[Forked off from a comment on this "road crossing" post. {blr_editor}]
Silkboard, Your mention of "Oh yeah, the job of taking initiatives is best left to the citizens" really amused me - whether you said that in a sarcastic sense or otherwise.
Praja should begin unearthing the primitive most cause for all problems that it finds in the society around it. If there's a road-crossing problem in Bengaluru, and the same doesnt exist in Jaipur, for instance, there is a way in sight to find what that root cause could be. If there's more rash driving, illegal-cab-hiring and such nasty things happening on the roads of Bengaluru, and not Chennai, for instance, there's a cone of light pointing towards something more primary to this phenomenon than mere failure amongst politicians/representatives/cops etc. Its because of a systemic failure in the state, and in the country.
There is an uncontrolled migration of people into Karnataka, and mostly into Bengaluru. Our system has miserably failed in acting tough on monitoring this migration into Karnataka, let alone controlling it to limits that actually might be necessary. Praja with its presence in multiple towns of this country should try pouring pressure on governances across India. The polity of India is in urgent need to realise that people need to stay where they belong and make a good living, instead of migrating to find better places for the same apparent cause. No land in this country is cursed to be unable to give a good life to its people!
No matter what the size or kind of issues it sees around it, Praja needs to visualize the problem at this level, and realize that, this, only this, could be the holistic approach to solving our problems. Otherwise any attempts (however good, and laudable) could just resemble closing the holes in a weak balloon. You'll never fully solve the problem!
So as an action plan, I would suggest Praja bring its contacts into the governance into play here, and ensure its talks with governance in future have this tone. Among other things, Praja should press the public bodies for a strict monitoring and thereby control over migration into Karnataka (Bengaluru too) - regardless of the department it happens to deal with - be it the Police, the Legislature, or the Corporation, the Transport authority, or even the Weather department! Talk about basic issues, and try and help them realize the issue. The problem is half solved when you've understood the problem.
-Nijavaada
ಈ Forum topic ಅನ್ನು ಸ್ನೇಹಿತರಿಗೆ ಕಳಿಸಿ
Only crying baby gets its milk
The people in and around tin factory area whose children are facing the problem everyday are to demand for a solution. A proper pedestrian underpass and proper traffic control especially the city buses is the urgent need.
Migration between different states especially into Bangalore is to be taken positively in the greater national interest.For a better perspective on the subject, the following reference may be relevent
Published by Penguin Group
Praja is rightly helping on focusing on such problems on the web platform, so that the concerned people get to know what is required. It is also important to evolve policies how to go about solving the cities infrastructure problems. Recourse to RTI is the tool available which is effective for organizations like praja.
Thanks silkboard, for the article.
PSA.
how you take it is not going to affect how it takes you!
@PSA,
How anyone (including you and Nandan) would take the migration between two (or more) Indian states - in a positive sense or otherwise - is not of much relevance here. Of relevance here is how this inter-state migration is going to take us, the system around us, and what it is going to do to us.
The India that Nandan has imagined has been rather extensively ridiculed by many a educated audience. Besides, this imagination in his book, has remained, after all, but an imagination, and far from truth. Imagining India standing on false grounds will take us no far. If you find true reasons in Nilekani's book eliciting the goodness of inter-state migration, please place them on the table here, and we shall debate it even.
Frankly speaking there're a lot of myopisms evident straight out of this book our friend has recommended!
In the first part of the book, called "Ideas that have arrived", Nandan's thoughts are recklessly limited to only the urban India and the social parameters that relate to this miniscule percentage of India - perhaps as low as 10%. Besides his imagination of this urban India (and its progress - we're evidence to this progress I believe) is based on aspects that are really not going to drive us into sustainable growth in the coming decades, unless of course we want to remain what we are today - taking the world's calls, buying the world's produce, selling what we grow, including our children as well!! Across the pages of this book, all Indian languages have been grossly slighted in front of the capacity and earning-power that Nandan has seen in English but never perhaps attempted to explore the same from our own languages. Proposing imaginations based on such weak grounds is going to be disastrous to readers and followers!
This cannot be a reference for us at Praja to take cues from, especially in aspects as complex as inter-state migration, or the paradigm of handling linguistic diversity in India.
Come to think of it, it is the system around us that needs a hand, to cross the road.
-Nijavaada
No body is taking anyone nijavaglu Nijavada avre
I from interior coorge was born in Pune and did my primary schooling in “The Modern School” of Deccan Gymkhana, Pune. In fact I got married in a house in Deccan Gymkhana. My wife who is from North Canara in Karnataka, is a Havik Brhmin like me. Thanks to my Father being in all India service of Defense accounts, who knew a good friend, girls mava (mama) settled in Pune. I have very sweet memories of the city called Pune. No body “took me in" there. On the contrary I am afraid some body is going to take me in the reverse case. Oh yeah, now I am really in doubt.
I have gone through the Nelekani book 50%. I remain impressed till now. Nijvada, we are “educated” lot, including you, I am sure. Now let me see whether I come to your side by the time I am finished reading through this book.
Obama is the next President of USA. I am sure USA is not going to be “taken in” by the Blacks. In fact we expect the next President will be of Indian Origin. Please note it will not be an Indian.
Lastly, when some body cries, cries well in the mother tongue. Universal language like English could be of advantage, too. I did not think my son is at any disadvantage except that I cannot gift him a Calender which is in Kannada. We have Kannada associations all over US. Our children do learn Karnatik music, in there. We have our temples and purohits in US.
Oh yeah, when I read the book “Avarana” which is written in Kannda by SL Byrappa, I really felt bad, because I am unable to gift it to my son as he cannot read it.
PSA
one thing to 'dismiss', another to work on
Moving on to migration:
There are a good number of people who think the culture of the state would be at risk as its capital city loses its regional character. They may be wrong, they may be right, but there is a need for some steps to take in the moderates (which I trust is the majority) amongst this set. Essentially, the government needs to do something before a Kannada Navnirman Sena is born here (JD-S is lurking, its needs an identity, and extreme regional is the way waiting for it).
So, how do you deal with this in constitutional and pro-active way? Let me make some observations first:
What I am coming to is that The problem to be solved here is urban poverty, and not migration.
Perhaps Nvaada is worried more about loss of regional identity than urban poverty here. But we'd do better if we turn the priorities around. Putting the problem up that way is perhaps a better way of dealing with it, though I wouldn't say I have thought of the best solutions here. Talking more on the subject:
PS: Nvda - do come to a Praja meeting, some of us would be glad to see you.
