Some of those who voted YES stated that:
• Yes and please reorganize all the existing districts and make it total tribe wise district
• Yes because Nagaland is a tribal state and if a district is created based only on size of population and if that district happens to be located in a particular tribe's land, the particular tribe tend to curb all the opportunities and begin to instill inferior complex to the fellow minority tribes and thus, tribalism, conflicts, etc, etc.
• YES to the deserving ones and NO to the undeserving ones. Government should thoroughly do some calculations, so as to avoid havoc in the future
• Yes because Pork and chicken cooked together doesn't taste good
Some of those who voted NO stated that:
• No, this is not a healthy sign. I agree that the number of districts should be increased but this decision must be made purely from the point of improving governance. This current policy of creating districts on the basis of tribe identity is wrong and will only create more problems in the state.
• No. It is funny. We Nagas keep saying that tribalism is one of the causes of division in our society. We say that tribalism is destroying the Nagas. How can we now justify the creation of districts on the basis of tribal identity? This is hypocritical.
• Each distinct Naga tribe deserves a separate district of their own so that each unique identity, culture, tradition and arts can be better preserved. However granting more than one district to any tribe is simply greed and exercise of excessive power undermining other minority tribes. So such selfish act of practice should be condemned by all right thinking people. Every tribe is equally important irrespective of quantity or quality.
• The answer is absolutely "No", randomly granting/creating new dist. may look "a job well done" for the moment, but on the inside complications on the long run can be serious. Period without an bias.
• Generally, the main purpose of creation of district is for better administration and governance. So, creation of district for growth is beyond the scope of Indian polity, as where there is strong administration and good governance there will be growth irrespective of tribe, divisions, district etc. Interestingly, this question would not arise if Chümoukedima and Niuland were not created. Instead of long term growth, this will affect the governance of Nagaland in many ways forever. Lastly, In India, the largest district is Kachchh (Gujarat) of 45,652 Sq km and the Smallest District is Mahe (Pondicherry) of 9 Sq km. Which means Nagaland having 16,579 Sq Km is smaller than half of largest district in India.
• Organising districts along tribe identity is not a positive step for the long term growth because:
1) It will further divide the society on tribal lines.
2) Minority community and unrecognised tribes may feel inferiority complex negligence/within the districts.
3) Inter-tribe marriage cannot take place in such a scenario.
4) Boundary disputes may arise as we can see from past and present experiences.
5) Further demands of new districts may arise.
6) More corruption will take place as people from same tribe may not complain about it.
Some of those who voted OTHERS stated that:
• Whether creation of a new district is good or bad depends on the factors for its creation. If it's created for administrative convenience, we can expect a fair and expectant result. If the creation is a consequence of tribal conflict, the result is expected to be conservative, reactionary and perpetual. Conservative because every division is given a new identity that will make them more conservative about their own tribe. Reactionary because there will always be a by-product: those who became part of the divided unit because they have no choice. Perpetual because the division is a result of conflict, and conflict will continue to exist, leading to more and more divisions until the very idea of "being different" is washed away with the blood of harmony and understanding. There are more reasons to be united than divided, so division must be avoided as much as possible. That being said, I support the creation of Shamator District. By all accounts, it provides administrative convenience and economic viability. I cannot say the same for other "divisions within divisions."
• District for the people, not for the tribe.
• Bad example set by Rio
• Tell uncle Rio to give tribal district to all recognised tribes
• I just don't understand why Rio government created Niuland as a district. Sorry if I hurt any person but I'm not against anyone ... If we keep on creating district according to tribe. Then in the future one community alone will have four five districts. That will be too unfair.
• Nagaland will be known for highest districts with no villages.
• Depends on what kind of person leads
• Hey this badass move is to distract us from Oting incident. Keeping us engaged with this civil affair. I smell the center's work at hand.
