The People's Eye - Liberal Noaborot

Unveiling the past, Eye on the present

PEOPLE’S EYE

Critiques - Comparisons - Truths

 In this prolonged classroom election, one of the student political groups is known as “Liberal Naoborot”. It made its entry into the arena with its own graphic identity. The symbol of its unity and oneness is reflected in its flag with a star in the middle and a wreath around it along with a red background. Its logo includes quotes in the Russian and Latin languages, which in itself adds to the symbolic approach that shows a lot about their values and ideologies. The candidates Prakruti and Saanvi, who stands for their party, emphasizes collaboration, answerability and group oriented decisions. Its slogan, which best defines the concept of participation as "Unum Sumus Unum," can, in itself, be translated as the collective responsibility of the whole group.

 

The name of the political party itself, “Liberal Naoborot”, already threw people into confusion. Although the group proclaims communist ideologies in practice, the addition of the word “liberal” appears unnecessarily confusing. However, when asked about it, Prakruti went on to clarify that “Naoborot is ‘contrary to’ in Russian.” In the end, the name of the political party came off as confusing at best or deceptive at worst in terms of marketing of political ideologies.

Despite this vision of inclusivity, some inconsistency between ideals and actual plans have been brought to light in this interview. For example, leadership is in the control of no more than Prakruti and Saanvi, while the rest of the class is expected to work together to complete responsibilities assigned to them. When this topic was mentioned in conversation, Prakruti responded, “Well, I think we work really well together. So I think if we are in agreement with each other, then we can also communicate it and manage it between other people.” 

One crucial aspect that raises some concerns is the party’s academic support strategy. When posed with a question of whether students requiring more support would get that support, Prakruti overwhelmingly emphasized equality and support for all by replying repeatedly that “I would favour equality more because we all should be responsible together.” When prompted a question regarding equity, that is, whether they should provide support to some students more than others who have to catch up. 

She also emphasized that “we will try our best like what we can do to get the student that extra support without it being an overburden on students.” Focusing on equality at the expense of equity runs counter to the practical principles of communism, as it reflects a superficial idea of ‘sharing’ where everyone gets the same thing without regard for justice or individual needs.

The party also emphasized efficiency rather than fairness as a value. When asked a question regarding group projects for classroom activities, she stated, “But I think efficiency would be better. But like, people who do more work get rewarded for their work and like people who do less work will, you know, be punished.” Although intended to maintain productivity, this approach creates a meritocratic system that conflicts with a party emphasizing collective responsibility.

The party’s “pen distribution” clip in their campaign video demonstrates the contradictions in their methods as well. Prakruti first deemed it as “bait,” although later, under pressure, she tried to correct herself and stated that they just did the “bit” and that it’s all in jest as a means of injecting humor into their skit performance. However, she also mentioned that “each person is…entitled to their own things. But it will…share.” The plan contradicts the core principles of communism as it relies on unstructured sharing rather than fair and collective distribution

"Liberal Naoborot" comes up in words as the emblem of unity and cooperation but from its policy expression, so many contradictions and ambiguities can be seen. At the same time as the party appeals for a feeling of collective responsibility, what has been emphasized in this interview is equality, not particularly targeted support, efficiency, not fairness and the leadership of the centre, not democratic participation.