In an open conversation with the renowned historian Siddharth Varadarajan, Romila Thapar discussed the role of media and the intellectuality of the public. She also spoke on the position of nationalism in contemporary Indian politics. While talking on public intellectuality, she stated that she had been disturbed like all the other renowned figures and faced criticism because of the condition of the country. She also accepted that the election of Trump was, of course, an unforeseen morning bell which brings a couple of questions which requires being answered. She boldly questioned, ‘why are we losing the sense of critical inquiry that we always appreciated?’ She also accepted that the notion of rational inquiry is analogous to the middle class. This arises primarily due to the traditional way of thoughts and a dissent.
It can be admitted that the dissent didn’t occur as vocal as they thought it would be and conclusively added doubt that there might be a decline of critical inquiry. According to her, it raises fingers to the structure of democracy and the institution. She asserts to rethink the actuality and the basis on which the systems and the structure should be established. Indian media surround themselves with elections and representation and the way they represent opinion and people, the expression of people’s ideas and the question regarding majoritarianism and so on.
This is not sufficient to build an active media, and the journalists should go beyond all these shared factors and consider the matter of all these achieving power based on the minority votes. Among this, one-third of the ballot is hardly a majority vote, and the method works in a way that the media wins the power. She also claims that Trump’s election and selection are not something overwhelming. Thapar wants to convey the necessity of people to talk accurate, and democracy defines these common institutions.
To make them effective, more representative and allowing people to take part to determine a base. To her, the one person one vote has overplayed in the real sense of the term. She doesn’t proclaim to eliminate the process of selection but to strengthen the procedure to make it more efficient to encourage the people of the country to take the decision of voting accurately. Regarding this matter, she speaks that, ‘’ I don’t like the system. I’m not interested. I won’t vote”.
About America, she comments that the country is not only an accurate evidence of a democratic system but also is an acutely educated society by all its accounts. She thinks that we should consider the content of education more seriously than before. This factor not only applies to the country of America but India as well. Indian media is lurking in the absurdity with a lack of intellectual power and proper education. It is not easy to have intelligent debates by the people existing in the democracy. This is crucial in the part of India that unlike America, they should evolve the method of education and give the people the right information that they deserve to know.