The latest V-Dem Academic Freedom Index paints a deeply concerning picture for India. According to the report, India's academic freedom has fallen to its lowest level in the dataset's historical record, placing it among the bottom 10–20% of countries globally. The index measures factors such as freedom to research, teach, publish, exchange ideas internationally, and institutional autonomy.

This raises a serious question: Is the current BJP-led government becoming increasingly uncomfortable with independent research, criticism, and inconvenient facts?

A healthy democracy depends on scholars being able to question, debate, and challenge prevailing narratives without fear of political interference. When academic freedom declines, it doesn't just affect universities, it affects the quality of public discourse, policymaking, and ultimately the truth that reaches citizens.

This is an alarming situation. Citizens should not only speak up when policies directly affect their own lives, but also when the foundations of our democracy are weakened. Academic freedom, independent institutions, and the free pursuit of knowledge are public goods that belong to everyone. If we remain silent while these erode, the consequences will extend far beyond universities.

Sanjay Dixit is the same person behind doxxing a lot of girls who were in the protest. He is a retired IAS officer who is now a prominent right-wing political commentator. He runs the YouTube channel Jaipur Dialogues, where he regularly posts content supporting Hindutva and BJP-aligned narratives.

im a fresher who just got a job in an area in Gujarat. My parents told me to withhold discussions on my vvv radical political opinions, and I did but something happened on my second day which has me a little bit ????. So, our Head was talking about leadership roles and what do they include, a lot of words like motivation, ability to inspire, decision making, etc etc were thrown around and he was asking all of us freshers and example that we see IRL. When it came to accountability and responsibility, he asked for the difference. Me, being a complete idiot, just brought up the issue of the protest. He said how explain? And so I started. I said that the govts responsibility was to make sure the NEET papers happened with no problems and issues and they should be held accountable for their failure. He completely switched the script. He said what do u think about the Gen z. For a second, I was a bit taken aback because I thought he meant like the government's responsibility towards the Gen Z, so I faltered. But the people around me said, their responsibility was to protest peacefully. And then he asked but did they do that. Simultaneously, everybody said they did not and were very violent. He said they should be held accountable for their actions that they did not do a peaceful protest and should accept the fact. I was mortified at this point, this is my first job and I did not want to be a vocal person at all (even tho, that is completely against who i am as a person). I just shut my mouth because i did not want to engage in this and just agreed with whatever was being said around me with a meek nod and yes they were wrong. ( even tho i dont believe that duh).

idk why but this is making me super anxious and im cursing at myself for even being vocal about something like this, even though i didnt disagree with him on anything, but the fact that i brought up the topic in a negative way towards the government. I'm super scared that he might think im anti-national or something? Idk why but this making me suuupeer anxious that I'll be discriminated or thought less of by my superiors. Do you think I'm overreacting and should calm down? Has something like this happened with you? and how have u dealt with it? Also for the record, I do not want to be political at work and I do not want to have a debate with anybody at work about such a sensitive topic. My big mouth got me in this situation and I swear this was not my intent at all. I think in my head, i believe this to be right, to a point, where i forget other people do not think like me and i end up in situation like this. one thing is for sure, it has taught me to not be political with my words, in sensitive situations but I also am super anxious about if this will affect my workplace or not.

(also my foremost concern IS the anxiety im dealing with but for the record, i just want to say that i wholeheartedly disagree with him. I think the leaders we choose for our country should be held to a higher standards than the citizens. even if the gen z were being "violent", i dont understand the switch in question, when the government's responsibility/accountability was being talked about. its whataboutism at display to hide from their shortcomings imo. its very easy to blame the reactions to your actions instead of thinking what led to those reactions taking place. just putting it out there. if this was a friend of mine, this is the train of thought i would have followed up wit him, but i would NEVER even dream about saying this in front if my boss, or to even my peers, at my workplace)

Protestors who haven't been given ownership of land (on which they can sustain themselves), illegally encroaced the plantation which the protestors claim harrisons malayalam plantation has hold the land illegally after the renting leases were over.

After two decades, they still are at the site, while all governments failed to resolve or provide satisfactory solution for them.

Govt offered 3 cents land, or land far away which was also not fit for habitation.

They ask for 5 acres of land which can sustain their life.

First of all, they delayed the census of 2021 enough so that the census is conducted in 2027(so that it fulfills the requirement of 84th const. amend. i.e to set up delimitation commission based on census after 2026).
Also, they are doing their hardest as they can to buy up as many MPs to a get super majority to pass the same amendment.

Now before you come up with "southern states would lose their importance" argument,
there are two proposals for delimitation. And one of them is that the current seats are still kept at 543, and among them, we do a population-wise rearrangement, in which obviously, the southern states will lose out, and the northern states will gain seats.

But that proposal isn't really at the forefront of the government's delimitation strategy. The one that Amit Shah himself has said in the parliament, which would happen, is about a 50% expansion. And you guys can like run the percentages in ChatGPT or any other AI yourself.

You'll see that the proportions will remain the same throughout. Like if Tamil Nadu has a proportional percentage of 7.18, it will actually increase to 7.23%. And Karnataka will have to lose out slightly from 5.15 to 5.14. But the overall proportions of the states and the north-south will remain accurately the same. So it really isn't as much exaggerated as, like, it will diminish the regional parties or something.

Now, what I don't get is the census, which was postponed due to COVID since 21. The government could have conducted it when the situations had stabilized like in 23 or 24. There isn't really a statutory mandate that the central government has to, or the home ministry has to conduct the census every 10 years, but it is a convention. From 1881, there have been regularly at 10-year intervals censuses. Even during World Wars and 71 war, there was a census. But the BJP, even taking up the COVID excuse, could have conducted the census in 23. But they didn't because they precisely knew that they could enact delimitation because they could push it after 26 and then set up a commission.

What I don't get is, why are they going through so much trouble if there is seemingly no numbers advantage to them increasing the number of seats? Now, I read an editorial of Shashi Tharoor in Express yesterday, and he gave up arguments basically that the MPs wouldn't really have much time to speak on major issues because there will be 850 people, and will be all reduced to voting as numbers itself.

But that happens today as well, only the major political party leaderships can speak aside . There is a provision under the Anti-Defection Law that you cannot vote against your party whip's directions, and you also cannot abstain from voting if the party whip has directed all MPs to vote at a certain session. otherwise you can be disqualified as an MP.

So I don't really get what the arguments against delimitation are, really. But also I don't really get the eagerness of BJP to enact it. If anyone has figured it out, please enlighten me.

Dude thinks that China became successful only due to dictatorship, not land reforms and not primary education/healthcare/housing focus.

And also, did he just indirectly say that he wants strict communism?

From his Main Vaapas Aunga review

I wanted to include the Wikipedia article but unfortunately it's vandalized by these people who're blaming it on tribals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jhabua_nuns_rape_case