1/6. Are those noisy Punjabis at Delhi’s gates “rich farmers?” The average monthly income of a farm household (avg. 5.24 persons) in that state was Rs. 18,059. Or a monthly per capita income of Rs. 3,450. (NSS 70th Round). Story link at end of thread.
#FarmersProtests

2/6. In Haryana: Farm household avg. 5.9 persons. Avg. monthly income Rs.14,434 or Rs. 2,450 per capita. That’s income from ALL sources: cultivation, livestock, wages/ salaries, non-farm businesses. Gee! Such wealth. What a ball these folks must be having.
#FarmersProtests
3/6. Sure they’re better off than farmers in, say, Gujarat: Farm household avg. 5.2 persons, Avg. monthly income Rs. 7,926 (or Rs. 1,524 per capita). All India average: farm household 5.1. Avg. monthly household income Rs. 6,426. Per capita barely Rs. 1,300
#FarmersProtests
4/6. Please remember that the government has pledged to double farmers’ incomes by 2022 – 12 months from now. A herculean task. That’s what makes the disruptive interference of the Rihannas and Thunbergs all the more annoying.
#FarmersProtests
5/6. It only affects Punjab-Haryana, say the experts. Funny. When last verified by a committee not appointed by the Supreme Court, both Punjab and Haryana were a part of the Indian Union. You’d think what happens there matters to all of us.
#FarmersProtests
6/6. Funny. Some of the great names trashing the “rich farmers” on media are people who make more money in a day than an entire farm household of 5 in Punjab or Haryana earns in a month.
#FarmersProtests

https://t.co/zNX0LeUwYC

More from Society

Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause


I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.

I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views

I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.

I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.

You May Also Like