Hazarika:
Pursuant to my note of Wednesday ( below) in response to your e-mail, I was
hoping
that you would help me understand what you were attempting to convey.
I was temporarily ticked off by the tone and substance of the letter and
had the urge to reply rightaway; but respecting our long friendship, I felt
obliged to allow you an opportunity to re-think what you wrote.
Since you chose to exercise the silence option, I felt compelled to reply;
even though I am no longer upset.
For starters, I was very curious about the recipient list of your e-mail,
all of whom I know fairly well. At first I thought it was the Texas
convention committee for 2004. But it was not. It was NOT addressed to the
Assam Net community either, whose discussions / debates of recent days
triggered your e-mail. It was not a private communication between old
friends, not an open commentary on a public issue, but a communication to a
select group of people,who I know to represent the entire spectrum of
complete support to total antipathy towards joint conventions,
making me the whipping-boy for imagined ills.
What exactly did you have in mind ?
Now Hazarika, I would have thought that you would have had the courage of
your CONVICTIONS
to challenge, or correct me publicly for my views, which I never made any
secret about;
by posting your note to the net-community whose OPEN discussions and
debates you had no stomach for. But public issues ought to be dealt with
publicly. That is why I am posting this reply to Assam Net as well, in
addition to a few people whio I thought might be interested.
>This whole situation is getting nasty and is promoting division and not
>helping at all.
*** What WHOLE SITUATION, Hazarika? And what part of it, if any, was
something that I
initiated, promoted or was otherwise responsible for?
Assam Net is a free forum for people to express their views. People
discuss/debate what they wish. I don't CONTROL the subject matter, the
tenor, or the results of these. Nor does anybody else. If YOU felt
something was wrong, incorrect, unfair or otherwise undesirable, YOU had
every opportunity to express your views. You could have set things
straight. Correct the incorrect. Inform the speculators.
Where were you? Why could you not stand up to be counted? YOU had the power
to stop the
speculations flying about the 2004 convention. YOu could have clarified the
intent of the "Assam Day" celebrations held by AANA in St. Louis this July,
reported to the Sentinel. What prevented you from doing so? Or most of the
list of the recipients of your mail for that matter?
I sure did my part. If you chose to miss it or ignore it, that is your problem.
I had some idea of what was going on. But it was NOT my place to step in
with third hand information. The RESPONSIBILITY is YOURS as the designated
spokesperson for your community in regard to the 2004 convention.
To blame me for YOUR lapses, obviously inspired by a tradition of faith in
the dubious dignity of stone-walling , was not a very well considered move.
And the tradition of disregarding the courtesy of a reply is not very cool
either, to be blunt about it.
>It does not matter what way the plebiscite for a single organization
>goes. The out come really does not bind either AANA or ASA to accept it.
*** You are preaching to the choir here Hazarika. Tell me something I don't
know.
>I am surprised that one poll was not enough for you because the out come
>expected
>did not favor the organizers and now a second one is being set up.
*** This is a rather sorry bit of commentary . You forgot to take note of
the FACTS here entirely didn't you?
Did *I* initiate the polling? Did I even suggest it? Sure I was the first
to put my
comments and votes. That was not because I was waiting in line to be the first.
So what is YOUR view of the poll results NOW after the disclosures on
sabotage? I was
almost certain of something like that to happen, but never for a moment had
I ever
considered that to come out of Houston. Obviously the ghosts of old
fashioned rabid
partisanship are still haunting even the best of our communities.
NOT THAT IT WOULD HAVE MADE AN IOTA of DIFFERENCE EVEN IF THE POLL SHOWED A
PREFERENCE FOR A SINGLE ASSAMESE ORG., if past experience is any guide. But
a lot of young people, driven by idealism, were attempting to gauge the
public sentiment, and one of us consumed by partisan politics chose to
sabotage it.
But don't blame me for it Hazarika. I never had anything to do with
creating such attitudes.
