THe leftist wants to make Ashoka University a cesspool ike they made of JNU, now that the JNU cespool is almost cleaned they are looking for another place. For them attacking hinduism under a facade of secularism is what lthse universities are for.
I studied under Bikhchandani. He was a well-liked guy. but was not rich. Money has ruined him, just like it ruins everyone. He reminds me of industrialists who supported the holocaust and were too afraid. If you can’t support your own faculty, your own employees, who will you stand for? Who all are dispensable? The family, the country. If he can’t say something good, maybe he should say nothing at all.
Salute to Mr. Bikhchandani.
It takes courage to speak the truth. To have the guts to call out a spade for what it actually is.
An academic is always free to engage in activism. But that activism is his/her personal thing. The institution is not associated with it. People of various ideologies and inclinations are part of an university. The wide variety of ideas and opinions invariably make their way to the classrooms and thereby enrich the university and encourag students to think critically. All of that is good and great.
But when an academic or a student engages in activism, it’s his/her personal choice. It’s a private endeavour of that person. Of course, one is free to be an activist in a democratic country. But the institution is not involved in this activism in any manner.
What we post on our individual Facebook or Instagram or X (Twitter) account reflects our own opinion and thoughts. It does not reflect the institution’s opinion or thoughts.
Hence, to drag the institution into a controversy and expect it to get into fights with the law enforcement agencies on our behalf does reek of entitled behaviour.
Mr. Bikhchandani has quite beautifully differentiated between academic endeavours of a scholar and his/her activism. The university is always duty bound to defend genuinely academic activity that it’s teachers and students engage in. That may include research papers on “controversial” topics, inviting “controversial” scholars on campus for talks, etc. The university management is responsible to ensure that such activities can take place without any issues.
But to put out ridiculous posts from personal accounts on social media platforms and then expect the university to jump in and fight on our behalf is just not acceptable.
Prof. Mahmudabad has acted grossly entitled in this instance. All those who castigated the Ashoka founders for not standing up for Prof. Mahmudabad have acted frivolous too.
Kudos to Mr. Bikhchandani, Pramath and Ashish for taking a firm stance on this issue. The Ashoka university administration must warn Prof. Mahmudabad that such entitled behaviour will not be tolerated going ahead and he must own up to his responsibilities as an individual.
Also, it would be in the best interests of everyone concerned if the university were to put out a circular on this and clearly inform the “activist” academics in it’s ranks (Ashoka has too many of that variety) that they must not associate the university with their personal thoughts, opinions or activism. Any attempt to get the university into conflict with law enforcement agencies, in order to further their own personal activist “causes”, will result in swift disciplinary action against the concerned “activist” academic.
In light of all of this we keep forgetting smthing very simple, the context and the atmosphere in which the professor made the post. I am not a supporter of war in any way, but the fact that pro peace gang is quick to talk about peace , especially when India retaliates doesn’t show an impetus for peace but a desire for impotence and weakness. Let’s also not forget how he changed the discussion from the war to Right wing attitude towards sophia qureshi, (because why?) and then highlighted how right wing needs to stand up with those tht get lynched based on religion. Fair. But what was the point of bringing it here? One could also argue why the asoka university professor didn’t mention , that the other side needs to talk abt peace wen riots in murshidabad or Bangladesh attack the minorities of those areas aka non muslims. In either case both of these discussions are relevant in country’s internal matters and discussions on religious freedom, i cannot understand why the professor brought it in context of operation sindoor. My best bet is, simply his desire to paint the operation as a shadow of Hindutva , which supposedly attacks minorities in India, to paint the operation itself as an attack on the “innocent” people of pakistan. That is to make the perpetrators of terror attacks on India as the “victims”. It’s pretty clear where his motivations lied. One hardly feels the desire to stand with the professor with such ideology.
The letter from Ashoka University founder Mr. Sanjeev Bikhchandani, in response to concerns about the university’s silence over Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s arrest, reveals something deeper than just institutional positioning—it exposes the fault lines of private higher education in India.
Instead of standing with a faculty member who voiced truth and constitutional values, the university seems to distance itself under the pretext of “academic neutrality” and “liberal education not equating to activism.” This, to me, is a way of saying: we will not stand with those who challenge injustice or power, because institutional survival matters more than the values we claim to teach.
This is the inevitable outcome when education is privatized and left in the hands of those whose vision is shaped more by donor comfort and risk aversion than by ethical courage or democratic responsibility. In such spaces, critical inquiry is tolerated only within limits—never if it unsettles the status quo.
We must ask: What good is a liberal arts education if it produces silence in the face of repression?
