India uses widespread internet blackouts to mask domestic turmoil
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
> Thwarting insurgency and government critics are not the only reasons for the blackouts. According to a new report by Human Rights Watch (hrw), an ngo, almost a third of the disruptions it counted between 2020 and 2022 were intended to prevent cheating in school exams or entry tests for government jobs.
The recent events unfolding in the region have unfortunately jeopardized a climate business I launched last year, which had the potential to bring millions of dollars in investments to the area (the hilly border region between India and Myanmar). I don't foresee a quick resolution to the situation. In fact, I expect it might take a few decades before we see a return to any semblance of normalcy.
We made the decision to alter our business model (or to be more specific, our initial go-to-market strategies) halfway through this year, acknowledging that the resources we'd invested there were unlikely to yield returns.
During the Internet shutdowns, our family was able to assist many people back home with various needs, such as bill payments, school fees, and facilitating new admissions, among other things.
While there may be other solutions, I'm of the opinion that these swift shutdowns are playing a crucial role in preventing the situation from escalating into a "Meta in Myanmar" scenario.
Has an AAP government.
> In February, the internet was blocked in 11 cities in Rajasthan state to prevent cheating during exams.
Has a Congress government.
> While local governments ruled by opposition parties in India also frequently block the internet, the Manipur example highlights a wider pattern in an India governed over the past decade by Modi’s BJP.
Why don't you provide a statistical, party-wise breakdown so that people can know? Right now, the article seems to be all about "Modi’s BJP."
The answer to my question is: the "article" is part of a series where the Hindu nationalist is portrayed as the villain who is involved in communal violence; all other communities are, obviously, peaceful; violence is always initiated by one side.
> a shutdown was imposed in Haryana state, ostensibly to control riots
Everyone in India knows what happened in Nuh. There are pictures and video on social media.
> The unrest in Manipur began on April 27. Kuki activists called for a general strike against the land policies of the state’s chief minister that day, and the demonstration turned violent.
> Tensions had been brewing for months between the Kukis, a Christian hill tribe, and Meiteis, the politically and economically dominant valley dwellers who mostly practice Hinduism. Kukis have long accused Meiteis of coveting land in the hills reserved under the Indian constitution for tribal peoples, and those fears sharpened this spring when the state’s top court backed a Meitei demand that it also be granted official tribal status.
So, the moment a court decided that the Meitei demand should be considered, thus giving them a share of the reservation/affirmative action pie, violence erupted?
> Tensions had been brewing for months between the Kukis, a Christian hill tribe, and Meiteis, the politically and economically dominant valley dwellers who mostly practice Hinduism.
The article has so much Christian imagery. Could they not find a single temple that they could photograph? Or an affected Meitei who has photos of some Hindu gods on the walls of his house? After all, 1/3 of the people who have died are Meiteis.[1]
What are you talking about?
> atrocities committed in the name of ethnic nationalism
If you are referring to the Hindus, they are not a single ethnicity.
i know more about these than any commentator because i've literally suffered through it
people have just one demand. secession. that is a culmination of over 500 years of struggle.
the point is, people do not want to remain in the union so the government is using every trick in the book to force people to remain in place.
from mass rapes to torture to collective punishment, we people have basically seen all.
information blockade is yet another tool. you know a couple of journalists from the valley won pulitzer for a striking picture
https://www.pulitzer.org/cms/sites/default/files/styles/slid...
you should read on the interesting story how the photos were smuggled outside the valley. it reads like a spy triller.
point is, the government is scared of an uprising so they simply turn off the internet and hope people will forget.
Against whom? The Afghans? The Mughals? The Sikh Empire? The British? Republic of India?
> people have just one demand. secession.
This is never going to happen: 'The Partition and the violence of 1947 in Kashmir forced the Constituent Assembly to revise its approach and it resolved in favour of a strong Centre. The possibility of the secession of States from the Union weighed on the minds of the drafters of the Constitution and ensured that the Indian Union is “indestructible”. In the Constituent Assembly, B.R Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee, observed that the word ‘Union’ was advisedly used in order to negative the right of secession of States by emphasising, after all, that “India shall be a Union of States”. Ambedkar justified the usage of ‘Union of States’ saying that the Drafting Committee wanted to make it clear that though India was to be a federation, it was not the result of an agreement and that therefore, no State has the right to secede from it. “The federation is a Union because it is indestructible,” Ambedkar said.'[1]
[1] The ‘Union government’ has a unifying effect (https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-union-government-...)
>Against whom? The Afghans? The Mughals? The Sikh Empire? The British? Republic of India?
yes. countless aggressors have tried to exert their control over this piece of land and people and every time they have perished and the people have survived to fight.