Solution

Yes, to some extent movements and protests in country strengthen democracy to have mixed reactions both for and against:

Arguments for:

1. Anti-arrack movement, Chipko movement, NBA etc., rectified some problems to be seen as integral part of democratic politics.

2. These movements ensured participation and representation from diverse groups to reduce possibility of deep social conflicts in democracy.

3. These movements broadened the idea of participation in Indian democrac i. e., Anti-arrack movement and Dalit Panthers.

Arguments against:

1. Collective actions, rallies, strikes, disrupt the functioning of a democracy and create a delay in decision making.

2. Routine functioning of democracy did not have enough space for the voices of these social groups.

3. It is possible to ignore demand of these movements with the presentation to be represented by one section of society only.

4. Political parties do not seem to be taking up issues of marginal social groups.

5. The relationship between popular movements and political parties has grown weaker over the years creating a vacuum in politics.

Hence, we may conclude that movements are not only about collective assertions or rallies or protest, but they also involve a gradual process of coming together of people with similar problems, demand and expectations.