>I am afraid that this current
>situation may pull us back to 1991 in Philadelphia.
*** I was not in Philadelphia. But I have heard differing versions of the
proceedings.
For discussions' sake let me accept YOUR version. But to dwell on it to
justify the segregation, demonstrates, at best, a bankruptcy of IDEALS and
an abiding sense of UNWARRANTED cynicism.To wag it as many time as I have
seen it being wagged as an excuse for the segregation, does little to our
image in front of our younger generation. More so because YOU are just as
aware as we all are about the dire outcomes predicted for joint conventions
turning into free-for-all battlefields, and how much of it actually came
about.
The only sordid aspects of these have been the feuding that went on behind
closed doors among the planners acting like schemers, St. Louis being the
only exception.
I just hope your words will not turn into self-fulfilling prophecies.
>We tried so hard to
>get AANA invite ASA to a joint convention in Houston in 1999, that itself
>was a big thing.
*** I would agree that it WAS a big thing. I commended YOU for your vision
and your courage then, and I do now. But your comment raises a couple of
questions in my mind. Try the following on for size and see what, if
anything, fits:
*****
The statement is an affirmation that you all believed in your mission.
Your ( plural) 'trying so hard' is a relative term. It implies that
the opposition
to it was very strong. If so how does that reflect on your fellow
AANA members
who opposed it so strongly?
*****
Now that you think that the ">The damage is probably done already";
how does that
reflect on the STRENGTH OF YOUR CONVICTIONS which has evaporated
merely as a result
of a handful of anonymous posters' comments in the poll; most
vicious and mindless
of the personal attacks of which was directed not at YOU, not at
the Houston
community, but at ME?
*****
Would I be incorrect here to conclude that the above two are
conflicting claims?
*****
>People started enjoying these and wanted to continue. Now this whole
>situation will bring back division and what ever was accomplished so far is
>in jeopardy of loosing.
*** I have great difficulty understanding what you mean. WHAT exactly did
you see in
the" WHOLE SITUATION" which puts the joint convention in jeopardy? What was
leading you
to predict the DIVISION you cite?
And WHAT PART OF IT are you INSINUATING that I instigated and/or promoted
? I find the insinuation quite misplaced, Hazarika.
>The damage is probably done already. It will be hard to repair this
>damage.
*** If your despair is caused by this realization, and it is a fact, then
the guilty party
is NOT me, but those who are using the open debates of Assam Net, or
anonymous posts in the Assam.org polling, as an excuse for precipitating a
crisis that is not warranted by any stretch of the imagination. If you need
elaboration on it, let me know. I will be pleased to explain it in details.
>I feel pity to myself that I proposed the joint convention for AANA
>to extend the invitation to ASA in 1999 with out which there would have
>been continued 2 conventions.
*** First; Hazarika, your comment demnonstrates that you ( like some other
people I know)
are unable to see the people of our community WITHOUT the label of AANA or
ASA. But you ought to
have realized by now, that it is the result of an impaired vision. There
are many people who attend these conventions, and far greater still who are
a part of our community; but who do not go about either sporting these
labels, or laboring under the burden of these identities.
And it is exactly people who are beset by such partisan outlooks that is
the cause of our
community's rifts.
Second: YOU DO DESERVE to be congratulated on leading your community on to
a higher road.
But the DEGREE of your accomplishment is dependant on the degree of
receptivity in your community. If it was very receptive of the idea to
begin with, then the credit to you would be only lukewarm. But if the
opposition was vehement, then the credit to you is that much higher.
Maybe you did deserve a medal. But that has to be decided by the
beneficieries of your action, the Assamese community - NOT ME. But WHO is
going to tell the Assamese community how to EVALUATE your contributions?
You know what, I would have thought that it ought to come to us naturally
to do the
RIGHT THINGS ?
>May be that was better. Then we did not have to go through this anguish and
>not see my name as accused by some in the web
>with out factual information. I am really very upset and hurt with this
>whole thing.
