For the first time, the BJP government is facing intense political pressure. Regardless of caste or religion, the student and youth movement has now grown into a formidable force. What began under the leadership of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) as a protest against the alleged NEET examination paper leak and demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan has attracted widespread support, not only among students and young people but across all sections of society.
The movement has not remained confined to the national capital, Delhi. As is often the nature of popular protests, it has spread across the country. From Ahmedabad to Surat, Patna to Hyderabad, Bengaluru to Jaipur, Dehradun to Guwahati, and Kolkata to Patna, spontaneous demonstrations have taken place.
It cannot be denied that the movement at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar has assumed historic significance. Many students and young protesters were left bleeding after what they described as the harsh and brutal action of the Delhi Police to disperse the demonstrations. The severity of the police crackdown drew criticism even from prominent public figures. Cricket legend Sachin Tendulkar, actors and actresses from the film industry, and musicians expressed solidarity with the protesting students and condemned the police action.
Opposition political parties, including the Congress, stood beside the students and supported what they called their legitimate movement. Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra personally visited the protest site, encouraging the demonstrators. Rahul Gandhi himself was reportedly subjected to police action, dragged away and taken into a police vehicle. It may be said that, for the first time, Rahul Gandhi physically joined the ranks of protesters, strengthening his political connection with grassroots movements. Ignoring the intimidating posture of the police, he actively participated in the protest.
Is this movement solely about the NEET examination paper leak? Is that the only issue around which the protests revolve? Certainly not. While every movement begins with a specific trigger, it often embodies a broader accumulation of public grievances. Unemployment, inflation, job losses, the growing difficulty of sustaining households, attempts to suppress democratic voices through stringent laws, industrial slowdown, inadequate action against major bank loan defaulters, and the many promises made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi before assuming office that remain unfulfilled – all these factors have contributed to the present outburst of public dissatisfaction.
This Gen Z-led movement undoubtedly presents a significant challenge to the Modi government. Consequently, the education minister Mr. Dharmendra Pradhan has resigned. The government transferred the secretary of the concerned ministry to another department.
How does the RSS view this movement? That is an important question. The RSS has merely criticised the aggressive conduct of the Delhi Police, but it has remained largely silent on the broader failures of the BJP-led UnionGovernment. Since the BJP functions under the ideological influence and organisational umbrella of the RSS, the RSS would continue to extend political support to the government.
Independent India has witnessed numerous political movements. Not all of them evolved into full-fledged mass movements, yet many of them profoundly influenced the country’s political trajectory. One movement often inspires another, eventually becoming a catalyst for political change. Some movements have failed, while others have achieved remarkable success.
One of the most significant political and social movements of the 1960s was the anti-Hindi language movement in Tamil Nadu. It emerged in response to the perceived attempt to impose Hindi as the sole official language of India. Under Article 343 of the Constitution, both English and Hindi were to remain official languages until 1965, after which Hindi was expected to become the principal official language.
This proposal sparked widespread resistance in Tamil Nadu. The DMK successfully transformed the language issue into a powerful political movement. The Dravidian movement had long opposed Brahminical dominance, and its ideological inspiration came from Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, one of the foremost social reformers and leaders of the anti-caste movement during India’s freedom struggle.
Inspired by Periyar’s ideals, the DMK strongly resisted what it viewed as the imposition of Hindi by the Hindi-speaking northern belt. The entire Tamil society rallied behind the movement. Tamil identity and the protection of the mother tongue became the central driving forces of the agitation, which soon developed into a genuine mass movement.
Eventually, the UnionGovernment retreated from its earlier position. In 1967, the Official Languages Act was amended, allowing both English and Hindi to continue indefinitely as official languages of the Union. The DMK emerged victorious, winning the 1967 Tamil Nadu Assembly election and replacing the Congress government. Since that electoral defeat, the Congress has never regained power in Tamil Nadu.
In 1974, Jayaprakash Narayan launched the movement known as ‘Sampoorna Kranti’ (Total Revolution), widely referred to as the JP Movement. It too assumed the character of a nationwide mass movement. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi responded with a series of controversial decisions, culminating in the declaration of Emergency in 1975. The Emergency ultimately proved politically disastrous. In the 1977 general election, the Congress government was defeated, the Janata Party came to power, and Morarji Desai became Prime Minister.
In West Bengal, the CPI(M)-led Left Front came to power in 1977 and remained in office for an uninterrupted 34 years. However, its long rule came to an end in 2011. The Singur and Nandigram movements, which centred on land acquisition for industrial projects, became the turning point that ultimately brought down the Left Front government. The Trinamool Congress assumed power, and Mamata Banerjee became Chief Minister of West Bengal.