Read The White Tiger
SB,
It seems you have been reading the White Tiger :). If someone is willing to live in the sub-human conditions that you sometimes see in Bombay, you have to wonder how much worse it is where they come from. It is probably the difference between living along a drain and starving to death.
It is rural and sub-urban poverty that needs to be solved. Cities are also largely secular (at least compared to villages) and it is rare that you care whether your driver belongs to any particular caste. No bus will not stop for you just because you are a person from a lower caste, no post office will throw you out.
A lot of migration into Bangalore is from neighbouring towns - do we stop that also? How much migration is "necessary" as Nijavaada puts it? Who decides the limits? Who enforces it? Is it even legal per the constitution which guarantees me the right to settle anywhere in the country and buy property there (Kashmir excepted)? Why should I be forced to accept a low paying job in Bangalore if someone is willing to pay me more in say Gurgaon? Do we then become like China where permits are needed to move into the big cities (and also accept other things - like Mandarin being imposed on everyone)? India is not just a union of 30 states - it is a nation of Indians - yet we view "the other" with more than bit of contempt. Have efforts been made to really integrate this country?
No easy answers to this issue.
Drive safe. It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.
You just cant work on ONLY one of them :)
SB,
I am surprised by your way of picking from problems, especially because it shows your inclination to seeing as less number of problems as possible - while we are all swimming in a pool of 'em! Just a thought.. lets focus on the issue now:
Anyway, to summarise your outlook on this matter, you've chosen to pick the effect, and ignore the cause. IMHO, any pursuit on this route is bound to take you to a point of diminishing returns only. As long as an informed body of citizens doesnt see the cause from its effect, its informed state is going to be of no avail to the society.
But SB, let me tell you that there is a primary confusion lurking large in your thought flow (going by what you've written in you last comment here) and that is about the need and cause for migration in our society. Please be informed that urban poverty, as you yourself have cited with comparisons of living conditions of maids/drivers/servants of the local and migrant classes, is a dynamic entity weighed proportionally on these two classes - local and migrant. If you were to accept that the local class has been living in better conditions, and enjoying better statuses, in contrast to their migrant counterparts, that, I say, is the point of our divergence.
I have to say it, for its the truth, but excuse me if you're hurt, no place or system needs to be built to handle migrant population efficiently! In a developed state of affairs, migration for life is treated as an exception. Thinking otherwise, will be a failure on our part in the direction of progress and welfare. In asking the system to equip itself & cater to such an exception (which incidentally has created anti-development vote-banks in India already) doesnt fit Praja's claim to be a responsible citizen body. While I agree anyone can go & work/live anywhere in India, why does the system that runs Bengaluru have to care about a migrant population that deems it their right to stay aloof from their surroundings. The system that runs Bengaluru, needs to just run Bengaluru. The migrants will have to align to Bengaluru to make a living here, and reap benefits from the system. Then urban poverty or any such parameter will be out of question. That apart, I wish to clarify that there is no (fear of) loss of identity (regional or otherwise) here, but a risk the migrants run of making this migration a mistake of their lives, owing to which they ended up with no better a lifestyle, unlike their imagination.
Coming to Srivathsa's rhetorical question about the definition of "necessity of migration," I'd like to draw his attention towards the real attitude any system needs to have about migration. It has to be an attitude of what the migrant can do to the system (that he/she is migrating into) and not the other way. Excuse me again, the system need not sit waiting to do something for a migrant, but it may actually have expectations from migrants - as in the ways in which these "necessary" migrants can contribute constructively to the system, and its betterment. This could quite automatically be a natural way of defending a system from unwanted migration, which in an extreme form could lead to phenomena like terrorism as well. Quite interesting here is also several recent occasions of several migrants that were arrested for their cheap and indecent crimes, some even resorting to physical attack on our policemen.
Anyway, let us first understand this problem in its entirety, and then try and expand our understanding to such extreme implications.
-Nijavaada
"Anyway, let us make sure we
thampan
Dude! I am sorry, but you may have to begin from the first page to be able to curtly, yet so criticly comment on the ongoing discussion.
Or if you insist, please project your comment with supporting substantiations, or logical explanations - failing which you only attract ignorance from the audience here - and elsewhere. Things are being discussed here, if you will; and not being rampaged upon like you just did!
-Nijavaada
a few comments ..
Pardon me for not critically commenting on what you had expressed. I had just presented a view point alone due to lack of time.
Quoting your arguments
"The polity of India is in urgent need to realise that people need to stay where they belong and make a good living, instead of migrating to find better places for the same apparent cause."
"No land in this country is cursed to be unable to give a good life to its people!"
1) I presume that you agree that "there is an entity called India."
2) The constitution of India says that people can live anywhere in this country of their free will. So please define what you mean by saying "need to stay where they belong".
You also seem to agree on this when you say "While I agree anyone can go & work/live anywhere in India".
3) "why does the system that runs Bengaluru have to care about a migrant population that deems it their right to stay aloof from their surroundings. The system that runs Bengaluru, needs to just run Bengaluru."
Please define Bengaluru. Bengaluru Or any place in India, in my opinion, is defined by the set of people who are staying in the place at this moment. There should not be a distinction between "Migrant" and "Home dweller". The root cause of the lack of cultural integration starts when you make this distinction in my opinion.
4) "No land in this country is cursed to be unable to give a good life to its people!" .. As far as i remember the pledge that we take is "India is my country, all indians are my brothers and citizens". This is one land, please don't fragment it.
5) You also say that "Moving from Mandya is not migration". Would like to understand why this is not so. What are the limits that you have set for this migration ?
----------------------------------
a) There can be rational discussions on how over population is killing a city's resources or what can be done to see how an area can develop in an equitable manner whereby there is a merger of cultures, ideas and thoughts in a friendly and rational manner.
b) Culture is something which evolves over time and not a static entity. Is it the same culture we have as we had back in 1000 AD ?
c) I agree with you on that people should try to understand local culture. The way for promoting the culture should be to popularize it and give incentives to people for understanding the local language or culture. Taking a hard stand that migration is the cause and should be avoided is not "friendly" to the "Idea of one india".
I am sure that there are a lot of migrants who have contributed to Bangalore and Karnataka.
thampan2
@thampan
Being on Praja, if you have had the occasion visiting the india census website, you would have surely found data related to people movement across Indian states. The department clearly terms this migration. There are of course migrations of various other kinds there, but the ones that are really important to our discussion here are the ones in which the migrant is more different (in kind, language, culture and other parameters as the case may be) from the mean kind of the people residing in the migrated society, than the differences that can be found within the migrated society. But seriously, and fundamentally, if you've migrated into Bengaluru, and someone asks you where you were from, would you tell them your city/district/state, or will you blank them out saying I am from India?!
