Dear BK:
Sorry if I rubbed your sensitivities the wrong way. But I am sure
you know by now that my comments and criticisms are not personal, even
though they do encroach into such boundaries at times.
But let us examine them in context:
>The Municipal
authority and the Government have all the powers they need to control
these strikes. It is a matter of law >and order.
**** Here it is not merely what you wrote, but also what
you did not write, that I responded to. The meaning of the sentences,
as I read them, is that it is a simple law and order matter, of
breaches of the law that the authorities simply do not respond to.
Therefore it must be an Assamese attitudinal problem like so
many of our esteemed netters keep harping on. A 'people
are bad ', nothing is the matter with the system'
conclusion.
It is entirely believable that there might indeed be laws and
regulations prohibiting such shutting down of life in the city or
region or state and even the country ( post Godhra for example). But
if we fail to ask, question why the authorities are unwilling
or unable to perform their duties of enforcing the laws of the
land, then we merely indulge in scratching the surface of the issues
-- not attempting to get to the bottom of it.
Thus your explanation, something that usually follows a
conclusion or belief, was simplistic at best.
Even though you might not have intended that, there is a well
documented pattern of such unwillingness to dig deep enough among
Assam Net debaters/analysts. As you can imagine, it does not
take much to see why: it may dig up politically unpalatable scenarios.
Exactly the reason why some of us don't want to examine the roots of
the mushrooming of the Bondho phenomenon. It is so much easier to rail
against what is so easy a target. One cannot go wrong about coming to
the defense of Mother and Apple pie ( pardon the Americanese
allusion).
>Chandan. I would
suggest that this genre of critique (simplistic) needs to be
avoided for your own good. I can just >return them, can't
I?
**** Of course you can return that. That is the beauty of
this forum. No holds are barred. In fact I would encourage you to just
that. That is how we can examine the complex issues, without concern
for personally offending anyone. But such returning of favors
:-), require explanations. If I did not have a good explanation, I
would not have responded the way I did .The same will be operative on
you or anyone else. Sometimes the explanations may not be black
and white because the issues may be complex . There may be grey
areas. The viewers will have to use their own reasoning powers to
decide what is more credible.
I am acutely aware of the fact that most everyone in this forum (
there always are exceptions :-)) are very intelligent people, even
though some may seem otherwise at times :-), usually due to political
or ideological dogmas or baggages. That is why *I* never even attempt
to assert anything unless I have a good and easily comprehensible set
of explanations for what I proffer. I don't expect anyone to accept
anything because I say so :-)- I know I won't get away with it. Doing
otherwise would damage my credibility, something I value.
But one thing I can assure you of: No word of criticism would
hurt my feelings, fair or even unfair. Because, like most people in
this net, my self esteem too is made of many different ingredients.
Wins or losses in Assam net debates could neither boost it sky high,
nor erode it to be of concern.
>Then you found
fault with me for not assessing the merits or demerits of
the recent Act passed by the UK >Parliament to protect the
Westminster Palace and its immediate surroundings. Was that called for
in the context of our >discussion? Indirectly, it appears you want
me to be partisan rather than
objective.
**** You are not suggesting that the two are exclusive of each
other are you? That being a partisan, of necessity, robs one of
objectivity? I cannot imagine that to be true.
Why asked is that it is one thing to report news, but another to
engage in an evaluation , discussion. It is possible that one may not
have an opinion about a matter, or one just might not be inclined to
express an opinion. But neither would be true while one engages in
attempting to gauge the root causes of the Bondho phenomena in Assam
or India.
This particular matter certainly is a debatable issue, not some
unquestionable virtue. That is why I was hoping you would have shared
your views on the matter, so that one could relate it to the issue of
Bondhos in Assam and India.
>The presumption is that the British Parliament is omnipotent although British pride in this has been severely eroded by the new European Community laws.
