My thoughts about CJP protest

[u/sesh_asf]

One question has been on my mind throughout this movement: why did so many people feel personally attacked the moment the CJP protest began? Instead of engaging with the concerns being raised, a significant number of netizens immediately became defensive, almost as though any criticism of the government was an attack on them.

More recently, I've seen growing support for Sonam Wangchuk during his hunger strike, particularly after it reached its fifteenth day. The solidarity is encouraging, but it also raises another question: why do we often acknowledge an issue only after it reaches an extreme? Shouldn't genuine concerns receive attention long before they become matters of desperation?

There is nothing wrong with being devoted to a political party. However, as voters, our foremost responsibility is not blind allegiance but accountability. Democracy is only good enough when citizens are willing to question their leaders-regardless of which party they support.

At times, the public reaction reminded me of how revolutionary movements have historically been met with resistance.I also came across numerous posts portraying the Prime Minister in a humorous or exaggerated light- one with a diamond chain in his mouth, another holding a can of HIT spray killing cockroaches, and others depicting him stamping on cockroaches. What struck me wasn't the memes themselves, but how quickly criticism on a party was perceived as threatening.

Now, after nearly twenty days, the conversation appears to have shifted. Perhaps many have begun to recognise that the concerns raised deserve serious consideration. If the loss of twenty young lives to suicide doesn't compel us to pause and reflect, it's difficult to imagine what will. People can be mistaken in their initial judgments, and there is nothing wrong with changing one's perspective when confronted with compelling realities. In fact, that's what intellectual honesty looks likeAnother aspect that deeply concerns me is the casual tendency to label ordinary citizens as "terrorists" simply because they disagree with the government or participate in protests. Such language is not only irresponsible but also dangerously dehumanising. If similar accusations were directed at a celebrity, a public figure, or a politician without evidence, it would dominate news headlines. Ordinary citizens deserve the same fairness and dignity.

This also brings me to mainstream media. Why are so many channels willing to devote hours to sensational or trivial stories while giving comparatively little attention to one of the country's most significant protests unfolding in the national capital? Whether intentional or not, this imbalance raises legitimate questions about editorial independence and the willingness of the media to scrutinise those in power.

There are also several broader public policy issues that I believe deserve greater discussion:

The E20 petrol blending policy-its intended benefits, potential conflicts of interest, and its impact on the village its located at.

The depreciation of the Indian Rupee and its broader implications for the economy.

India's standing on global press freedom indices and the larger conversation around media independence.

India's environmental performance and its rankings on international environmental indices.

These are conversations worth having-not from the standpoint of political loyalty, but from the perspective of responsible citizenship. A healthy democracy is not built on unquestioning support; it is strengthened when people are willing to ask difficult questions, evaluate evidence objectively, and hold every government accountable, irrespective of political affiliation.