Dangerous rhetoric

Opponents of demonetisation should not be demonised

There is little doubt that with demonetisation Prime Minister Narendra Modi has once again opened up a commanding lead in terms of messaging between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Opposition in general. The muted nature of the anti-demonetisation narrative reflects the fact that the argument has been effectively framed in terms of ending black money and progress — two issues few will oppose. Given that, however, it is unclear why BJP leaders, including the prime minister himself, have been using it as a stick with which to essentially de-legitimise not just Opposition parties but even the possibility of opposition itself. In a series of recent speeches, Mr Modi has declared that anyone opposing demonetisation is a “rajnitik pujari” (political worshipper) of black money. This is not a new argument in its essentials; the PM deployed it fairly early on in the demonetisation exercise, saying in November that if the Opposition had been given “even 72 hours to prepare” they would have sung his praises. The clear implication was that all opposition to demonetisation was coming solely from holders and beneficiaries of black money. This is a dangerous position for a leader to take. It effectively fits into a narrative in which those who disagree with the government on politics or even the specifics of a particular policy are necessarily “anti-national”. In fact, the chief minister of Maharashtra, Devendra Fadnavis, has openly declared that opponents of demonetisation are exactly that: “anti-national”.

For a party running the government to take this approach to dissent, especially from the parliamentary Opposition, is downright undemocratic. The Opposition exists to hold the government to account. Raising questions about the conception and implementation of one of the biggest policy exercises this country has seen cannot be termed as an anti-national act. Nor should the PM himself be dismissing all opposition as born purely of a desire to preserve black money. It is quite alright to disagree vehemently with the Opposition’s arguments and to insist that they are out of touch with what India needs, but the argument over policy issues such as demonetisation should not be allowed to descend to a wholesale attack on the motives of everyone on the other side of the aisle.

Members of the ruling party will perhaps argue that this is politics as usual — that in the heat of an election campaign, such things tend to be said about opponents. But that does not fit with what is, in fact, being observed: A concerted campaign to paint all dissent, political or otherwise, on this subject — and perhaps others — as being in bad faith. The assumption of good faith is crucial to the working of the public sphere in a democracy. Even if individual politicians are fallible, even if there is cynicism about their motives and motivations, the assumption of good faith is necessary for the genuine conversation that enables democratic exchange. Without such vibrant conversations, not only is democracy truncated, but the government is not able to receive the feedback and political stimuli that it needs in order to produce policy that genuinely benefits citizens. Mr Modi and his party should revisit their rhetoric in the national interest.