I hope this definition helps your understanding, and thereby rethink some of your remakrs in your last comment - especially your special concern about the difference between migrant and home-dweller - its not a crime to use two words in India, after all.
And like I said already, a migrant's contribution is but primary to the reason of his existence in a migrated society. So is of course, the reason for anyone else in the society - migrant or not. But this is often confused and construed as a right to stake claim over the state's/city's development while it is definitely not. The migrant migrates with a personal cause, and not with charity in mind. Although theoretically possible, that will never be the case, and will not be discouraged too. So a migrant makes his living and career out of this migration, this land, and not otherwise.
And coming to your question on the fundamental (lack of) understanding of the constitution that is common to many nowadays, is the subtle but important difference between the right (the word can) that the constt. bestows on every Indian to settle/work/live anywhere in India, and the necessity (the word need) of every Indian to settle/work/live anywhere in India. I encourage you to think more about this and apply this to wherever you hail from. We've had quite a few similar discussions on Praja in this regard, but I guess this subtle difference is still not felt/understood clearly. I hope Praja will one day put this up on its welcome message to every new member.
BTW, Sankaranthi Shubhashayas to one and all :)
-Nijavaada
'they are not coming'
I can prolong this discussion. But this website is not the best tool for perfecting the art of debates, We can practice our "vaachaspati" skills better in a face to face meeting. We should meet. Try attend our next monthly meeting Njvda, I will like to moderate a session with yourself, mcadambi on one side, and Srivathsa, murali etc on other. Being a 'migrant' myself, I am a sitting duck waiting to be attacked whenever these debates get out of hand :)
I won't sign off with just a small comment though, have two interesting anecdotes worth sharing.
Recently, on a flight to Mumbai, I ran into an Indian gentleman settled in the Gulf. He was traveling with his company troupe (they are into metals), CEO included to look for acquisitions, and do some quality hiring. A comment he made was "they are coming less and less". Broken english alright, but he explained that last over last 6-7 years, he has been having a tough time hiring people. The 'suppliers' from India are not able to get them enough people and the skills they need. And now, they have to come here 'looking' for quality people.
Around the same time, on another flight, I ran into an agri-processing businessman from Punjab. After the usual introductions, where the gentelman literally traced my entire family tree, he asked me, "Who is doing it yaar? Nitish Kumar, or Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme?". I listened on and he described how the NREGS induced employment at local rural levels has lead to visible drop in "seasonal migrantion" of laborers to Punjab from Bihar. I was so lost in my thoughts after hearing this that I don't remember anything of his contingency plans.
Hearing the two "they are not coming" stories within a month drew me into this internal debate - not having to travel far far away to study, even farther to work, living your life with people you grew up with, would that have been better? Or is this - knowing new places, newer people, newer things - more fun?
No answer yet, but I am willing to bet that the majority hates to migrate. Looking at urban poverty from the migration angle is fine, but the solution is not JNNURM's BSUP alone, but in things like NREGS and Prime Minister's Road Scheme (Pradhan Mantri Graameen Sadak Yojna).
Migration cannot be stopped
While there should be good open competition which fosters a competitive environment, that does not mean we open doors for everybody and provide less floor for us.
Yes, there are residency requirements already in place. I have to prove residency for CET seat allotment, BDA site allotment and even Mysore residency for MUDA site allotment.
Article 16 of the constitution of India provides a legal framework for having residency requirments for government jobs. We should ensure that there is a significant framework for citizens of the state to enjoy the benefits first. As of writing this, the Delhi High Court has ruled that DDA (Delhi Development Authority) flats are for citizens / residents of Delhi only.
More importantly - Bengaluru is NOT Mumbai. Bengaluru is NOT a cosmopolitan city. It is still, is and will be a 'Kannadapolitan' city. The Kannada framework of the city is big enough for multiple personalities to exist. I have noticed now the even street vendors do not reply to their hindi speaking customers in Hindi. This is a welcome change. We have to encourage Kannada and English as two languages of Bengaluru and not Hindi.
It's all about one's quest for prosperity and good life!
SB, Nijawada, Srivastha and others,
The issue and problem of immigration and allegation of "you don't belong here" lies at the core aspiration of our existence on this earth. Each one of us would like to live a good life and with prosperity for eternity.
Why do people migrate? For better living, better job and better opportunity. Sometimes it is real, other times it is perceived. Some succeed and a good percentage don't. Until recently the bond to local "MITTI" deterred a vast majority from moving to other place and even if moved due to jobs, tried to return to the birthplace. Due to various factors and uneven development/progress there is vast divide between Urban and rural living conditions.
For migrants, it is a pure quest and zeal to better their lives. In that quest what is wrong in moving to a big town, small city or big metropolitan city? Even going abroad? The constitution allows it, no legal or physical bar on such migration. Often times it is easy and convenient way of improving one's condition. I can take care cover under "I am Indian", "One Nation" slogans.
On positive side, I bring new ideas, new cultural exposure, I pay taxes, buy local goods, use local businesses and effectively I am helping the local economy and progress.
On negative side, I may be encroaching a local job, latching onto a dwelling space which could have gone to a local, I may promote my own ideas and culture which could create frictions, I may add to the existing civic problems, I may add to the more infrastructure requirements and in extreme cases I may work against the locals and their interests.
Should I decide on my own or should I allow somebody to decide where I should live?
From a local resident perspective, the apprehensions, accusations and allegations of "Its all your fault" also lies at the same quest that a immigrant had. I am a local resident and I feel it is my right to have the best out of my local environment. Immigrants should help my cause for my better living and doesn't have a right to enjoy the fruits of progress. A good job, good place to live, good civic amenities and infrastructure is my birth right and I alone should enjoy the fruits of this local land.
Shouldn't I be deciding this or should I have to share my booty?
As Srivasta said, no easy answer and not so quick. Because, in both perspectives one needs to be of "SAINT" class to allow the other to decide my share and progress.
In order to understand the reasons for migration, one needs to look beyond the high rises of Bengaluru, Mysore and Mangalore. One needs to taste the first hand accounts of life in remote villages. Year-by-year, unpredictable climate, not sufficient rains, failed crops, increasing cost of farm labor, negative return on Investment (ROI), increasing debt load, deplorable conditions of schools, literally no health care support, no supply chain structure for selling farm produce and grains, development and progress restricted to only cities and towns, children and offspring unwillingness to carry on family trade and professions and the big impact of WTO & global trade etc. All these have made the life in a village miserable and inhabitable.