When institutions sanitize politics, depoliticize dissent, and prioritize their brand over their backbone, they are not neutral—they are complicit.
Prof. Mahmudabad and others of his ilk are like parasites. They are always in search of wealthy patrons. Why? Because someone needs to fund their high flying lifestyles. And who better than a free market capitalist with deep pockets?
There’s just one catch though. Most of these “scholars” are from the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist school and therefore despise capitalists and capitalism. They spend their lives spreading misinformation and engaging in disinformation campaigns against the capitalistic world order. They rant and rail against the ‘gross injustices’ of capitalism.
All the while savouring the fruits of capitalism. They want the very best for themselves and their families. And Ashoka University provides just that and then some more – astronomical salaries and perks unheard of in Indian academia.
Ashoka University has become an infamous institution. Why? Because of Hinduphobic ‘scholars’ like Christophe Jaffrelot and Aparna Vaidik who have found refuge here. These bigoted individuals who have consistently peddled anti-Hindu propaganda and indoctrinated young impressionable minds have found a safe haven at Ashoka.
One can understand the predicament of the founders though. Their hard earned money is being wasted on such parasites.
People like “Dr.” S Sathananthan are the ones in charge of Ashoka University. Know-it-all types who have never ever created an institution.
People like Mr. Bikhchandani, Pramath and Ashish should actually walk out of Ashoka and leave it to the likes of Sathananthan and Mahmudabad. Let these idiots run the university on their own and let the world see how good they are at creating institutions of repute.
One cannot but feel deeply for the founders of Ashoka University. They wanted to create the Indian equivalent of MIT. Ended up creating another Jadavpur University.
The Left-liberal ecosystem is a vulture out to feed on anyone with deep pockets. They speak all kinds of mumbo-jumbo and critique capitalism all their life but their deep and abiding love for the trappings of capitalism belie their shrill voices. Deep down they just want to feast on other people’s hard earned money.
So tragic and disappointing.
The founders of Ashoka University, all billionaire capitalists, wanted to create an institution like MIT. The ambition was to facilitate top notch research and education in basic sciences and technology which could lead to Nobel Prizes, Fields Medals and Turing Awards.
The Left-liberal cabal got whiff of the plan and managed to convince the founders that the ideal way forward was a liberal arts and humanities university. As if JNU/Jamia/Aligarh was not enough, the Left-liberal ecosystem wanted another campus dedicated to their “cause”. Ashoka University, very unfortunately, became the hub of all sorts of woke ideas and idiocy. Led by the likes of Rudrangshu Mukherjee (ex-editor of The Telegraph) and Pratap Bhanu Mehta, it provided refuge to rabidly anti-Hindu “intellectuals” like Christophe Jaffrelot. Insulting Hinduism and demonising Hindus became the raison d’etre.
The founders, all well meaning individuals with great achievements to their names who genuinely wanted to contribute to India’s progress in science and technology, were fooled by the Left-liberal cabal into serving it’s own interests.
The salaries at Ashoka are unmatched in Indian academia. These Leftists, whose hatred for capitalism knows no bounds, enjoyed all the perks and benefits of capitalist largesse of the founders. All the while engaging in targeted disinformation campaigns against Hindus and Hinduism.
Mr. Bikhchandani and company has unwittingly created a monster.
Critical thinking devoid of it’s necessarily associated decisive action is impotent sabre rattling much encouraged by the status quo..
The status quo often dodges making informed responses by dismissing critiques on the spurious grounds of impoliteness and disrespect.
Politeness and respect disempower the opposition. They cannot challenge power.
Throughout history change has been brought about by impatient, abrasive and even revolutionary/violent speech and actions. Think of Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc. and the Feminist struggles and battles against caste oppression, all of which were the results of the status quo cheerfully abandoning respect, politeness and fair play.
Notice how the founder in his reply throws down the gauntlet – challenging critics to raise funds for Ashoka university.
Is that different from President Trump threatening to cut off and cutting off funds for Harvard and other universities for pro-Palestine activism?
Worse still, the founder makes the irresponsible distinction between “academic” and “journalistic” writings. What matters is the content of the intervention not the platform on which it appears. To dismiss an argument because it appears in a “non-academic” source is pseudo intellectual arrogance at its worst.
It follows that the founder’s assertion the Ashoka university is not obliged to defend its members for their interventions in socially important issues outside the contrived and limited academic circle smacks of cowardice
In the social sciences critical analyses are rarely to be found in hide bound academic tomes. Instead they grow out of pamphlets, issue-based publications by activists and their activism and personal communications which are thereafter retailed by passive academics.
Lastly, the admission of googling to determine what constitutes academic interventions is a source of mirth.
