Delhi-NCR has suffered enough during the campaign against the three farm laws; redux shouldn’t be allowed
Will the people of Delhi have to suffer another period of farmers’ stir? The Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM), which is a federation of farmers’ organisations, recommenced its 75-hour sit-in at Lakhimpur Kheri in Uttar Pradesh from Thursday. They demand, among other things, the removal of Union Minister Ajay Kumar Mishra, who represents Lakhimpur Kheri in the Lok Sabha, and a law guaranteeing minimum support price (MSP). Mishra’s son Ashish is accused of an incident on October 3, 2021, in which eight persons, including four farmers and a journalist, were killed. The SMK now plans a protest at Jantar Mantar. Delhi Police has beefed up security at the Singhu and Ghazipur borders. The SKM has already rejected the Narendra Modi government’s committee on MSP. It had earlier successfully fought against the three farm laws which were brought to reform the farm sector. The campaign against the laws continued for over a year, resulting in huge problems for the people of Delhi and the adjoining cities. Unbothered about the inconvenience and misery of the people adversely affected in Delhi-NCR, farm leaders continued their stir; they practically held the people in this region to ransom. On the face of it, theirs was a democratic protest; in reality, however, it was a prolonged sit-in, which meant an equally prolonged torture for the millions of commuters, goods suppliers, etc.
The biggest irony was that the three laws were the most pro-farmer pieces of legislation ever enacted in Independent India. They had a lot of enabling provisions—that is, enabling farmers. For instance, the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act intended to remove stock limits and movement restrictions on essential commodities like food-grains, pulses, edible oils, and onions; the restrictions could be imposed only in extraordinary situations like war and famine. A more pro-farmer law is impossible to conceive, but it was depicted as anti-farmer; it was said that it was brought because the government wanted to help some businesspersons. A photograph, showing silos owned by an industrial house, went viral. See the cronies are already prepared to reap the windfall gains, the protesters and their supporters told the media. Fact-check by various media houses, however, proved that the silos were over 10 years old, but the agitation had a very high emotional quotient. Sentimentalism, which is the bane of India’s public discourse, transformed the farmer into the annadata. Some news channels are especially prone to cheap sentimentalism; the annadata phraseology drove out facts and reason from political debate. Left-liberals joined in the fun. Normally, these guys are not very favourably disposed towards the rural gentry—which was spearheading the campaign—but at that time our intellectuals started depicting them as the representatives of Bharat (in contradistinction with India), of ‘real India,’ as the salt of the earth, and so on. Withdrawal of the three laws emboldened the stir leaders. They, however, should not be allowed to blockade Delhi this time.