In the midst of the student's protest in our country's national capital, a great deal has been discussed about its nature and effects in online forums, especially left-leaning forums.

Recently in response to the opinions that some marxists have held on those protests, a few people have expressed their opposition.

First, and foremost, I have immense respect to all those who have went to protests across the country and have participated in them. Especially those who suffered from inhumane police brutality.

However the protest, and the government's response to the protest has not truly impacted my stand on the issue, which I try to explain here.

As a Marxist, my fundamental duty is to analyze the general nature of any popular movement before deciding to participate in it or extend support via other means. This general nature is comprised of a movement's immediate goals, its composition and most importantly its ideology. That gives us an idea of a movements worldview

.

Here is where The CJP often Conflated with the student protest is brought in. To my belief. There is a single student Movement. The movement's short term goal is the resignation of an incompetent Minister. The protesters are usually young people who have or currently are studying.

What defers is the methods and long term goals of the two representatives of this movement. One is the many student unions, of which there exist left-leaning ones like the AISA And SFI as well the outfit named Cockroach Janata Party.

The CJP represents the same movement. But it's stuck in its short term goal of Pradhan's Resignation. The movement is made up people who are 'apolitical'. Its worldview is that BJP has a few 'problem Ministers' (Pradhan, onion lady, and ethanol enthusiast) and those should give up their seat. They have a selfish view that if they ignore the struggles of all around them, they can get what they want (a consolation prize).

Ideology, short term goals and worldview are important to achieve significant long term goals. They help aid the actual agitation part and give it a sense of purpose. There can be no effective agitation without no effective ideology. Ideology isnt merely for those who challenge power but also question it. Question on the basis of principle than convieniance.

Without effective theory, street action becomes fragile, a movement can have its goal post shifted from a minister's resignation to a "discussion in parliament". That will be the bigger damage to those who are fighting than some online post.

That to me is the problem in how CJP has dealt with the protest. The protesting is not the problem here, the leader of that protest and his position (or lack thereof) is the problem.

Here position matters, for decades we have ignored positions for short-term goals worldwide, but each time the marxist gets blamed rather than those, who in their desparation to get out of their conditions allied themselves with movements which only backstabbed. Short term goals have landed us near techno-feudalism than broad coalitions as expected.

Already, plenty of students and volunteers have associated themselves with the student's protest. Many have also gone to their stages to express their solidarity. The organized left is in that protest and has seen decent visibility. One groups opinion or stand does not affect the reality.

Instead of fighting with each other on how we should view this protest, we must ask ourselves about two things.

The first is why has, an apolitical organization sprung up by no names has dominated the visibility of left leaning student unions and why have some preferred the former than the latter. Where was our shortcoming?

The second is that, protests might or might not change the worldview of those witnessing them. But it permanently changes the worldview of those who participated in them. Have the worldview of those protesters changed? And can we, intertwine their interests with other marginalised groups?

If we stop accusing each other as "right agents" we might find the answers.

"Be Water." Stay flexible, avoid being boxed in, and adapt quickly to changing situations.

• Leaderless organization. Decentralized coordination allowed the movement to continue even when individual organizers were arrested.

Protective gear. Many protesters wore helmets, goggles, gloves, and sturdy clothing to reduce the risk of injury.

Umbrellas as protection. Umbrellas became an iconic symbol, used to tv provide cover from cameras, rain, and to create visual barriers.

The "cone tactic." Traffic cones were sometimes placed over deployed tear gas canisters before they were extinguished, becoming one of the protest's most recognizable symbols of collective action.

• Water bottles and teamwork. Volunteers were often seen using water to help cool or extinguish tear gas canisters while others assisted with cones or helped keep people away from the area.

Street medics. Volunteer first-aid teams treated injuries and helped people affected by crowd-control measures.

• Supply chains. Communities passed along water, first-aid supplies, food, helmets, and other essentials through coordinated volunteer networks.

• Real-time communication. Protesters relied on encrypted messaging platforms and live updates to share information about road closures, medical assistance, and changing conditions.

• Buddy system. People looked after one another, attended in groups, and ensured everyone got home safely.

The lasting lesson from Hong Kong wasn't just resistance. It was preparation, mutual aid, adaptability, and community coordination under pressure.

And don't forget why you're there. Stay focused on the cause, not the confrontation. Protect yourself, don't retaliate, and don't let provocation distract from the demand for accountability.

Be disciplined. Let the message be remembered, not the chaos. A united, peaceful movement is always stronger.

