[Assam] Demands for Separate states in India

[Rajib Das]

O' C-da,

If you notice, I mentioned "proportionately" as a key
word while talking about magnitude. I also mentioned
that there is a long line of extractors in the case of
Assam. They will come first and the re-engineering
will take into account the fact that they will come
first. 

So here is a question for you: Would it be acceptable
to you if the the new re-engineered government held up
the primacy of let's say ULFA and ULFA political wing?
If you are ULFA, you get 50% of the resources. If you
are a ULFA sympathiser, you get into government no
questions asked. 

Re-engineering will not happen in a vaccuum.

> But any event, it has NOTHING to do with the
> magnitude of resources a 
> sate has. Therefore your contention that India , if
> with its  much 
> larger ( MAGNITUDE) resources cannot re-engineer its
> governance, then 
> an independent Assam with much lesser ( MAGNITUDE)
> resources cannot 
> possibly effect governmental reforms is
> a highly untenable argument. One has nothing to do
> with the other.
> 
> 

No. And if you asked me - I would lay the blame
squarely on militants. The sovereignity movements in
the last couple of decades deprived people during 
moments of opportunity that were seized elsewhere
despite the central government.


> *** Perhaps so, just like it has been for the last
> quarter century 
> since Assam's sovereignty aspirations germinated.
> But what have we 
> seen so far? Anything to take note of, anything to
> bank our hopes on? 
> Nothing, zip, zero, nada--if you asked me.
> 

I cannot believe you still are fighting this fight????
:-) You see stats staring at you, telling you
otherwise and you keep on - much like Fidel Castro.

> 
> *** Perhaps so, but MANY needs defining.  How much
> is MANY? What 
> percentage of the whole would constitute MANY? Try
> defining it and 
> then take stock of the situation and report to us,
> would ya? I am 
> sure it will be an interesting read :-).
> 

Another one. As I mentioned earlier, India was
tottering a couple of decades back. Not any more. 

Now you can continue to be Fidel Castro :-)


> 
> *** Survival is NOT the issue. India has survived,
> tottering at the 
> edge, for a very long time. And it can be expected
> to do so for yet 
> another very long period. But why should Assam be
> held hostage to 
> such a tottering existence?
 

Those that took over from the Agitation had enough
control over how resources are allocated. They messed
up - period. 

I think the fault lines were elsewhere however. But
that is another topic of discussion.

> *** It had NOTHING to do with allocation of
> resources. Assam could 
> not possibly have had a say on resource allocation,
> because it is 
> controlled by Dilli. Not that the crew in charge
> could have done a 
> better job,had it been in control over resources;
> but the fact 
> remains that resources are controlled by that
> remote, imperial , 
> colonial Center.
> 

Yes. Like I said, many don't like the priorities and
the speed of the re-engineering happening. Why Naxals,
I don't too! But I see a positive. And in my opinion,
the naxals are fighting an unwinnable war because
their  agenda will be taken over by the mainstream
pretty soon.

> *** If that were to be true, Naxal movements
> spreading to 1/3 of the 
> districts could not possibly have happened.


It has. Because at the end, it is a war of ideas.
Which one is fresh, young and holds promise is the one
which will win. If Independent Assam has to win as an
idea, it has to show WHY it is a better option than a
resurgent India. In the seventies and eighties, it
would have been a different, far easier gig (which is
why these movements gathered momentum in the first
place). It isn't any more. 

> *** That has NOTHING to do with Assam however.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:43 PM -0700 8/26/06, Rajib Das wrote:
> >Actually I would say this is indeed.
> >
> >The intent, will and ability to re-engineer
> anything -
> >including governments, companies, communities and
> >families - is ALL about the reallocation of
> resources.
> >
> >>  *** Is this some kind of an irrefutable or
> >>  unchangeable natural law
> >>  :-)? What does RESOURCE have to do with the
> ability
> >>  to re-engineer a
> >>  state's governance?
> >
> >The fractured polity you talk about is really today
> a
> >work in progress towards a re-engineering. It just
> >isn't quite happening with priorities, speed and
> >directions many of us would want for different
> >reasons.
> >
> >The behemoth elephant called India is dancing
> pretty
> >well for many people within India (including many
> in
> >the NE) to align themselves to the idea of India.
> At
> >least - relatively speaking vis a vis the idea of
> an
> >idependent Assam, it is more attractive primarily
> >because it offers glimpses of a better availability
> of
> >resources for more sections of the people. This
> >behemoth, once moving, moves at more speed and
> >attracts more resources to fuel that movement.
> >
> >>  India is incapable because of its deeply
> fractured
> >>  polity, and its
> >>  behemoth-like size.
> >
> >Like I mentioned earlier, in as much as small
> nations
> >can survive, so can big nations. In fact, bigger
> ones
> >such as India can rally more people and more
> resources
> >behind an elightened agenda.
> >
> >It is ALL about what that enlightened agenda does
> to
> >the availability and the reallocation of resources
> :-)
> >
> >>  But Assam, in spite of its diversity, is a far
> more
> >>  manageable
> >>  entity, that can and will close ranks behind an
> >>  enlightened  agenda.
> >
> >No doubt, the Assam Agitation was a great example
> it
> >could be done. Unfortunately for the advocates of
> >independent Assam, the ideas of the agitation
> >floundered and was not followed up with a really
> >better allocation of resources. Instead what it
> >wrought, followed up with a decade and more of
> >destruction of resources.
> >
> >Fortunately for India, its ability to re-engineer
> >itself in the early nineties meant availability of
> >more resources to be allocated across larger cross
> >sections of people.
> >
> >It is no suprise which idea is winning today.
> >
> >>  The 'andwlon' was a good example that it could
> be
> >>  done. Unfortunately
> >>  the 'andwlon' leadership had a divisive agenda,
> was
> >>  uneducated about
> >>  how to form a government and reform it to move
> >>  forward. They young
> >>  folks thought that changing of the guard was
> enough
> >>  to take them to
> >>  the promised land. It was a profoundly  faulty
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com