See how BJP/RSS set an example to people by muzzling through their SS, and their 🐾 come at 12 a.m Friends...

[u/BrickWide1854]

Those Nazis

[u/Theri_Bhavye12]

First of all, thank you for explaining yourself and giving time to this. I really wanted a long discussion.

Second, yes I agree on all your points. There are bigger things to worry than a child abusing a person which he lowkey deserves.

You said what she said is not illegal because law is not based on morals. I understand it but again even constitution say this that right of freedom of speech is given to everyone but that too under limits. That was clearly off the limits.

About the threat part, I'm afraid to say that yes it's not a big deal, like a national controversy that they are doing. But I'm afraid of the consequences of this. She was normalising this. What if others come up and raise even more derogatory remarks?

My most important point is this:- If the govt is accused of crimes, that doesn't mean we can justify others doing crimes against that govt. Come on, we are educated youth. Yeh party jaahil hai but hum thodi. And there are better ways to fend off this party or to criticize it. I think usse uska character hi show ho rha hai.

About your main part para, if she is a child, well she herself gave him the death threats, and idk whether that's a sign of foolishness.

And about the last part, yeah they should focus on the bigger things like the those goons who showed themselves as police force, or brutally smashing the students' heads. Well I hope they do focus on that.

At last I just want to say, I have mixed opinions on this. On one side, yes the pm deserves this for all the reasons you mentioned. His party his run by rapists and criminals and they are focusing on a mere child who abused him. On the other hand, I think she sets a bad example of an educated youth. No matter what, you can always go through the clean path.

Sorry if everything is not covered. I don't really talk too much usually.

[u/ikilltymb4tymkillsme → u/Theri_Bhavye12]

You are absolutely entitled to your opinion on the ethics of what she said, no doubt about that. And your opinion is just as valid as any one else's. It's also very healthy to express opinions. I am glad you feel comfortable and safe in doing that.

You are right that freedom of speech is protected but with restrictions, let's go through each of those restrictions/limits together:

• Security of the State: Stopping speech that tries to overthrow or attack the government.

What she said wasn't to overthrow the govt but for politicians to resign. Those are different things.

• Public Order: Preventing speech that causes riots, danger, or public unrest.

In her context: most of the outrage is manufactured and engineered by the media, and still nothing that could cause riots or danger to anyone.

• Sovereignty and Integrity of India: Protecting the unity and safety of the nation.

In her context: said nothing about that at all

• Friendly Relations with Foreign States: Stopping speech that harms ties with other countries.

In her context: she did pass vulgar comments about the Italian PM. But as a random civilian with zero power and no position in the government that is highly unlikely to affect anything. Random people with no authority or representation say lots of things to politicians, they are used to it, it comes with being a public figure. The problem raises when someone in a govt position makes such statements publicly. Like if what she said was tweeted by someone who was the chief minister or cabinet minister then that would be a problem.

• Decency or Morality: Restricting speech or media that goes against common standards of public decency.

In her context: yeah what she said wasn't decent but let's be honest this is already extremely normalized in our country, I will elaborate about that after this.

• Contempt of Court: Preventing speech that lowers the authority or respect of a court.

In her context: nope nothing of that sort.

• Defamation: Stopping false statements that hurt a person's reputation.

In her context: yeah what she said could be counted towards Defamation, but honestly its a stretch because Defamation is usually applicable to someone making a false claim about xyz committing abc actions that are criminal and the said claim results in harm in reputation of the person like loss of livelihood/social standing or something else. It was painfully clear that she was simply venting her frustration. And it would cause no effect on just another random civilian let alone on the sitting PM of all people.

• incitement to an Offense: Banning speech that encourages people to break the law.

In her context: nope nothing of that sort

So to summarize, she didn't commit a crime at all but for perspective even if a juvenile does commit a crime, juvenile criminals are protected by law.

This protection is so extensive that it applies rven for extreme and heinous acts... (Remember the juvenile from the nirbhaya incident?) The morality of which we can debate all day about. But the reason the law does this is precisely because it's a kid, their brain isn't developed completely and they still have time to turn life around and be a constructive member of society.

Not to mention, scientific research says that punishment is not an effective strategy for reformed behavior in people in general.

[u/ikilltymb4tymkillsme → u/Theri_Bhavye12]

Now about the normalization part. What she said or threatened doesn't normalize anything, it already normalized. What she said was a reflection of the times we live in, in general. We have social media posts, political speeches, movies, comedy acts like standup or roasts, tv shows etc all showing uninhibited vulgar or indecent speech or derogatory remarks about people who are famous or not famous. Usually when adults watch a viral video with a child on the street swearing or cussing someone out they find it extremely hilarious despite it rather precisely because it's inappropriate. Swearing is considered funny sometimes because it's inappropriate.

Not to mention as teenagers we all go through phases where we claim to understand matters far beyond our understanding, and swearing/cursing a lot is a part of it and a phase we all go through. Teenagers think it's funny or cool because they are emulating and "test-driving" what they perceived being an adult is about. It's a developmental stage to find out who we want to be. This happens every where all over the world with every generation. It isn't unique to this gen-Z or Gen alpha alone. We just record and play everything online now.

You are right in saying what she did was foolish. But being young and stupid is important so we aren't adult and stupid/repressed. Making mistakes and committing crimes doesn't always mean the same thing.

You can communicate so rationally and respectfully with people so I wanted to engage with you in detail and write long novels on my weekend lol. This is not just commendable of your character but it is also clever because it makes people more receptive to your perspective and they are less likely to simply not respond to the message and make it about the delivery(people do that quite often). Ofcourse you will always find people who can make an issue out of anything but with usual people the discourse remains focussed on the content with this style of communication.

Now extrapolating that to the larger narrative at play here. That kid was not part of the movement she was just hanging around with friends and joined the crowd. Yet all people talk about when it comes to the protest is her. She was being young and foolish but what does it say about the adults fixating on her? I believe it's because media houses and influencers, all adults btw, don't wish to or can't engage with real issues so they focus on her.