psychology, general law, social etiquette”
- “Personal hygiene, hostel customs, beauty culture”
- “Training (in) physical drill and conflict management in a bid to increase mental and physical fitness”
- “TV shows to identify students talented in various fields such as music and dancing.”
The compulsory element in both the Private Sector Pension scheme and the military camp training programme for university entrants would seem to suggest an assumption that the citizenry don’t know what’s good for them, and that the state knows better. If these are benign and beneficial schemes one may ask why they are made compulsory. Wouldn’t the potential (adult) beneficiaries subscribe to them of their own accord? Is this a case of “political infantilization?”
In the context of a discussion on the ‘creation of a political culture that treats people like little children’ the New Internationalist (Oct. 2007) described “political infantilization as follows:
“The idea of infantilization hinges on the human reluctance to leave the womb, the family home, the care of the parent, and enter into the adult world to do (and think) for oneself. The politician can play on this feeling by trying to replace the parent as someone who continues to decide for you. This tendency is quite clear in dictatorships …”
Given the political history, Sri Lankan workers and students do not come across as likely candidates for any kind of “political infantilization.” Sri Lanka’s president is a politician known for his knack of ‘feeling the pulse of the people,’ who constantly has his ear to the ground.
It is unlikely he will not hear the rumblings manifested in the current wave of protests.
The writer is a senior freelance journalist
|
E-mail