In such miserable conditions, shouldn't I be looking for another place where I can take care of myself and my family?
There are quite a few steps that could mitigate the situation but not the one perfect solution. One, improve the living condition in rural and semi-urban area by providing the basic necessities, create conditions wherein villagers could earn a decent earnings that exceeds their basic needs and make urban living less appealing (more Taxes and less luxury).
There is a way out. We could help build "RURAL-INDIA" for cities to be for locals only.
migration is not the issue
Nijavada,
With your line of thought and reasoning I feel like that we are all foreigners within our own country depending on our ethnicity & language. Whenever such a topic comes up i really wish that we had just one or two languages in our country and the other languages didn't exist. Believe me, we would not be missing anything if that happened.
What we are sorely missing is good infrastructure, a pollution free environment, a lawful & orderly society.
Mcadambi saare,
I am quite shocked on your viewpoint from your previous post which says -> "More importantly - Bengaluru is NOT Mumbai. Bengaluru is NOT a cosmopolitan city. It is still, is and will be a 'Kannadapolitan' city."
Have you ever wondered why our country hasn't progressed inspite of having some of the best minds in the world? We are so busy infighting and dividing ourselves that I can say with supreme confidence that with this contined thought process we alone are enough to defeat ourselves. Please tell me you were joking when you mentioned that Bangalore is not cosmopolitan because the reality says otherwise. In fact it was cosmopolitan(not to the extent of bombay & delhi) even before the software boom.
Friends, migration is not the issue. The issue is systemic failure of laws, governance & failure of urban planning. When we convert non commercial propery into offices, build multistorey apartments double the number of storeys than what permission was given for, we naturally are creating a magnet for uncontrolled sustenance of population without regard to whether the population speaks kannada,hindi,tamil etc.
Friends, culture transcends beyond language, our eating habits and ethnicity. Culture is our way of life and it includes our chaotic way of life outside in public places, littered roads, continous honking, the way we drive, the way we follow(or don't follow) rules, the way we bribe and get bribed, the way we respect our elders(which is good), the way we attend to natures call in public(not good) .....i can go on with the list about the good and bad things of our culture. The point is, tell me how different culturally is a person let's say for example from Bengal coming in to live in Bangalore other than the fact that he or she speaks Bengali and eats fish? Do you think we will force him/her to integrate by forcing to learn "Kannada"? What's the use? He or she is culturally the same as Bangloreans because of the other 90% culture(or way of life) being the same. As long as I can communicate with him/her in English or perhaps Hindi i really don't care what he/she speaks or whether he wants to learn French,Assames,Chinese etc. All I care is he/she follows rules&laws and does not harm others. If he/she doesn't learn English the common language I am not the loser :-).
Folks, I mean no offence to any state, I gave Bengal just as an example to drive my point. Let's move on, there are issue that really are problems begging our attention.
More comments
Not sure how MCadambi got this Kannadapolitan idea from. He might want it to be that way - but some census data shows that only 35% of Bangaloreans speak Kannada (just data - not whether it is desirable or not).
@Thampan - great points. You have articulated what I have been struggling to do. As expected you got a verbose, winding response which go on the lines of - "it is the truth and the most important thing because I say it is"
Nijavaada - you are sometimes tautological You say "moving from Mandya to Bangalore is not migration just as moving from Pune to Bombay is not migration". In 1991 (and I am trying to get data for more recent years), inter-state migration accounted for only 12% of all migration within India.
Srivathsa
Drive safe. It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.
Bengaluru's nature
Besides it is wrong to assing the software and industrial boom to the "efforts" of outsiders. The city has been continuosly industrialising since the times of Sir MV when none of our chatterati and 'page 3' scum were around.
On a personal note, although i am of Tamil heritage, i do not conciously regard myself as a Tamilian. I neither read or write Tamil and do not even celebrate Tamil festivals like Pongal. I made a desicion to celebrate Chandramana Ugadi instead of Souramana Ugadi which Tamils do.
Do in rome what romans do. Do in Karnataka what Kannadigas do!
See this http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/727-bangalore-multiple-city-book-review
Fundamental Rights vis a vis Migration
The Fundamental Rights in India enshrined in the Part III of the Constitution of India guarantee civil liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace and harmony as citizens of India. These include individual rights common to most liberal democracies, such as equality before law, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of association and peaceful assembly, freedom to practice religion, and the right to …..”
As summarized in the Wikipedia , the fundamental rights are common to all citizens of India. Of course diversities in language, culture etc is also duly recognized. One can therefore assume that one can reside any where in India except J& K which is a special zone, for the time being. The rights also accompany with some duties too of course.
SB
I do not understand what Urban Poverty is. I can understand the reasons for problems like poverty can be different in rural vs urban areas etc. Our best efforts are needed for the solutions at both rural or urban areas.
PSA
Japanese singer to sing Kannada songs
http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=108957
Professional singers are
Migration??
Migration within a state is not migration per se
Even today, the state only considers your residence in KA for various residency requirments such as CET seat allotment, BDA site allotment etc.
Be careful what you wish for
Sustainable Migration
It is not that migration is opposed per se. The question is sustainable migration. We in Bengaluru have to ask ourselves whether we have enough resources to sustain such a large population. Where are the water resources, given we hardly have enough perrennial rivers close to Bangalore? How do you all of a sudden invest in such large infrastructure before such superfast growth? How do you put institutions in place so that the local population does not feel a sense of alienation?
As an example, the city of Mangalore itself is starting to feel pangs of growth. It's water resources are already streched and it is facing an actue shortage of water.
See this:
http://www.hindu.com/2009/01/14/stories/2009011458960300.htm
Mcadambi:
mcadambi:
"The Kodavas and Tuluvas have no problem in being first cousins of Kannadigas"
That's what we all think, don't we? How can we blame Dilli-wallas who think that Kannadigas are happy being their first-cousins? We (BLR-MYS Kannadigas) all think that Kodavas and Tulus are happy being our 'first cousins'. I request you to check the two links I have provided below. It will take less than a minute.
http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2006/05/08/if-aishwarya-rai-loves-the-state-of-her-origin/#comment-70973
http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/does-the-identity-of-anglo-indians-not-count/#comment-85517
These are only two links I got from the top of my head. If you spend some time reading that blog, you will observe more stuff of that kind. I have personally also met people from the coast who echo similar sentiments. Many people from North KA are infuriated by the attention given to Bangalore and Mysore. Several people there identify less with us and more with Marathi and Hindi.
