An overall ambiance of intolerance appears to have permeated our country at this time. Everyday, almost without exception, newspapers have been carrying headlines about collectively executed misdeeds and even violence aimed at subjugating dissent or opposition to authority expressed by this or that private individual. Indeed, the intensity of this crisis of majoritarian intolerance appears to be such as would not easily find its match in the history of independent India. One of the latest events in this series is the arrest of an apparently ‘leftist’ singer-composer by Jayalalitha’s police in Tamil Nadu for the ‘crime’ of satirizing through a song what he perceived as misrule in Amma’s land and especially the way liquor business is promoted in the state. For this writer, domiciled in Bengal, this refreshes the memory of a similar incident that happened in 2012: a professor named Ambikesh Mahapatra was arrested by the Kolkata police for having the temerity to post on Facebook a cartoon satirizing the chief minister Mamata Banerjee and one of her party men. Mahapatra was later released on bail; the folk singer of Tamil Nadu has been denied even that.

Clearly, our elected rulers, irrespective of party colour, are getting increasingly intolerant of diversity of opinion and are not hesitating to high-handedly use state-power in order to silence criticism and to gag voices of dissent. Even the erstwhile British rulers of colonized India would appear more tolerant of criticism in comparison: If they had been as prone to arresting protesters or critics, writers and composers like Kazi Najrul Islam or Rabindranath Tagore would surely have been imprisoned more than once.

The incident in Tamil Nadu has shown us also that cow-slaughter, minority-culture, or rationalist activism are mere externals, mere triggers to specific incidences. The real, the fundamental issue is intolerance on the part of the powerful to dissent or opposition of all hues and degrees. What the ruler thinks or says is being held out as sacrosanct. The ruler—or the ruling party—everywhere in the country is deciding on what is right and what is not and bulldozing everyone else into conformity and obeisance. The private individual is not being allowed to stray from this political and majoritarian straight path either to the left or to the right. And this Orwellian authoritarianism, this penchant to re-create the country’s socio-polity on a unidimensional model is a malaise that afflicts rulers and parties of all hues. The mindset exhibited by Jayalalitha or by Banerjee before her—is no better or more forward-looking than the one motivating the words or actions of, say, Amit Shah in Bihar, the Sangh Parivar in Dadri or the Shiv Sena in Mumbai.

The bottom-line is this that the political culture of India at this time is characterized by an extreme intolerance of dissent and the insult to the spirit of democracy that it implies. Those who are in power are engaged in imposing their concept of a good society, their idea of ‘India’ on those over whom they wield their power. Those who are sitting on the margins of power might be waiting for their turn to try their own designs on the country and her hapless people. It is not for this commentator to analyze what the root cause of this vile culture of authoritarianism might be: political theorists or sociologists would be better suited to the task. But it does appear that pervasive politicization of all levels of the socio-polity could be one major reason behind this evil. Whether communal, or religious, or ideological, the basic cause of intolerance and authoritarianism, it would seem, is the might of the political party in the Indian political system. Perhaps, it is time we should think of replacing our system of government-formation and administration with one that would be characterized by much less linkages between the party and the administration—like it is in the political system of the UK. If the administrative apparatus could be made immune to party-pressures and the exigencies of populist politics—perhaps by forcing MPs and MLAs to resign from party memberships—political intolerance might be thwarted somewhat.

Writers, artists, historians, and others who have been protesting against the communal and religious intolerance that the RSS-influenced BJP has undeniably been evincing should not—would not, we hope—be blind to the broader, fundamental danger of intolerance and totalitarianism that seems to threaten the country at this time. The onus lies on them, the representatives of educated India, to prove that what Arun Jaitley has said in his recent blog is untrue: that leftists and centrists are not influenced themselves by the sort of intolerance and disrespect for plurality that the BJP is rightly being accused of.

True, Modi should understand that in order to realize his slogan of ‘Make in India’—in order to significantly advance in the World Bank’s ‘Ease of doing business’ rankings—he has to translate his words on ‘unity among diversity’ into action. Economics, if nothing else, should influence him into projecting a more tolerant, less communal public image: He would fail to deliver on his promise of development if he continues to soft-pedal on the issue of communalism. He has to finally decide if he would take an unambiguous and tough stand on the culture of communal hatred and majoritarianism that the RSS stands for—or would waste his chance to prove that he is indeed worth the trust India reposed in him a year back.

On the obverse, left-leaning, or centrally poised, artists and intellectuals should finally be able to accept the fact that the BJP was resoundingly voted to power—rather recently—by millions of Indians cutting across community, caste, gender and other sectoral barriers. While criticizing the BJP for its excesses they should guard against ideological animosity against the BJP or to Modi himself. After all, it would be in no Indian’s interest if the country gets branded as an intolerant, rabidly rightist, majoritarian one. For it is not! It would be best to trust the people of the country to reject intolerance in favour of pluralism and diversity, especially as assembly and municipal elections are going on at this precise juncture of time. All right-thinking people, ‘intellectuals’ or not, should protest and fight against majoritarian intolerance and its nasty expressions but without being waylaid by short-sighted political games—of the kind that the Bihar elections make the BJP and the Congress play against each other.

The publicity around the spurt in rapes across the country since December 2012 has damaged India’s image as a country committed to gender-equity and women’s rights. Now if political rivalry of a certain kind gets India a bad name as a communal and intolerant country that would be unfortunate. It would be unfortunate for Narendra Modi and Sonia Gandhi alike. It would be unfortunate for people like Narayana Murthy too. And, above all, it would be very unfortunate for you and me, the ordinary Indians.

Obama was right when he proclaimed, in his 2010 address to the Indian parliament, that India has succeeded not in spite of, but because of democracy. How far India has ‘succeeded’ and in what could form the subject of a learned debate. But that a pluralistic democracy has been at the core of the Indian story since independence can never be denied. A long tradition of pluralism and diversity going back to the deep past, and a constitutional framework committed to the ideals of democracy and secularism are one of the few things that India, still, can justly feel proud of. Governments, political parties, ‘intellectuals’, and ordinary citizens—everyone should take care not to let that pride take a hit because of blind political rivalries or dogged ideological animosities.

On the eve of the Congress’ protest march to Rashtrapati Bhavan one pins high hopes on the sagacious President of the country to intervene in the debate around the intolerance question with impartiality, wisdom and sanity. The workings of majoriatarian violence and high-handed use of political power should stop immediately, the mud-slinging between rival political parties should not continue to vitiate public discourse and, last but certainly not the least, the international image of Indian democracy should be saved from getting sullied beyond salvage.