[Assam] Demands for Separate states in India

[Chan Mahanta]

BK,


>Assam's case look pathetic because of a number of things. Somebody 
>rightly mentioned in these mails, there are no >Assamese in Assam: 
>who do you want to be sovereign?

*** Does this therefore constitute ONE of the reasons for your 
assessment, that Assam's quest for freedom is not legitimate enough?

I surely hope not. Because I know you are much too thoughtful and 
analytical a person to proffer this argument to a bunch of people 
like Assam netters.



>For example, when the Official Language Act was passed it >was 
>passed as a working bilingual or trilingual Act >(Assamese, Bengali 
>and English: you can add Hindi to it as >well).    


*** Same comments again.


>  Assuming that Assam is sovereign, she can follow the lessons of 
>Saudi Arabia and Dubai.And Malaysia. The >economies of these 
>countries are practically run by expatriate labour.

*** I presume you are attempting to suggest that since Oxomiyas are 
genetically lazy and do not like to work, they will have to depend on 
B'deshi and Bihari itinerant labor force to take care of their needs, 
even though you do not see a problem with that.

I will agree with the latter part -- that *I* don't see a problem 
with that either, as long as Assam has the resources to PAY for it.

But I take issue with the implied first part. It is about as 
meaningless a statement as one can get. The perceived Oxomiya sloth 
is a RESULT of a number of factors:

	** Traditionally, Oxomiya sustenance farmers did not have to work
	nearly as hard as people of some other areas, like Bihar for example.
	Assam's population density was very low, things grew without much
	effort ,there was plenty of game in the forests  and fish
	in the rivers and marshes.

	** The govt. office workers, the 'babus' who are the only people
	that the so-called intellectual class who help perpetuate such
	myths usually are exposed to and are aware of, do NOT make up
	the bulk of Assam's population. And these babus, a bunch of
  	unproductive, worthless people, wallow in their sloth and get away
	with it due to the dysfunctional-desi-system of governance which is
  	incapable of maintaining even a rudimentary degree of EXPECTATION of
	its cadres. And to add insult to injury, the system is incapable
	of holding its ranks accountable and set up deterrence to such
	behavior.

	It should not therefore require a rocket scientist to see how the
	lack of any deterrence , bee it social, be it moral, be it religious
	or be it governmental, perpetuates the non-performance of this
	sector.

*** An Assam that is free to re-engineer its governance with tools to 
exact accountability and set up deterrence against non-performance, 
can immediately turn things around on this front.

A governmental bureaucracy that is not sustained by a treasury that 
steals from those who PRODUCE and re-distributes to the 
non-performers  in the form of life time employment regardless of 
productivity would immediately react to the fact their "xaandoh-khwa 
baali tol-jowa" ( the demise of the golden goose) situation.
All of a sudden the bloated and un-productive  bureaucracy will be a 
thing of the past.

Ensuing social turmoil?

Some of it is bound to happen. Everything has a price. What makes the 
security of the non-performing establishment,built on the backs of 
the producing masses, so sacred? But pretty soon, like water finding 
a level, things will settle down, but with a brighter future for ALL.

sondon













At 3:24 AM -0400 8/26/06, BBaruah at aol.com wrote:
>Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
>Content-Language: en
>
>Since the fifties or so sixties Great Britain decided to get rid of 
>their colonies for one reason or the other. But there were a few 
>small island colonies, I now forget their names (of course I can 
>find out if I can visit a good library), they didn't want to be free 
>because they were entirely dependent on the Government of United 
>Kingdom for their livelihood. They were liabilities to the UK 
>Government and the UK Government would have very much liked to get 
>rid of them.
>
>
>
>I presume that it is not the case with the States of India I 
>mention. Unlike the nameless islands I indicate above where the 
>working population were mostly manual workers, Indians are today an 
>elite nation, professionals in various fields besides being engaged 
>in good farming and industrially progressing. And the majority of 
>the population owe allegiance to established religions.
>
>
>
>Assam's case look pathetic because of a number of things. Somebody 
>rightly mentioned in these mails, there are no Assamese in Assam: 
>who do you want to be sovereign? For example, when the Official 
>Language Act was passed it was passed as a working bilingual or 
>trilingual Act (Assamese, Bengali and English: you can add Hindi to 
>it as well).    
>
>
>
>Don't despair. At the moment I suppose Assam does have a bare 
>majority of Assamese speaking people. Assuming that Assam is 
>sovereign, she can follow the lessons of Saudi Arabia and Dubai.And 
>Malaysia. The economies of these countries are practically run by 
>expatriate labour. But these expatriates have no right to 
>citizenship and constitute no threat to local inhabitants.
>
>
>
>What about the language? Do the expatriates learn Arabic? Some do 
>but I understand the natives are trying to learn the language of the 
>expatriates as well.
>
>Bhuban
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20060826/c0da908e/attachment.htm>