Essay: May 2025 UPSC Current Affairs | UPSC Mains Essay Preparation PDF Download

You Cannot Shake Hands with a Clenched Fist

In a world increasingly shaped by complex divisions: political, ethnic, economic, or ideological, Indira Gandhi’s statement, “You cannot shake hands with a clenched fist,” remains strikingly relevant. The metaphor represents a universal truth: sustainable peace cannot emerge from hostility. This essay will examine historical precedents, contemporary challenges, and policy-driven solutions to argue that dialogue is indispensable for lasting peace.  
At its core, the metaphor speaks to the emotional and psychological barriers to peace. A clenched fist reflects fear, anger, and defensiveness; traits that often escalate rather than resolve conflict. By contrast, the gesture of a handshake implies mutual recognition and a desire to coexist. In both personal and political arenas, real progress begins only when parties choose communication over coercion. Such psychological barriers manifest as geopolitical conflicts, underscoring the urgency of diplomatic engagement, as history repeatedly demonstrates. 
History provides numerous instances where diplomacy played a decisive role in averting large-scale disasters. During the Cold War, despite intense ideological divisions, diplomacy played a vital role in maintaining a balance of power. The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, resolved through direct communication between Washington and Moscow, is frequently cited as a moment when dialogue triumphed over destruction. Likewise, the post-World War II formation of multilateral institutions like the United Nations and the European Union reflected a collective recognition of the necessity for rules-based international cooperation. More recently, the Iran Nuclear Deal (2015) showcased the potential, albeit fragile, of multilateral diplomacy to curb proliferation. Agreements such as the Paris Climate Accord, though often imperfect or critiqued,  institutionalize dialogue, creating platforms for incremental progress.  
While the ideals of diplomacy and cooperation are widely supported in principle, real-world applications are fraught with difficulty. Historical grievances, asymmetrical power dynamics, and political opportunism often obstruct genuine negotiation. The ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine illustrates how entrenched distrust, competing historical narratives, and cycles of violence undermine diplomatic efforts. Despite repeated international initiatives, a durable peace remains elusive. In another instance, the 2021 withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan exposed the limitations of prolonged military engagement without parallel political reconciliation. The eventual negotiations, though contentious, reaffirm that even adversaries must eventually embrace dialogue. 
India offers a particularly rich context for exploring the balance between coercion and cooperation. As a pluralistic democracy with immense diversity, the Indian state has often relied on negotiation and constitutional mechanisms to manage differences. Yet, the country has also experienced significant internal conflicts where diplomacy was either delayed or sidelined. India’s success in integrating over 500 princely states post-independence was not just a feat of administrative reorganization but also a product of diplomatic finesse. Figures like Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel used a mix of persuasion, legal arrangements, and, where necessary, force to bring diverse regions under a common constitutional umbrella. While Hyderabad required military intervention (Operation Polo), Mysore’s accession via diplomacy preserved regional trust. With regards to prolonged issues which need diplomatic deliberation, the Northeast has long been marked by ethnic assertions and insurgent movements. For decades, the government adopted security-led responses. However, over time, dialogue became central. The Shillong Accord (1975) and the ongoing Naga peace talks are notable for attempting negotiated solutions. While not without setbacks, these efforts show that engagement, though slow, offers pathways to stability. 
India’s decentralized governance model especially after the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments has created formal mechanisms for conflict resolution at the village and municipal levels. For instance, Gram Sabhas in Kerala have mediated land and water disputes, while municipal ward committees in Bengaluru have facilitated community dialogues over infrastructure issues. In states like Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, local bodies have helped defuse communal tensions through inclusive decision-making. These mechanisms enhance social cohesion by fostering dialogue, accountability, and participatory governance in multi-ethnic and multi-religious settings. 
Even with institutions in place, diplomacy often falters due to factors like mistrust, imbalance of power, populist politics, lack of institutional support and cooperation, and autocratic tendencies. Historical wounds, such as those from Partition, communal violence, or caste oppression, continue to hinder reconciliation. Triggers of past incidents act as catalysts for reinforcing a lack of trust, thus distancing both parties involved further into hostile behaviours and practices. Dominant groups may resist dialogue, perceiving it as a concession rather than a strength. They also might try to use their dominance in terms of economic, military, or political strengths to weaken the opposing group, creating an imbalance of power. For example, China’s Belt and Road Initiative leverages economic clout to sway negotiations, often sidelining smaller nations’ interests. Populist politics has become another contributor to complicating national and international issues instead of solving them diplomatically. These leaders thrive on polarizing narratives that often undermine diplomacy by framing it as weakness. Where legal and bureaucratic structures are weak, even well-intentioned negotiations can collapse. Institutional structures need pillars of cooperation and unity to implement and initiate diplomatic reconciliations successfully.  
In India, for example, inter-community tensions, whether between Hindus and Muslims, upper castes and Dalits, or locals and migrants, persist partly because institutional mechanisms for trust-building are underdeveloped or applied inconsistently. To move from a clenched fist to actionable peace, several remedial policies and steps, like educational and political inclusivity, are essential.  India has implemented several policies that reflect the principles of dialogue, inclusion, and cooperative governance. In education, the National Education Policy 2020 promotes critical thinking, experiential learning, and civic responsibility. By integrating empathy training in curricula, the NEP cultivates future leaders inclined toward collaborative problem-solving. Programs like SEWA (Self-Employed Women’s Association) and NCERT’s peace education modules strengthen empathy, dialogue, and conflict resolution skills and cultivate a culture of understanding and peaceful coexistence.  
To strengthen federalism, the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments empowered local governments, while the Sixth Schedule granted autonomy to tribal regions. Financial devolution through the Finance Commission further supports regional governance. Inclusivity is advanced through reservation policies for SCs, STs, OBCs, and women, especially in local bodies. Schemes like Stand Up India and community radio promote marginalized voices in entrepreneurship and media. Judicial representation remains a critical area for reform. Visionary leadership is seen in efforts like the Naga peace talks, Punjab and Mizoram accords, and Vajpayee’s “Insaniyat, Jamhooriyat, Kashmiriyat” doctrine, emphasizing dialogue over coercion. Institutional reforms like the RTI Act, 2005, and Lokpal enhance transparency and civic engagement. These initiatives show that building peace and justice in India requires consistent investment in education, decentralization, inclusive politics, and leadership rooted in empathy and dialogue. 
Indira Gandhi’s words are not a call for pacifism but a recognition of practical necessity. The clenched fist may command attention, but it rarely earns respect or delivers lasting outcomes. Whether navigating international disputes or internal disagreements, the logic of diplomacy remains the same: no solution is sustainable unless all parties feel heard, respected, and included.  To address emerging threats like climate migration, India must institutionalize dialogue in multilateral forums, leveraging its pluralistic heritage to model inclusive diplomacy. It is a strategy, a principle, and a commitment to listen, to negotiate, and to build peace one conversation at a time.

