Actually Santanuda's points about there being no insurgencies in Bihar, UP, MP and Orissa is just about plain wrong. The Maoists active in Bihar, parts of MP, parts of Orissa and elsewhere are not exactly saluting the Indian constitution. Uttarkhand and Jharkand were created out of Bihar and UP precisely because economic opportunities were not created for people in that region. Other factors such as the absence of OBCs in Uttarkhand and the dominance of tribals in Jharkand were corollary factors that spun very closely around the fact that these groups primarily did not get to share in the economic opportunities. If someone told me that there was nothing about economic development about the Bodos desire for a Bodo Autonomous Council I would tell him he was smoking pot. Now that is separatism as well.
The corollary of that is the case of the Tamils in Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu does not have a separatist movement - yet a hard separatist battle rages just across the seas where Tamils of that nation are involved. I could google and get some stats out of the Net - but I am sure the per capita thing works in Tamil Nadu's favor. And if you take Andhra Pradesh and did the per capita thing, you will find the per capita GDP of Hyderabad city would be much higher than the one in the Telengana region which has a statehood movement as well as a Naxal issue. As Ramda pointed out, no one is saying economic development or the lack of it is ALL that is there to separatism. It does however form a large part of the "real substance" of separatist movements anywhere. Assam is no exception. I am really hard-pressed to find a separatist movement in any part of the world where there is plenty for ALL the people in that region. For anyone to suggest that economic development is NOT a reason demonstrates how much "out of it" he or she is. Even as I make this statement I am concious that I am playing on words in exactly the same model as some of these votaries have done. In exactly the same model that Ramda has not suggested economic development is the ONLY reason, these guys have not suggested that economic development is NOT a reason. But then let's get off the high horse! --- ram Sarangapani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > C'da > > >Yet another one of those statements assigned to > > me,but something I NEVER said. Because I always > knew > >that it was NOT about economic development > > Nor have I. But I believe economics is at the root > of > the problem, and I did mention religion, identity > etc > as other factors. But here it is from an earlier > post > from you: > > >Incidentally, one of the most glaring omissions or > >ignorances some of you demonstrated last week about > >Assam's alienations were your beliefs that it was > all > >about economic development or lack of it. > >Shows how much you guys are out of it. > > First of all, I never said it was all about economic > development. But I subscribe to idea that economic > development (or lack there of) was a basis for > insurgence in Assam. > People is Assam (NE) were already feeling the > disparities meted out by the Center (stepmotherly > treatment), and it was a good basis to go on. Then > add > to this a dash of 'Assameseness' ,and a dash of > 'identity' or what have you, and one one can draw up > enough to form insurgent group. > > > >Why don't we see insurgent groups in any of > > the advanced countries? Do you believe, any any of > > them would want to break away from success? > > There were no selective choices here. Forget the US, > where states have autonomy, what about Eurpoe or > even > Japan. Why has it not occurred in those countries? I > attribute is to success the nations as whole have, > and > people would find no reason to break away. > > Now, Santanu has brought up some good points. It is > true that Bihar and UP lag behind Assam (and also > other NE states) in many economic indicators & > education. > > I attribute this to: > (a) Bihar/UP are the hindi belt. There cronies are > in > Delhi. They get generous helping, and often from the > center. > (b) The NE states are very well educated. Education > lets one know what disparities are around you. The > Biharies or UP wallahs may not deem it necessary to > kill the golden goose here - why would they ever > think > of breaking up. This is a great deal for them -why > do > anything else. > > >I know why though. It is so much easier to deal > > with money, and we can always place the blame for > > having no money to laziness of the kharkhowas :-). > > Thats pretty intuitive! Where has anyone implied > that? > A tad bit touchy here, are we -:)? C'da, many of us > have written about this. Most of have placed the > blame > if you will on a number of areas and 'parties'. What > we always have said is this: You cannot blame the > Center for everything, and absolve the other parties > of any omission or wrongdoing. > > Again, please tell us what this insurgency is all > about. If its not about economics as a backdrop, > what > is it? > > -- Ram > > > > > --- Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Ram: > > > > >You are comparing apples to oranges in this > > situation. > > > > > > By jove you got it :-). > > > > > > But why selectively here, and not in: > > > > > > > > >Why don't we see insurgent groups in any of > > the > > >> >advanced countries? Do you believe, any any > of > > them > > >> >would want to break away from success? > > > > > > > > > > >And I have > > >always supported more autonomy for states in > India > > > > > > Tsk, tsk---the honchos at Hastinapur did not > listen, > > did they :-)? > > > > > > >I thought your > > >implication in an earlier post was that economics > > has > > >nothing to do with the cries for freedom (in the > > NE). > > > > > > Yet another one of those statements assigned to > > me,but something I NEVER said. > > Because I always knew that it was NOT about > economic > > development > > alone and argued so right here in Assam Net. It is > > you folks who > > dumbed things down to > > rupees and paisas. I know why though. It is so > much > > easier to deal > > with money, and we can always place the blame for > > having no money to > > laziness of the kharkhowas :-). > > > > > > Look at Santanu's comments. He is another person > who > > always > > understood what it has been about. > > > > c-da > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 2:52 PM -0800 1/5/05, ram Sarangapani wrote: > > >C'da, > > > > > >> There are aren't they? But they don't hold the > > >> Federal Govt. responsible. They do not charge > > the > > >>Feds with step-motherly treatment. They don't > > accuse > > >>them of ignoring them or exploiting them. They > > hold > > >>the feds responsible for a lot of things, but > none > > >> whatsoever the Indian union's constituents do. > > > > > >You are comparing apples to oranges in this > > situation. > > >The US system of governance is totally different. > > The > > >states do have more autonomy than India. And I > have > > >always supported more autonomy for states in > India. > > So > > >the question of step-motherly treatment does not > > come > > >about here - the states are responsible for their > > >success or failure to a large extent. > > > > > >Inspite of this, states like California complain > > that > > >states like New Mexico get more than they > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
