C'da,
>*** That is the hard part. If WE are indeed congruent, then we could focus our discourses to >drive that point home. Hopefully some in Assam are listening and will take it up themselves. But >even if they are not, if those in Assam Net who might taken positions against ....
I totally agree. A blog dedicated to such issues is a good first step.
>Do you, for example, think the Assam insurgency was planted there by someone out to destroy >the Indian nation, and it has gone on for nearly thirty years without PEOPLE's involvement?
No, I don't think that was the intent. What I think is immaterial. But if you ask me, I think the people were originally sold something else, and now the insurgency movement has turned into something that is not in the interest of Assamese at all. Nobody can convince me that Bangladeshis and ISI HAVE the best interests for Assam. And I am not sure if there is 'support' from PEOPLE for ISI/Bdeshi involvement and more importantly to break away from the India.
>> They are the ones who would need to get politically educated,
>>demand their due from erring polititcians, and make sure they don't keep voting errant >>scumbags to power every election cycle.
>*** You are back to your desi-delusions about 'people voting errant scumbags to power every >election cycle', the ol' 'guns don't kill people, people do' kind of fallacious and absurd thinking.
Ok, how is this different from your solution? How do you want people to get the 'power', and bring an end to all the corruption etc?
There are basically a couple of ways: (a) by force, arms, threats (b) thru democratic means.
Take your pick.
>*** That is NOT a GIVEN, and MUST NOT be a given, because we have seen how this >democracy has gotten to a self perpetuating virus infected one. If it won't allow changes, if it >won't allow reforms, then it is no sacred cow. Slaughter it if it must be. Re-build that hard-disk >to get rid of the virus infected one.
How would you slaughter and rebuild this hard-disk? I don't have an answer to this, EXCEPT thru proven demeocratic and peaceful means. Not sure if these terms are fashionable today, but being old-fashioned, I still believe in these.
--Ram
>From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Ram Sarangapani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[email protected]
>Subject: RE: [Assam] from the sentinel
>Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 08:29:11 -0500
>
>Hi Ram:
>
>
>At 4:58 AM +0000 4/10/05, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>C'da,
>>
>>Ah! at last there is some congruency. That was a pretty good
>>description of what any of us would want to happen and I don't
>>think I can disagree with what you has said.
>
>
>*** Thanks. I sure am glad to hear that. Wasn't sure we would ever
>reach that point :-).
>
>
>> Now, that we have settled that part, how would one go about
>>bringing this change? Is it possible? Where and how would you kick
>>off this political change, specially if the politicians are not
>>going to want such changes just becuse few like you & me want it?
>
>
>*** That is the hard part. If WE are indeed congruent, then we could
>focus our discourses to drive that point home. Hopefully some in
>Assam are listening and will take it up themselves. But even if they
>are not, if those in Assam Net who might taken positions against
>reforms on whatever misunderstanding or political beliefs turn
>around and support it and express their own views on it, it would go
>a long way. Because if WE all or most all of us believe in it, then
>we could spark and even fuel a public debate in Assam. Maybe some
>with a flair for writing letters to editors that stand a chance of
>publication would write. Or maybe we can start a BLOG on the
>subject. Maybe in Raiz-koo~x, where it will remain for the public
>record for others to see and pitch in?
>
>>
>>Don't you think then that the solution does lie with the people in
>>the end.
>
>*** Did I create an impression implying otherwise :-)? Do you, for
>example, think the Assam insurgency was planted there by someone out
>to destroy the Indian nation, and it has gone on for nearly thirty
>years without PEOPLE's
>involvement?
>
>
>> They are the ones who would need to get politically educated,
>>demand their due from erring polititcians, and make sure they don't
>>keep voting errant scumbags to power every election cycle.
>
>*** You are back to your desi-delusions about 'people voting errant
>scumbags to power every election cycle', the ol' 'guns don't kill
>people, people do'
>kind of fallacious and absurd thinking.
>
>The system does not allow the right people to be on the slate, for
>giving the people a choice Ram. That is why the it needs to be
>changed, reformed; to help let the able get a shot at being elected.
>
>
>>
>>Obviously, whatever corrective courses of action are taken, they
>>must be within the confines of democracy (however long that takes).