In 2011, another major nationwide movement emerged in Delhi under the banner of India Against Corruption. It was led by Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan, Devendra Yadav and several other activists. The anti-corruption campaign gained further momentum in the aftermath of the horrific Nirbhaya gangrape case, although the movement’s primary focus remained the fight against corruption. The widespread public anger generated by this campaign significantly weakened the Congress-led UPA government and contributed to its eventual electoral defeat.
Today, a considerable section of the Indian public has become increasingly disillusioned with the Modi government over a range of issues. In this context, the movement led by the CJP has undoubtedly attracted widespread public attention. The present youth movement is not an isolated incident; rather, it reflects the accumulated frustration of millions of unemployed young Indians.
Importantly, the movement has not embraced violence or anarchy. It has largely remained within the framework of peaceful and democratic protest. Participants include people from diverse political, social and ideological backgrounds. Citizens belonging to different religious communities have extended solidarity by providing moral support, physical assistance and food supplies to the protesters gathered at Jantar Mantar.
This demonstrates that people of different faiths can unite for the larger national interest. Raising above communal divisions, they have not only joined the movement but have also endured police repression together. This represents one of the movement’s most significant achievements, particularly at a time when critics accused the BJP and the Sangh Parivar of sustaining their political influence through religious polarisation. According to those critics, such politics prevents people from uniting around the country’s fundamental socio-economic challenges.
The government is also perceived to enjoy the support of sections of the judiciary, parts of the media, segments of the bureaucracy and influential business groups.
Some intellectuals have questioned whether large crowds on the streets alone are sufficient to bring down a government. A government becomes politically vulnerable only when the institutions and groups that sustain it begin to distance themselves. If bureaucracy, coalition partners, influential business interests, sections of the media and elements within the security establishment start withdrawing their support, a political movement can truly become a transformative force capable of altering the balance of power.
The crucial question now is how far public loyalty towards the BJP government is beginning to weaken. Some intellectuals argue that a significant section of the Indian population, while continuing to believe in electoral democracy, has also become more accepting of a highly centralised political authority. The real challenge for any popular movement, therefore, is to demonstrate that authority alone cannot ensure good governance; it must also be accompanied by justice, fairness, integrity and administrative competence.
History shows that even authoritarian governments can fall when they fail to uphold these principles. The downfall of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini remains a reminder of this reality. More recently, the fall of the government in Bangladesh has once again illustrated that no administration is immune to sustained public discontent, although the nature and circumstances of that movement were different.
Another important question concerns the role of those above the age of 40. Have they remained indifferent to the ongoing student and youth movement, or are they also beginning to reconsider their support for the Modi government?
At present, however, the BJP continues to derive considerable strength from its ideology of religious and cultural nationalism. Identity-based politics and economic dissatisfaction have come to coexist in the minds of many citizens. This, perhaps, explains why the government continues to retain public support despite concerns over inflation, unemployment and other economic hardships. Many voters may remain dissatisfied with economic conditions while simultaneously supporting a leader whom they associate with religious and cultural revival. This contradiction represents one of the major political realities – and, arguably, one of the tragedies – of contemporary India.
What, then, lies ahead for the Modi government? A credible and united political alternative could eventually challenge the present dispensation. Yet any successful mass movement must remain firmly rooted in truth, democratic values and constitutional principles. It should encourage participation from people of every community, religion and social background.
The movement must also consistently emphasise that strengthening India’s democratic institutions is essential to safeguarding the nation’s long-term interests. This message needs to reach the broader public through sustained political education and effective mass communication.
Equally important is the articulation of a positive agenda – one that addresses the legitimate aspirations of the country’s youth and offers a convincing vision for the future. Those who assume leadership must enjoy public credibility and maintain lives that are beyond serious ethical question. Mass movements often require patience and perseverance; therefore, temporary setbacks should not become a cause for despair.
Strong coordination among participating organisations and allied groups is essential. The movement should also build constructive engagement with retired civil servants, members of the media, intellectuals and representatives of civil society. It must remain dynamic and responsive while ensuring that it does not provide the government with an opportunity or justification to suppress it.
Ultimately, the success of any democratic movement depends not merely on the size of the crowds it mobilises, but on its ability to unite diverse sections of society around a shared commitment to justice, accountability, democratic institutions and the public good. Only such a movement can bring about lasting political transformation.
[The writer is State President of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind West Bengal]