Do movements and protests in a country strengthen democracy? Justify your answer with examples.

Yes, to some extent movements and protests in country strengthen democracy to have mixed reactions both for and against: 

Arguments for: 

1. Anti-arrack movement, Chipko movement, NBA etc., rectified some problems to be seen as an integral part of democratic politics. 

2. These movements ensured participation and representation from diverse groups to reduce the possibility of deep social conflicts in democracy. 

3. These movements broadened the idea of participation in Indian democratic i. e., Anti-arrack movement and Dalit Panthers. 

Arguments against: 

1. Collective actions, rallies, strikes, disrupt the functioning of a democracy and create a delay in decision making. 

2. Routine functioning of democracy did not have enough space for the voices of these social groups. 

3. It is possible to ignore the demand of these movements with the presentation to be represented by one section of society only. 

4. Political parties do not seem to be taking up issues of marginal social groups. 

5. The relationship between popular movements and political parties has grown weaker over the years creating a vacuum in politics. 

Hence, we may conclude that movements are not only about collective assertions or rallies or protest, but they also involve a gradual process of coming together of people with similar problems, demand, and expectations.

Yes, to some extent the movements and protests do strengthen a country’s democracy but it does have both for and against arguments,

which are as follows:

Arguments in favour:

i. Some movements do resolve some problems at a democratic level such as – Chipko movement, Anti-arrack movement, etc.

ii. These movements had representations from various social groups, which avoided any social conflict on a democratic level.

iii. It gave a broader participation of groups in society – Dalit Panthers, anti-arrack movement, etc.

Arguments against:

i. These movements delay the decision making process and disrupt the functioning of the democracy.

ii. The issues of marginal groups are not taken by the political parties.

iii. With time, a gap has got created between political parties and movements, resulting in a weaker relationship between them.