Read on Twitter
Thread to dissect the nature of dissent in the light of D Ravi's arrest IMSOT(In My School Of Thought) = A commoner's School Of Thought.
@reachind_uk @reachind_USACAN @reachind_bharat
@RDXThinksThat @arifaajakia @vivekagnihotri @vivekanandg
@reachind_uk @reachind_USACAN @reachind_bharat
@RDXThinksThat @arifaajakia @vivekagnihotri @vivekanandg
Statement to dissect - D Ravi's age is the only point raised in each and every tweet made in her defense of being arrested. Neither her credentials as a Climate activist nor her academic background.
Question - Age is the only highlight about D Ravi??
Question - Age is the only highlight about D Ravi??
Thesis - Attributes of state actors defending D Ravi, either they are unaware or they are agenda driven which is strictly against the state. This is the crux of the matter which will be dissected in the thread further.
The dissection involves a for and against argument -
Null Hypothesis- State Actors can be unaware if you are not too active on SM or politically.
Alternate Hypothesis- You are agenda driven that could be either anti- Modi or anti-National in the light of metaethics.
Null Hypothesis- State Actors can be unaware if you are not too active on SM or politically.
Alternate Hypothesis- You are agenda driven that could be either anti- Modi or anti-National in the light of metaethics.
Disclaimers- 1 must understand the scale of difference b/n anti- Modi and anti-National IMSOT(In My School Of Thought)-On the scale of 1-10, anti-Modi = anti-National is 7+(inclusive of all the biases/variances), subjected to challenge with right premises and no emotions.
When I say "no emotions", it's only fair to be emotional if you are a nationalist. Being emotional is allowed in the boundaries of nationalism keeping out individual's Crucifixion.
Support of the statement- Using my emotive significance towards the fact-at-issue followed.
Support of the statement- Using my emotive significance towards the fact-at-issue followed.
1- How constructive left liberals/opposition has been in the past 6 years for every actions/bill proposed by Modi Gov?
2- Credentials of the state actors opposing the GOI in the past 6 years?
Both these statements are personal opinions subjected to subsequent facts provided.
2- Credentials of the state actors opposing the GOI in the past 6 years?
Both these statements are personal opinions subjected to subsequent facts provided.
Answer - Very consistent, Rejective Dissent(RD) with just being Disagreeable and an objective to just downplay the current gov. You can tell me off, saying disagreement is welcome in democracy. Absolutely YES, every move of the Gov can be challenged but when its about the nation.
The downside of RD are - Disharmony is maintained, development is halted, Gov is defocused from far more essential subjects. Fabricated hostility towards the progressive gov is established.
Case-In-Point - Pulwama criticized , Surgical strike criticized and questioned, Rafael criticized and rejected by the highest court(I understand your disgust but the fake narrative couldn't be sold for long),Triple Talaq criticized , the latest Farm Bill criticized and many more
Criticisms by SA r welcome in democracy, should you wanted to debate in the Parliament. Holding press conferences only puts forth your dissent as "NO with NO WHY". It must be of the form "NO with WHY". "No with Why" is well executed only in parliament not in party house(Pol.)
Now the hypothesis comes into play -
NULL Hypothesis- You can be unaware if you are not too active on SM or politically
The fact that the opinions from SAs are expressed in the form of regular tweets are the testimony to their activeness on SM.
NULL Hypothesis- You can be unaware if you are not too active on SM or politically
The fact that the opinions from SAs are expressed in the form of regular tweets are the testimony to their activeness on SM.
The fact that these SAs represent a political party and tweet regularly with their political opinions goes to show they are politically active.
Hence NULL Hypothesis can be Rejected. State Actors(SA) can't be unaware by being active on SM and also politically active.
Hence NULL Hypothesis can be Rejected. State Actors(SA) can't be unaware by being active on SM and also politically active.
Hence we accept the Alternate Hypothesis that these SAs are agenda driven that are anti-nationals in the light of metaethics and NO NONSENSE.
Thanks for reading the thread.
Thanks for reading the thread.
