THIS refers to the letter ‘Are sit-ins democratic?’ (Jan 29). Prof Sharif Al Mujahid has made a strong case that sit-ins at multiple places at the same time, and others at one place for long periods do cause lot of inconvenience to the people.

Such sit-ins prevent people from performing their routine or planned functions, hitting hardest daily wage earners.

However, it would seem that he has approached the issue from a very narrow angle. He has completely ignored the motivation behind this form of protest.

Come to think of it, even our assemblies, and the governments that emerge from them, are not much more than glorified sit-ins.

Additionally, most of the individuals who enter and squat there, for up to five years at a time, manage to sneak in usually through the use of dubious means.

By their near-absolute power and a long tenure, such sit-ins have a potential for doing, and actually do, much greater harm to the interests of the country and the people.

In fact, they have already brought the country to the verge of total collapse.

So, if the smaller, short-duration and less harmful sit-ins staged by protesters can manage to topple the bigger, long-lasting sit-ins, causing colossal damage, one could say that they are worth it.

I think sit-ins should be viewed as a lesser evil — and the only means available to the suffering masses to rid the country of the much bigger and near-perpetual evil.

S. R. H. Hashmi

Karachi

Published in Dawn, January 31st, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play