5 min readApr 29, 2026 01:36 PM IST First published on: Apr 29, 2026 at 01:36 PM ISTThere was a time when, in school report cards, class teachers would routinely describe a “good” child as an “obedient” one. Such remarks would be considered a matter of pride for the child and for his or her parents.We may have moved ahead, but our conventional education system still emphasises discipline, conformity, and “right answers” over open-ended inquiry. Across classrooms, families, workplaces or politics, we often feel uncomfortable with those who question, challenge, or think independently. “Argumentative Indian(s)” are rarely appreciated, even when their questions might lead to deeper understanding or clarity. Take, for instance, recent reports on Delhi University colleges that have cracked down on student protests over a range of issues, from UGC equity regulations to defamation of colleges on social media. Or, the labelling of universities such as Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi or Jadavpur University in Kolkata as “anti-national”. Instead of encouraging healthy questioning and critical thinking, and engaging in debates and discussions, the tendency is to shut it down by marking dissent as problematic.AdvertisementDespite all the emphasis on critical thinking, rational inquiry and problem-solving, why does our conditioning still lean strongly toward obedience?Also Read | From Hansraj College to JNU and beyond: The spread of unfreedoms on campusPart of the answer lies in how we understand and practise respect. Respect, in itself, allows for dignity, mutual regard, and healthy relationships. However, when it is tied to an unquestioning attachment to authority, it can begin to resemble obedience as a character trait rather than a conscious choice. Parents often teach their children “badon ki baat maano”, reinforcing the idea that submission is virtuous. Teachers may reward or favour compliant students, interpreting curiosity as defiance rather than engagement. In workplaces, loyalty to the boss is valued; in families, deference to the head of the household; and in politics, unquestioning support for the supreme leader is normalised. Over time, this obedience becomes a safer and socially accepted choice.Questions start to feel discomfiting and socially riskier.AdvertisementCultural traditions have reinforced this tendency. In the guru-shishya tradition, obedience is a norm. Mythologies highlight similar instances — when the great scholar of her time, Gargi, wanted to ask more questions of Yagyavalkya, she received a warning that asking more questions could be dangerous for her. These narratives continue to shape our collective imagination.What makes this dynamic more complex is how deeply it is internalised. Social hierarchies normalise obedience as both expectation and privilege. While individuals may resist being controlled, they often expect obedience from those below them. Assertion, reasoned disagreement, and self-respect are frequently mistaken for arrogance. As a result, people tend to comply upward while demanding compliance downward, reinforcing hierarchical behaviour.Also Read | I teach at Jadavpur. Calling it a place of ‘anarchy’ misunderstands the purpose of a universityyou may likeToday, this pattern is more frequently driven — and complicated — by the desire to avoid punishment, conflict, or exclusion. Whether rooted in belief or fear, excessive obedience limits autonomy, critical thinking, and genuine moral agency. People often feel compelled to plead rather than assert their rights with dignity. Instances of public deference toward authority figures — even in situations of injustice — highlight how deeply ingrained this mindset can be. Recently in Meerut, when Arun Govil, the local MP and the actor who had enacted the role of Ram in BR Chopra’s Ramayan, arrived at a protest site, people who were sitting on a dharna began singing his praises, performing aarti, even breaking down in tears. What was striking and almost unsettling was that Govil remained seated, calmly receiving this display of devotion and emotional release. When rightful anger transforms into submissive reverence, it raises troubling questions about how power is perceived and exercised: Is this merely a remnant of a colonial mindset, or does it have deeper cultural roots?A society conditioned to obedience becomes easier to govern without accountability. Compliance can be quickly mobilised, while dissent is reframed as disloyalty or disruption. Those who question authority may be marginalised, while obedience is equated with good citizenship or patriotism.Building a healthy and respectful society demands the ability to question authority while upholding responsibility, to assert rights without descending into disorder, and to maintain social norms without suppressing dissent. Without this balance, societies risk producing not engaged citizens, but subjects — and that distinction makes all the difference.The writer is a Delhi-based school teacher