Enlightened debates on topics of public interest are an essential part of any vibrant democracy. We are seeing such debates on a variety of topics - now, more than ever.
However, there is a disturbing tendency evolving. When shouting matches and dramatic rhetoric dominate, most intellectuals quietly withdraw. Clearly, when two intelligent people can argue any topic ad infinitum, how many people are willing to argue until exhaustion?
Yet, this is only one-half of the problem. Most reasonable opponents of UID are content to let others win their battle for them.These others include those who don't fully understand the issues at hand; those with vested interests and those with narrow political agendas. That, is a serious problem (that intellectuals, even if passively, are siding with the others).
Two reasonable anti-UID arguments I've heard so far are:
- Why can't NPR do the enrolments in one step? Why two separate projects?
- Is Aadhaar cost-effective for what it is setting out to do?
Just because there is a reasonable argument to be had, it doesn't mean that it is automatically right. It is important to tone down the rhetoric. To climb down from positions; to approach the problem(s) with open minds; and to engage in that debate. To accept a let us agree to disagree approach. As opposed to an approach that says I will not rest until you and your opinion are ground to dust. The former permits freedom of expression and encourages diverse opinions to emerge. The latter, doesn't.
Are you taking the latter route? Do you realize that if you sacrifice reason to be extinguished at the altar of win vs lose, then the alarmists win. It will be your turn next.
If you are one such person, then I ask that while you state your opposition to the UID project, you also denounce the illogic and rhetoric. Not implicitly promote it - just so that you can win.
My friends and I started the ThinkUID website, to express our views. To express support to the UID project, based on our years of thinking and knowledge gathered in relevant areas. To rebut some of the rhetoric we hear. To bring reason to the fore. If your opinions differ, we are fine with that. Not to fight until only person is left standing.
This clarity is important to us. Especially as we are going to step up our campaign to support UID. To engage more people whose opinions differ from ours. With respect, not disdain.
Sas3, When I sense that discussion goes nowhere because of 'death-by-argument', I cut it with 'you got the right to be wrong; but just don't abuse it'. Well, it doesn't stop the argument though.
ReplyDeleteBTW, thinkUID site is too cluttered with pop-ups; little cleaner site mite be of easy to navigate.