,
8 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
@Niharb101 @NishkaK I didnt anticipate you will deliberately reduce my indicators of state-level support, internal or transnational, of violence or promise/threat of violence in winning or defeating such ethnic basic rights claims - to the person examples u used now.
@Niharb101 @NishkaK I tweeted with comparisons from Gandhian/Brit/revolutionary or Israel foundation example as illustration of the pivotal role of actual or potential state-backed violence. How did they become comparable to whatever aggression shown by individuals you mentioned?
@Niharb101 @NishkaK My tweeted concrete suggestion was to at least collect the cases of Bong Hindu disqualification by NRC, even after documentary submissions - so that patterns of bias/or exploring how/why certain docs were being rejected/accepted could be brought out. Was this a very violent way?
@Niharb101 @NishkaK non-violent protests only work when the opponent with capacity for overwhelming violence sees value in supporting such protest either out of fearing even greater external/internal threat of violence - internal or external.
@Niharb101 @NishkaK I saw no such "greater threat" and hence said such protests wd hv zero impact as they pose no "threat" to state or supreme judicial power which is supposedly "tightly/closely supervising" NRC. Legal challenge will be extremely costly& unaffordable for most Bong Hindus in Assam.
@Niharb101 @NishkaK I dont know why u claim "violence had no effect in Assam" on NRC: which Bong Hindu or Indian internal orgs or transnational forces with capacity for violence, supported? if there wasnt any violent support/threat available how was effectiveness of "violence" tested?
@Niharb101 @NishkaK the legal route is an extremely prolonged and at this point, a very expensive route, against full state bureaucracy supposedly overseen "closely" by the highest, unanswerable at any level to people, judicial body: thus of dubious future outcome.
@Niharb101 @NishkaK How likely will a state wing of coercive power, find actions under its own claimed "close supervision" - to have been biased/selective? it will be an indictment of itself, and there has been no such indications of inclinations to do so, even at vague self-criticism levels.