**** I cannot pass judgement on British Parliament's potency.
However I cannot imagine ANY law-making body in ANY democratic society
to be omnipotent, without any restrictions imposed on it by the
institutional checks and balances that are essential in a true
democracy. For example in the USA, the House and the Senate act as
checks and balances against each other, as does the judiciary. The
Congress cannot pass a law merely on numerical strength, if it is in
conflict with the provisions of the Constitution, which is interpreted
by the independent judiciary.
>Perhaps the
Assam Government should make haste to bring in legislation on
the lines of the British Parliament.
**** You are missing a very fundamental consideration here again:
Why do you think yet another law
could be or would be enforced, while few if any of the myriads of
laws of the Indian nation serves little more than a decorative
purpose?
It is a widely accepted fact among discerning people in India
today is that the country has far too many laws, far too many
regulation, but lack any ability to enforce them. It is not the
absence of laws that is the problem.
Question is how will you change this condition?
And that is the big question in Assam, just like is for India. On
every issue from corruption, to tax evasion, to injustices suffered by
Assam , insurgencies to struggles for independence to social justice
to criminal justice to Bondhos and everything in between.
Regards,
c
At 5:04 AM -0400 9/6/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Language: en
The discussion on the spectre of of bondhs in the North-east has hotted up. I take up the cudgels with Chandan first.
When I said that the Municipalities are armed with necessary legal power to deal with the situation created by bondh-makers, you criticized it as simplistic conclusion. It is not a conclusion. Than you add that you didn't expect me to take recourse to such a theory. Is that a theory, Chandan. I would suggest that this genre of critique (simplistic) needs to be avoided for your own good. I can just return them, can't I?
Then you found fault with me for not assessing the merits or demerits of the recent Act passed by the UK Parliament to protect the Westminster Palace and its immediate surroundings. Was that called for in the context of our discussion? Indirectly, it appears you want me to be partisan rather than objective.
Yes, Parliament has the power to pass legislation retrospectively. The presumption is that the British Parliament is omnipotent although British pride in this has been severely eroded by the new European Community laws.
What I liked about your criticism is that you've brought in the argument of 'cause and effect' to the situation. You find gap in the arguments of fellow netters because of the lack of it. Fair enough.
Ram has been able to find out how much these bondhs have cost the nation's treasury. Well done, Ram. These are staggering indeed!
Today's letter to the Assam Tribune on the subject of Bondh, one Arup Kumar Choudhury of Itanagar, states that the bondh culture has spread to Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya , and the people of Mizoram, Nagaland, and Manipur also suffer as a result.. An antidote the author suggests: If the bandh-callers have genuine grievances they should go to Dispur and 'gherao' the Janata Bhawan or Parliament instead of harassing common people.
Perhaps the Assam Government should make haste to bring in legislation on the lines of the British Parliament. As I understand these places at Dispur are now high security areas and protesters do demonstrate there in spite of it. The final submission by the author is: The elite group should take immediate initiative to defy any bandh call in Assam. I appreciate the move being taken by the officials of Assam State Transport Corporation to defy bandhs and we all should join hands with them.
KJD is wondering what was the convincing reason that a bandh had to be called by the disgruntled group on account of the ouster of Mr P K Mahanta from the party, which paralysed normal life and brought all activities to a grinding halt in certain parts of Assam? Wasn't it simply an intra-party conflict?
On the face of it, it is indeed a party matter but this party happens to be the alternative party hoping to form the next Government in Assam and the matter involves the task of choosing the party's leader. This is not a simple matter for the supporters of either groups.
My solution is that the solution could be a Think Tank report on the subject. If the netters are really serious enough, there should be a team of four or five people chosen from amongst us; stay in Guwahati for about three months or so, gather material, interview officials of both trade unions and the government and finally produce a report.
We netters give opinions with inadequate background material, very much so I believe. Tony Blair decided to go to war in Iraq on information based on official dossiers. Another Cabinet Minister, Robin Cook who recently died, who studied the same dossier disagreed and resigned on that issue.
Best
Bhuban
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
