To be true, it should not be referred to as the Foreign Internship ban at the first place. What the new rule says is that, from now on, the credited internship that most of the B.Techs and Dual Degree students do after the end of their third year, should be done only in respective core industry in India. That effectively rules out any possibility for a student to apply to a foreign Univ for any kind of summer project whatsoever. And this implication of the new rule is what’s bothering loads of students who are totally frustrated by such a stand from the authorities out here who take pride in avoiding any kind of discussion with the students.
I have a question (or rather a couple of questions) to ask to all those who had a hand in coming up with this new rule: Don’t you have the guts to come out in open and carry forward a discussion? Are you like afraid that you will never be able to win if a debate is triggered? Are the students, non-human fools with no brains to understand what you have to say? Or, is it only your ego that prevents you from accepting the fact that something like this deserves a fair discussion?
When I was a kid, dad used to tell me stories of kings, queens and their sons and daughters and the the country which these folks ruled. And almost in all the stories, the bad kings where those who forced the subjects to respect them while the good ones were those managed to win respect by winning the heart of every common man. Dear ‘few good men’, didn’t you ever read or hear about such stories? Or you did, but you decided you would prefer being bad over good any day?
Why do you guys live in the false illusion that you are the only ones who know what’s good and what’s bad? Even if you actually knew, why do you have to avoid putting your points right on our face, by facing us? Just because it will end up consuming a little time from your extremely tight schedule? Or just because there is no rule which states that you need to discuss it with us, the students?
I could have gone ahead and put points about advantages and disadvantages of such a rule. But tell me, what’s the point? What’s the whole logic of discussing when no one who can really bring about a change, is willing to shun his/her ego and include us in the participation? I prefer being opinion-less.