PaRCha - JNU - AISA - 2005 ID-2366
.
old, 'Maruti-marxist' a~cusation, w.hich says, "lfyou buy corporate-products, ifyou use Maruti cars,whyobjectto lettingcorporates run ourUniversity?" In otherwords; "ifwe have no objection to using Tata Steel or Birla Cement, why object to the corporatization blueprint, 'Model Act for.
.
Universities', drafted by Birla and Ambani?" If we do nevertheless, continue to resist the commercialisation of education, arguingthat our education should be based on a social principle rather than amarket principle, should we not also insist that·our dhabas be run on · oci J rinci I ather .
_than a purely marketprinFiple? . ·.~~~~· M_ .
...........v..itt~n::~.
.
..
.., . .
> TI1en, therg's the excuse that Nestle can stay. smce the dhaba~alas arc also exploitative and usc child labour.In otherwords, becausethe dhabawalais exploitative, let's allowthe Super-Exploiter ofchild labour, N'estle,to stay! This is similar to the argumentthatsince mothers-in-Law oppress daughters-in-law, there is no need to fight patriarchy! Of course, even the sm allest, poorest roadside chaiwala often exploits and abuses child labour.Docs that mean that we invite a fargreater, more powerful exploiter, the l\1NC, to replace him? .
> Also the excuse thatthe canteenwalas and dhabawalas are actually quite well off: they own a home in Delhi! Friends, the top 10 MNCs ofthe world earn more than a hundred countries put together! Can there be any comparison between the MNC giant Nestle, acnd the men orwomen who run Ganga dltaba,Tetlas orLibrary canteen? Can'twe address the importantissii~ofhygiene, quality and child labour on the existing dhabas, without making these an excuse to retain Nestle? .
> Amazingly, the pro-Nestle SFI is going to the extent of campaigni-ng 'Retain Nestle -It w ill sell tea at Rc. l per cup' !Nestle does not sell tea at this price anywhere; it is far-fetched to imagine that it will do so here. .
r But ifi{does so, itwill only be partofaploy to displace every otherdhaba inthe campus and establish its monopoly, and thendictatethe priceat its will. Remember,Nestle has the notorious history ofdistributing baby food supplies 'free' in Brazil's maternitywards; as a result, mothers' milk supply ies. .
We appreciate the fact thatjust like a Left Front partner RSP has criticised the CPI(M)'s moves to introduce FDI in retailing, theAISF on campus has also chosen to take a principled stance and speakout againstthe Nestle Outlet. We wonder why, while eventhe right-winggroups are not vocally defending Nestle, it is SFI alone which is offering one excuse after another to retain Nestle."AISA did a 'flip-flop', so letNestle stay; the dhabawala is well-off, so letNestlestay;-there is child labour on can1pus, so let Nestle stay;..."-every sensitive student should ask: why is SFT showing such unexplained desperation to defend the Nestle Outlet? .
Friends, there will always be 'reasonable', 'mature' reasons andjustifications not to make socially sensitive choiceS. There willalways be voices which willsax "Since everyone takes dowry, why not me?" But there comes apoint in our lives when all ofus have a chance to make a difference, to qct on certainprinciples. The Nestle issue is not a p&tty quarrel betweenpolitical groups,· it:s-a question ofdefending the sociallysensitive characte1; priorities andculture ofour campus. Ifthe SFI-ledJNUSUmade a mistake twoyears back by lettingNestle, itspossible now .
~ .
to admit it, and correct that mistake before.it :S· too late. .
Thattime is now. Let's tnake sure thatin the UGBM on 27tb, each ofspeaks out against corporate takeover, and casta vote to scrap·the Nestle Outlet and replace itwith a 24-hour dhaba. Let the fight . to scrap Nestle be the first step in the direction of resisting corporatisation and tackling the issues of .
child labour, hygiene, and quality. .
.. .
Make UGBM a Clear Mandate against Corporate Takeover of Campus Spaces! .
Defeat the Attempt to Retain Nestle in the name of'Review' ofthe Contract! .
Unite for Scrapping ofthe Contract with Nestle, Demand its Replacement with a 24-hourDbaba! .
sdl-Awadhesh, Gen. Secy., AJSA, JNU sci!-Rajesh Ranjan, Jt. Secy., AISA, JNU .
~ .
c( .
I T , .
,_.,__ -.
-.
~ .
.
