It goes without saying that persuasions can alter attitudes and minds of people for good or for bad and consequently affects behavior or action of people, one subject that is heavily articulated by behavioural scientist B F Skinner. By the mention of persuasion it does not necessarily to mean direct campaigns or lobbies. Anything ranging from write-ups in newspapers to comments in public meetings or on social media by many Nagas in an atmosphere of macabre speculations and near-grisly trend is nothing but a form of persuasion in one way or the other to affect the Naga course adversely. The intent or nature of persuasion depends on how much or in what way one dislikes or likes something.
It has become an ‘urgent pertinent’ matter to question whether many of the write-ups and comments by many Naga people serve the purpose of Naga unity and reconciliation or otherwise. Masquerading as ‘concerns,’ many producers of opinion pieces in public domain often do more harm than soothing the hobbling ‘Naga course’, thereby affecting indirectly or directly the Naga unity and reconciliation campaigns in detrimental terms. Was Chairman Isak Chishi Swu indicating to this trend when he commented that the “psychology of the Naga people needs to change?”
A big vacuum of ‘concerns for Nagas’ has been created because of the intense indulgence of ‘persuasion’ that is devoid of Naga unitary approach in wholeness by many public figures, various ‘Naga Political Groups’ and many civil society organizations. This is also to point out that insipidity of Naga conscience keepers has become a larger concern; as such state of affair is only helping in the splintered Naga course.
With the detrimental agents prowling more confidently than ever before, the conscience keepers of the Naga society need to accept that this grim trend is also due to their failure to meet their obligation.
There have been talks of ‘concerned Nagas’ working to heal the Naga wounds for sometime now. However, these ‘concerned Nagas’ unless they choose to be very loud and swift the eroding process may become too much for them soon. They ought to get shrill so that their ‘persuasion’ becomes more pronounced than the ‘other persuasion’. There is a need for ‘silent persuasion’ but if the ‘concerned Nagas’ choose to go discreet when loudness matters their efforts will be as good as no efforts invested.
Again, in discreet and in loudness of their campaigns the Naga situation should be treated in the approach of unitary wholeness. Anything less of this approach is nothing but the reverse ‘Naga course’. The ‘concerned Nagas’ or conscience keepers of the Naga society whose project is to uphold this spirit of unitary wholeness of the Naga course are definitely diagnosing the cause of the ‘splintered Naga course’ before they start treating the wounds.
There is no disagreement in saying that the duty of conscience keepers is to expose lies/falsehood. However, given the nature of the prevailing Naga situation the ‘concerned Nagas’ with a strong sense of dedication to ensure Naga unity and reconciliation fully understand that ‘over conducting’ of postmortem will only disfigure the Naga figure.
But to be more relevant to the occasion the ‘concerned Nagas’ and conscience keepers of the Naga society need to go loud and open whenever the situation demands.