>
>
>*** That is NOT a GIVEN, and MUST NOT be a given, because we have
>seen how this democracy has gotten to a self perpetuating virus
>infected one. If it won't allow changes, if it won't allow reforms,
>then it is no sacred cow. Slaughter it if it must be. Re-build that
>hard-disk to get rid of the virus infected one.
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>--Ram
>>
>>
>>
>> >From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >To: "Ram Sarangapani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>
[email protected]
>> >Subject: RE: [Assam] from the sentinel
>> >Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:07:00 -0500
>> >
>> >>So, what exactly do you mean by "radical reform"? And I will
>> >>understand if you >don't really want to give us your definition
>>:-)
>> >
>> >
>> >*** My definition of 'radical' would be traditional meaning of
>>the
>> >English word, which is to do with fundamentals.
>> >
>> >
>> >By radical reforms I do not mean superficial reforms or window
>> >dressing. Nor do I mean isolated instances of reforms, as might
>>be
>> >involved in Manmohan Singh's call for administrative reforms, as
>>if
>> >the administrative services are the REAL problems. It drives me
>>take
>> >a highly unusual stance--of coming to the defence of the
>> >administrative services :-). But that is not where the real
>>trouble
>> >lies. It is in the electoral processes. Of selecting candidates,
>>of
>> >election funding, of
>> >a Central HIGH COMMAND dictating solutions on local issues, of
>>the
>> >concept of campaigning on symbols and not on issues--so on and
>>so
>> >forth. Once the political reforms take place, administrative
>>reforms
>> >also must take place, just like the judicial reforms. And ALL
>>must
>> >be done at fundamental levels to make a REAL difference.
>> >
>> >Can it happen overnight? No. But a trend must become visible,
>> >defined goals
>> >must be set with timetables.
>> >
>> >That is how I envision RADICAL reforms.
>> >
>> >Details? I am NOT competent to discuss details. Maybe on
>>isolated
>> >issues with which I may be familiar. But the details have to be
>> >looked into people who are in the KNOW of things, thru an
>>informed
>> >public debate in which no holds must be placed. It will involve
>>the
>> >mass media, but an independent one. Doordarshan's version won't
>> >suffice. So on and so forth.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >At 2:16 PM +0000 4/9/05, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>> >>C'da,
>> >>
>> >>That was pretty good. The topic is interesting and I would like
>>to
>> >>see the views of other netters on the subject. I will hold off
>>till
>> >>then.
>> >>
>> >>Just one question though.
>> >>
>> >> >> >When you say 'radical reforms', what exactly are you
>> >>proposing? What about thinking in terms of 'progressive
>>reforms'.
>> >>
>> >> >*** This is a fake argument, because anyone can assign
>>anything
>> >>to:
>> >>
>> >>RADICAL REFORM or PROGRESSIVE REFORM.
>> >>
>> >> >To assign such concepts as a Pol-pot like regime, or
>>Mao-like
>> >>autocracy, or Stalinist dictatorship to a declared intent of
>> >>reforms based on the best democratic processes of the world is
>>not
>> >>only >disingenuous but also is an attempt to prevent reforms.
>> >>
>> >>You are absolutely correct that anyone can assign anything to
>> >>Radical or Progressive reform.
>> >>
>> >>So, what exactly do you mean by "radical reform"? And I will
>> >>understand if you don't really want to give us your definition
>>:-)
>> >>
>> >>--Ram
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> >To: "Ram Sarangapani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >>
[email protected]
>> >> >Subject: RE: [Assam] from the sentinel
>> >> >Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 08:58:44 -0500
>> >> >
>> >> >>I think this is where some might disagree with you. Yes,
>>the
>> >>system
>> >> >>needs >'reforms' and yes it needs some new thinking. But to
>> >>term
>> >> >>them as totally >dysfunctional is going a bit much.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** Whether a system is functional but may need a bit of
>>fine
>> >> >tuning, or dysfunctional requiring a thorough overhaul could
>>be
>> >>and
>> >> >should be judged from RESULTS and not with choice of words
>>of
>> >> >characterization.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>And even if you did, what are the alternatives, other than
>> >>making
>> >> >>the present >democratic setup stronger? Do you see any
>>other
>> >>way?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** Of course I do--and have explained time and again how.
