Factors Influencing Student Participation In University Governance A: Fill & Download for Free

Youth from underdeveloped states (UP, Bihar) join electoral politics than developed states (TN, Maharastra) in India. Meghalaya tops in youth participation followed by Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, UP, Odisha and West Bengal. Let’s check various factors that impact youth participation in electoral politics.Student movements, from which various strong political leaders emerged are systematically collapsed in recent times. Political parties, organisations and interest groups that were influential among student bodies had a nexus of media and student union. They protested towards social issues and development, leaders emerged out of protests who later joined active politics. This system has now faded off. One prime reason is - nowadays student union leaders are chosen based on political background and not based on merits. This is a drawback and true leaders lose interest in politics.During election campaigns, pre-poll alliance, choice of powerful existing candidates, freebies, govt social welfare schemes - all these play an important role for winning candidate. A youth who participates in electoral politics struggles to compete against seasoned politicians as they have more access to state machinery and resources. These factors demotivate youth to join politics.Nepotism of family is widespread among the entire political ecosystem. One reason is expense during an election. It’s expensive to build a candidate towards public participation(which happens for few years) and contest an election, as all these require marketing and additional costs. These finances are usually hidden from the public due to the nature of the expense and are kept within a family control system. This restricts the youth representation in the political landscape by limiting the entry to a particular family, caste, religion, and ideology.Indian govt’s NETRA monitors social media posts and content. Political views and statements are constantly monitored, restricted and taken down based on political pressure. Disha’s arrest based on sedition charges is a recent example. All such activities restrict youth from entering politics.Pressure for career and attainment of prestigious jobs restricts educated urban youths while the uneducated rural youth are preoccupied with making a living. Youth also face poverty, barriers to education, multiple forms of discrimination and limited employment prospects and opportunities. Along with this political influence, corruption and bribery restrict youth to actively enter electoral politics.Govt policies to encourage youth participation in politics.National youth policy(2014) is about encouraging youth outside the political system from grassroots level to national stage, government mechanism which can leverage the youth, promoting youth in urban governance. Ministry of Panchayati Raj runs Rajiv Gandhi Panchayat Sashaktikaran Abhiyan, Panchayat Mahila Evam Yuva Shakti Abhiyan (PMEYSA). They form “youth clubs” in villages that facilitate youth participation in decision making and governance. This has successfully implemented in few states like Haryana.Policies in other countries that encourage youth participation in politics - that can be adopted by the Indian Govt.Nigerian youth agenda is about youth members across various parties come together to discuss on national issues with students and youngstersBangladesh’s National youth parliament is about youngsters interacting with parliamentarians and contribute towards the framing of local and national level policies.Tunisia’s Democratweet is about youngsters conducting a mock election, campaign and public speaking, using social media as a tool for national development and peace.Palestine universities along with NGOs conduct a training program for youths in enhancing the capacities of student council members to articulate, effectively communicate and persuasively argue issues that affect them as active individuals and engaged citizensLebanese Parliamentary Internship Programme offers graduate real-time opportunity in policymaking, introduces them to the legislative and oversight functions of the Parliament and its function in the framework of parliamentary diplomacy in regional and national issues.Libya runs programs and projects where youth groups learn to collect data under the framework and disseminate it to policymakers and the general publicRecommendations to the Indian govt in increasing youth political participationIndian govt should work on training programs, policies and initiatives that support, assist young people’s participation in inclusive political processes and democratic practices.Support young people’s inclusion in decision making and in all levels of development processes at local, state and national level governanceYouth participation can bring phenomenal change in electoral governance. They must be encouraged at institutional levels towards active participation in electoral politics.Original question: Young people are very well aware of Indian politics. Why are they unwilling to come forward and improve it?Footnoteshttp://jpg.net.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Dishant-Parakh.pdfhttps://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/youth/fact-sheets/youth-political-participation.pdf

