Recently, an article raised concerns about the stagnation of Meitei academia, claiming that Meitei intellectuals have failed to engage meaningfully in academic debates or advance their positions in international academic circles. In contrast, Kuki academics are said to be more effective in influencing discussions at global levels. This critique, though harsh, reveals a painful truth: Meitei academia has struggled to achieve visibility or make impactful contributions beyond regional boundaries.
A significant factor contributing to this stagnation is the inward-looking nature of Meitei intellectual practices, coupled with a lack of academic rigor. While these shortcomings are evident, it is equally important to explore the deeper, systemic reasons behind the limited academic growth in the Meitei community. The challenges faced by Meitei scholars are rooted in the socio-political constraints they operate under, creating barriers that prevent them from realizing their potential in academia.
One of the primary obstacles for Meitei scholars is the fear of expressing ideas that diverge from the dominant narratives within the community. Academics often feel pressured to align their research and writings with widely accepted societal beliefs. This tension between scholarship and social expectations leads to self-censorship among intellectuals, who fear backlash if they present interpretations that differ from what is popularly accepted.
This phenomenon is particularly visible in historical writing, where two distinct forms of history emerge: Activist history and Academic history. Activist history seeks to serve a community’s immediate political or cultural goals, while academic history emphasizes objective analysis and debate. The divergence between these two modes of writing places academic historians in a difficult position. When their work conflicts with activist narratives, these historians face hostility and criticism, which stifles their ability to contribute boldly to academic discourse. As a result, many Meitei scholars refrain from pursuing original research that could advance knowledge, fearing the social and political fallout of challenging prevailing narratives.
Another significant factor hindering the development of Meitei academia is the absence of genuine academic freedom. Scholars often find themselves working within rigid institutional frameworks that limit their ability to explore new ideas. The political environment in the region further constrains academic freedom, as research topics or viewpoints perceived as controversial are discouraged, if not outright suppressed. This restriction not only prevents scholars from contributing to cutting-edge debates but also discourages them from addressing complex or sensitive issues that are crucial for the progress of the society.
Moreover, the academic infrastructure in the region lacks the necessary support to encourage intellectual rigor. Universities and research institutions in Manipur are often poorly funded, and scholars are left to navigate their careers without adequate mentorship or access to global networks. This isolation makes it difficult for them to engage with international academic communities or keep up with the latest developments in their fields.
A further challenge is the lack of respect and recognition for intellectuals within the Meitei community. Scholars and researchers are seldom regarded as valuable contributors to public discourse. The general public often overlooks the role of intellectuals, and their work is not given due importance in shaping social narratives or influencing policy decisions. As a result, academics feel demotivated, as their efforts are not acknowledged or appreciated.
Additionally, the government does little to utilize the expertise of scholars for policymaking. Unlike in other parts of the world, where intellectuals are actively engaged in drawing up policy frameworks and providing research-based recommendations, Manipur’s government rarely involves academics in these processes. This disconnects between academia and governance further marginalizes intellectuals, leaving them without avenues to apply their knowledge for public benefit.
Moreover, the government has issued orders stopping intellectuals affiliated to the colleges and universities of the state from participating in public discussions organised by local and national media without permission from competent authority.
While the criticisms of Meitei academia’s shortcomings hold some validity, it is essential to recognize the structural barriers that impede its growth. The fear of backlash, the lack of academic freedom, and the absence of public or governmental support have created an environment where intellectuals struggle to thrive.
Given these issues, Meitei academia will continue to operate in isolation, unable to engage meaningfully with the broader academic world. The path forward lies in breaking free from the constraints that limit intellectual expression and building an environment where knowledge is valued, debated, and applied for the betterment of society. Only then can Meitei scholars take their rightful place in both national and international academic circles.
Challenges Faced by Meitei Academia and the Path Forward
91
previous post