Open Forum
New Delhi, 13 January
2021
Political Movements
NON-VIOLENT PROTESTS’ EFFICACY
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
It is a well-known
fact that society has become rather explosive and tension-ridden i.e. it is
prone to violence in most parts of the Third World. The quest for material
prosperity and yearning for more power and wealth, resulting in poverty and
squalor along with ever rising inequality and a deep sense of despair and
frustration of a major section of the population in these countries, including
India, may be considered the major factors that have made the social climate
violent. But it is also a fact that non-violent movements have been witnessed
and these have successfully raised national concerns.
It is thus quite
apparent that political protests have been rampant due to unjust policies
adopted by the ruling dispensation and viewed by some as anti-people and an
encroachment of their rights. The question that needs to be analysed is whether
such protests or movements are non-violent in character. This is most important
in the land of Mahatma Gandhi who gave the concept of non-violence and
Satyagrah to the world, which succeeded in India gaining independence. The
ongoing sustained agitation of farmers, for one, has so far proved the efficacy
of non-violent agitation against the brute force of the State.
Delving into the
issue of violence, it may be said to be fundamentally a primitive animal
instinct. However, the manifestations of violence have become wider, possibly
with the diversification of the urges of man for freedom, for establishing his
viewpoint and a sense of belonging. Former Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar had
observed: “Men have been fighting for freedom since the beginning of humanity.
Similarly, he has also been striving to get recognition and he gets a sense of
exaltation if he is able to contribute to the human achievement. Deprived of
this opportunity, he is bound to be rebellious against the social system, which
deprives him from this favour”.
According to Mahatma
Gandhi’s definition, violence can be ascribed to exploitation. The centralised
bureaucracies, large organisations, monoliths of industry and business all
combine together to unleash violence amongst the people. However, the
establishment may be passive and concerned with the welfare and well-being of
the people and may not have an exploitative tendency; still the concentration
of power cannot be beneficial for real development to take place.
Prof. Sugata
Dasgupta, a well-known Gandhian scholar, aptly pointed out: “The establishment
exploits and since all exploitation hurts, the violence of exploitation too
hurts all concerned . . . . In short, the violence of establishment spills
blood, as such a dagger or a gun does; the only difference being that this
violence is not seen and often unrecognised and unaccounted for.”
One may recall here
the towering leadership of Jayaprakash Narayan and his movement called ‘Total
Revolution’ that brought Opposition political parties together on a common
platform. This movement connected disparate student movements in Gujarat and
Bihar and melded it with the grievances of farmers and workers, thereby giving
it a national character. It must be noted that an uplifting political vision
does not mean an exact political programme. JP’s ‘Total Revolution’ – a mix of
democratic decentralisation and corruption-free governance – was vague enough
to attract a broad swath of the population while being inspiring enough to
energise people into anti-government action.
Recently, the anti-Citizenship
Amendment Act (CAA) protests, although they were forthright in their
ideological challenge to the government, were largely unsuccessful in expanding
beyond minority-dominated spaces and, hence, at no point did they threaten the
political calculations of the government. In both cases, as experts pointed
out, the protests remained confined to their particular constituencies because
of an absence of leadership. Thus, it may be stated that the Opposition
political parties have singularly failed to capitalise on the government’s
failures and the resulting undercurrent of resentment have ceded space to civil
society organisations.
However, it has to be
agreed that the anti-CAA protests (from December 2019 to February 2020) were a
truly democratic upsurge spearheaded by women and students who stepped forward
to reclaim the country’s egalitarian essence. The Preamble, the national flag
and the national anthem were the overarching symbols of this mass movement. The
unexpected solidarity across class and community rattled the government, which
attacked anti-CAA protesters as anti-national, fanning anarchy and endangering
the rule of law.
One may mention here
that draconian laws such as the NSA and the UAPA have been used with
devastating effect to stifle dissent. The transformation of the peaceful
anti-CAA protests into a ‘secessionist’ movement propagating ‘armed rebellion’,
as portrayed in the police charge sheets on the Delhi riots, is Kafkaesque in
its distortion.
Most Opposition
parties acquiesced to the larger ideological framework of the BJP and are too
timid to mount a serious ideological challenge. These recurring protests are an
outcome of the contradictions in the ruling party’s system of dominance; yet
there is no political leader of JP’s stature who has the skill, credibility and
acceptability to convincingly articulate how these contradictions lie into each
other, formulate an alternative political vision and build a sustained
political movement based on it.
At the same time, the
recent sustained protests by the farming community are testimony to the fact
that even without a strong personality to lead protest movements, the issues
has equal importance. This is well manifest from the farm protests led by
peasants from Punjab, Haryana, eastern Uttar Pradesh and also other States
where the subject can be considered to have national appeal, as the farmers fear
the business groups subverting their interests and livelihood. The movement has
managed to get a national character as experts have opined that the government
had no constitutional right to legislate on agricultural marketing since it
happened to be a State subject.
Political protests
and movements are bound to continue in a democratic polity though the ruling
dispensation would try to break these peoples’ demands by unethical means, as
happened in India during the CAA agitation and now the farmers’ stir. Moreover, while non-violence is the preferred
mode, and this is desirable, these agitations are being handled by a brute
police force of the State that very often resorts to violence.
Therefore though
there have many obstacles to democratic functioning, protests have emerged in
the country from time to time, and quite successfully, to voice concerns
against policy issues. The strength and resilience of the people in India needs
to be appreciated as they have organised protests, both at the State level as
also nationally in spite of a brutal police force and administration. The
blessings of Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King and many others have
possibly imbued the masses to fearlessly stand up in protest. ---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|