Is West Bengal burning due to vote bank politics of Mamata Banerjee?Is the truth that the bill actually benefits the state is wrongly interpreted for the same reason?Why only communist prominent states and Minority Dominated Organizations are focal points of the agitations against CAB?Are the agitating persons are really students or the illegal immigrants?Why no student is able to answer why they are agitating?All these are questions without answers.At least let us try to find answers.After passing of CAB in parliament agitations took place in North eastern states, West Bengal, kerala and some Minority institutions such as Jamia Milia University and Aligarh Muslim University.Now the situation in North eastern states is becoming normal, even after 10 days the agitations are still going at other places mentioned above.We have to understand the political influence behind these agitations.Especially the State Governments of Kerala and West Bengal are instigating the violence in their own states.What is happening in West Bengal?Why Mamata Banerjee is engaged in this low level political stunts?So, we have to know how Mamata is engaged in appeasement politics in its State.After CAB bill passed, Mamata Banerjee used Tax payers money to commercially publicize in electronic media against the bill.After the intervention of the Governor, the publicity stopped.This is the first time in the history that a State Government engaging commercial publicity against the centeral bill with taxpayers money.The person who is responsible for controlling law and order in the State is engaged in rallies against the Central Bill, thus causing law and order problem.Here the problem solver has become problem instigator.Also she as CM ordered all to participate in the rally.How disgusting situation.Also she announced that she will not allow the Bill to be implemented in her state, fully knowing that it is impossible.The same person who in 2005 cried with tears in Parliament to implement NRC suddenly became anti.Everybody knows the reason.Bloody vote bank politics.Now she is aiming at 2021 elections.In 2011 TMC secured 184 and in 2016 it increased it tally to 211 in 2016.Then she got shock of her life in 2019 Lok Sabha elections.BJP snatched away most of her seats.In 2014 elections BJP secured 34% votes and in 2019 it increased to 36.5%.BJP increased its Loksabha seat share from 2 to 18.So now worry started in Mamata’s Mind.Whether she can again win 2021 elections.Apart from above mentioned facts lot of hindus who are persecuted in Bangladesh are coming to West Bengal and Assam as refugees.In 1941 there used to be 30% of Hindus. (even though Bangladesh is not there, the area is taken into consideration)In 1951 the number reduced to 22%.In 1991 the number further gone down to 11%.By 2011 the number still decreased to 8%.Also in about 102 assembly constituencies the deciding factor between win and loss are Muslim Votes.Most of those votes are from illegl immigrants.So the agitation.It is understood that due to attacks by Majorities and perscution hindus left the country.But along with Hindus lot of Muslims also came to West Bengal and Assam for better living conditions.This act is un explainable.For every hindu, 10 or more Muslims entered West Bengal and Assam , which is disgusting.At present after Kasmir valley, Highest percentage of Muslims are in West Bengal only. It is found to be 27%.And next comes Kerala.Why Muslims are more in these communist ruled states.Because these pseudo intellectuals who talks about human rights issues have been indulging in appeasement politics and accommodating the illegal immigrant Mulims in large numbers.The governments gave them all facilities including voting rights.Now in West bengal those Muslims are appeased by Mamata banerjee and that is why those agitations.That is the reason why the agitations in these states along with the Minority Universities has not come down. The agitation has been done in a systematic manner.In videos also it is seen that the stone pelters and the persons setting fire to public and private transport vehicle come prepared with protective foot wear.The irony of the fact that when questioned by reporters the citizen Muslims could not tell what harm the CAB is causing them.That clearly shows the government is behind the agitations.Because these are state sponsored agitations with the police are just like spectators, it may not come down in near future unless central government imposes President rule and take over the law and order situation in these states.Even now Mamata Banerjee should rise above vote bank politics and think of nationalism and think about future of India, rather than thinking of her personal future and support CAB as was done by her in 2005.JAI HINDSource:- Nationalist hub videos

The results of Finland’s two-year UBI experiment were published last Wednesday.It was the first nationwide, mandatory, and randomized UBI experiment in the world. In other words, the participants were selected randomly, they lived all across Finland, and weren’t given the option of not participating once selected.The experiment was conducted in 2017–2018, and since then the researcher team consisting of researchers of the VATT Institute for Economic Research, the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, and of the University of Helsinki, have been analysing the vast amount of data collected from all kinds of registers, as well as surveying and interviewing the participants and analysing this qualitative data.The experiment covered 2,000 unemployed persons who were paid a monthly tax-exempt basic income of 560 euros, irrespective of their labour market status during the two years that the experiment lasted. They were selected randomly among the recepients of unemployment benefit in November 2016.The control group covered all the others who received unemployment benefit in November 2016.The original plan was to conduct a more ambitious experiment, but in the end the model chosen left out all other groups but the unemployed.The principal goal was to gather information for a social security reform by finding out if UBI would have advantages in e.g. increasing the employment rate by preventing welfare traps.The experiment was implemented by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. The budget was 20 million euros.So, what did they find out?First, the employment effects were not particularly significant.During the first year of the experiment, the employment rate of the participants was not statistically higher than that of the control group. During the second year, they were employed approximately 6 more days than the members of the control group.However, the results varied according to the subgroup. Among the families with children receiving UBI the employment rate increased both in 2017 and in 2018.The participants were in no way expected to participate in the activation measures (such as courses or subsidized employment organized by the labour administration). It thus surprised the researchers that many of them did so nevertheless.Despite the discouraging employment effects, the experiment showed that the UBI had a positive impact on the participants