6 ms·

Well this was done as a precautionary move so that people stop spreading rumours and videos of affected areas. Also to stop mobs to communicate in mass with ea

Well this was done as a precautionary move so that people stop spreading rumours and videos of affected areas. Also to stop mobs to communicate in mass with each other.

nitrogen 11y ago
Such "precautionary" moves are putting the cart before the horse; they value the state over the freedoms of the people. They are incompatible with any honest representative government.
- techaddict009 11y ago
  Well I am from the effected area. Believe it or not this move has surely helped to maintain peace. No doubt it has effected many peoples work. But this was one of quickest way to control mass communication. Plus the ban is on 2G/3G & SMS on mobile network not on broad band or usual wired network. On wired network probably only fb & whatsapp are banned.
  - mirimir 11y ago
    So did they declare martial law? Edit: Yes[0] [0] http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/08/indian-army-deployed-riot-hit-areas-gujarat-150827052532462.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/08/indian-army-deployed-r...
    - techaddict009 11y ago
      what does that mean?
      - nitrogen 11y ago
        It means military rule. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law
      - mirimir 11y ago
        Sometimes, when the fit hits the shan, governments must act decisively to protect the public interest. So they call a timeout on civil society. Not quite state of war, but heading that way. But when that's not explicit, it becomes hard to tell whether or not one is living in a police state.
    - adityab 11y ago
      This is incorrect: Deploying the RAF to control a situation is not the same as declaring Martial Law. That would require declaring an Emergency AFAIK.
      - mirimir 11y ago
        OK, thanks.
- srean 11y ago
  I say this as an Indian and with sadness: The notion and importance of free speech is at worst alien and at best a concept with little or no respect in India. If you exercise your right to free speech (you can only do so when you indulge in speech not welcome by anyone who holds influence) you seriously risk physical harm. This is the reason you dont have Jon Stewart show in India, wont have in the near future. If someone drops his pants, or more accurately does something much worse (multi-homicide level worse) and claims "I did because BTNM said so", no one will seriously question his/her judgement or responsibility of listening to BTNM but will fall over themselves in their eagerness to blame BTNM exclusively and put a blanket ban on anything that is deemed unpopular by the people who have influence: think of the women and children that may be harmed. I am sick and tired of waiting for us to behave like adults and treat people like adults with the full set of responsibilities that comes with it. But no, we want to be treated like kids incapable of taking responsibility of our own actions and elect such people to high places. I expect this to be downvoted if there is a large Indian audience hanging out here. This is definitely a minority view here, going by multiple conversations I have had on this topic.
  - Qantourisc 11y ago
    Start with small insults. But be careful not to create hidden tension. And it will take years.
  - eklavya 11y ago
    You are correct, however the problem is with the large % of illiteracy/poor education. I hope things will improve once the society is better educated.
    - srean 11y ago
      I wish I could bury it under that rug, but such views are held quite strongly by the apparently educated and "literate" class. Those who do not hold on to such beliefs are typically labelled "communist", "unpatriotic" or some such.
      - 11y ago
- bandrami 11y ago
  India has decided over the years, for better or for worse, that keeping the nation together is more important to them than freedom of speech. This is why the film censorship board is so strong here compared to most other democracies, for instance. I'm an American expat living in India and it's still quite alien to me after a few years. The government really can tell you to stop saying something because it offends someone else. They can do that because the alternative is that hundreds or even thousands of people die. My opinion on that decision isn't terribly important because I'm not Indian; it's not my decision to make. It's a very deliberate compromise that the Indian people have found over the decades.
  - selimthegrim 11y ago
    So they decided to sign over people's future to a bunch of caste elders who demand that you walk on eggshells to preserve some construct with colonial boundaries?
    - prapam2 11y ago
      What does colonial boundaries have to do with caste elders or anything related to this topic?
      - selimthegrim 11y ago
        It most certainly has to do with who freedom of speech is being sacrificed for and why?
voltagex_ 11y ago
I'm seeing very similar wording all over the place, although most accounts posting are new and yours isn't.
- techaddict009 11y ago
  Bro if you need any verification from me let me know. I am from effected area. I have seen 3 bus stands burning in front of my eyes. Reached home with difficulty. No one stopped any one from protesting but destroying public property is not a way to protest. This guys had gone highly out of control. Banning their communication was one of the way to control them. Atleast I feel so. I am from affected area. If you want I can send you some photos I took from my mob while going home shivering.
  - srean 11y ago
    ...and the way to fix it, the only effective intervention, the only conceivable intervention is to ban / censor mobile communication, to take away the ability of all people in the area from communicating over mobile. Fair enough, seems the obvious and logical thing to do. Government caught in the noble act of governance.
    - techaddict009 11y ago
      They havent banned mobile calls. They have just blocked mobile internet for 24 hours. No doubt that should have been last option. But yes they did it at last. People started pelting stones on Army. So even Army couldnt control mob via flag march or any such thing.
      - selimthegrim 11y ago
        What, the Army doesn't have teargas or rubber bullets? Or real ones, for that matter (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashimpura_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashimpura_massacre)
  - nitrogen 11y ago