Yes,sustainable migration is the key. The solution to this problem of unstainable migration lies elsewhere, and NOT in barring migration into KA. I will expand on this point and present my view, but first I am waiting for Nijavaada to answer my questions.
@MCadambi
Cadambi-sir,
First off - migration within a state is not migration. Why not? Migration can be defined as a short term or long term move across administrative lines. If I move from Jayanagar to Koramangala it is not migration strictly - but in many cities (Singapore e.g.) you have to notify the police, etc that you are moving.
The restrictions that you talk of are reasonable restrictions - else the Supreme Court would have shot them down. But that does not give any more legality to a person moving from Davangere to Bangalroe vs. someone moving from Hyderabad to Bangalore.
Coming to migration, here is what I suspect is your line of thought
a. Local people, meaning people who have spent a substantial amount of time here regardless of their mother tongue (you being a classic example), care more about the city than new comers.
b. New comers, especially economic immigrants are here in it for the money and don't really care if the city goes to the dogs, because their heart lies elsewhere (and many of our politicians fall in this bracket - milk this city dry)
c. Local people feel that their peaceful lives have been shattered. Noise, more expensive rents and real estate, expensive to eat out, tough to get kids into schools.
Am I correct? Your theory might have some basis. Silkboard is a counterexample though. Maybe a survey on Praja itself will shed some light :). I myself am not sure that too many local people care about rules and regulations, etc. Else we would not see this mass red light breaking, building violations, etc.
How does one ensure sustainability?
On utilities, pricing is the easiest way to do it. If water is scarce and say only 75litres of water are available per capita per day then we need to have slab based pricing for water. Upto 9000l/month for a household will be provided say at Rs.10/1000 litres. After that it will be Rs.20/l for the next 1000 and so on. Same for electricity. Just watch how well water will be conserved and how rainwater harvesting will be adopted.
On road traffic, etc, locals also contribute both to the crowd and the disorder. Let's not pretend it is only the Dilliwala who drives badly. If law and order would be enforced, then no Dillwala would break the rules. Just go to Singapore or the US - would any of us, however badly we drove here, dare to violate a single rule?
On culture, etc, I am cut from a different mould. I e.g. would prefer to live in a building where people from different parts of India lived. I don't really see a threat to the local culture (whatever that maybe). None of these people force us to stop listening to Carnatic music or stop watching Kannada movies or stop eating idli/dose. I don't know how you would define Bangalore culture really.
Srivathsa
Drive safe. It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.
bag of answers..
@ bialterminal:
Sir, without any intention to imply personal attack, but with an intention to press upon and clarify the real necessity of a language in human-kind, I had to say this: With your stance, you'll need another decade to understand the importance of a language in one's life. Until you've done that, I dont think your comments or thoughts can in any way help improve whatever, of a human settlement - including infrastructure, or urban development! Your language exclusionary thought flow shows how linguistically inferior your mind has grown to be, and that is very much central to the allegation I have made upon our society, and the system that is currently running it.
@ silkboard:
Your idea about people "not coming" sounds too limited in reference to the kind of migration I am talking about here. Talk about the unnecessary blue-collared labour, or the perfect example (even breaking its own laws) of group-D recruitment of Biharis happening in most parts of South & West India. If your news contribtes to a percent of the migration, these kinds of migrants nearly fill up the migration chart. So they're indeed coming!
@ Srivathsa:
I didnt expect people to take my Karnataka Maharashtra "analogy" (only to personalize the idea it conveyed to some people that might be from MH here on Praja!) as a tautology. Shall we say, this was some preconceived notion about me working in there? Anyway, I am glad I could clarify your concern straight away now. And coming to your stats on migration, let me clarify here too. Yes, I agree inter-state migration in India accounted to 12% in 1991 census data. But the progress has been from 11.2% in 1971, to 14.3% in 2001 census. The 2011 census is nearing, and the figures might as well surprise many of us. While that was only to complete your mention of stats, that is NOT the point here.
The most important point here is we're talking about the noticeable "phenomenon" of people of different cultural backgrounds, which includes the language they speak (notice the singularity), migrating to a region of another major-administration-jurisdiction. So while it is not wrong to call Mandya-Bangalore a migration, it is of least significance in this manifestation of migration, and hence unwanted in this particular discussion. I would be glad to have such discussions if this thread were about Finding ways to develop more and more opportunities within Karnataka for the citizens of Karnataka, or something like that. And we're not just talking numbers here, but taking into consideration all those migrations that have the biggest proportion of change from the migrant's perspective. So we're essentially talking about a migration that is diluting this diversity in our country, and that is what I called uncontrolled migration, or unnecessary migration.
If some migration is necessary, and is actually "arranged," it automatically means there could be a process put up in place to handle it, and ensure this cultural dilusion doesnt take place. But from a national perspective, making this "necessary migration" a practice is degenerative to the system because we finally want each state to be able to stand on its own feet in all respects - only on that day will the real Indian dream be satisfied. I hope bialterminal will agree here as well!! If all the migrant population was the smart (& strong) ones, how can the state that lost those brains (& brawns) ever get back those brains (& brawns) for its own development, and how can the receiving state ever be able to cope-up all that growth in its population, when it doesnt know whether it needs them or not?!
@ Vinay,
I am surprised why your posting of comments here, or continuing to provide some answers/details relies on my posting answers to your questions. For whatever reason that could be, I hope my above reasoning helped. And as a common factor of all your questions, I find that the cited person doesnt seem to be aware of his identity, and hence asks "is this right, or wrong!" Goes to show that this person is confused between where all he CAN make a living, and where he NEEDS to make a living. After all one must remember that an individual is not alone, and that he's born and brought up with a particular kind of surrounding, and that is unique to that place. Placed anywhere else, and his identity goes fuzzy! We dont want a country full of citizens with "identity confusion" lurking large in their minds.
A perfect comparison would be the European Union of today, where any individual is indeed allowed to cross boundaries and settle in another EU nation. The highest out-migrant numbers are of under-developed EU nations only. But even then, there's a very clear system in place which monitors the cross-border EU citizen movement too. Every citizen of France who migrates to Southern Belgium is filed in some or the other dept., and tracked. Simiarly info about Austrians migrating into Germany is reasoned, monitored, and tracked. Here too, no such monitoring is done with an intention to throw those migrants away, but as a necessity to make their country a better country.
