Opinion | Dimagi Naxalism: When Dissent Turns Into A Search For Violence And Disorder

A democracy must be able to distinguish between disagreement and the systematic glorification of destructive politics

Got Question about the News?

India must distinguish legitimate criticism from ideological politics that romanticises violence, excuses coercion, or undermines the constitutional order.

The phrase “Dimagi Naxal" has become politically charged. Still, it points towards an important question that India can no longer afford to avoid: when does legitimate dissent cross the line into an ideological justification of violence, disorder and institutional paralysis?

Use These Handheld Garment Steamers for Quick Wrinkle Removal

Unrest Spirals In Balochistan As Separatists Mark Pakistan’s Independence Day As ‘Black Day’ | Exclusive Details

Karnataka’s RSS Test: Why The Sangh Is Choosing Not To Take Political Bait Over New Bill

Balochistan Burns On Pakistan’s I-Day: ‘Black Day’ Protests, Attacks Rock Province | Exclusive

The idea of “Dimagi Naxalism" should be understood as a mindset that continues to search for conflict and disruption even after armed Left-wing extremism has been substantially weakened. The argument deserves serious consideration, not because every critic of the government should be placed in the same category, but because a democracy must be able to distinguish between disagreement and the systematic glorification of destructive politics.

India’s experience with Naxalism demonstrates the distinction clearly. Armed insurgency was never merely an alternative political opinion. It involved violence, intimidation, attacks on security personnel and the rejection of India’s constitutional framework. The decline of extremist violence in several regions is, therefore, a significant achievement. But the disappearance or weakening of an armed movement does not automatically eliminate the ideas that once provided it with justification.

That is where the phrase “Dimagi Naxalism" becomes relevant, but also where it must be used carefully.

Calling every opponent of a government “Naxal" would be intellectually lazy and politically dangerous. Democracies need opposition. Governments must be questioned. Policies must be criticised.........

© News18