The student movement in July 2024 is an unprecedented event in the political history of Bangladesh. This historic movement led to the fall of an authoritarian regime and raised great hope and aspiration among the people. Political and social analysts describe this phenomenon in various ways, with varying hopes and aspirations for its future. Some scholars see it as a revolution, calling it the "July Revolution," and propose going beyond the current constitution to establish a revolutionary government. Others, however, see it as a popular uprising, advocating for making necessary reforms in State to fulfill people's aspirations. Widespread discussions and debates on this subject are taking place, as evident in newspapers and on social media, generating various types of hope and aspiration.

Understanding the characteristics and nature of the student movement is essential in achieving its goals, as expectations and aspirations vary depending on the nature of a movement. A significant gap between anticipated outcomes and actual results can lead to frustration and disillusionment. Signs of discontent are already surfacing from certain quarters, with such sentiments growing steadily. Therefore, it is imperative to grasp the true characteristics of the movement and set the expectations, hopes, and aspirations accordingly.

A lack of clear understanding of the characteristics of the movement can lead to misguided policies, potentially disrupting its objectives and goals. Analyzing the post-movement situations in various countries worldwide reveals that misguided policies and initiatives have often prevented many nations from reaping the benefits of their movements, resulting in even worse outcomes. For instance, several Arab countries now have more reactionary governments in place following the Arab Spring.

To fully understand the characteristics of the student movement, it is necessary to analyze its goals and objectives, leadership style, and the overall nature of the movement. Movements, mass uprisings, and revolutions are interrelated. When a movement gains in scope and intensity and involves a large segment of the population of the society, it takes the form of a mass uprising. For instance, between 2010 and 2011, there was widespread discontent and mass uprisings against authoritarian regimes in several countries of the Arab world.

A revolution takes place when a mass uprising overthrows the existing State system and introduces a new one. A revolution is the pinnacle of a movement that seeks to fundamentally alter existing political, economic, and social systems while introducing new ones. This is evident in the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the Chinese Revolution, among others. The French Revolution resulted in the overthrow of the monarchy and establishment of a republic. Similarly, the Russian Revolution of 1917 saw the end of monarchy and establishment of a communist state. Similarly, the Chinese Revolution of 1949 led to the establishment of a socialist system in China.

In Bangladesh, we have witnessed numerous movements, mass uprisings, and revolutions. The Language Movement of 1952 secured Bengali as one of the then Pakistan's official languages; the popular uprising of 1969 overthrew the autocratic Ayub regime; and the bloody armed Liberation War of 1971 culminated in Bangladesh's independence.

Sociologists and political scientists argue that movements, uprisings, and revolutions, share some similarities but each possesses distinct characteristics. Their objectives and aspirations differ, as do their leadership style and organizational structure. The approaches, methods, and techniques employed in these events also vary, along with the expectations and aspirations they generate. To understand the nature of the July 2024 student movement in Bangladesh, it is essential to analyze its characteristics through the lens of these criteria.

Let us first examine the objectives of the July student movement. The primary goal was to reform the existing job quota system, which allocated 56% of the government jobs based on quotas rather than merit. Students demanded a fairer, merit-based system to replace what they viewed as a discriminatory quota system. The particularly contentious issue was the allocation of 30% of the government jobs to the children and grandchildren of the freedom fighters, who constitute less than 1% of the total population. Frustration and anger surged among students when the High Court reinstated this 30% quota, especially at a time when the number of educated unemployed was rising in a limited job market. Students realized that their demands could not be met without movement or agitation.

As the movement gained momentum, the anti-quota movement evolved into a broader anti-discrimination movement. Its focus expanded beyond job quotas to address various forms of social and economic discrimination. Now, let's explore the types of discrimination the movement seeks to eliminate within the anti-discriminatory social system it advocates. Does it aim to dismantle class-based discrimination? Economic inequality is an inherent aspect of a capitalist system-do they intend to abolish the existing capitalist system? Are they striving to eradicate all forms of economic and social inequality? Probably not.

In fact, this movement, led by an educated student community, aimed to ensure equal opportunities for individuals with similar qualifications. The core philosophy driving the movement was that people should be evaluated based on the ability and merit, rather than background, connection, or political affiliation. Instead of promoting revolutionary ideals, such as eradicating all forms of economic and social discrimination or establishing a classless society, the movement focuses on reforming existing structures to eliminate discrimination and foster a system that values talent and effort above all else. It advocates for a fair chance for everyone, regardless of family lineage or political influence, to succeed in their professional endeavors.

