I have strong reservations whenever the government aggressively indulges and postulates in pedagogy as to what should be drunk or eaten or for that matter what should or not be viewed inside the four walls of my living comforts. Saner voice says that choice should be better left to the discretion of individual(s) who knows what one needs to go about espousing or practicing within the confines of four walls. Sadly though, overzealous governments invariably tweaks implicit harmony through unsolicited curbs that are aimed at upsetting the very fabric of freedom of choice concurred by the law of the land.
Make no mistake; posturing always tantamount to appeasing one or the other group / verticals of the society – marginalized or well-off. More often than not the target is to consolidate vote bank at the cost of fiscal jurisprudence where revenue generation through sale of liquor is phenomenal. Past experiences amply demonstrate that prohibition assumes superfluous connotation rather than serve the actual purpose. Flourishing illicit trade, recurring hooch tragedies, unholy nexus, bootlegging is proof enough of the folly of prohibition gone haywire.
Apart from economic considerations, prohibition is also one such anachronistic measure which not only places unsavory restrictions on what I consume – whether good or bad – but defeats the very purpose of portraying us as a fast developing modern nation. Agreed, nobody disputes the fact that the government has humungous responsibilities to ensure general well-being and sound health of the society. However, forcefully imposing restrictions where majority viewpoint is against any measures considered antiquated deserves definite no further thrust and if required, quashing forthright.
Mature democracies and its societies intrinsically comprehends how not to treat its citizens with kid gloves. Rather than forcefully coming down on the society, I strongly believe timely advisories and precautions extolling the hazardous ramifications of excessive abuse of liquor of all hues – including illicitly produced – should suffice. There are umpteen agencies / mechanisms / Medias precisely meant to disseminate information related to the matter across length and breadth of the country using different platforms. Conversely, government donning the garb of moral vigilant advising on personal preferences is neither welcome nor advisable. This goes against the tenet of sustaining vibrant democratic structure of the nation.
I wish all people entrusted to carry forward robust heritage of democracy to root for preserving the rights of individual(s) without resorting to forceful intrusion. Right from politicians / leaders / law makers / legal luminaries / civil society representatives to well-meaning organizations are expected to essay distinct role to safeguard freedom of choice. This being the case, why then let some section of society – especially our own peoples’ representatives – garner undue traction in disturbing the smooth sailing by propagating prohibition of all things? Move on powers-that-be! Give us free not stifling society to make life pleasant.
