Premium

Tavleen Singh writes: Old ways of ‘satyagraha’ have become boring, young Indians must find new ways to make their case

In our own ancient and wondrous land, the institutions of democracy remain fragile. But here is a small warning to those political leaders bedazzled by their own propaganda: there is increasing evidence that voters are seeing through the propaganda.

Activist Sonam Wangchuk and Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke during an indefinite hunger strike at Jantar Mantar during a protest over alleged examination irregularities, repeated paper leaks and demands for accountability from the government, in New Delhi. (PTI Photo)

Written by: Tavleen Singh

6 min readJul 5, 2026 08:57 PM IST First published on: Jul 5, 2026 at 06:24 AM IST

Last week America celebrated her 250th birthday, so I shall begin by saying happy birthday to the world’s oldest democracy from a citizen of the world’s largest democracy. As an admirer of America, I have been truly impressed that its institutions have managed to survive what The Economist recently called the ‘wrecking ball revolution’ that Donald Trump has used to try and weaken them. It has made me reflect and brood over how our own institutions have been less resilient. Our prime ministers may not have used a wrecking ball, but right from the time that we became an independent nation, there have been attempts to weaken the institutions of democracy.

At the risk of invoking (yet again) the ire of the Gandhi family’s belligerent supporters on social media, I shall remind you that the First Amendment to our Constitution was brought to curb dissent. The opposite was true in America. The first amendment to that constitution says, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.’

Those who believe that such freedoms have been damaged only since Narendra Modi became prime minister should read our own First Amendment. And we must never forget that the only prime minister who took a ‘wrecking ball’ to Indian democracy was Indira Gandhi. It is against this backdrop that we need to examine what has happened in twelve years of Hindutva Raj, during which a disturbing allergy to dissent has become evident. As a judge of the Bombay High Court reminded us last week, ‘it is the right of citizens to protest’.

It is sad but true that every time there is a protest of some kind, Modi’s acolytes, spokespersons and social media warriors collude to damage the reputation of the protesters. When farmers protested for more than a year against laws that they believed benefited corporations and not them, they were called anti-nationals, Khalistanis and traitors. All that the prime minister needed to have done was invite leaders of that protest for a cup of tea and listen to what they had to say. Why this did not happen, I do not know.

For the past two weeks, the Cockroach Janata Party’s leaders and supporters have been protesting in Jantar Mantar with a single demand that the education minister take responsibility for the mess in the education system and resign. If this minister had the smallest shred of self-respect, he would voluntarily hand in his resignation. Since he does not, it is the responsibility of the prime minister to ask for his resignation. Inexplicably, this has not happened, so now the ‘cockroaches’ have backed him into a corner. If he sacks the minister, it would seem like surrender, and if he does not, he will continue to alienate young students.

Meanwhile, sundry leftist leaders who never protested the crushing of dissent by ‘secular’ prime ministers are now banding together to share the stage in Jantar Mantar. Personally, I think the fast unto death by Sonam Wangchuk is a bad idea. The old ways of ‘satyagraha’ have become stale and boring. Young Indians must find new ways to make their case. It is also time they stopped invoking dead leaders and started looking for younger leaders in their own ranks. They have a right to be very angry about the appalling state of our education system and the terrifying absence of jobs for those who somehow manage to get an education. They have a right to be angry about other things. Corruption has become a huge issue since revelations about the looting of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, and people are becoming increasingly angry about the deep roots of corruption in all our democratic institutions.

Corruption is, alas, not the only thing weakening our democracy. Almost as damaging has been the rise of a tendency in our political leaders to encourage an ugly form of cultism to build around them. They do this by plastering their pictures everywhere, from electricity poles and petrol stations to advertisements of their achievements in the newspapers and on television. If this is an attempt to show the people who hold up the institutions of democracy that big brother is watching, then they may have succeeded. But is this good for democracy? Clearly not.

The additional damage that this kind of narcissistic promotion does is that it proves that despite all our talk of development and modernity, we remain a third-world country in which elected leaders can behave like kings. It is true that in this 250th year of American independence, the leader of the free world is behaving more like a king than any leader in the third world, but American institutions have shown that they are strong enough to survive Trump.

In our own ancient and wondrous land, the institutions of democracy remain fragile. But here is a small warning to those political leaders bedazzled by their own propaganda: there is increasing evidence that voters are seeing through the propaganda. This is one reason why political parties built around the cult of a single leader and his extended family are beginning to crumble into dust. It is a warning that all political leaders would do well to heed.