The on-going farmer’s agitation and the role of the Government of India, there is no hesitation to say that there exists a communication gap which must be removed through a dialogue with open minds. We should know that there is a difference between reasoning and having reasons, that is to say, between arguing for a particular course of action and rationalizing a particular course of action. The farmers are not speaking from a position of reason, but future consequences of the three Acts to overcome their anxieties. They are confused.  The decision-making by the Government can, at times, be “too close” to the situation and because of that fact,  is unable to make a good decision or even be able to properly evaluate the situation.

We must show humility and self-critical understanding to acknowledge that the viewpoint of the Government or farmers might be flawed, and it is this issue that needs to be actually illustrated by the farmers in the dialogue with the government.  The farmers are actually less concerned with issues of comprehensive outcomes. The lessons articulated here are connected with impartiality and self-criticalness of the Government.

Farmers are not fools if the government is clever. The government should avoid false promises to the farmers.