-Nijavaada
So in a nutshell
Nijavaada,
In a nutshell, migration is undesirable because
a. It reduces diversity. How??? So diversity means 30 different lingusitic states each having only its linguistic group in it?
b. It causes cultural dilution. What is cultural dilution?? Can you give me some examples?
c. It causes identity confusion. There is more to a person's identity than the language he speaks. I can see myself as a Kannadiga, as an Indian, as a male, as a secular liberal, as an atheist. Which one is primary? Who decides for me?
d. It weakens the sending state. Good point. But when my stomach is growling and my children are starving - it is a bit tough to think of the greater cause.
e. "After all one must remember that an individual is not alone, and that he's born and brought up with a particular kind of surrounding, and that is unique to that place. Placed anywhere else, and his identity goes fuzzy! We dont want a country full of citizens with "identity confusion" lurking large in their minds." So someone from Mandya will be confused once he comes to Bangalore and someone from a village will be lost in a city. Won't he? As per this, there is no need for any migration. A person born in Gulbarga has his own unique way of talking Kannada and also NEEDS to make his living there. Please clarify.
BTW - EU is not the best comparison. It is primarily an Economic Union. Countries came together. Ours is a political union.
Srivathsa
Drive safe. It is not just the car maker which can recall its product.
Nijavaada
Why is the Mandya-Bangalore example not significant? I thought this thread started with the problems caused by overcrowding and inadequate resources for support of migrants? In that case, Mandya-Bangalore migration is also "undesirable", isn't it? The culture-and-language factor is the only thing that binds Mandya-ites and Bangaloreans. Replace Mandya with Madikeri, and the "commonality" reduces even further.
And, you said:
"I find that the cited person doesnt seem to be aware of his identity, and hence asks "is this right, or wrong!" Goes to show that this person is confused between where all he CAN make a living, and where he NEEDS to make a living."
No, the cited person is not 'confused' at all. He has asked no questions of "right or wrong". There are 4 persons who have decided to move, for their own economic benifit OR survival. The questions are from me, directed at you. The questions do not come from them. The questions are simple: In each case mentioned, in your view, is the migration that has happened desirable, or undesirable, or 'neutral'? And, in your view, is each case classified as 'Migration', or not?
In a discussion like this, it helps to know what exactly the other person is referring to, especially when the terminology is open to interpretation. What is Migration, and what kind of migration is acceptable (in your view)?
Its not about migration but about cultural integration
Rational rather than Emotive logic is needed
Its time to move beyond emotive discussion stuck within parameters of culture, cast, race, religion, language, domicile............
Here is how I see it -
- Every city has finite land
- Every city has a city development plan
- This plan outlines (and it is statute) land use for different purposes.
- Thus a proportion is available for residential use, some for roads, parks, shops, leisure, sports, utilities like fire brigade / sanitation plants / hospitals / schools................
- With FSI limits in place and Development Control rules in place - one knows or can know exactly how many people can populate a given city
- If we say 10million by 2020 = one can plan a city to sustain this population in terms of transport and all other utilities
- Now because rural India remains neglected, for survival people move to urban locales.
- People find jobs (including child labour) and live on vacant land (public property) - in inhumane conditions - is this constitutional? Definitely not.
- I dont care if some one comes from Kashmir or Bengal and lives legally
- I would however find it difficult to accept people moving and living in illegal buildings (has haappened all over, includes high rises and not just slums).
- In effect we must focus on rural growth and stability - NREGS as SB says or develop other townships / semi-urban locations as Sri said instead of abusing a finite land with limited resources continuosly.
- Look at Mumbai - 400 km or rail tracks, the best possible Bus network, they may build underground, elevated, sea links and whatever our minds fancy, but the city will still be just as congested and useless when it reaches an estimated 30 million by 2025.
I support growth and migration but once a certain threshold is reached, focus ought to move to adjacent townships. Instead of Pune, Infy and Wipro should be given sops to go to Satara, sangli, Miraj, Kholapur.................why abuse and cause havoc in one place?Sustainability can't be planned for an infinite population.
ASJ
www.driving-india.blogspot.com
seclusionary
Srivathsa,
I see that your interpretation of my stance is rather exclusionary on my identity here! You seem to quote your whim to live along with people from various Indian states as though hinting that I detest this very possibility in Bengaluru. But let me point at this fine difference between a wish to live amidst different state Indians, and the possibility of living amidst all these Indians in Bengaluru, even while every such individual speaks the language of the land, and behaves like a Kannadiga, has his/her heart beat for Karnataka, and other Kannadiga brethren. Only then will I consider this as a really gelled society or an apartment building, a city or a state.
A cosmetic integration of Indians, evident in your suggestion has been happening in every damn building in Bengaluru, I am sure, but of no avail for true integration. Why? Thats because there's no true integration happening there, with people having no "real" thread that can bind them together into real brotherhood. Why do you think we carved out linguistic states as individual elements of administration during 1956? That was because people at that time realised that a common language was what kept its people together. If we want this togetherness to stay, cosmetic togetherness is the not the way to go! The togetherness has to be in the real spirit, and that comes only when every migrant in Karnataka speaks Kannada and lives a Kannadiga life; so should every migrant in Rajasthan speak Rajasthani, and lead a Rajasthani life; so on & so forth for all linguistically unique states of India. And to this end, of course, comes the point #2 that ebi.schubert raised here - the one about having a system for cultural integration. If there's something constructive that a responsible citizen charter could do, talking about a framework for such an integration system would be one of it.
And let me repeat this once more - the subtle difference between the migration a Gulbarga Kannadiga makes into Bengaluru, and the migration a Delhite (speaking some other language) makes into BLR is in the delta-s that these two individuals see upon migration. The Gulbarga Kannadiga wouldnt not need more than a minute to adapt to the surroundings in BLR, and perhaps gel into the people of BLR (beware, BLR is not MG Rd, or Brigade Rd alone!). Whereas that would not be the case for this Delhite in BLR.
That apart we're talking about people crossing boundaries of major governance jurisdictions - if you're in Delhi, your jurisdictions are under the Delhi state govt. and get transferred to the Karnataka state govt. when you migrate to BLR. For a Gulbarga or Mandya guy, this doesnt change between Gulbarga/Mandya and BLR. While I dont say any such intra-state migration is necessary in the long term, that as I said, is food for another thread. The yogyate to debate that topic lies in the understanding of the importance of this topic - there being a need to have control over inter-state migration.