>>But
>> >>MY
>> >> >views need not be gospel. Let us hear other views on HOW
>>they
>> >>ought
>> >> >to be reformed. But to turn tail and claim nothing is the
>>matter
>> >> >with Indian governance, is patently unpersuasive.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>I don't think anyone has charged you with that.
>> >> >
>> >> >*** You are being very kind :-). But I will let Netters make
>> >>their
>> >> >own conclusions from what they have seen or read.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>But it does become of concern when people straight away
>>want
>> >> >>'independence' because they see corruption, dysfunctional
>> >>setups
>> >> >>etc around.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** A demand and a wish for "Independence" or "Sovereignty"
>>has
>> >>more
>> >> >dimensions than need for governmental reforms. Even if India
>> >>gets an
>> >> >epiphany tomorrow and re-tools its governance overnight
>> >>including
>> >> >the very best practices of democracy that could be found the
>> >>world
>> >> >over, a wish and demand for Assamese self determination may
>>not
>> >> >evaporate concurrently. My own guess is that it won't.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >However, IF a trend could be set, visibly and perceptibly,
>>that
>> >> >positive
>> >> >changes are possible within the Union and that the Union is
>> >>WILLING
>> >> >and CAPABLE of addressing the reasons, the causes, that
>>gave
>> >>rise
>> >> >to the sense of alienation and the demand for
>> >>self-determination;
>> >> >then in time, it is conceivable that such demands for
>>secession
>> >>will
>> >> >slowly recede to the point of
>> >> >arriving at a win-win solution to the NE insurgencies.
>> >> >
>> >> >That is why I have been such a die-hard proponent of radical
>> >> >reforms.
>> >> >
>> >> >Obviously it is not such a 'gosot-goru-utha' ( outlandish)
>> >> >suggestion, as could be surmised from the declared support
>>for
>> >> >AUTONOMY from my many esteemed opponents in Assam Net.
>> >> >
>> >> >But there is this lingering attachment to living in denial,
>>as
>> >> >expressed by the fact that many of those who would support
>> >>autonomy,
>> >> >would refuse to say WHAT they think is the PROBLEM, which
>> >>autonomy
>> >> >might help resolve. Either to these supporters of
>>'autonomy', it
>> >>is
>> >> >merely a decorative, element, an ornament, an adornment -- a
>> >> >pacifier to a troublesome child -- or it is a TOOL to help
>> >>achieve
>> >> >certain goals, meet certain ends, and help ease the demand
>>for
>> >> >secession.
>> >> >
>> >> >WHICH is it? If it is the latter, why can't they admit it?
>> >> >
>> >> >Oh, sure it would validate the fact that there indeed ARE
>>good
>> >> >reasons why the demand for independence arose. But to deny
>>that
>> >> >those exist--as is demonstrated by this flight from the 'WHY
>> >> >autonomy ?' question, would not help change anything. It
>>would
>> >>not
>> >> >make them go away.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> >When you say 'radical reforms', what exactly are you
>> >>proposing?
>> >> >>What about thinking in terms of 'progressive reforms'.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** This is a fake argument, because anyone can assign
>>anything
>> >>to:
>> >> >
>> >> > RADICAL REFORM
>> >> > or
>> >> > PROGRESSIVE REFORM.
>> >> >
>> >> >To assign such concepts as a Pol-pot like regime, or
>>Mao-like
>> >> >autocracy, or Stalinist dictatorship to a declared intent of
>> >>reforms
>> >> >based on the best democratic processes of the world is not
>>only
>> >> >disingenuous but also is an attempt to prevent reforms.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >WHY? Simply because a call for reforms would also validate
>>the
>> >> >notion that there indeed are good reasons why the rise for
>> >>seditious
>> >> >tendencies and movements have arisen in the NE.
>> >> >
>> >> >But to deny that would lead to nowhere.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>In the end, India is based on a democratic setup.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** So what? Not ALL democracies are equal. Just because a
>> >>country
>> >> >can hold elections does not guarantee that it would produce
>>good
>> >> >governance. Has India produced good governance?
>> >> >
>> >> >The packaging is not enough, even though that has been a
>> >>hallmark of
>> >> >Indian democracy, where the make believe is willingly
>>accepted
>> >>as
>> >> >the real thing
>> >> >even by large segments of its intelligentsia. That is the
>> >>tragedy of
>> >> >it all.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>Nobody gets away for ever. The solution lies in
>>strengthening
>> >>the
>> >> >>common man.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >*** Heh-heh :-). Good joke, that.
