The Government's Case: Why They Said the Laws Would Help

Kissan Andolan — The Complete Story · Part 4 of 12 · by Lovepreet Singh

Now I'm going to do something that may surprise you. I'm going to argue for the farm laws — as strongly and honestly as the government and its supporters did. Not because I'm taking a side, but because you cannot judge a fight fairly until you've heard the best version of each side.

In this part

• The big picture: a system stuck in the past
• Argument 1: Freedom to sell anywhere
• Argument 2: Cut out the middleman
• Argument 3: The old system only helps a lucky few
• Argument 4: A guaranteed buyer before you even plant
• Argument 5: Money to fix the rot
• Argument 6: "We're only adding a choice — MSP and mandis stay"
• Argument 7: This wasn't sudden, or even one party's idea
• The government's read on the protest
• An honest scorecard
• Where we go next

Now I'm going to do something that may surprise you. I'm going to argue for the farm laws — as strongly and honestly as the government and its supporters did. Not because I'm taking a side, but because you cannot judge a fight fairly until you've heard the best version of each side. A fair-play promise This part is the government's strongest, most honest case , argued the way its smartest supporters argued it. It is their case, not my verdict. Every point here has a powerful answer from the farmers — and that answer is Part 5 . Read both before you decide anything. 1 The big picture: a system stuck in the past Start with how reformers see Indian farming. To them, it is a sector frozen in time: over-regulated, starved of investment, and choked by middlemen. Half the country works in it, yet it produces less than a fifth of the nation's income (remember Part 1). Something is clearly broken…

Read the full part