THe leftist wants to make Ashoka University a cesspool ike they made of JNU, now that the JNU cespool is almost cleaned they are looking for another place. For them attacking hinduism under a facade of secularism is what lthse universities are for.
I studied under Bikhchandani. He was a well-liked guy. but was not rich. Money has ruined him, just like it ruins everyone. He reminds me of industrialists who supported the holocaust and were too afraid. If you can’t support your own faculty, your own employees, who will you stand for? Who all are dispensable? The family, the country. If he can’t say something good, maybe he should say nothing at all.
Salute to Mr. Bikhchandani.
It takes courage to speak the truth. To have the guts to call out a spade for what it actually is.
An academic is always free to engage in activism. But that activism is his/her personal thing. The institution is not associated with it. People of various ideologies and inclinations are part of an university. The wide variety of ideas and opinions invariably make their way to the classrooms and thereby enrich the university and encourag students to think critically. All of that is good and great.
But when an academic or a student engages in activism, it’s his/her personal choice. It’s a private endeavour of that person. Of course, one is free to be an activist in a democratic country. But the institution is not involved in this activism in any manner.
What we post on our individual Facebook or Instagram or X (Twitter) account reflects our own opinion and thoughts. It does not reflect the institution’s opinion or thoughts.
Hence, to drag the institution into a controversy and expect it to get into fights with the law enforcement agencies on our behalf does reek of entitled behaviour.
Mr. Bikhchandani has quite beautifully differentiated between academic endeavours of a scholar and his/her activism. The university is always duty bound to defend genuinely academic activity that it’s teachers and students engage in. That may include research papers on “controversial” topics, inviting “controversial” scholars on campus for talks, etc. The university management is responsible to ensure that such activities can take place without any issues.
But to put out ridiculous posts from personal accounts on social media platforms and then expect the university to jump in and fight on our behalf is just not acceptable.
Prof. Mahmudabad has acted grossly entitled in this instance. All those who castigated the Ashoka founders for not standing up for Prof. Mahmudabad have acted frivolous too.
Kudos to Mr. Bikhchandani, Pramath and Ashish for taking a firm stance on this issue. The Ashoka university administration must warn Prof. Mahmudabad that such entitled behaviour will not be tolerated going ahead and he must own up to his responsibilities as an individual.
Also, it would be in the best interests of everyone concerned if the university were to put out a circular on this and clearly inform the “activist” academics in it’s ranks (Ashoka has too many of that variety) that they must not associate the university with their personal thoughts, opinions or activism. Any attempt to get the university into conflict with law enforcement agencies, in order to further their own personal activist “causes”, will result in swift disciplinary action against the concerned “activist” academic.
In light of all of this we keep forgetting smthing very simple, the context and the atmosphere in which the professor made the post. I am not a supporter of war in any way, but the fact that pro peace gang is quick to talk about peace , especially when India retaliates doesn’t show an impetus for peace but a desire for impotence and weakness. Let’s also not forget how he changed the discussion from the war to Right wing attitude towards sophia qureshi, (because why?) and then highlighted how right wing needs to stand up with those tht get lynched based on religion. Fair. But what was the point of bringing it here? One could also argue why the asoka university professor didn’t mention , that the other side needs to talk abt peace wen riots in murshidabad or Bangladesh attack the minorities of those areas aka non muslims. In either case both of these discussions are relevant in country’s internal matters and discussions on religious freedom, i cannot understand why the professor brought it in context of operation sindoor. My best bet is, simply his desire to paint the operation as a shadow of Hindutva , which supposedly attacks minorities in India, to paint the operation itself as an attack on the “innocent” people of pakistan. That is to make the perpetrators of terror attacks on India as the “victims”. It’s pretty clear where his motivations lied. One hardly feels the desire to stand with the professor with such ideology.
The letter from Ashoka University founder Mr. Sanjeev Bikhchandani, in response to concerns about the university’s silence over Prof. Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s arrest, reveals something deeper than just institutional positioning—it exposes the fault lines of private higher education in India.
Instead of standing with a faculty member who voiced truth and constitutional values, the university seems to distance itself under the pretext of “academic neutrality” and “liberal education not equating to activism.” This, to me, is a way of saying: we will not stand with those who challenge injustice or power, because institutional survival matters more than the values we claim to teach.
This is the inevitable outcome when education is privatized and left in the hands of those whose vision is shaped more by donor comfort and risk aversion than by ethical courage or democratic responsibility. In such spaces, critical inquiry is tolerated only within limits—never if it unsettles the status quo.
We must ask: What good is a liberal arts education if it produces silence in the face of repression?
