Hushing an uprising.
Vehicles set ablaze, effigies burnt to ashes, eminent symbols blemished, and an entire nation bereft of its sanity. These are only minutely graphic silhouettes that make it to our imagery while thinking of protests and dissent. The Indian Freedom Struggle too was an uncanny reminder of the two starkly varying alternatives to garner what was originally ours and to claim what seemed to be opulent initially. While both the paths led to the same terminus, history did not quite pass its judgment with the same vigour for the two. School textbooks have glorified and venerated our heroes in inconsistent and unequal proportions. Their maxim here may be to not substantiate potential chaos and insignias of a remorseful end but to highlight what it is about the violence that dissociates and distracts people from the motif and gives birth to chronicles that result in interrogation, scepticism, and incredulity.
Standing at the crossroads of two of its most deliberated upon bills, the present Indian Government has witnessed it all. The dubious nature of misinformation has been both, created and suffered from. However, when on one hand, the administration was successful in providing credulous pieces of evidence and testimonies in pre-mediated discourses over raising panic and deterioration of civility by expunging the conspiracies surrounding them, little seems to work in their favour this time around. Whether the legislations were inept and outlandish is a topic for another article, the means of righting the wrong can surely be pondered upon. Pushing past the jargons of peaceful and mature opposition, 15 young boys in the Syrian Arab Republic decided to contest authoritarianism via graffitis. What soon trailed was an interminable circle of torture and uprisings. From the alleged use of biochemical weapons to other disastrous RCAs, what was left of that nation was a pitiable land and shattered hopes. While there couldn’t have been a civilised curation of questioning and intercourse, it was those in power who proliferated the ruckus and catastrophic external/internal relations.
What comes as retaliation to dissent is often deemed to be the true litmus test of an organisations’ preemptive actions. However, seldom do we attempt to comprehend the residues of conversations that never make it to the public domain. The foundational ideologies that steer movements, if marqueed by ulterior motives, are more detrimental than the brutality faced afterwards, itself. What kingpins don’t realise is, by shooting bullets at the cost of others they immaterialise the actual motif of the struggle and legitimise the force used by authorities. Nevertheless, sheer maligning of the assuage of governing authority is more of convenience than regulation.
Resorting to harsh control mechanisms and blurring the plight of those affected directly/indirectly undermines the constitutional guarantees and puts forth an entire nation on the pedestal of international humiliation and denouncement. When distraught communities rise, their angst is multiplied by innumerable factors coupled with the stone-cold demeanour of the government. The volatile outbursts of destruction cannot be treated as justifiable by any means, but so can’t the totalitarian and crass ineptitude by those in power. Such instances make us realise the innate need for reforms and pathways that are concurred by all stakeholders.
Convulsing into the labyrinth of neither tyrannical anarchy nor veiled expeditions can yield outcomes that are noteworthy. While fringe groups cannot be permitted to rule over our societal narratives, we can also not rely on rudimentary loopholes in legislation that hamper people’s right to protest and break the spirit of citizens. Strict scrutiny of an oppressive executive and havoc- creating forces is a barrier that still needs to be tackled with. However, once dealt with, it will pave the way for a more homogenous and considerate moderation.