*** Hazarika, I am no psychologist ( I am no Tilok Hatimuria ) and am
ill-equipped to help you with your self pity and grief. But as far as I am
concerned, your condition is self-induced and based on flimsy grounds,
unless you are being hounded by somebody or some people for your past
transgressions of stepping up to a higher road.
At any event it is NOT my fault.
I also am totally incapable of empathy for your thin-skinned condition for
reasons that ought to be obvious to you. The only thing I can suggest is
for you not to look at unpleasant e-mails. Keeping the eyes, ears and mouth
closed is certainly your prerogative and an option, even though it is not a
choice I believe in exercising.
Most importantly, I am sure you realize what you did in 1999 for the cause
of joint conventions, was for the COMMUNITY and not for ME. I do not
represent the community, even though I do step out often to speak for
people who would otherwise not have a voice. If your or your community's
commitments to the joint conventions concept could come unglued by some
spirited Assam Net debates on the merits of a single organization to
represent all of us, then it must have not been very well founded to begin
with. Something that you certainly ought not to pin on me. You are barking
up the wrong tree.
Finally, Hazarika, I have prurposely resorted to a tough reply,hoping to
shock you out of your self-pity and angst. But I continue to consider you a
dear and valued friend and hope I too would measure up to be reciprocated.
It has always been my belief that personal friendships are far more
valuable than community politics. Recently a friend of yours, (and mine)
confided to me that he lost some very good and old friends in
embracing/promoting the idea of joint conventions to underscore his sense
of loss in justification for his current opposition to joint conventions,
even before the recent Assam Net debates. I did not comment, but I felt
bad, both for his friends and him too.
You are welcome to debate, rebut or refute the points I made. But please do
so publicly. I don't like the private-club ways of dealing with public
issues.
Take care.
mahanta
********************************************************************************
*************
9/10/03
Dear Hazarika:
I am quite distressed by your e-mail. Not something that happens often to
me, as you know. I can take a lot of beating.
But coming from a very old and level headed friend, like yourself, I am
quite perplexed.
I'll give you an opportunity to rethink and explain your note, with
reference to context. I hope it will be something more understandable than
what I see below, and a detailed and PUBLIC ( because we are dealing with
public issues here) response on my part would not be required.
Take care.
m
********************************************************************************
Status: U
From: "Mano Hazarika" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Barada & Kumkum Sarma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Dilip & Dil Deka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kamna Das" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Manjula Datta-Barua" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mano Hazarika" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mano Hazarika" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Rabin Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rana Gogoi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Sayten Das" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 11:42 PM -0500 9/9/03, Mano Hazarika wrote:
>Mahanta,
>This whole situation is getting nasty and is promoting division and not
>helping at all.
>
>It does not matter what way the plebiscite for a single organization
>goes. The out come really does not bind either AANA or ASA to accept it. I
>am surprised
>that one poll was not enough for you because the out come expected did not
>favor the
>organizers and now a second one is being set up. What are you trying to
>accomplish? Is it worth it? I am afraid that this current
>situation may pull us back to 1991 in Philadelphia. We tried so hard to
>get AANA invite ASA to a joint convention in Houston in 1999, that itself
>was a big thing. A better understanding was continued to build after 5 joint
>conventions between people that could not see eye to eye before. People
>started enjoying these and wanted to continue. Now this whole
>situation will bring back division and what ever was accomplished so far is
>in
>jeopardy of loosing. Do we really want to go back to 2 conventions
>again? Think about all the hard works and sacrifices that went in building
>these orgs.
>
>The damage is probably done already. It will be hard to repair this
>damage. I feel pity to myself that I proposed the joint convention for AANA
>to
>extend the invitation to ASA in 1999 with out which there would have
>been continued 2 conventions. May be that was better. Then we did not have
>to go through this anguish and not see my name as accused by some in the web
>with out factual information. I am really very upset and hurt with this
>whole thing.
>
>Best of luck.
>
>Mano Hazarika
_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