And as mcadambi has mentioned several times here with citations of many of the state's systems requiring 10 or 15yrs domicile in this state, there is reason to believe (regardless of any such polity in existence) that the entire state is one entity in provision for a Kannadiga, likewise is the entire Maharashtra a provision for all Marathis residing in it. A Delhite migrating to MH is a migrant, not a Pune guy moving into Mumbai. So is the case in Karnataka. Karnataka is of/for/by Kannadigas, and likewise for other states and its people. So this way everyone has his/her own land/state in India. To call Karnataka his own too, all a Delhite has to do is be a Kannadiga during his migration into Karnataka. Likewise I should be a Hindi-ga if I migrate into Delhi or UP. I should be a Maithili-ga when I migrate to Bihar. Only then am I a true Indian.
-Nijavaada
So, it is culture
Talking hindi is cosmopolitan but talking kannada is parochial
Singing "wothla" and outdated copy cat Hindi songs and cheering copy cat movies like 'Ghajini' and 'Bhul Bhulaiyaa' is "cosmopolitan". But asking for holiday from Infy in Bangalore for Ugadi instead of Onam is parochialism.
Kannadigas are known for their accomodative nature. Perhaps their fuse and tolerance limits has been breached. No wonder you witness clashes on a daily basis even today. All these migrants to Bengaluru have to be the only ones to blame.
A life of a migrant (or rather economic refugee) is largely determined by $$$ and he/she treats Bengaluru as nothing more than an ATM machine. He/She does not care about civic involvment, cultural involvment etc.
I have personally known many Kannadigas who do not even want to be friends with other non-kannadigas, except having professional links.
This was not the case during the times in which our family migrated to KA.
Migrants these days have only themselves to blame.
And please a simple request to all migrants - please stop talking in Hindi in Bengaluru.
Sarojini Mahishi report
With all due respect to the Honourable Armed Forces - the Armed Forces do not recognise Kannada education and only want Hindi proficiency. This is why Kannadigas are reluctant to join the armed foces.
Nijavaada,You may perhaps
You may perhaps be mixing immigration into a country vs intra-country immigration. Immigration into countries is typically controlled (via immigration policies) & tracked and for obvious reasons(the quality and quantity of immigrants, national security etc). Migration within a country from place to place is typically not (and need not necessarily be) controlled in most of the civilized world. There is definitely a need to balance out the population density vis a vis the resources and infrastructure available. That will automatically happen and so will the automatic equal distribution of mogration happen when there is proper urban&social planning combined with effective implementation of bye laws, land use laws etc.
Regarding cultural integration and & language, I have realized the futility of this and prefer to concentrate on more pressing issues like infrastructure, law&order, education etc. when having interfaced with groups of fellow Indians who insist on being oblivious to proper ettiquettes and go into their subgroups depending on their language even at the work place rather than sticking to the common language. One need not mention the ample prevalance of Kannada Sangha, Tamil sangham, Bangali Association etc. when once Indian association would suffice in any major US city. Are we so culturally different that we cannot integrate as "Indians", the mere separation being languages? Hence my viewpoint of the futility of this excercise and rather concentrate on providing school level education about - impacts of overpopulation, impacts of poor infrastructure, impacts of a lawless society, impacts of corruption..there are so many pressing issues. For many general non airport related issues I post under the "blrpraj" handle, please read this post of mine to understand what I am getting at - http://praja.in/node/1039...
As regards to your statement from your above post - "Your language exclusionary thought flow shows how linguistically inferior your mind has grown to be, and that is very much central to the allegation I have made upon our society, and the system that is currently running it."
My answer would be -> Yes, my mind was definitely inferiour prior to 2000. What changed in 2000? Well, I was fortunate to be able to go out of the country solely due to 1) my education and 2) my English language skills. After 2000 my mind developed further after seeing that there is a different world outside where I lived(India), a world(US,UK,Canada,Singapore) where things are done differently, I got to know for the first time that public places are litter free, drivers don't honk, clean public restrooms exist, by and large law abiding people with good enforement,heck..for the first time I saw what a good footpath looked like. Pardon my lecture, but the point is no matter how many languages I knew (or did not know) in India, my thought perception has changed and my mind had become more superior thanks to "exposure" to new ideas. Please note that I am not sounding demeaning about anything or anybody. Your judgment about the linguistic state of my mind and it being very central to the society and system running it doesn't really make any logical sense. When one travels to most developed parts of the world and comes to India, what is central to the society and the system running it becomes apparent - a chaotic & lawless society with lack of accountability driven by a general excuse based mechanism. Migration (or lack of it), cultural integration (or lack of it) are definitely not the foremost issues that become apparent.
while some are losing it
peace out
Mcadambi:
why even discuss all this?
We all know Blr emulates US and so does Hyd and other cities ..if US jobless count is increasing..its not too far that this happens in blr too..I believe its already started..and then who will be able to afford the high cost of living here..
so it will be bye bye soon!
has anyone made a count of all the empty appartments in blr today? its no different than the ghost towns in Colorado and other places..:P
Criticism of other cultures/people is not hatred
Bangalore is way ahead of other cities - Hyderbad is no serious competition at all - because of it's ability to retain it's native language, Kannada and provide space for other identities and use English as a commericial / business language. This is the model we Kannadigas like to retain.
So when claims for "hindi boards" in BMTC buses and Metro comes up - then it is to be rejected. Of course we kannadigas do not want Kannada in all sign boards in New Delhi or Itarsi, MP.
Karnataka gives space for Marathi in border districts like Belgaum and yet Maharashtra does not do the same for Karnataka in it's border districts.
Perhaps we kannadigas being too accomodative, we have let migrants sit on top of our heads. Unless we firmly put the foot down, there is no strong message going to be sent across.
Hindi Boards are not necessary
Where there is a will, there is a way
There are so many examples of migrants who have now blended in. Pooja Gandhi, an actress for example.
Where there is a genuine will, there is a genuine way. Migrants typically do not make any effort to integrate into our culture. Example include the gerontocratic Rameshwar Thakur who duing President's rule appointed all Biharis into his advisory committee. Even Dharam Singh, of Rajput heritage, considers himself a proud Kannadiga.
And our "supreme secularist" Maulana Lalu Prasad Yadav wants to appoint Biharis into SWR and deny us an oppurtunity to make use of our own Railway assets - much of which we built even before electricity reached Bihar.
A K Ramanujan, the famous literatteur, once remarked, Tamil is the language of the kitchen, Kannada the language of the street and English the language of the office. In Karnataka, migrants should speak in the street and office what is spoken in KA. The variety of the kitchen is best left to them.
