This was a very interesting, and very sad read. To see how low the education rates in our country are, and how drastically lower they are in Balochistan, is truly telling about where the priorities of our states have been for years, ever since Independence. However, in such a deprived atmosphere, it would also be interesting to see what kind of alternative methods of education have evolved where the state has failed. For example, how have the people of Balochistan tried to keep their cultures and stories alive? What kind of education do children receive, if any? It is also ironic how the state has doubts about the loyalties of the Balochi people and thus do not invest in their education secotr, when it is infact that very thing that has aided in making that loyalty shaky.

I really liked your post! This is such an apt issue. One thing that particularly stood out to me was the French beleif that secularism could be achieved by forcing people to stop wearing parts of their religious identity on themselves, which is utterly ridiculous. Secularism is a theory that is enforced on a state level, i.e. that a government will not take a religious stance, not that it will make life hell for people wanting to practice their own religions on an individual level. Would they then stop a Christian from wearing the cross? Or a Hindu from wearing sandoor on their foreheads? All in the name of a 'united' society? France is famously problematic when it comes to accepting different religions or ethnicities. There's a video by Trevor Noah where he details this in the Between the Scenes segment of his show, The Daily Show that I'm attaching here as I think it aptly covers this issue. France, it seems, has not learned how to acknowledge and subsequently get over its colonial mindset, something that is also apparent in past British colonies as well. I have explored this in my articles here and here. I'd love to hear your insight!

I think you have brought up a very tricky thing to navigate. Definitely, students should be allowed to protest and have the right to free speech, but this. I believe, would only work if we consider universities to be politically neutral institutions. Ideally, universities should, as you have said, be safe places where one cane express their opinions and hold onto their beliefs without harrassment and coersion from external and internal factors. However, many universities have highly problematic origins, things that have been brushed under the rug rather than being aptly dealt with. In addition to this, donors and major financial contributors for many universities all over the world have very morally grey foundings and rises to fame (for example the Rockerfellers and other old money families like the Carnegie's). These donors then have a lot of say over the proceedings of universities, and many are then included in their board of trustees. I think that along with the problems you have highlighted, this becomes another very important problem in allowing for freedom of speech. I've also explored how problematic money and philanthropy in education can be in my blogpost here, I'd love to hear your thoughts!