How Social Media Defines Self-Worth

The recent sudden death of a social media influencer who succumbed to depression after her follower count plummeted starkly is testimony to a modern paradox. Armed with a law degree, she had options, yet her identity and ultimately, her sense of worth, remained shackled to the volatile metrics of online validation. Her tragic choice to end her life speaks not just to personal despair, but to a societal epidemic where algorithms dictate dignity. As a clinical psychologist observes, “We’ve built a world that conflates visibility with value, applause with authenticity. In chasing the approval of strangers, we risk erasing ourselves.” This influencer’s story is no isolated incident; it is a chilling reflection of how platforms designed to connect us are quietly corroding the foundations of selfhood. 
The influencer's story is a harrowing microcosm of this crisis. In today’s digital landscape, where individuals increasingly equate their value to their social media presence, her struggle mirrors a generation’s silent battle. A 2023 NIMHANS study underscores this reality: 30% of urban Indian teens report anxiety linked to social media addiction, trapped in cycles of counting likes and curating flawless personas. Thus, this essay examines social media’s dual role in shaping self-worth, its capacity to empower and marginalize, and advocates for balanced, conscious engagement. 
The roots of social media have branched dramatically over the past two decades, fundamentally reshaping how individuals connect, express themselves, and perceive self-worth. Initially, global platforms like Friendster (2002) and MySpace (2003) offered basic tools for digital interaction: users could list interests, customize profiles, and maintain friend lists. In India, Orkut, launched in 2004, quickly became the dominant platform, particularly among urban youth. Its scrapbook feature and community pages made it a cultural phenomenon, serving as many Indians' first introduction to online social networking. 
Subsequently, the global launch of Facebook in 2004 redefined digital identity by encouraging users to present real names, photographs, and life events. In India, Facebook gradually overtook Orkut by the early 2010s, aligning more with the shift toward curated digital personas. Over time, features like “likes,” “comments,” and “shares” transformed user behavior across both contexts, from casual sharing to competitive self-presentation. Instagram (2010) and Twitter (2006), with their emphasis on visuals and brevity, further intensified this transformation, both globally and in India. 
In recent years, technological advancements such as affordable smartphones, cheaper data (a major factor in India post-2016), and algorithm-driven content have made social media omnipresent. The rise of influencer culture, viral content, and monetized engagement reflects a global trend but also finds strong resonance in India’s youth-driven, mobile-first digital ecosystem. This shift from social networking to social performance has contributed to rising mental health concerns.  
In the current era, social media profoundly affects how people, especially youth, assess themselves. The constant exposure to others’ lives leads to habitual comparison, often resulting in diminished self-esteem and mental distress. 
Research shows that excessive use of social media correlates with heightened anxiety, body dissatisfaction, and depression among teens and young adults. A National Institutes of Health (NIH) study found that excessive social media use can lead to anxiety, body dissatisfaction, and depression in teens and young adults. The use of visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat is linked to negative perceptions of physical appearance and increased interest in cosmetic surgery, particularly among females. The curated perfection often portrayed online sets unrealistic standards, making users feel inadequate and anxious about their lives. These issues extend beyond individuals and impact societal well-being, as mental health struggles put pressure on families, schools, and healthcare systems. 
Social media algorithms are designed to show users more of what they already engage with, reinforcing dominant trends and aesthetics while marginalising diverse voices and appearances that don't fit popular norms. This digital echo chamber limits inclusion and narrows the definition of beauty, success, and identity. Additionally, social media equates visibility with value, which poses a troubling shift for personal identity and self-worth. Moreover, algorithm bias tends to prioritise content that is sensational, polarising, or superficial. In this environment, sensational content, often emotionally charged, polarizing, or misleading, tends to gain disproportionate visibility, as algorithms prioritise engagement over nuance. This distorts public discourse by rewarding outrage over reason, eroding the space for meaningful, fact-based conversations. For example, India banned TikTok in 2020, citing data privacy and national security, which stemmed from worries about the app's impact on youth mental health, including addiction and exposure to harmful content. Remedial measures like the Indian Mental Healthcare Act of 2017 focus on the protection of rights for mental illnesses born owing to excessive screen time and social media use, strengthening and rectifying young people’s perspectives about social media and self-worth. 