wellbeing.The recipients of UBI were happier with their lives and had lower levels of mental strain, depression, sadness and loneliness than the people of the control group. They perceived their life as more economically stable and predictable, and they trusted other people and societal institutions as well as their own future and agency more than the people of the control group who hadn’t received UBI.The researchers also interviewed 81 participants more closely, in order to obtain more detailed qualitative data.Those interviews revealed many unexpected ways of benefitting from the experiment. Some participants had indeed had the experience of finding a job more easily, but others had also been relieved that they had had the chance to study, volunteer, or take care of a family member without financial problems.Some had also experienced additional stress caused by the consciousness of being part of an important experiment in which their labour market status was examined. They felt pressure to find a job, and if they failed doing so, they felt they hadn’t contributed positively to the success of the experiment.The most common reaction, however, was a relief related to the fact that the participants didn’t need to calculate the economical pros and cons of each temporary job offer or be afraid of losing their social benefits for accepting a job with no certain future prospects.The challenges of the experimentThe researchers listed some fundamental challenges that complicate the interpretation of the results.The most obvious thing was that the experiment only covered unemployed people. In order to find out the overall impact of UBI on a society, also other people—employed people, students, retired, etc.—should be included.Another big problem was that the UBI was tax-exempt. If the social security system were based on UBI, the idea would be to give it to everyone but “tax it away” from the people who wouldn’t need it. Only then would it be viable. In this experiment, there was no way of finding out how a taxable UBI would have influenced the participants’ decisions concerning accepting a job offer.The two-year period was also too short to really show the long-term effects. Often the results in people’s behaviour will only manifest themselves after three years, so in this sense the experiment was insufficient.Finally, in 2018 the government implemented an activation model that targeted the control group. The idea was that those unemployed people who didn’t participate in activation measures, or who didn’t work at all, automatically lost a certain percentage of their unemployment benefit monthly. As a result, it’s not easy to see in which ways this impacted the employment rate of the control group.Given all this, the results of the experiment unfortunately aren’t as generalizable as we would have hoped.COVID-19One of the often quoted advantages of UBI is its flexibility: it adapts itself to a wide range of life situations, which a more traditional and patchy social security system doesn’t necessarily achieve. The researchers used the current pandemic as an example of a situation in which that kind of flexibility would seem to be of first-rate importance.However, our parliamentary system has proved its functionality also during a pandemic, when thousands of people have been laid off and thousands of enterprises are struggling.New bills have been passed swiftly (e.g. abolishing the five-day waiting time before receiving unemployment benefit), new social benefits have been implemented (e.g. temporary financial assistance due to an epidemic outbreak), and old ones have been expanded to cover new target groups (e.g. unemployment benefit for self-employed persons).All in all, our social security system—often blamed for its inflexibility and its many pitfalls—has proven to be more flexible than what was thought.On the other hand, however, it’s yet to be seen how much the patchiness of the system hampers those who are not familiar with the system or who don’t speak very well Finnish, Swedish, or English. For those people, receiving a steady monthly income by default, without filling any forms, would naturally be a huge relief.One of my colleagues has helped many of her friends who have moved here to work, paid their taxes, been too busy to learn the local language, and who now have lost their jobs without language skills and not knowing how to receive the benefits they are entitled to as permanent residents and as taxpayers who have contributed to financing those benefits.In theory, the current system is waterproof even now. In practice, however, I can see why UBI could be beneficial for many.ConclusionThe Finnish UBI experiment was in many ways well planned and thorough. It offered valuable information of the (not very encouraging) employment effects of UBI as well as of the (more promising) impact on the wellbeing of the participants.The UBI seemed to activate, above all, those people who were already active before the experiment and increase their agency. For those people who suffered from different problems before the experiment, the impact was less positive.What was important was that the process served to prove that conducting such experiments is constitutionally possible in Finland, i.e. creating an artificial situation in which people are not treated identically based on arbitrary factors is not unconstitutional when the goal is clearly formulated, like it was in this experiment.Due to the problems listed above, however, the findings of the experiment were not entirely satisfactory, and it’s clear that before adopting such a system we need to address the open questions left by this experiment.Thank you for asking, Gabriel and Alexander!Further reading:Results of Finland's basic income experiment: small employment effects, better perceived economic security and mental wellbeing - News archive for customersEdit:I originally didn't include a link to the report itself, since I thought that a report written in Finnish wouldn't help English-speaking readers. With time, undoubtedly, there will be more information in English. But in case someone is interested, you can find the whole report in Finnish here:http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/162219/STM_2020_15_rap.pdf?isAllowed=y&sequence=1