As talks of so called ‘civil war’ prevail, there has also been much derision on many other ‘wars’ engaged by Naga organizations/leaders against various detrimental factors/issues confronting Naga society. Resorting to tribalism or sectarian politics or stooping to the lowest ebb to pick names of someone’s family members who is being attacked or instigating violence or maintenance of extreme authoritative and rigid stand while carrying out certain campaigns is in fact ‘uncivil’. Such campaigns/wars, though the campaigns/wars may be against social ills, may be called ‘uncivil war’ or ‘uncivil campaign’.
Indulgence of ‘uncivil war’ has become more comfortable and satisfying for many Naga organizations/leaders today. However, they have forgotten that the most ‘comfortable’ or emotion-satiating means is never the best way to build the future. Rather, such means only take a society to a retrograde trend.
Here, the writer is not connoting that if it is not an ‘uncivil war’ then one should resort to a conventional ‘civil war’. The general terms of ‘civil/uncivil’ or ‘civility/incivility’ have been the premise of the argument advanced.
When there is a compelling need and demand that ‘regional’ allegiances and loyalties be altogether replaced by a sense of ‘Naga wholeness’ it is noticed that assuaging opportunities have been nipped in the bud by Orwellian measures from all quarters, thanks to the ongoing ‘uncivil war’. In a war/campaign against detrimental factors of Naga society, it is imperative to be conscious of rampant indulgence in ‘incivility’ while also identifying mutually supportive factors in the same time. One glaring detrimental factor at the moment has been a strong tendency of chauvinistic streak of tribalism and ‘regionalism’.
It is time to talk of a ‘reverse war’ against ‘uncivil war’ that has been a retarding agent of the people’s movement. This ‘reverse war’ or one may call it ‘civil war’ is a pacification campaign to undo all those grudges and sulks locked in the ‘Naga heart’. In doing this, and to begin with, choosing media as a parroting platform against another kin organization or fellow Naga should be done away with.
As commented earlier, to make the media as the only ‘connect’ for communication is a concomitant of the continuing practice of ‘untouchability’ among the Naga organizations, which is unbecoming of them who are supposed to be leading a people’s movement. This practice of ‘untouchability’ by Naga organizations should be ‘abolished’ if the society is to take the pacification campaign seriously.
In the wake of the prevailing rumbles in Naga society, every organization and individual ought to contribute their shares by way of shunning the indulgence of ‘uncivil war’. It is also imperative to remind oneself that promoting ‘colonial remnants’ has also been one of the key detrimental factors. Towards this endeavour, one must recognize that, in order to safeguard any movement from going haywire one must ensure that it must be coherent, and there should be consciousness constantly that its conclusion must reflect well on the initial reasons for starting the movement.