When institutions sanitize politics, depoliticize dissent, and prioritize their brand over their backbone, they are not neutral—they are complicit.
Prof. Mahmudabad and others of his ilk are like parasites. They are always in search of wealthy patrons. Why? Because someone needs to fund their high flying lifestyles. And who better than a free market capitalist with deep pockets?
There’s just one catch though. Most of these “scholars” are from the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist school and therefore despise capitalists and capitalism. They spend their lives spreading misinformation and engaging in disinformation campaigns against the capitalistic world order. They rant and rail against the ‘gross injustices’ of capitalism.
All the while savouring the fruits of capitalism. They want the very best for themselves and their families. And Ashoka University provides just that and then some more – astronomical salaries and perks unheard of in Indian academia.
Ashoka University has become an infamous institution. Why? Because of Hinduphobic ‘scholars’ like Christophe Jaffrelot and Aparna Vaidik who have found refuge here. These bigoted individuals who have consistently peddled anti-Hindu propaganda and indoctrinated young impressionable minds have found a safe haven at Ashoka.
One can understand the predicament of the founders though. Their hard earned money is being wasted on such parasites.
People like “Dr.” S Sathananthan are the ones in charge of Ashoka University. Know-it-all types who have never ever created an institution.
People like Mr. Bikhchandani, Pramath and Ashish should actually walk out of Ashoka and leave it to the likes of Sathananthan and Mahmudabad. Let these idiots run the university on their own and let the world see how good they are at creating institutions of repute.
One cannot but feel deeply for the founders of Ashoka University. They wanted to create the Indian equivalent of MIT. Ended up creating another Jadavpur University.
The Left-liberal ecosystem is a vulture out to feed on anyone with deep pockets. They speak all kinds of mumbo-jumbo and critique capitalism all their life but their deep and abiding love for the trappings of capitalism belie their shrill voices. Deep down they just want to feast on other people’s hard earned money.
So tragic and disappointing.
The founders of Ashoka University, all billionaire capitalists, wanted to create an institution like MIT. The ambition was to facilitate top notch research and education in basic sciences and technology which could lead to Nobel Prizes, Fields Medals and Turing Awards.
The Left-liberal cabal got whiff of the plan and managed to convince the founders that the ideal way forward was a liberal arts and humanities university. As if JNU/Jamia/Aligarh was not enough, the Left-liberal ecosystem wanted another campus dedicated to their “cause”. Ashoka University, very unfortunately, became the hub of all sorts of woke ideas and idiocy. Led by the likes of Rudrangshu Mukherjee (ex-editor of The Telegraph) and Pratap Bhanu Mehta, it provided refuge to rabidly anti-Hindu “intellectuals” like Christophe Jaffrelot. Insulting Hinduism and demonising Hindus became the raison d’etre.
The founders, all well meaning individuals with great achievements to their names who genuinely wanted to contribute to India’s progress in science and technology, were fooled by the Left-liberal cabal into serving it’s own interests.
The salaries at Ashoka are unmatched in Indian academia. These Leftists, whose hatred for capitalism knows no bounds, enjoyed all the perks and benefits of capitalist largesse of the founders. All the while engaging in targeted disinformation campaigns against Hindus and Hinduism.
Mr. Bikhchandani and company has unwittingly created a monster.
Critical thinking devoid of it’s necessarily associated decisive action is impotent sabre rattling much encouraged by the status quo..
The status quo often dodges making informed responses by dismissing critiques on the spurious grounds of impoliteness and disrespect.
Politeness and respect disempower the opposition. They cannot challenge power.
Throughout history change has been brought about by impatient, abrasive and even revolutionary/violent speech and actions. Think of Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc. and the Feminist struggles and battles against caste oppression, all of which were the results of the status quo cheerfully abandoning respect, politeness and fair play.
Notice how the founder in his reply throws down the gauntlet – challenging critics to raise funds for Ashoka university.
Is that different from President Trump threatening to cut off and cutting off funds for Harvard and other universities for pro-Palestine activism?
Worse still, the founder makes the irresponsible distinction between “academic” and “journalistic” writings. What matters is the content of the intervention not the platform on which it appears. To dismiss an argument because it appears in a “non-academic” source is pseudo intellectual arrogance at its worst.
It follows that the founder’s assertion the Ashoka university is not obliged to defend its members for their interventions in socially important issues outside the contrived and limited academic circle smacks of cowardice
In the social sciences critical analyses are rarely to be found in hide bound academic tomes. Instead they grow out of pamphlets, issue-based publications by activists and their activism and personal communications which are thereafter retailed by passive academics.
Lastly, the admission of googling to determine what constitutes academic interventions is a source of mirth.