Can’t have sabka vishwas with tear gas and lathi

The abundant images on Monday — of thousands of mostly young and mostly peaceful protestors facing barricades and lathi charge and tear gas shells in the heart of the national capital — were stark and dispiriting. They indict the government. The protestors were reportedly responding to the call of the satirical online platform, the Cockroach Janta Party, to march to Parliament. The CJP has been conducting a sit-in protest since June 20 at Jantar Mantar, from where education and environment activist Sonam Wangchuk, fasting since June 28, was taken to a hospital, Saturday, forcibly. But the protestors were arguably responding to more than one fast or one platform. They were rallying behind the issue that is being highlighted — the urgent need to reform a broken education system, beset with exam leaks, delays and irregularities, which leads, in turn, to swelling the ranks of the unemployed. In a country of the young, the recent episode of the NEET cancellation and retest has touched a raw nerve, sparking larger anxieties about the shape of an uncertain future, and lack of readiness to meet its challenges. The Centre looks harsh and unyielding towards the young protestors, and insensitive on an issue that ripples widely. It kept its back turned, eyes wide shut. It took three weeks to break its silence with a meeting on Monday between Minister J P Nadda and spokespersons of the CJP. It is, of course, far from clear whether the meeting translates into reform and accountability.

On the interlinked matters of shiksha and berozgari, education and unemployment, the government needs to recognise that it cannot keep kicking the can down the road. It must acknowledge, also, that citizens have the right to place demands on it, to disagree with it and to protest peacefully. In letter and spirit, the Constitution guarantees citizens both the freedom to speak and the space to be heard. Over the last 12 years or so, however, the government’s instinct has been to distrust and demonise those who express dissent, to reflexively label them “anti-national”. It favours a top-down, one-way communication that does not involve listening and responding.

On Monday, the march of the protestors was to Parliament, the highest forum of deliberative democracy, where elected representatives take up the people’s issues. The concerns highlighted at Jantar Mantar must find their way into the House eventually — that is the legitimate trajectory. A government that has, through its serial electoral successes, underlined its connect with the people can ill afford to stand in their way when they demand a hearing in between elections. It is still not too late, a beginning has been made towards a dialogue with the protestors. In days to come, the government must make amends by building on it.

Overall Analysis

The editorial criticizes the government’s handling of peaceful youth protests, arguing that the use of force against demonstrators contradicts the principle of “Sabka Vishwas” (winning everyone’s trust). It presents the protests not as isolated incidents but as a reflection of deeper public frustration over unemployment, exam irregularities, and the declining credibility of India’s education system.

The editorial opens with vivid imagery of young protestors facing barricades, lathi charges, and tear gas in the national capital. This descriptive language immediately creates a sense of concern and disappointment. By stating that these scenes “indict the government,” the author clearly establishes a critical stance from the very beginning. The language is emotionally charged but remains within the boundaries of formal editorial writing.

The author then broadens the focus from the immediate protest to the larger issues that triggered it. While the protest was organized following the hunger strike of Sonam Wangchuk and supported by the Cockroach Janta Party, the editorial argues that the real issue is the widespread frustration among India’s youth over exam paper leaks, delayed recruitments, and rising unemployment. Expressions such as “touched a raw nerve” and “uncertain future” effectively capture the emotional state of students and job seekers, making the argument more relatable.

A significant part of the editorial criticizes the government’s delayed response. The phrase “kept its back turned, eyes wide shut” is a powerful metaphor suggesting deliberate inaction and indifference. The author argues that a government claiming strong public support should be willing to listen to citizens between elections rather than responding with force. The language here is persuasive and appeals to democratic values rather than political ideology.

The final section shifts from criticism to constructive advice. It reminds readers that the Constitution guarantees not only freedom of speech but also the right to peaceful protest. The editorial contends that Parliament is the appropriate forum where such public concerns should ultimately be debated. It concludes by urging the government to continue dialogue with the protesters and convert discussions into meaningful reforms. The ending is hopeful, suggesting that rebuilding trust is still possible if the government responds with sensitivity and accountability.

Overall, the editorial combines descriptive narration, emotional appeal, constitutional reasoning, and persuasive argumentation. Its language is rich in metaphors and idiomatic expressions, making complex political and social concerns accessible to a broad audience.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Dispiriting – causing disappointment or loss of hope.
2. Indict – to strongly criticize or condemn.
3. Ripple – to spread gradually and widely, like waves in water.
4. Demonise – to portray someone as evil or dangerous.
5. Trajectory – the expected path or course of development.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial argues that governments strengthen democracy by engaging with peaceful dissent rather than suppressing it. It stresses that issues like education reforms and unemployment require dialogue, accountability, and policy action instead of police action. According to the author, public trust cannot be earned through coercion but through listening, responsiveness, and democratic engagement.

Tone: Critical, persuasive, democratic, and cautiously optimistic.