Can't believe I am reading all this
Jeez,its unbelievable that this kind of bigotory and hateful thoughts still exist in minds of educated folks here.
@mcadambi,
seriously, stop your hateful and norrow-minded comments, you are not helping anyone
re: Can't believe I am reading all this
Why is even discussing this topic a hatred?
This is where the clash. My opponents in this thread fail to understand the issues at ground and are comfortable in putting themselves in a cocoon and closed shell without having guts or even rational logic to discuss such issues.
In any case, i can only think of what Sir V S Naipaul had to say about modern day Indian intellectuals - "What is happening in India is a new historical awakening. Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening."
Re:Why is even discussing this topic a hatred?
I did'nt say discussing this topic is hatred. I was saying some of the comments especially yours were hateful and defenitely does'nt represent majority of indians.
Anyways whats wrong in using Hindi, the primary reason someone would use Hindi is because its a language everyone in any part of India would understand, you should be upset if they use their native language (telugu,tamil,bengali,etc)
Its hilarious that you are actually against of our national language being spoken, but how come someone like you wih "Kannada-only" mentality is posting comments here in English, maybe you should replace your keyboard and start typing in kannada then, atleast practice what you preach
//Anyways whats wrong in
Bayern, that assumption above is false. This is the most fundamental problem that every hindi speaking Indian assumes. Yes, granted, Hindi is "a" national language, given that it is widely spoken by approximately 500 million people. But it is NOT "the" national language. India does NOT have national language.
I am not opposer of Hindi per se. But Hindi imposition is what i oppose. Thankfully, Shri C N Annadurai and others put an end to Hindi dominance in 1965. There ends the matter.
//you should be upset if they use their native language (telugu,tamil,bengali,etc) //
What else would one living in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Waste (sorry West) Bengal speak? Swahilli? If Barack Obama spoke only Swahili and Bahasa indonesia - would he even have got a clerk job in America?
//Its hilarious that you are actually against of our national language being spoken//
Repeat again - HINDI IS NOT INDIA'S NATIONAL LANGUAGE!
//but how come someone like you wih Kanada-only mentality is posting comments here in English//
That is because you and others are able to read and understand English here. I would gladly post in Kannada - if you could understand.
And one more, i post in English so that "vadhanthi pichaachi baasham pichaachi baasham iva" - that is in Sanskrit - i leave it to you to understand that.
re: Why is even discussing this topic a hatred?
Re://Anyways whats wrong in
What else would one living in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Waste (sorry West) Bengal speak? Swahilli? If Barack Obama spoke only Swahili and Bahasa indonesia - would he even have got a clerk job in America?
Mcadambi,
I was'nt talking about people living in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal , but people who migrated from these states to Bangalore and choose to speak the common language Hindi since it (Hindi) promotes a feeling of unity among Indian citizens.
And regarding Obama, he was born and grew up in Hawaii, and if Hawaii had enforced everyone in Hawaii to speak only Hawaiian langauage and not English, do you think Obama would have got a clerk job anywhere else in America?
FYI... State of Hawaii has two official langauage, Hawaiian & English and Obama does'nt speak swahili
Secondly, I can read and write Kannada, so please post your comments in kannada,lets see if you are true to ur words and afterall this is praja-bangalore, right? then why are you contradicting yourself by using English
weekend confusions!
Firstly, I thank mcadambi for stating in capitals the most important fact of the nation - HINDI IS NOT THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE OF INDIA. It is at best, the widely spoken regional language of a couple of north Indian states, and nothing more than that. Anyone who wishes to argue this fact, shall only be guided to another thread here on Praja, and also recommended a good education of the constitution of India.
Although I wish to stick to the topic of migration here, I wish to relate to an analogy to the Hindi unifying India myth here. There were 20 people living in a house, 2 each across 10 rooms. While people in 4 rooms spoke Hindi, the people in other rooms - adding up to 6 rooms spoke various other languages. What some people here (bayern, among others) have been saying is analogous to saying all the 20 people in this house need to speak the language the 4 out of 20 houses speak - even while knowing that the 6 non-hindi speaking houses form the majority in the nation. But I do not want to rest my explanation upon numbers, but on the fact that India was formed as a union of linguistically unique states, only to show the deserved respect to each language, and hence its people. Besides, there was a need for this, to ensure effective governance.
Why dont we realise this?! If there had to be one language for the entire nation (by brute force only), then there was no need to form states like this. They could have just drawn straight lines like in US - where of course - some of us (like our bialterminal, among others) may want to appreciate this as well - the difference in the languages spoken by people of different states of US bears semblance to the degree of difference one finds within any state of India, and not between two states of India. So that way, bialterminal's comparison of India with US or UK or any other country is unwarranted here. If at all you want to compare equivalent entities, compare Karnataka with US, Karnataka with UK, Karnataka with Germany, or Israel.. So would other Indian states fit in a comparison with such countries. That immediately translates to my age-old quote that if one needs to work for his country (India in this case) his best efforts would be what he does for his own state. His dharma lies in putting his best efforts towards making it compete to be the best state in India. Look at Modi in Gujarat for example. I dont call Modi a factionist or a parochial thinker because he is daring to stand for Gujaratis and their welfare in Gujarat. It is the duty of each and everyone of us to work for our state first. And to do that, he need not migrate to any other part of the country for making his life. That this is not the case today, is the sad state of affairs we've been talking about here..
@ Silkboard, I would have loved to attend Praja meetings but for some limitations I have. But I hope it shouldn't be the cause for any neglect/disinterest from any of the Praja members (including you). I regret if my derivations have been wrong in this regard!
-Nijavaada
What really fuels hatred
you wrote:
//(which has gone on for the past 50 years &we still haven't learnt from it) //
According to people like you, the rest of Indians have to accept that Bollywood + Cricket + Hindi = Indian and other combinations such as Sandalwood (Kannada movies) + Carnatic music = Non Indian. According to you the former is "cosmopolitan" or whatever that means, and the latter is "hatred" and "parochial".
It is only because of people like you that other non-hindi speaking people resent and hate hindi. It is because of people like Amitabh Bachchan, Jaya Bacchan that people like Raj Thackeray exist. A reminder - there are more than 300 million of us who do not speak hindi in this vast and diverse nation.
I feel the constitution framers of India did the right thing by giving linguistic groups their own territory to realise their regional aspirations.
If we had imposed Hindi - we would have only ended up the way Sri Lanka did - a disaster. Sri Lanka made a huge mistake in trying to impose a monolithic Sinhala identity.