[Assam] Letters to the Editors

[Chan Mahanta]

First things first:

 >Both letters are great examples of the sentiment and aspirations  
expressed
 >by a lot of common folks in Assam


*** Glad we are told! Could have missed it. And coming from an authentic
'common folk' from Assam, there can be no room for doubt.

*** It is also heartwarming to know that  representative of these  
'little people' ( to paraphrase
the Chairman of the BP Board), is so well versed with the Greek  
classics.

*** The letters themselves , of course are authentic expressions of  
the aspirations
of them 'little people' of Assam. Who could therefore take issue with  
them, unless one is as
despicable elitist  as yours truly!

But I will let it go for now. Maybe, just maybe, I might revisit them  
at d some future time,
should I find it necessary to spill some blood in this net :-).









On Jun 17, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

> I think a good response is warranted to our own version "Hippias  
> Major 1".
>
> In the original version, Socrates is said to be his own inferior,  
> and his
> own superior, refutes, and gets refuted (by himself).
>
> In our Kharkhowa version, Socrates (and his other self) seem to be  
> superior,
> they refute everything others say, and no quarters are yielded....  
> and so
> forth :-)
>
> Well, I hope I can respond adequately... we will have to see... :-)
>
> In the mean time..
>
> Here are two letters to the editors (one from Today's AT, and the  
> other from
> yesterday's Sentinel). One of the letters is from KJD.
> Both letters are great examples of the sentiment and aspirations  
> expressed
> by a lot of common folks in Assam
>
> It seems there are only on the fringe, who will somehow refuse to  
> see the
> light.
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
> *(From The Assam Tribune, today)*
>
> * *
>
> *Give up sovereignty demand*
>
>
>
> Sir, – Today everything is wrong with Assam and her neighbouring  
> States. A
> few misguided youths have taken up arms in their bid to give shape  
> to their
> pipe dream. Sovereignty is an absurd dream. Since independence we are
> attached to the Indian
>
>
>
> Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech, right to education,  
> freedom
> to practise one’s own religion, and freedom
>
> to work anywhere. What else are they aspiring for? The common people  
> are not
> interested in sovereignty or independence,
>
> they want an economically sound and prosperous State. The Assamese,  
> Bodos,
> Manipuris and Nagas are all peace loving people.
>
>
>
> Everybody wants to live peacefully. Thousands of men, women and  
> children
> have been killed by various outfits for their unjust
>
> political demands. The Dhemaji massacre, the Bhimajuli killing, and  
> bombing
> of Ganeshguri are a few examples to remind us how cruel these people  
> are.
> They have already created mistrust among different communities living
> peacefully for years together.
>
> By now they should have realised that sovereignty or independent State
> outside India is an absurd dream. For example, LTTE’s separate  
> homeland for
> Tamils and Khalistan for Punjabis did not materialise. It is better to
> abjure violence and to solve all
>
> problems through negotiations with the Centre. Problems of any  
> magnitude can
> be solved through dialogue with a give and take policy. – yours
>
> etc, DWIPEN TALUKDAR,
>
> Usha Nagar, Tezpur.
>
>
>
> (From The Sentinel - yesterday)
>
> *ULFA’s Demands: What are they?*
>
> I concur with the opinion expressed by Shibdas Bhattacharjee in his  
> article
> ‘‘Don’t Sabotage the Peace Process’’ (The Sentinel, June 10, 2010)  
> in which
> he has rightly said that ‘‘some intellectuals are trying to redefine  
> the
> term ‘sovereignty’ as per their convenience to make it fit in the  
> context of
> Assam’’. It sure makes my hackles rise to see a tiny group of  
> individuals in
> Assam who cling to the belief that the Centre, in view of the changing
> concept of sovereignty, must not hum and haw to initiate peace  
> process with
> the ULFA on the issue of Assam’s sovereignty. Additionally, the same  
> group
> proposes that the Constitution can be amended at any time since it  
> was not
> written by an invisible divine power. However, the inescapable truth  
> is that
> whether the definition of  ‘‘sovereignty’’ has changed or not is a  
> matter
> that is purely academic. We obey only the Indian Constitution which  
> does not
> have an enabling provision that allows an elected government  
> official to
> discuss on the issue in point. Further, the Constitution cannot be  
> amended
> at someone’s whim, will and fancy. Simply stated, it cannot be bent or
> twisted according to one’s convenience. Therefore, to expect the  
> Centre to
> cave in to the ULFA’s overweening demand of ‘‘sovereignty’’ with an  
> eye to
> usher in peace to the region will be, in my view, a total
> Alice-in-Wonderland.
>
> It is equally nettlesome to watch a few intellectuals trying to  
> exhort the
> government to rope in ULFA to the dialogue process with the purpose of
> having a discourse on its ‘‘various demands’’ in order to clinch a  
> peace
> pact. But the question that stares in our face is: Could anyone,  
> save ULFA,
> identify the charter that has listed out the so-called various  
> demands as
> expounded by those intellectuals? I am almost certain that the  
> people of
> Assam, at large, are not cognizant of ULFA’s ‘‘various demands’’  
> with the
> exception of its extravagant demand of  ‘‘sovereignty’’ vis-a-vis  
> Assam’s
> independence. The ULFA may have a trick up its sleeve, but in a
> representative democracy, the people, whose wishes and aspirations  
> they
> claim to represent, have the fundamental right to be aware of it.
>
> Now come to those who stand firm on the theory of the ‘‘root  
> causes’’ of
> terrorism – that terrorism is a result of deprivation and injustice,  
> that it
> expresses the frustration and rage of an oppressed people, and that  
> these
> are fundamentally political questions and not a law-and-order  
> problem. This
> assumption is flawed for one reason. Are we to understand that  
> crimes other
> than terrorism arise without ‘‘root causes’’? Most — if not all —  
> crimes of
> violence are committed in subjectively justifiable states of rage,  
> distress
> and alienation. It certainly does not mean that until an utopian  
> world is
> created where there are no injustices, and where all the ‘‘root  
> causes’’ are
> eliminated, such crimes should go unpunished.
>
> Kamaljit Deka,
>
> Sugarland, Texas, USA.
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org