Well this was done as a precautionary move so that people stop spreading rumours and videos of affected areas. Also to stop mobs to communicate in mass with each other.

nitrogen 11y ago

Such "precautionary" moves are putting the cart before the horse; they value the state over the freedoms of the people. They are incompatible with any honest representative government.

techaddict009 11y ago
Well I am from the effected area. Believe it or not this move has surely helped to maintain peace. No doubt it has effected many peoples work. But this was one of quickest way to control mass communication. Plus the ban is on 2G/3G & SMS on mobile network not on broad band or usual wired network. On wired network probably only fb & whatsapp are banned.
- mirimir 11y ago
  So did they declare martial law? Edit: Yes[0] [0] http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/08/indian-army-deployed-riot-hit-areas-gujarat-150827052532462.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/08/indian-army-deployed-r...
  - techaddict009 11y ago
    what does that mean?
    - nitrogen 11y ago
      It means military rule. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law
    - mirimir 11y ago
      Sometimes, when the fit hits the shan, governments must act decisively to protect the public interest. So they call a timeout on civil society. Not quite state of war, but heading that way. But when that's not explicit, it becomes hard to tell whether or not one is living in a police state.
  - adityab 11y ago
    This is incorrect: Deploying the RAF to control a situation is not the same as declaring Martial Law. That would require declaring an Emergency AFAIK.
    - mirimir 11y ago
      OK, thanks.
srean 11y ago
I say this as an Indian and with sadness: The notion and importance of free speech is at worst alien and at best a concept with little or no respect in India. If you exercise your right to free speech (you can only do so when you indulge in speech not welcome by anyone who holds influence) you seriously risk physical harm. This is the reason you dont have Jon Stewart show in India, wont have in the near future. If someone drops his pants, or more accurately does something much worse (multi-homicide level worse) and claims "I did because BTNM said so", no one will seriously question his/her judgement or responsibility of listening to BTNM but will fall over themselves in their eagerness to blame BTNM exclusively and put a blanket ban on anything that is deemed unpopular by the people who have influence: think of the women and children that may be harmed. I am sick and tired of waiting for us to behave like adults and treat people like adults with the full set of responsibilities that comes with it. But no, we want to be treated like kids incapable of taking responsibility of our own actions and elect such people to high places. I expect this to be downvoted if there is a large Indian audience hanging out here. This is definitely a minority view here, going by multiple conversations I have had on this topic.
- Qantourisc 11y ago
  Start with small insults. But be careful not to create hidden tension. And it will take years.
- eklavya 11y ago
  You are correct, however the problem is with the large % of illiteracy/poor education. I hope things will improve once the society is better educated.
  - srean 11y ago
    I wish I could bury it under that rug, but such views are held quite strongly by the apparently educated and "literate" class. Those who do not hold on to such beliefs are typically labelled "communist", "unpatriotic" or some such.
    - 11y ago
bandrami 11y ago
India has decided over the years, for better or for worse, that keeping the nation together is more important to them than freedom of speech. This is why the film censorship board is so strong here compared to most other democracies, for instance. I'm an American expat living in India and it's still quite alien to me after a few years. The government really can tell you to stop saying something because it offends someone else. They can do that because the alternative is that hundreds or even thousands of people die. My opinion on that decision isn't terribly important because I'm not Indian; it's not my decision to make. It's a very deliberate compromise that the Indian people have found over the decades.
- selimthegrim 11y ago
  So they decided to sign over people's future to a bunch of caste elders who demand that you walk on eggshells to preserve some construct with colonial boundaries?
  - prapam2 11y ago
    What does colonial boundaries have to do with caste elders or anything related to this topic?
    - selimthegrim 11y ago
      It most certainly has to do with who freedom of speech is being sacrificed for and why?

voltagex_ 11y ago

I'm seeing very similar wording all over the place, although most accounts posting are new and yours isn't.

techaddict009 11y ago
Bro if you need any verification from me let me know. I am from effected area. I have seen 3 bus stands burning in front of my eyes. Reached home with difficulty. No one stopped any one from protesting but destroying public property is not a way to protest. This guys had gone highly out of control. Banning their communication was one of the way to control them. Atleast I feel so. I am from affected area. If you want I can send you some photos I took from my mob while going home shivering.
- srean 11y ago
  ...and the way to fix it, the only effective intervention, the only conceivable intervention is to ban / censor mobile communication, to take away the ability of all people in the area from communicating over mobile. Fair enough, seems the obvious and logical thing to do. Government caught in the noble act of governance.
  - techaddict009 11y ago
    They havent banned mobile calls. They have just blocked mobile internet for 24 hours. No doubt that should have been last option. But yes they did it at last. People started pelting stones on Army. So even Army couldnt control mob via flag march or any such thing.
    - selimthegrim 11y ago
      What, the Army doesn't have teargas or rubber bullets? Or real ones, for that matter (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashimpura_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashimpura_massacre)
- nitrogen 11y ago