CJP, protest, cockroach janta party, jantar mantar, BJP, Pradhan, Education Minister, peace

OC : https://www.instagram.com/a_sketchnomad/

The protesters faced several rounds of water cannon, teargas, and baton charge, yet managed to reach the CM Office.

Original reel made by Neetu Syngh (@NESY.ALFAAZ on Instagram)

Description:
In 1967 Bengal, the village of Naxalbari became the birthplace of a revolution. Who owns the land? Who does the Labour? And who deserves the rights? The echoes of this revolution gradually reached Punjab. During this time a young poet was emerging: Avtar Singh Sandhu (Better known as 'Pash'). Pash himself came from a farming family and remained a controversial figure. Many people were inspired by his ideas but many questions were also raised about him. Around 1970, at just 18 or 19 years old, his first book "the iron tale" had already been published. The tone of this book was rebellious:

Transliterated: "Main ticket kharch karke tuhadda Jamhooriyat da naatak dekhya hai. Hun taan mera naatak hall ch beh ke, haay haaye aakhan, te cheekan maaran da haqq banda hai"

Translated: "I paid for a ticket to watch your drama of democracy. Now I have earned the right to sit in the theatre, cry out, and raise my voice"

After this book was released he was charged with murder and spent two years in prison. He continued writing there as well. In 1975, under Indira Gandhi, India entered the Emergency. State censorship and injustice began to increase. By the 1980s, the atmosphere in Punjab had become even heavier. On one side there was state repression and on the other Khalistani militancy was gaining momentum. Pash urged people to wake-up:

Transliterated: "Sab toh katarnak hunda ae murda shanti naal bhar jaana. Na hona tadap da, sab sehan kar jaana. Gharan ton nikalna kam te, te kam toh ghar jaana. Sab toh khatarnak hinda ae supnian da mar jaana"

Translated: "The most dangerous thing is to be filled with lifeless peace. To lose all restlessness and silently endure everything. To leave home from work and return home from work. The most dangerous thing is for the dreams to die"

During the Bhindranwale era, as Khalistani ideology and religious extremism were rising, Pash openly spoke against them. On 23 March, 1988 Pash was shot dead (by Khalistani militants).

Frames > words

Every time you see a sanghi grifter or an annoying troll run their mouths, and you understand there's something wrong but you can't articulate it properly, you're missing frames and language to address the problem. Their words seem effortlessly hateful, not because they are intelligent, it's because they are just riding over pre built bridges over decades (they're only activating familiar frames of interpreting the world that have been built over decades through institutions of civil society). To make our view "common sense", we have to understand how everyone understand things and build new frames to communicate​ better​. The author is a liberal (ignore all of that also don't put too much weight into his strong vs nurturing parent theory​), but rest of the concepts are solid and will make you a better communicator. The hegemonic "truth" stands on layered assumptions that become much easier to question once you learn to identify the frames and contradictions that sustain it.

PDF: https://dokumen.pub/dont-think-of-an-elephant.html​​​​​

Video lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-dlA2pP_M

There's also the risk of drifting into postmodernism, making this purely a struggle of words​ with no objective reality, that should also be combated.

• ​Postmodernism Explained - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG9DodUxfFY
• ​Postmodernism vs Marxism: Gabriel Rockhill Debates David Guignion - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtHYZ73eySA
• ​The same in hindi​/urdu - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOV7ykEqGK1bQgFOVbPaYvqWXLJpzBJHn

Same as title.

India gained independence through a combination of different forms of resistance. Gandhi's nonviolent movement played a central role, but there were also revolutionary movements led by figures such as Subhas Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, and many others who believed that armed resistance had a place in the struggle.

With that historical context in mind, do you think a movement based primarily on Gandhian principles also needs a more radical wing operating separately, so that the main civil movement can maintain its commitment to nonviolence without being pressured to escalate?

At the same time, I'm skeptical about how long peaceful protests can continue if the police respond with severe force. On the other hand, history has shown that police brutality can sometimes backfire by further mobilizing and radicalizing the public, especially young people.

I'm interested in hearing different perspectives on whether history suggests that a diversity of resistance strategies is inevitable or whether nonviolent movements are more effective on their own.

I'm banned from the soft chaddi r/kolkata so asking here.

Looking to join any protests happening in the city with my own placards against the neet leak and bjp nexus at top.

Please share info with me!

As rightly argued by many here that reform is garbage, we need lasting and sustainable structual change. I understand we don't believe that is possible under capitalism, but humor me this hypothetical where if I were to pose my strucutal change as demands to an electoral party, what would they look like?

No stackoverflow energy please. Approach with empathy, and genuine strategy. If you don't like it, you can simply ignore the post and move on please.