Validation-seeking behaviour is another concern. Many users post content not out of a genuine desire to express themselves but to receive positive feedback. This reliance on external approval can diminish internal confidence and create a fluctuating sense of self that depends heavily on public engagement. Online harassment also takes a toll on the confidence and self-worth of the user. When personal worth is tied to online identity, cyberbullying and negative interactions can have devastating emotional consequences. A recent example is the targeted online abuse faced by India’s Deputy National Security Advisor, which highlights how even high-ranking public officials are not immune to digital vilification. Such incidents emphasise the need to establish stronger cyber governance, accountability mechanisms, and mental health safeguards in the digital space. 
Despite its downsides, social media has empowered millions. For marginalised groups, this visibility can be transformational. Movements such as #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter highlight how online platforms can legitimise under-represented voices and promote social change. In India, campaigns like #DalitWomenFight and farmers’ rights have gained momentum and impact owing to social media. These spaces offer support, validation, and solidarity that many people lack in their offline environments. Professionally, social media enables content creators, entrepreneurs, and freelancers to showcase their skills and build brands. Curating a social media presence can be seen as an exploration of values and personal identity, a form of modern-day journaling or artistic expression.  
For many, online platforms offer opportunities to achieve financial independence and reach audiences far beyond traditional geographic or cultural boundaries. In India, this digital empowerment is further supported by initiatives, such as Meta’s partnership with the Open Network for Digital Commerce (ONDC), which aims to democratise e-commerce access for small businesses and local sellers by integrating them into a unified digital ecosystem. Additionally, the process of creating digital content can spark self-reflection and creativity while reinforcing self-awareness and identity building.  
Nonetheless, the drawbacks of social media in terms of self-worth are considerable. Central among them is the relentless culture of comparison. Users often view others’ curated lives as benchmarks, leading to feelings of failure or inadequacy. The compulsion to relive past moments via Facebook or chase viral trends erodes authentic living. 
As awareness of these issues grows, there are signs of progress toward a more mindful and healthy relationship with social media. Public discourse around digital wellness is growing, with users, educators, and policymakers emphasising intentional and balanced engagement. Tech platforms are starting to respond. Features like hidden counts, screentime tracking, and mental health prompts are becoming more common. Some platforms are exploring new algorithmic models that prioritise quality interactions over viral content. Education is another key factor. Media literacy programs, especially those targeted at youth, can teach users to critically assess digital content, understand the artificial nature of online personas, and maintain self-worth independent of social media validation. 
In addition, alternative platforms promoting authenticity, slow content, and real conversations are gaining popularity. These digital spaces aim to reduce the pressure to perform and instead foster deeper, more meaningful connections. On a broader scale, the concept of digital identity continues to evolve. Emerging technologies like virtual reality and the metaverse may expand how people express themselves online. While these tools pose new challenges in terms of authenticity, they also provide opportunities for creativity, experimentation, and personal growth. 
India promotes healthy social media use through initiatives like the IT Rules 2021, the Digital India programme, and the Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. Educational efforts include school cyber safety curricula and campaigns like ‘We Think Digital,’ which encourage digital literacy, responsible online behaviour, and protection against cyberbullying and misinformation. Social media companies, too, are under increasing scrutiny to adopt ethical design practices. Advocates are pushing for accountability in content moderation, algorithm transparency, and data ethics, such that it could help foster healthier digital environments. 
Media literacy is vital for youth and society as it empowers individuals to critically evaluate content, recognize misinformation, and navigate digital platforms responsibly. It ensures informed decision-making, protects against manipulation, and promotes respectful online engagement, which are crucial skills in an era dominated by rapid information flow and social media influence. 
Social media’s influence on self-worth is undeniable, but not necessarily inevitable. It is a tool that reflects and amplifies human tendencies, for better or for worse. How we engage with it and how consciously we use it determines if it uplifts or undermines us. Rather than disengaging entirely, the solution lies in cultivating a healthier digital culture. Governance, education, and civil society play key roles in fostering healthy digital engagement by developing critical awareness, responsible online behaviour, and setting and encouraging self-development.  
The first step to that change begins within us. In crossing the complicated terrain between social media presence and personal identity, balance is essential. Social media may play a role in how we see ourselves, but it does not have to dictate our value. By reclaiming self-worth from metrics and media, we take an important step toward more grounded, fulfilling lives, both on and offline. 

