Looking at the anti-CAA protests, I am compelled to wonder whether the phrase, “I attended a protest” is, today, but a scholarly way of saying, “I found a way to kill time.”
This is based on the following evidences:
– The protests are based purely on virtue-signalling.
– The protest banners are full of slogans with emotional jargon, and devoid of actual issues.
Now, let me turn to the government.
– It has earned, in the Lok Sabha elections, a storming mandate at the Centre with 353 seats in alliance, and a single party, the BJP, accounts for 303 of them, over thirty seats past the half-mark.
– With this clear majority, it wields a lot of power. Verily, any bill it introduces is bound to be passed in the Lok Sabha.
Therefore, the confidence of the government is at an all-time high.
With the astute political brain that Shri Amit Shah possesses, it can hardly be said that he introduced the Bill (now Act) without examining the legalities with the help of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General. Indeed, on account of being the Union Minister of Home Affairs, he has access to information on virtually everything in the country.
The sheer number of protesters and the lack of intellectual basis of the protests, confirms that none of them has bothered reading the Act in its entirety, nor do they have an idea that there are, in fact, two aspects to it: The aspect of Constitutional Law and the aspect of policy.
Any argument to the effect of (a) exclusion of atheists, Ahmadiyas etc.; (b) limitation to only three countries; and (c) state of our own economy, is a policy argument, and not a Constitutional Law argument. Verily, these are the only arguments that can be raised against the Act.
Therefore, the assertion that it violates legal procedures is demonstrably false and unfounded.
In light of this, I conclude the following:
– With such facts and such data at the disposal of the government, if it were to hold a face-to-face dialogue with the protesters, this phenomenon of protest, at least in the current context, shall fall flat on its face spectacularly, for the protesters may be blessed with intellect but it is not reflected in their protests.
– The government shall have exposed either that its own citizens lack awareness and understanding to an alarming extent, or that the protesters have vested interests.
It would be unwise to expect that the government does not have a reason for introducing the Bill at a time when the economy is facing testing times. It is of prudence to remember that we are dealing with experienced players at the Centre.
To think that the government is scared of these protests is sheer gullibility of thought if not immaturity and childishness. This is something only the utopian-ist Indian communists believe in.
On the contrary, it is the moral duty of the government, nay the Prime Minister himself, that the citizens be addressed on account of the protests devolving into anarchy. Callousness bespeaks arrogance, something bad for our international image.
I seek to add something of prudence. That the government shall not admit persecuted religious minorities in mass numbers into our country is something I am confident of, for there would, otherwise, be a proliferation of the Sons of Soil Theory at the national level, although I hasten to add that something to that effect shall take years to create an impact on a pan-India level.
The popularity of the BJP shall then be on the decline, something the Centre cannot afford on account of one loss after another at the state level. Currently, the CAA shall be restricted to, I theorize, to naturalizing those already inside India.
Finally, it is not to be forgotten that there exists a cut-off date in the Act. Only those who entered India before 31st Dec, 2014 are eligible. This is done in order to ensure that people do not start emigrating to our country in mass numbers now that we have an Act. It points unambiguously, to the fact that the amount of research that must have been done before the draft was approved, was substantial.