Let us look at the ideology behind the student movement. Although it began with economic demands, primarily focused on increasing job opportunities, it gradually evolved into a broader political demand for a liberal-democratic State. Students recognized that the job crisis was deeply intertwined with political governance, as the authoritarian rule of the Sheikh Hasina government increasingly stifled dissent and curtailed the fundamental rights and freedom essential to democracy.

The government's authoritarianism-combined with corruption, nepotism, unemployment, and widening social and financial inequality-fueled widespread anger and frustration among students and the public. Central to this movement were the three controversial national parliamentary elections held during Sheikh Hasina's tenure. In the elections of 2014, 2018, and 2024, the public was effectively denied their right to choose their political representatives, severely undermining trust in the democratic process and raising serious concerns about electoral integrity. These pervasive feelings of disappointment and frustration have sparked a growing sense of urgency among students and the general public to overthrow the autocratic regime and establish a more equitable liberal democratic system.

Besides the movement's ideology and objectives as described above, it is important to examine its leadership. One distinctive feature of this movement was that it was led and organized by educated, young, conscious student organizations. This movement attracted students from a variety of public and private universities, colleges, madrasas, and schools. The movement had a decentralized structure. Initially led by public university students, the movement expanded to private universities and other educational institutions nationwide. The movement was initially coordinated by central organizers, but when the autocratic government attempted to disperse it by arresting them, all of the students stepped forward on their own. Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram served as conduits for this movement and became platforms for information exchange.

Another notable characteristic of this movement was that it began peacefully. Unlike many revolutions that involve armed groups and insurgencies, this movement started with peaceful protests, meetings, rallies, and sit-in strikes. The movement used powerful slogans and resonant messages that united students and captivated the general public. In addition, students used graffiti as a powerful form of protest, covering public spaces with bold, thought-provoking images. All these peaceful tools amplified the movement's voice and kept its momentum alive in the public consciousness. However, as it progressed, it became increasingly violent in response to the government's brutal oppression and torture of the participants.

Analysis of the ideals, objectives, leadership, and organizational structure of this movement reveals that it was driven by an educated and socially aware student body with the primary goal of advancing their professional careers based on merit. Their anger, however was directed at the autocratic regime and the discriminatory system that hindered their aspirations but their movement lacked revolutionary thought, consciousness, ideology, or desire.

Some may argue that the people's movement is a dynamic process. The intensity of the movement can change and take on different forms as it progresses. For instance, the Six point movement aimed to greater self-determination of East Pakistan gained momentum and led to widespread protests and strikes, and eventually led to the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. However, no movement can be transformed into a revolution without revolutionary ideals and aspirations.

While individuals from all classes and professions, particularly the poor working class, joined this movement, leadership remained firmly in the hands of the students. The student leaders consistently articulated their desire to end authoritarian rule and establish a liberal democratic system that champions anti-discrimination principles. Nahid Islam, one of the coordinators of the student movement, clearly stated, "Our political position was moderate." This stance allowed us to engage with leftists, Islamists, and supporters of the BNP (Prothom Alo, November, 2024).

To achieve their objectives, the student leaders articulated demands for State reforms and improvements rather than revolutionary aspirations to create a new system by discarding the existing one. Therefore, those who claim that the movement has lost its revolutionary aspirations seem inconsistent with its character and the nature of its leadership. While movement is a dynamic processes capable of evolving at different levels or stages, it remains an open question whether the ideals, goals, and revolutionary consciousness necessary to transform a people's uprising into a full-fledged revolution were present within this movement.

Without a nuanced understanding of the characteristics of the student movement, any attempts to impose a revolutionary character on it could do more harm than good. Just as counter-revolutions can be detrimental to a movement, ultra-revolutionary sentiments can also impede progress and provoke backlash. It is crucial to first prepare the people for a revolutionary movement and awaken their consciousness. Rushing into calls for revolution without adequately preparing the people can be recklessly naive and potentially dangerous.

We hope that essential state reforms can establish a liberal democratic system in Bangladesh that truly reflects the aspirations of this historic student movement. Achieving this requires not only policy changes but also a cultural shift that promotes democratic principles, ensuring respect for people's rights, transparency in governance, and accountability of institutions to the public.

Golam Rasul, PhD, Professor, Department of Economics, International University of Business Agriculture and Technology (IUBAT), Dhaka, Bangladesh. E-mail: dr.rasul.econ@iubat.edu and golam.grasul@gmail.com