Vishwanath Kamat Malyekar
The trend of activism is not new in India. It was activism for independence that led independence. The same activists were branded as anarchists by the Colonial powers, but today we revere them as the founding fathers of modern day India.
Masses of people coming in hordes to protest on the streets is a sign of institutions not delivering on their promises, it is never a good idea to barricade such voices, as preventing such voices from coming out in open, as such barricades often leads to discontent which may find other non-peaceful outlets to express their opinions.
When leaders wear earplugs while the citizens air their grievances democracies throughout the world are troubled. One person’s anarchist could well be another person’s activist. Go back a little in time and consider the demonstrations throughout the world that brought in universal franchise or racial equality or the establishment of women rights. It took decades of activism before women got the right exercise their franchise and before Blacks became legally equal to the rest in America. Had these movements been banned, democracies would have been that much poorer.
But the question staring us in the face today is who is complaining today? Are those who are protesting, actually working towards betterment of society or are they protesting for personal accolades or gains? The recent act of a well-known environmental activist Claude Alvares in Goa wherein he proceeded to lock a Government Department is an act which can be considered as Anarchical to say the least while the same may not be physically violent by was inherently violent by its nature and verbally. While some sections of the society describe the said act as a much needed step to wake the slumbering government into action, there is a large undercurrent which if not stemmed may result in a larger problem facing our nation. This concern is not unfounded as in the past democracies have been challenged by genuine anarchism, so are the religious zealots, extreme political ideologues and Maoists of the day.
The one defining feature of an anarchist remains their aversion to democratic procedure. Anarchism, however, is not only about physical violence; it is as much about verbal violence too. The attempt which is being made in our country to rewrite history is a form of anarchy too. In a democracy the ultimate power lies with people and if these activists who claim to represent the majoritarian civil society view do believe in their capability garner popular support than they should participate in greatest dance in democracy i.e. elections and let the people decide where they stand.
