The popular student uprising of July-August 2024 in Bangladesh, which culminated in the overthrow of the authoritarian government of Sheikh Hasina, challenges conventional narratives surrounding democratic movements. Unlike classic political revolutions, this uprising did not forge a new collective language centered on ideals like democracy or pluralism. Instead, it was driven by a singular, organically emergent goal: to eliminate an increasingly authoritarian regime. The success of the movement was not based on a visionary articulation of a shared future but on a pragmatic alignment of political, social and civic forces around a common goal.

For years, Bangladesh’s political landscape has been dominated by the toxic binary of “pro-liberation” and “anti-liberation” forces, a narrative skillfully deployed by the ruling Awami League to marginalize opposition parties. The anti-discrimination student movement that spearheaded this summer’s protests successfully challenged and neutralized this binary opposition. Their slogan, “Who are you? Who am I? Razakar! Razakar! Who said it? Who said it? Dictator! Dictator!” – with “razakars” referring to collaborators with the Pakistani army during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War – served as a powerful tool to dismantle the divisive rhetoric of the Awami League. This seemingly simple but powerful slogan created a rare public space where individuals from diverse political backgrounds, including those previously silenced or stigmatized, could voice their grievances.

Yet it would be a mistake to overestimate the role of language or slogans in the success of the uprising. The real driving force behind the movement was linked by the common and urgent goal of overthrowing an oppressive regime that, for more than a decade and a half, had used state power to suppress political dissent, co-opt civil society, and silence the opposition. The deaths of more than 400 Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) activists during the protests have highlighted the movement’s high stakes, but their involvement has been notably muted. Their participation was largely hidden under the broader banner of student-led protests.

This raises a crucial question: why did the popular student uprising succeed where established political parties like the BNP failed, despite their common goal of regime change? The answer lies in a deep-seated political distrust that has taken root within the Bangladeshi public. For years, parties like the BNP have struggled to build movements capable of galvanizing broad support. Their language of democracy and pluralism rang hollow in a society disillusioned with the very notion of political integrity. The public’s willingness to engage with mainstream parties has been eroded by decades of political corruption, entrenched divisive narratives, and the government’s effective use of “development” rhetoric to mask disenfranchisement. .

The student movement, on the other hand, benefited from its lack of an established political identity. It has not been weighed down by a history of electoral defeats, internal corruption or failed attempts at coalition building. By leading a protest against discrimination in government hiring – an issue that has deeply affected young people frustrated by a lack of opportunities – the students managed to unify disparate groups. The movement’s strength lies in its ability to express growing public discontent with an authoritarian regime that has long disrespected its citizens, masked by demands for national development.

The fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government was the ultimate, albeit unspoken, goal that united political actors and non-political participants in the movement. While initial demands focused on reforming the civil service quota system, the government’s heavy-handed response to peaceful protests quickly broadened the scope of the movement from social reform to outright regime change. By early August, the call for Sheikh Hasina’s resignation had become the de facto sole objective of the movement, even though this demand had been formally declared just weeks after the protests began.

Rather than a common aspiration for democracy or pluralism, the real collective language of the movement was the common desire to end authoritarian rule. It was not the vision of a future democratic state that unified the protesters; it was a rejection of the current authoritarian regime and the repressive tactics it employed.

Ironically, the student movement’s success in creating a public space where diverse political actors could come together under a common banner also sowed the seeds of future divisions. Without a common understanding of what should follow the removal of Sheikh Hasina, ideological divisions re-emerged and sparked internal conflicts within the movement. This is not unusual in movements focused primarily on opposition to a common enemy rather than a shared vision of governance.

The disunity that followed the uprising highlights an essential truth about political revolutions: the language that unites a movement in opposition is often insufficient to keep it in power. The absence of a deeper collective vision for Bangladesh’s future beyond the remarkable fall of Sheikh Hasina reflects the fact that the student movement, despite its success, has not generated a new political language for the country .

After the ouster of Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh faces a critical juncture: developing an inclusive political language to combat corruption, disenfranchisement and social inequality. Even though the student movement overthrew the regime, it did not – and perhaps could not – lay the foundations for a democratic future, which requires a broader reimagining of the political landscape.

In summary, the July-August 2024 uprising in Bangladesh shows that a clear and simple goal – overthrowing an authoritarian regime – can unite diverse actors, but that the real challenge ahead is to build a sustainable and inclusive political future, for which the country is still looking for its own future. collective language.

Dr Kazi ASM Nurul Huda is an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Dhaka.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentary and analysis from experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to the Daily Star Opinion, see our submission guidelines.