Thread by @sankrant

Appeared briefly on Arnab's debate on sedition on
@republic. It's not the place for nuance, so here is the nuanced view.

1. We need to look at FOE in totality. Sedition law is one part of it. There are a lot of laws, not just 124A, that are of concern—153A, 505, 295A, 298...

Many of these laws are used arbitrarily, give the state draconian power to arrest people, as we saw in the case of @TajinderBagga and many others. People can be arrested over an innocuous statement or SM post by police acting for vindictive politicians.

2. At the same time...

There are powerful forces, working to undermine India, break India. Section 124A sedition law is both too much and not enough.

Section 124A defines sedition as disaffection towards the *government* of India, not the *nation* of India. This colonial law doesn't get the nation.

India does not do enough against #BreakingIndia forces, when it does, it takes reactive, not proactive action.

A lot of theories are created for #BreakingIndia in many ways (eg. the colonial separation of "Sikh" from "Hindu"), but the government does not fund counter-narratives.

It also is completely clueless about the worldwide narrative war, frankly Pakistan gets is more.

The West carefully manages worldwide narratives, NGOs, media, academia are part of its tools. Even China manages global narrative. India is pathetic at it.

https://twitter.com/sankrant/status/1240361431427473408?s=20&t=JlpQhHQAb6Y8y6_NbAesmw

So the question is not really about the sedition law. This is the point I made on the show. Questioning the government is one thing (which is what the colonial 124A is about), but there are forces looking to attack and break the *nation*, that is where our focus must be.

Thus Jinnah was never charged with sedition! You can break up the country but not be seditious per the law.

Because the law, again, is about disaffection against the government. *Not* the nation.

The sedition law can go. But when will the government seize the narrative?