[Assam] From Tehelka

[Chan Mahanta]

>It is important to know what would be ULFA's agenda in
>an independent Assam (and that includes how they will
>govern, what "freedoms" would be allowed or
>disallowed, how will the government be run etc.).
>Wouldn't we all expect to get those answers to form a
>complete opinion? And wouldn't we be right, in the
>absence of any such answers, in determining that this
>would spell anarchy, no less?


*** That is a fair question.

The answer to it probably have been easy to get, had Assam's 
intelligentsia and the establishment showed any inclination, to 
provide even a conditional support to ULFA's goals for Assam. Support 
conditioned on the RIGHT form of a system of governance; truly 
democratic, secular and so forth. The ones who have supported ULFA 
steadfastly all along have been those who are disenfranchised, at the 
bottom of Assam society, and a few of the rare breed from the ranks 
of the middle and upper-class, highly educated, informed and with the 
intestinal fortitude to stand and fight for what is right.

Expectations for answers from those who would not give ULFA an inch, 
very obviously, would be completely ignored. Wouldn't you, if you 
were in ULFA's shoes?










At 4:28 PM -0700 8/16/06, Rajib Das wrote:
>Yes, I agree completely. Labels of any kind don't
>amount to much. The Indian political class has only
>now started to shed labels. Within those, the ones to
>do so thoroughly were the Indian nationalists however.
>
>If the Indian nationalists are green with envy of
>China, it is great. At least envy might lead to
>something sustainably productive - as opposed to
>labeling China's progress as a CIA ploy or some such
>thing.
>
>The questions beneath the labels however are
>important.
>
>It is important to know what would be ULFA's agenda in
>an independent Assam (and that includes how they will
>govern, what "freedoms" would be allowed or
>disallowed, how will the government be run etc.).
>Wouldn't we all expect to get those answers to form a
>complete opinion? And wouldn't we be right, in the
>absence of any such answers, in determining that this
>would spell anarchy, no less?
>
>And no, the Oracle's (Mike Da) monologue, "Main Hoon
>Na" is not enough :-)
>
>
>
>--- Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>>  If so, those labels are that much meaningless,
>>  aren't they?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  At 3:14 PM -0700 8/16/06, Rajib Das wrote:
>>  >I thought that wasn't really Marxism (or for that
>>  >matter Maoism) that did it in China - it simply was
>>  >sheer capitalism.
>>  >
>>  >Before they started off on this Capitalist route 20
>>  >years before India, they were reeling off from yet
>>  >another one of the Maoist (or is it Marxist)
>>  >endeavors.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >>  Also, even though Marxism might not be your cup
>>  of
>>  >>  tea or mine, can
>>  >>  you go tell that to Chinese? A nation way worse
>>  off
>>  >>  than India 50
>>  >>  years back, now has no one going hungry or
>>  homeless
>>  >>  or without health
>>  >>  care, leaving Indian nationalists green with
>>  envy,
>>  >>  isn't it?
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >__________________________________________________
>>  >Do You Yahoo!?
>>  >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>>  protection around
>>  >http://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com