They've broadly been peaceful in nature.
It's immoral to paint the entire struggle as being violent.
People are just trying to uphold India's founding principles.
I don't think they termed entire protests as violent. You are right in saying that protests have been largely peaceful in nature. But there has been some significant violence throughout the protests. Acts like stone pelting, lynching policemen, torching buses, uprooting train tracks, attacking school buses are petrifying. And this will become worse as protests spread to semi-urban areas.
The protesters in Hong Kong were also throwing Molotov cocktails, destroying public property, and beating people up, but Western news media didn’t call it “violent.”
So what if they are violent? Fascism is violent. They're not going to ask people to just eff off, they're going to force them, with violence. Seems to me like what we have here is the same class war we have all over the world. If you're not on the side of the oppressed and the provoked, you're on the side of the oppressor and provocateur.
Setting police stations on fire and lynching policemen is not violence?
reply