Often the dilemmas of who, why, when, where and whom incur in our thoughts and they can be regarding anything. In its literal definitions democracy allows citizens exercise all of their aforementioned dilemma regarding their own chosen leadership. What makes it even more presumptuous is the fact constitution proposes them in written in the constitution. The major difference in what people get is the imbalance of spoken and implied promises. The resistance comes from within the society which is the outcome of unrest due to unsatisfaction from leadership. The basic idea of liberalism is to liberate out and in order to do that a nation needs to provide flexibility to its citizens to be able to agitate the law and governance. Irony in today’s times is that the democracy has become a chanting phrase for leaders and very less of it they actually understand or mean. Never have the principles of democracy been to suppress any type of voices being raised, freedom of speech and freedom of expression is the given fundamental right. More we tend towards the risk of creating a nation where demands of citizens go unheard more we push ourselves to tyranny. A popular notion of being in democratic country is you can disagree or be intolerant to almost anything you feel hurts your or your belief’s sentiments. The expression is guaranteed, the resentment is allowed but when it comes to practicing these rights freely the bearers of nationalism and pro governance speakers churn up the wings of thoughts. Through a faded spectacle of partial truth they see a image of nationalism they are made to see, but the liberal eye denies to believe it all. It’s a sense of discontentment of what the men of nation are fed with regardless of their opinion or choice. But only resorting to agitation is not the motto of liberalism, taking the baton of change to its final destination is what matters to this society. Realizing the advent of radicalism in recent times it is ardent that people have grown in their verbosity and are raising it out loud regardless of its feasibility to the scenario. The bans and outcries have led society to a cycle of resentment and revenge. People are keeping institutional agendas in line with national agendas and satisfying their greed for supremacy. It’s the fact that liberalists are voices concerning the general common society while radicals talk of group specific interests. Liberalists are open to variety of fields of dialogues and entertain every possibility of dispute resolution, that’s who they are, open to ideas and thoughts of change unbound and unchained of conservative ideology.