What history speaks of, about Nagas being a sovereign independent people from time immemorial is a fact and so shall it ever be. What the present has, is the burden for a future that wouldn't embody a futile Naga condition should we miss out reasoning before the march has been set untoward the future. Having said that doesn't mean that the people wouldn't move forward or let anyone who has contributed their part, (despite their flaws or not) to let move forward. The Naga people has every need to move forward and progress and so shall it be done but only in such a way that every people would be informed about the step to be taken and the informed intellectual (scholar) persons can altogether critically examine whether the proposal to move ahead would be fruitful for all the people not just in the present but also for times to come. After having examined it, the people should have the right to "suggest some and omit some" (compromise, if needed), since the proposal is to affect not just the policy makers but also the people. And only after everything is sorted out between the policy makers and the informed persons, will the proposal be forwarded for the general people to take a vote on it and decide the fate of Nagaland, as it is done on rational ground in democratic nations. (For eg:- The plebiscite taken in UK during the Scottish urge for an independent nation and the Brexit during this decade.)
A mere plebiscite could be, [Start Quote] "dangerous political hypothesis if the claimed number does not represent the issue" [End Quote], as per the statement of the senior national workers from Nagaland State on the framework agreement Chq, Hebron, May, 10, 2017, has rationally pointed out. And as per their statement about 'principle-based politics' and 'principle based solution', [Start Quote] "The principle of 'free Nagas' is the foundation of Naga politics and their unique history." [End Quote], if this statement is to be taken into consideration then, [Start Quote] "The plebiscite conducted in 1951 was a reaffirmation of the stand of the Naga people on their national principal." [End Quote], then the second statement let us to consider that if the claimed number do represent the issue then a plebiscite sought after informing the "claimed number", only stands to reason out any other approach, based on the same principle.
Without considering and acknowledging each other's "logical rationale", then no one has the right as a "human being" to ask of something without giving back. This is only necessary so that aside from the right to blame or applaud for its contribution in Naga's political development by the proposer in the future, the main priority is to strive not to see the day when we could, after the damage has been done, blame on the wrong doers, but to strive to see the day where our collective "logical reasoning" would forbid the outcome to be futile and only be progressive. And as "Accidents" remains an unpredictable phenomena to change the outcome despite our determination and well thought out plan to never fail but only prevail, then in such circumstances the people could only accept the responsibilities collectively and conclude collectively instead of waiting for the opportunity to put the blame on others after the damage has been done.
We Nagas as a whole should be concerned enough to participate directly or indirectly towards our political cause because ultimately it affects our way of life and even the policy makers should be "humane" enough to understand this human condition where without the consultation of the concerned majority, implementing policies that would only prove to be fatal in the socio-political relationships of the few policy makers and the large policy followers in the long run. This would only either lead to benefitting the people for a while or impacting a serious repercussion beyond repair, which is why the involvement of the people in the "Determination" process is only deem worthy.
With the fact that Nagas have always been a sovereign independent people, prior to the arrival of the westerners and their way of modernization, what kind of progress (from the perspective of the 21st century generation, which we all are, with the rest of the world) be it in terms of human norms/ human rights, technologically, civilization, development (infrastructural/ human index), economically, scientifically etc. had we accomplished till that time? Thus the fact remains to be questioned whether every past ideologies which have nonetheless brought us to where we are today (which would be respected for sure), necessarily has to be implied if at the cost of depriving the people their right to pursue happiness in life in this modern and changing times. If not, then the notion behind our political foundation (sovereignty) is indeed a beautiful cause.
Since we Nagas are living and would still continue to live, we have the outmost responsibility to ensure the better outcome for our survival that would be followed by issuance of peace, development and progression in harmony, one that could be at par with the western giants not in terms of superiority but capacity, for which should not be compromised by uneven reasoning. And if anyone has possible solution that would ensure all the above necessities while also installing seemingly controversial elements, then as explained initially, the proposer has to take into account the necessity of varying the contents by the informed concerned intellectuals and the general people with their model and then change our present wretched condition.
[The LDPN has no view of its own for any groups or organization as we respect the right of establishment of any organization aimed for social upliftment pacifically. This article only reflects the rational code of conduct in human society as done in modern western democratic countries.] Liberal Democratic Party of Nagaland
