INTOLERANCE IN INDIA

History bears witness to the fact that no democracy exists without a considerable amount of
challenges present in front of it, each having its indigenous set of problems. But it is only natural for
democracies to have them. When the opinions of all the citizens are put together, inconsistencies
are a given. And, India being a country with varied groups of people, it is all the more difficult for her
to realise the dream of a smooth democracy. However, can we justify the growing intolerance in the
country as a by product of it being a democracy which houses various groups of people? And, can
extreme views on sensitive subjects be passed as ‘public opinion’? I think not.

Out of the sizeable amount of problems our democracy is facing, I think the biggest issue is that we,
as humans have lost the ability to be tolerant towards fellow humans. Be it politics or religion or
movies, one refuses to accept another’s point of view. This growing intolerance hinders
development of our democracy. It snatches away the possibility of development in the presence of
stark differences. And, it doesn’t end there. Intolerance is not only harmful for India domestically,
but also internationally. Worldwide, we are developing an image of being of being an increasing
intolerant nation.

If we were to talk about the present government, I feel that it is unduly proud of its international
standing. The reputation we are gaining is in complete contrast with what the government claims it
to be. The popular impression is that our country is being governed by intolerant forces that seek to
put the existing minorities in deeper darkness. Shashi Tharoor is not wrong when he says that “the
behaviour of Hindutva extremists has opened the door to the critics to suggest that it is safer in India
to be cow than a Muslim”.

In my opinion, when one cannot expect any reformatory measures from the government in charge,
it becomes the responsibility of the people to bring in change. We should be more open to accepting
everyone’s views. However, at the same time, one must not allow the breeding of extremist
ideologies in the name of public opinion.

Recently, most news papers and news channels have been talking about the on going problem of the
‘Padmavati Row’. Personally, I feel that the movie must be released only if it does not distort history.
But, just because I feel that way, I cannot, come what may, threaten the makers of the movie. This
controversial case shows that in such a sticky situation where the makers have artistic liberty and the
protesters have a right to expression, a solution which is somewhere in the middle of the two view
points should be adopted. We have to create an environment which can accommodate different
perspectives.

Our democracy, in the last seventy years of independence, has been built on the idea of nation that
celebrates its differences of caste, creed, race, conviction and culture and still rally a democratic
consensus. And this idea rests on the principle that in a democracy, one must not necessary agree,
except on the grounds of how you disagree. This means, that the need of the hour calls for not just
respect for the differences but the acceptance of the same. Our diversity is our strength, not our
weakness but it would not take much to convert it into our weakness. We may have been a country
of pluralism, acceptance and Gandhism but, at the rate at which we are going, we will soon be a
country of Intolerance, minority insecurity and communal hatred.

It is time of us to go beyond black and white and find the grey that lies somewhere in the middle.
The optimistic Indian in me enforces me to think that we will, in due course of time, be able to reach
that grey.