We ought to have realised by now that an inclusive ethos is too deeply ingrained in the Indian mind. The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, is being seen in the perspective of the National Population Register-National Register of Citizens, and there is not much to find fault with this perception. The fact is that the common man is truly apprehensive. This policy-troika now under way appears to delineate differences where none should exist. And this is precisely what has fuelled the peoples’ agitation. The government is yet to proceed beyond parsing a conciliatory sentence, much less open a dialogue. The deterioration in the economy and employment is only adding to the angst.
R. Narayanan,
Navi Mumbai
The protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, are now drifting without a credible face to anchor them and are becoming more sporadic in nature. One also has the government in its wisdom reluctant to talk to anyone to clear misgivings in the minds of people and also getting away in the process on account of its sheer and brute majority in Parliament. It seems to have forgotten that in a democracy, debate and discussion are essential. It is saddening that there is no meeting ground between the protesters and the government to sort out the issues and saving the country from the continuing chaos and disruptions. There has to be a focus on steps to ensure progress and prosperity.
V. Padmanabhan,
Bengaluru
The writer, in her eagerness to romanticise the anti-CAA protests as a massive popular uprising against the government, has glossed over the unfolding silent backlash against the perceived excesses of the protests (Editorial page, “Sparkling people, a spiritless Opposition”, January 14). That the pro-CAA support has been muted does not mean the silent majority has endorsed the streak of intolerance that permeated the street protests in the initial phase. The Opposition has developed cold feet after going overboard in fanning the flames of discord because the milking of political capital is an exercise fraught with electoral risks. There is no denying the fact that the anti-CAA protests have gained a sectarian streak. The neutral observers who have been following the anti-CAA bandwagon see the waving of the national flag not as a spontaneous outburst of the pluralist sentiment; they consider it as a belated attempt to blunt the growing perception that opposition to a law is a mere front for spewing hatred against an elected government. The attempt to depict the protests as the fight between a community and the government was a dangerous narrative that upset those who seem willing to accept the articulation of the CAA as positive discrimination in favour of persecuted people who have cultural links with the nation.
V.N. Mukundarajan,
Thiruvananthapuram
