Nalinikanta Mallick

In our day to day life we came across such type of experience. Now while confronting someone we should keep some factors in mind, like the age of the person, his knowledge about the subject and so on. We have to keep in mind our motive is to make that person aware not to start an argument. It's hard to change the mindset of a person in one instance, but definitely we can give it a try.
Now the factors that may have led to the situation, we should discuss it first. We should let the person speaks about his thought process and we can counter him with reasonable questions. Second in such conditions examples works better than reason. So we can put some examples of great personality from History or Mythology who belong to some specific group accordingly but have done some tremendous work and their contribution to humanity is remarkable.
Again our motive is to make that person aware, so we should let that person think about it.

The fundamental difference between Loksabha and Rajyasabha is the direct representation and indirect representation respectively.

Loksabha has the discretionary power to introduce Money bill, Financial bill and about the budget. So it has the supreme control over the finance of the country.

Second Loksabha can be resolved when it loses it's confidence,i.e; majority in Loksabha. So there is a sense of responsibility towards the people. In particular ministers are collectively responsible to the Loksabha.

source- M Laxmikant.

The fundamental difference between Loksabha and Rajyasabha is the direct representation and indirect representation respectively.

Loksabha has the discretionary power to introduce Money bill, Financial bill and about the budget. So it has the supreme control over the finance of the country.

Second Loksabha can be resolved when it loses it's confidence,i.e; majority in Loksabha. So there is a sense of responsibility towards the people. In particular ministers are collectively responsible to the Loksabha.

source- M Laxmikant.

With constitution came to place, India adopted Universal Adult Suffrage. ie; 21 years old, later it became 18 years old to vote for. It was a bold move as the constitution maker didn't discriminate between gender, rich or poor, even between educated and uneducated.

The founding fathers of the constitution had faith on the common people, and the theory that every person knows what is best for him/her.ie; Wisdom.

Now the criticism are;

People with lack of wisdom tends to see the nearest benefits rather than the long term goal. So they can be easily manipulated by some cash benefits or in other ways.

Second people tend to vote by their instinct and emotions rather than the logic.

Another criticism was people was not ready yet.

Now we can consider it has always been a philosophical debate.

Now this is a debate of effective and efficient governing of Parliament houses. The objective is to serve the people and to represent their voices in one forum.

Now sometimes we see a hot debate, argument instead of debate, disturbances and walkout. But this is not quite often. Most of the time it is due to the pass of a vital bill without proper discussion or by not addressing the issues in the country that need an urgent attention. We can say this is a way of protest inside the parliament. But we have to remember that the members of the parliament have to keep the dignity of this democratic institution.

No doubt the different voices represent the vibrancy of the democracy. At the same time parliament should not lose it's dignity due to some political motive.