The Evolution of Democracy in the 21st Century

Democracy in the 21st century is undergoing significant transformation, marked by both erosion and renewal. Many countries are witnessing democratic backsliding, where elected leaders undermine institutional checks and civil liberties while maintaining the façade of democratic rule. This includes weakening judicial independence, curbing media freedom, and suppressing public dissent. Populist leaders across regions have capitalized on public frustration, framing themselves as anti-elite figures and often centralizing power in the process. 

The digital age has further complicated democracy’s trajectory. On one hand, it has enabled greater political engagement and mobilization; on the other, it has amplified misinformation, polarization, and digital surveillance. These developments have challenged the integrity of democratic processes worldwide. 

Despite these setbacks, there are strong signs of democratic resilience. Youth-led movements, civic protests, and innovations in participatory governance are keeping democratic ideals alive. In countries across Africa and Latin America, local democratic experiments and reforms continue to inspire. 

This essay argues that democracy in the 21st century is being reshaped by the digital revolution, populist politics, and global backsliding—yet it also shows surprising resilience and innovation. In the South Asian context, particularly in India, democracy faces deep institutional and cultural challenges, even as citizens continue to engage with and redefine it in new ways. The evolution of democracy in this region provides critical insight into global trends. 

The Digital Revolution and Democracy 

Technology has radically redefined the democratic experience, making political information and participation more accessible than ever before. The digital revolution has given rise to new forms of engagement—from online petitions to hashtag movements—and reshaped election campaigns and policy discourse. 

In India, the scale and scope of digital political engagement are vast. The 2014 and 2019 general elections saw political parties, leverage social media and data analytics with unprecedented sophistication. WhatsApp groups, Twitter trends, and YouTube content have become essential tools for reaching voters. Digital platforms have also facilitated citizen mobilization on key issues, from the anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare to recent farmers' protests. 

However, the same tools that amplify democratic voices can also undermine democratic discourse. In South Asia, the rise of misinformation, digital surveillance, and hate speech has deepened polarization. In India and Bangladesh, for instance, state and non-state actors have used troll armies and disinformation campaigns to delegitimize dissent and spread communal narratives. The control and monitoring of online spaces raise concerns about privacy and freedom of expression. 