PaRCha - JNU - AISA - 2005 ID-2366
.
old, 'Maruti-marxist' a~cusation, w.hich says, "lfyou buy corporate-products, ifyou use Maruti cars,whyobjectto lettingcorporates run ourUniversity?" In otherwords; "ifwe have no objection to using Tata Steel or Birla Cement, why object to the corporatization blueprint, 'Model Act for.
.
Universities', drafted by Birla and Ambani?" If we do nevertheless, continue to resist the commercialisation of education, arguingthat our education should be based on a social principle rather than amarket principle, should we not also insist that·our dhabas be run on · oci J rinci I ather .
_than a purely marketprinFiple? . ·.~~~~· M_ .
...........v..itt~n::~.
.
..
.., . .
> TI1en, therg's the excuse that Nestle can stay. smce the dhaba~alas arc also exploitative and usc child labour.In otherwords, becausethe dhabawalais exploitative, let's allowthe Super-Exploiter ofchild labour, N'estle,to stay! This is similar to the argumentthatsince mothers-in-Law oppress daughters-in-law, there is no need to fight patriarchy! Of course, even the sm allest, poorest roadside chaiwala often exploits and abuses child labour.Docs that mean that we invite a fargreater, more powerful exploiter, the l\1NC, to replace him? .
> Also the excuse thatthe canteenwalas and dhabawalas are actually quite well off: they own a home in Delhi! Friends, the top 10 MNCs ofthe world earn more than a hundred countries put together! Can there be any comparison between the MNC giant Nestle, acnd the men orwomen who run Ganga dltaba,Tetlas orLibrary canteen? Can'twe address the importantissii~ofhygiene, quality and child labour on the existing dhabas, without making these an excuse to retain Nestle? .
> Amazingly, the pro-Nestle SFI is going to the extent of campaigni-ng 'Retain Nestle -It w ill sell tea at Rc. l per cup' !Nestle does not sell tea at this price anywhere; it is far-fetched to imagine that it will do so here. .
r But ifi{does so, itwill only be partofaploy to displace every otherdhaba inthe campus and establish its monopoly, and thendictatethe priceat its will. Remember,Nestle has the notorious history ofdistributing baby food supplies 'free' in Brazil's maternitywards; as a result, mothers' milk supply ies. .
We appreciate the fact thatjust like a Left Front partner RSP has criticised the CPI(M)'s moves to introduce FDI in retailing, theAISF on campus has also chosen to take a principled stance and speakout againstthe Nestle Outlet. We wonder why, while eventhe right-winggroups are not vocally defending Nestle, it is SFI alone which is offering one excuse after another to retain Nestle."AISA did a 'flip-flop', so letNestle stay; the dhabawala is well-off, so letNestlestay;-there is child labour on can1pus, so let Nestle stay;..."-every sensitive student should ask: why is SFT showing such unexplained desperation to defend the Nestle Outlet? .
Friends, there will always be 'reasonable', 'mature' reasons andjustifications not to make socially sensitive choiceS. There willalways be voices which willsax "Since everyone takes dowry, why not me?" But there comes apoint in our lives when all ofus have a chance to make a difference, to qct on certainprinciples. The Nestle issue is not a p&tty quarrel betweenpolitical groups,· it:s-a question ofdefending the sociallysensitive characte1; priorities andculture ofour campus. Ifthe SFI-ledJNUSUmade a mistake twoyears back by lettingNestle, itspossible now .
~ .
to admit it, and correct that mistake before.it :S· too late. .
Thattime is now. Let's tnake sure thatin the UGBM on 27tb, each ofspeaks out against corporate takeover, and casta vote to scrap·the Nestle Outlet and replace itwith a 24-hour dhaba. Let the fight . to scrap Nestle be the first step in the direction of resisting corporatisation and tackling the issues of .
child labour, hygiene, and quality. .
.. .
Make UGBM a Clear Mandate against Corporate Takeover of Campus Spaces! .
Defeat the Attempt to Retain Nestle in the name of'Review' ofthe Contract! .
Unite for Scrapping ofthe Contract with Nestle, Demand its Replacement with a 24-hourDbaba! .
sdl-Awadhesh, Gen. Secy., AJSA, JNU sci!-Rajesh Ranjan, Jt. Secy., AISA, JNU .
~ .
c( .
I T , .
,_.,__ -.
-.
~ .
.