>> >> >
>> >> >And how exactly is the common man being empowered by Indian
>> >> >democracy, by Indian governance?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Perhaps by calls to replace the GO's by NGO's :-)?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Let's get real my friends !
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >At 4:13 AM +0000 4/9/05, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>> >> >>C'da,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >It means that the means of democratic societies for
>>holding
>> >> >>people accountable do not work. It >is an example of a
>> >> >>dysfunctional govt.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I think this is where some might disagree with you. Yes,
>>the
>> >>system
>> >> >>needs 'reforms' and yes it needs some new thinking. But to
>>term
>> >> >>them as totally dysfunctional is going a bit much. And even
>>if
>> >>you
>> >> >>did, what are the alternatives, other than making the
>>present
>> >> >>democratic setup stronger? Do you see any other way?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Am I proposing something subversive, as I get charged
>>for
>> >>when,
>> >> >>I present such ideas?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I don't think anyone has charged you with that. But it does
>> >>become
>> >> >>of concern when people straight away want 'independence'
>> >>because
>> >> >>they see corruption, dysfunctional setups etc around.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The way I see it, that line of thinking does not solve the
>> >>current
>> >> >>problems, but in fact creates new ones. When you say
>>'radical
>> >> >>reforms', what exactly are you proposing? What about
>>thinking
>> >>in
>> >> >>terms of 'progressive reforms'.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Now, we don't want to hang erring ministers/MLAs at dawn,
>>do we
>> >> >>(not that some of them don't deserve it)? :-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>In the end, India is based on a democratic setup. Nobody
>>gets
>> >>away
>> >> >>for ever. The solution lies in strengthening the common
>>man.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>--Ram
>> >> >>
>> >> >>.net>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >To:
[email protected]
>> >> >> >Subject: [Assam] from the sentinel
>> >> >> >Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:13:23 -0500
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Dear Netters:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >The following from tonight's Sentinel.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Do people wonder what this means? It means that the
>>means of
>> >> >> >democratic
>> >> >> >societies for holding people accountable do not work. It
>>is
>> >>an
>> >> >> >example of a dysfunctional govt. Something that direly
>>needs
>> >> >> >reforming, or so one might think. What do our friends
>>think?
>> >>Am
>> >> >>I
>> >> >> >proposing something subversive, as I get charged for
>>when, I
>> >> >>present
>> >> >> >such ideas?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >cm
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >36,000 cases pending against State Govt
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >By a Staff Reporter
>> >> >> > GUWAHATI, April 8: About 36,000 cases of the State
>> >>Government
>> >> >>are
>> >> >> >pending in both the Supreme Court and the Gauhati High
>> >>Court.
>> >> >> >Disclosing this on the floor of the House today, Assam
>>Law
>> >> >>Minister
>> >> >> >Dinesh Prasad Goala, in reply to a query from
>>Independent
>> >>MLA
>> >> >> >Pabindra Deka, said that the Government had already
>> >>appointed
>> >> >> >contact officers in the various departments concerned
>>for
>> >>the
>> >> >> >speedy disposal of these cases.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Goala said that as many as 35,780 cases are pending at
>>the
>> >>High
>> >> >> >Court while a total of 146 cases are waiting to be
>>settled
>> >>at
>> >> >>the
>> >> >> >Supreme Court. The Government has incurred an
>>expenditure
>> >>of Rs
>> >> >> >42.38 lakh on lawyers' expenses, the minister said,
>>adding
>> >>that
>> >> >>an
>> >> >> >amount of Rs 69.90 lakh has been incurred on litigation
>>at
>> >>the
>> >> >> >Supreme Court.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >On the other hand, Minister of State for Home Rockybul
>> >>Hussain
>> >> >> >informed the House that data relating to the pending
>>cases
>> >> >>against
>> >> >> >ministers and MLAs was still in the process of being
>> >>collected.
>> >> >>In
>> >> >> >reply to another question from Deka, Hussain said that
>> >>though
>> >> >>the
>> >> >> >Government had earlier decided to withdraw 39 pending
>>cases
>> >> >>against
>> >> >> >ministers and MLAs, the decision had since been
>>revoked.
>> >> >> >_______________________________________________
>> >> >> >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
>> >> >
>> >
