On 5 March 2025, one hundred days passed since Jagjit Singh Dallewal began his protest fast. Discussions continue on issues such as the Minimum Support Price (MSP) for crops, other demands put forth under the aegis of the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (non-political) and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, negotiations with the government, and coordination with the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM). Dallewal’s protest fast, too, continues. But if it stretches on much longer, there is a serious fear that it may turn into a maran vrat (fast unto death).
As a result of the farmers' protest at Delhi's Singhu border in 2020–21, the government withdrew the three agricultural laws. Since then, the yaksha prashn remains: How can the country’s vast agricultural sector survive the rapidly increasing corporatization of education, healthcare, and other service sectors, including public sector enterprises? Economists have yet to question the private capital being worshipped in corporate India—and how much of that capital is looted public wealth. It is hoped that economists like Professor Arun Kumar, who has extensively explained the scale of black money in the Indian economy, will also address this central issue. Whatever the case, a decisive point in the clash between farmers and corporate powers does not appear imminent.
However, regarding Jagjit Singh Dallewal's fast, which has now surpassed 100 days, it can be said with certainty that it has become a landmark in the history of nonviolent resistance against injustice. The significance of this fast increases when we consider that it has restored the credibility, dignity, and strength of protest fasts. I do not wish to mention here those fasts that are staged for self-promotion. Instead, I refer to the observation made by Abhimanyu Kohar, convener of the protest ongoing for over a year at the Khanauri border, who points out that while the media covered Anna Hazare’s 13-day fast in 2011 around the clock, they have devoted barely a fraction of that attention to Jagjit Singh Dallewal's long and determined fast.
In fact, the comparison is flawed from the outset. The truth was evident even then that Anna Hazare fasted for the media. The forces involved in that episode and their intentions were no secret. Its outcome was along expected lines: India’s national and social life fell further under the grip of the corporate-communal nexus.
Seriousness, dignity, and humility have always been maintained in Jagjit Singh Dallewal's satyagraha fast. Dallewal and the farmer leaders and supporters participating in the movement have refrained from turning the fasting site into a platform for speeches. This discipline has upheld the belief that the long-cherished value of “weighing one's words” has not been lost entirely in today’s cacophony. Needless to say, Jagjit Singh Dallewal prepared himself for this fast. Before beginning it, he completed certain worldly duties in order to detach himself. At the time, even some of his close colleagues did not fully realize that he was embarking on a maran vrat.
With Dallewal’s fast, there has indeed been a small revolution in the nonviolent mode of resistance—a single individual standing fearlessly against injustice through satyagraha, civil disobedience, and fasting. Mohandas Gandhi employed this method in India’s freedom movement, drawing inspiration from global traditions. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia, describing Gandhi's nonviolent action as “the most revolutionary core of his teachings,” writes:
“The greatest revolution of our time is, therefore, a procedural revolution: removal of injustice through a mode of action characterized by justice. The question here is not so much the content of justice as the method to achieve it. Constitutional and orderly processes are often not enough. They are then transgressed by the use of weapons. In order that this should not happen, and that man should not ever get thrown around between ballot and bullet, this procedural revolution of civil disobedience has emerged. At the head of all revolutions of our time stands this revolution of satyagraha against weapons...”
(Marx, Gandhi, and Socialism, pp. xxxi–xxxii)
It is now accepted common sense that the three agricultural laws withdrawn by the government will eventually be reintroduced, in the same or an altered form. The government itself said, “The laws are being withdrawn, not repealed.” This outcome is inevitable due to the neoliberal consensus prevailing among the political and intellectual elite of the country. But this does not lessen the need for resistance, nor diminish its value. As long as even a single citizen of this country stands opposed to corporatization and in favor of freedom, self-reliance, and sovereignty, the need for resistance will remain.
Governments can fire bullets. They can rig elections. But citizens who disagree with government decisions have the option to offer resistance—even at the risk of their lives. This satyagraha fast by Jagjit Singh Dallewal is an open, nonviolent rebellion by him and his fellow farmers against the corporate dictates of the government. Lohia, at the end of his above statement, lamented that despite its moral value and righteousness, the nonviolent mode of resistance had “made only a faltering appearance to date.”
The protest fast and resistance at Khanauri border offer reassurance against this concern; they have resurrected the nonviolent mode of protest against injustice and infused new faith in its credibility, dignity, and strength.
---
The writer, associated with the socialist movement, is a former teacher at Delhi University and a former fellow of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla
Comments