> Samyukta Kisan Morcha, an umbrella organisation representing more than 40 farmers’ unions, condemned those who had taken part in the clashes and said that “anti-social elements had infiltrated the otherwise peaceful movement”.
The organizers clearly condemned the violence. What else should they do?
Repeating what you conveniently ignored: one bad incident does not override months of completely peaceful protests, acknowledged by residents of the areas where they were protesting. And yet, you bring up just that one thing, which is very much in line with the government propaganda. The Republic link was the icing on the cake. Like I said, you are free to believe what you want but painting yourself as pro freedom of protests while ignoring the fact that they have been peaceful for months and singling out this one thing says a lot about your bias.
> Repeating what you conveniently ignored: one bad incident does not override months of completely peaceful protests
I am not the one conveniently forgetting violence at the Red fort. Let me ask you, why even protest when the Supreme court is hearing the case and Govt has agreed to put the law on hold for 1.5 years. Why violence & blocking highways? Why not take it up with Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court of India is going to listen to the farmers? The same Supreme Court that asked why and I quote, "why old people and women are kept in the protests" as if thousands of old farmers were paid money and brought in to the protests?
I repeat: protesting is a fundamental right. Farmers have been protesting peacefully for months. One bad incident is not reflective of the otherwise largely peaceful protests. You are ignoring this line.
You can drop the facade at this stage and stop wasting everyone's time. At least have the audacity to be genuine of your beliefs. To not be so is cowardly.
Why shouldn't the SC ask that question? They are not issuing a diktat. It's a large group and a certain degree of coercion, even if small, is likely involved. It's only now that it's coming out in open.
There's no need for personal attacks. You have conviniently ignored the link I shared that indicates coercion. While it's great that women actively participate in events in Punjab, a quick glance at the difference between male and female litery rates shows there's some distance to cover. Being better than UP and Bihar isn't exactly an achievement. My comment didn't even specially talk about Punjab. The protests also include people from other states and one of those has a really bad reputation for treatment of household women.
As for the SC, that's what we will get when there are strong rules around Contempt of Court.
I could have done better at the personal attacks but it's hard to tow the line when genuine grievances of peacefully protesting farmers are ignored for months and one negative attack is suddenly all that is talked about. That to me indicates malice and I cannot respond in good faith when that is done.
> a quick glance at the difference between male and female litery rates shows there's some distance to cover.
How is that relevant? You are pulling at straws here. Women work in the fields along with men. Anti-farmer laws affect both men and women, young and old. Supreme Court of India brings it up as if it matters, when it doesn't and clearly ignore the demographics at play, hinting at something without saying it. The literacy rate needs to be worked on but that's not the concern here.
How many people can you coerce to attend protests? Hundreds, probably at most. Not thousands. Some of the people have been protesting in frigid temperatures for months. Do you mean to say they are all paid? That doesn't even make sense and is logistically infeasible.
The Supreme Court allows seems to consider freedom of expression differently though, when it comes to granting bails to journalists in favour of the government versus cartoons that suggest contempt of court.
So no, I don't trust them to make the right call. Farmers should continue peacefully protesting, as is their fundamental right.
Notice in all this, you haven't said anything about: the right of farmers to protest and what they are protesting about.
because after 1.5 years the same law gets passed without amendments. This is a well known trick most authoritarian govts apply. If any law has immediate widespread resistance, just put it on hold for some time till the resentment dies down and new news cycle takes over. Then pass it up without much resistance.
> Samyukta Kisan Morcha, an umbrella organisation representing more than 40 farmers’ unions, condemned those who had taken part in the clashes and said that “anti-social elements had infiltrated the otherwise peaceful movement”.
The organizers clearly condemned the violence. What else should they do?
Repeating what you conveniently ignored: one bad incident does not override months of completely peaceful protests, acknowledged by residents of the areas where they were protesting. And yet, you bring up just that one thing, which is very much in line with the government propaganda. The Republic link was the icing on the cake. Like I said, you are free to believe what you want but painting yourself as pro freedom of protests while ignoring the fact that they have been peaceful for months and singling out this one thing says a lot about your bias.
Source: https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/farmers-storm-india-s-red-fort-...
> The farmers have been staging largely peaceful protests for nearly two months