Thus, while technology has expanded the democratic space, it has also created new challenges. The region’s experience reveals that digital platforms when weaponized, can distort public opinion, suppress dissent, and entrench power. 

Populism and the Challenge to Liberal Democracy 

“The grammar of anarchy begins when constitutional methods are ignored.”- Dr. B. R. Ambedkar 

The 21st century has seen the rise of populist leaders who claim to speak for “the people” against corrupt elites and institutions. Populism often exploits legitimate grievances—economic disparity, identity crises, or political stagnation—while simultaneously eroding democratic norms. 

India presents a compelling example of how populism interacts with democratic institutions. Various leaders have fused nationalism, religious identity, and economic promises to build a powerful popular mandate. Similar trends are observable in other South Asian countries, where leadershave framed their politics as a moral crusade against entrenched elites, often sidelining democratic procedures in the process. 

In countries like Sri Lanka and Nepal, populism has taken various forms, ranging from ethno-nationalist agendas to calls for direct rule, bypassing parliamentary mechanisms. While such leaders initially galvanize mass support, they often weaken checks and balances, concentrate executive power, and undermine judicial independence. 

Importantly, populism thrives within democracies—it is not inherently undemocratic. Yet, when leaders equate electoral victory with absolute legitimacy, the spirit of liberal democracy is hollowed out. South Asia’s experience shows how populist appeals can degrade democratic culture even when formal institutions remain intact. 

Global and Regional Democratic Backsliding 

Democratic backsliding—the gradual decline in the quality of democracy—has become a global concern. Across the world, countries are witnessing erosion in judicial independence, media freedom, and civil liberties. South Asia has not been immune. 

India, long regarded as the world’s largest democracy, has experienced several challenges that have raised concerns about the strength of its democratic institutions. Freedom House downgraded India from “free” to “partly free” in 2021, citing rising authoritarianism, internet shutdowns, and the suppression of dissent. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC), and the revocation of Article 370 in Kashmir have sparked global concern over majoritarian politics and human rights. Protest movements against these policies were met with arrests, internet blackouts, and allegations of sedition. 

In Pakistan, democracy exists in a hybrid form. Civilian governments operate under the shadow of a powerful military establishment. Allegations of rigging often mar elections, media censorship is rampant, and civil society faces sustained pressure. Bangladesh, too, has seen its democratic credentials questioned, particularly following controversial elections, opposition crackdowns, and the Digital Security Act, which curtails free expression. 

Nepal and Sri Lanka, despite holding elections, grapple with political instability, executive overreach, and weakened institutions. The Sri Lankan crisis of 2022, driven by economic collapse and governance failures, underscores how fragile democratic norms can be in the absence of accountability and transparency. 

These regional patterns reflect broader global trends, revealing how democracy can erode not through overt coups but through gradual institutional decay. 

Innovations and Democratic Resilience 

Despite the challenges, democracy is far from obsolete. Across South Asia, citizens and communities are reclaiming democratic agency through grassroots activism, judicial interventions, and institutional reforms. 

India’s judiciary, while facing criticism, has also acted as a bulwark at times—intervening in cases related to civil rights, environmental protection, and electoral integrity. Civil society organizations have mobilized on issues from gender justice to environmental protection, using both traditional and digital platforms to hold power to account. The anti-CAA protests, largely youth-led and decentralized, exemplify how dissent remains vibrant despite repression. 

In Nepal, the transition from monarchy to the federal democratic republic, though messy, represents a remarkable democratic experiment. Citizen engagement in constitution-making, despite ethnic tensions and political wrangling, shows the potential of participatory democracy in post-conflict societies. 

Deliberative and participatory innovations are emerging in local governance. In parts of India and Bangladesh, participatory budgeting, community monitoring of schools and health centers, and village-level planning reflect efforts to deepen democracy beyond elections. These initiatives, though scattered, hint at a future where democracy is more inclusive and responsive. 

Moreover, transnational youth movements—from climate activism to gender justice—are fostering a new democratic consciousness. South Asia’s young population is not just a demographic fact but a political force reshaping the contours of engagement. 

Conclusion 

Democracy is a living, contested process, determined by citizens' courage and creativity. Its evolution will be determined by leaders and institutions, but its evolution depends on citizen engagement, institutional accountability, and the capacity to adapt to global changes. Overall, democracy today is neither in decline nor triumph—it is in flux. Adaptability with the balance of rootedness in the democratic ethos is the key to strengthening democracy globally and nationally.