Protests are an ‘essential dimension’ of mankind. In fact, they are intrinsic to human existence. To put it in a familiar idiom, the history of mankind is a history of protests. Humans protest not just as individuals but as groups, communities and nations. They usually protest against something they perceive or believe to be harmful to them. The ongoing protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act seem to be the most significant in post-independent India. They have come as a bolt from the blue to the government that mistook its election victories as a licence to reshape the country to its will. The rightness of the cause — India’s continued existence as a secular and pluralist democracy — has thwarted the attempts by some to give the protests a communal colour, lamentably with the aid of sections of the media. Humanitarianism underlies these animated protests (“An anatomy of anti-CAA protests,” Jan. 1).
G. David Milton,
Maruthancode, Tamil Nadu
The CAA was introduced as if it wasn’t going to adversely affect the Muslim community. Concurrently, the BJP government kept insisting that CAA should be linked to NRC. Perhaps, the Centre wouldn’t have anticipated that the protests would quickly escalate and fire up across India. These rallies only underline the anti-Constitution attitude of the Narendra Modi government. There is little doubt that the CAA has been intentionally introduced to sidetrack people from real issues, particularly the severe economic slowdown. The civil society, rightly so, is posing fundamental questions about India’s political existence as a constitutional democracy. Indeed, this assertion of the civil society is going to determine the political fate of India in the near future.
R. Sivakumar,
Chennai
The CAA was drafted with the good intention of helping helpless minorities in the neighbouring nations where they were ill-treated. The media, which has been extremely critical of the Act, should recognise that there is a huge section of India’s silent majority getting disappointed by these rallies and the undue coverage given to them.
V.S. Ganesan,
Bengaluru
