By Utsav Chaudhary:
Abraham Lincoln’s most famous quote about democracy says that a democratic government is ‘of the people, by the people, for the people’. Taking this quote as the base, the Indian constitution was framed. But today, is the government of India ‘of the people’ or ‘of the people in power’?
The above question is rhetoric for a reason. If we chastise the current situation in India, we can derive that the decisions taken by the government lately are benefitting the people in power rather than the public.
A person has to sit on fast until death with the whole nation by his side to demand a bill that the whole nation covets. Isn’t it a bound duty of a democratic government to provide people what they want?
A person opened incessant fire at a crowded railway station, claiming hundreds of lives, is given the right to fight for justice & crores of rupees have been spent on him while a huge faction of people in India live in destitute. No action has been taken despite many protests and objection doing the rounds. Is this person a guest or a traitor to India?
The fundamental rights in the part III of the constitution of India, provides a citizen with the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19. For years people craved for a platform to speak about their dissent towards the government or basically to cash in their right to freedom of speech. With internet & social networking sites, the people of India now can raise their voice and express their views on the critical issues & share them with the world. Imposing a ban on these websites would be government’s treachery to the constitution of India as it will take away their right to freedom of speech. The same question arises again, is the Indian government for the people?
Another coin in the bank of this perfidious government is the recent ban on Salman Rushdie’s video call from the Jaipur Literary festival. It sounds comical as well as chimerical that the ‘Satanic verses’ which was banned in 1988 is still the root cause for the author to be deprived of the right to visit this country. His purpose of attending the festival was to interact with his ardent readers and not to talk about his banned book. In fact Rushdie has visited the country many times after the ban on his book but no issues were raised then. Is theÂ minusculeÂ issue been made a prodigious one just before the UP elections in order to win the Muslim vote bank? The ban was imposed on ‘satanic Verses’ and not on Rushdie, so by not allowing him to enter our country is the government amending the constitution itself? Is it on a path that deviate it from being democratic?
The Indian government is now becoming an oligarchy – ruled by a few people. None of the actions lately have been ‘for the people’; still, is it imperative that we call it a democracy?
When asked for answers and explanations, the ‘rulers’ equivocate and baffle the public. Ostensibly these oligarchs use the 1.21 billion people according to their will & apparently there is no solution to it. I hope I would not be banned after this because the government is lately on a banning spree; it bans everything that criticizes it. It’s high time we should raise our voice against these oligarchs & help India function according to its public and not the rulers.
In India, the community of Rohingyas is relatively small in comparison to these other nations, but their struggle is no less compelling.Read More >
Does the ban on entry for certain genders or castes into the temples of their own creators make sense?Read More >
In the last few years, there have been numerous incidents of Africans in India being attacked and facing racial stereotypes.Read More >
This month, Sikhs aren’t just holding up candles to commemorate the massacres of 1984. They are holding up their cameras.Read More >
The media failed to zoom out of the ruckus on campus and to not get carried away by seating people on their panels who prescribed what nationalism is.Read More >