Title: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese
>I provided you with my OWN interpretation, which you had trouble comprehending.

>That is because you could not differentiate between the concepts of nationality and ethnicity, It is that 'damned English language problem', not just with >yourself, but you have company I know.

>Would you argue with the concept of India for Indians? And if you would not, it is exactly the same for Assam for the Assamese. And, of necessity, it assumes
>an Assamese Nation ( as in the Indian Nation), and it includes a diverse milieu of ethnicities.
 
It is not the damn English language, it is damn Chandan Mahanta. You are absolutley wrong. In fact your following definition of Assamese does not show Assamese as a Nation, it shows Assamese as a group of several ethnic groups..
 
"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
 
On the other hand my definition, as noted below shows the Assamese as a Nation
 
ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE ASSAMESE.
 
This definition goes well with definitions of Indian, American etc. We donot say Indians consits of the following ethnic groups or American consists of the folloiwng ethnic groups like you are showing the Assamese people.
 
*** You do deserve a NOVEL prize foe discovering it and enlightening humanity with it.
 
I will take it
 
RB
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese

>I just wanted to show that 'Assam for Assamese' theme simply does not work whichever way we look at it.


*** That is YOUR opinion, and you are entitled to it.
You started off with saying you do not agree with Sumanta's " I donot necessarily support his Assam for Assamese Jatiotabadi writings. "

> In my opinion, Sumanta would not have interpreted the definition of 'Assamese'  the way Chandan did.

But you NEVER told us WHAT his 'jatiyotabadi' writings proposed or included. You are the one who was privy to what Sumanta had in mind. Or are YOU guessing here?
Since you would NOT tell us what Sumanta had in mind I provided you with my OWN interpretation, which you had trouble comprehending.

That is because you could not differentiate between the concepts of nationality and ethnicity, It is that 'damned English language problem', not just with yourself, but you have company I know.

Would you argue with the concept of India for Indians? And if you would not, it is exactly the same for Assam for the Assamese. And, of necessity, it assumes
an Assamese Nation ( as in the Indian Nation), and it includes a diverse milieu of ethnicities.

What you cannot handle is the concept of an Assamese Nation. As a result you went about attributing weird meanings to what I wrote when I submitted myself to your inquisition with the hope of aiding you with your profoundly muddled thinking process.

>In my opinion we should try to avoid using the word for political purpose,

*** Why? Because it holds the connotation of an Assamese Nation? Or for some other reason, like a problem with the English language?



>and only definition which will work for Assamese is this: ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE >ASSAMESE.


*** You do deserve a NOVEL prize foe discovering it and enlightening humanity with it.


>While keeping this definition, Assam should ask for cultural protection

*** From WHOM? Who has the RIGHT to take it away from Assam to begin with, so that Assam has to begging for it from someone else?

And WHY has that NEED arisen?

When you can answer that, you can understand the need for the concept of an Assamese Nation.

But I won't hold my breath.









At 12:25 AM -0600 12/29/05, Barua25 wrote:
Sure we need to move on to the next topic.
However this was an important topic for everybody interested for welfare of Assam.
I just wanted to show that 'Assam for Assamese' theme simply does not work whichever way we look at it.
In 1979, Assam Gana Andwlon failed exactly for this reason. The student leaders became over ambitious and went for 'Assam for Assamese' theme, and in the process failed to assure the minority groups in Assam that by 'Assamese; they intend to include the minority groups too, and that this revolution was not against them but for them.
 
Chandan came forward like a nopota phukon (for reasons of his own) to interpret the "Assam for Assamese'' theme, for and on behalf of Sumanta Chaliha, eventhough he flatly claimed that he had not idea what Sumanta stood for. This is simply a very dangerous game. In my opinion, Sumanta would not have interpreted the definition of 'Assamese'  the way Chandan did. That definition is outdated in my opinion. Assamese need to have a better definition of the word Assamese.  In fact those who are aware of the debates going on in Assam knows that even Oxom Xahityo Xobha and others are busy in their writing tables trying to revise the definition of the word 'Assamese'.
In my opinion we should try to avoid using the word for political purpose, and only definition which will work for Assamese is this: ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE ASSAMESE. Any definition short of this will not work for greater interest of Assam. This definition will work for internal purpose. While keeping this definition, Assam should ask for cultural protection of the so called 'khilinjia' Assamese which may be defined as residents of Assam who had been living in Assam on or before 'such and such' date (TBD).
 
Anyhow the above is purely my personal observation. I am sure others may have different opinion on this.
 
RB

----- Original Message -----
From: Dilip/Dil Deka
To: Rajen Barua ; Chandan Mahanta
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese

Hey guys,
Have you resolved this issue? Can we move on to something else?
 
How about this new DGP in Assam? The media says he is clean and corruption free. How did he pay for two kids in US undergraduate schools with his IPS salary? I read the glowing report in Assam press. Should I believe it?
 
I am ready to accept his clean record if some one from Assam attests to it.
 
Thanks,
Dilip

Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BLOCKQUOTE {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } DL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } UL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } OL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } LI {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px }
It is very common in Assam politics for a person to flatly deny a statement in broad daylight. But I thought you are above that.
Sorry my mistake in judgment.
 
This is your writing. Chandan
NOT SUMANTA's. Don't try to back off now.
This is YOUR Assam, NOT  SUMANTA's
Sumanta did not make those statement.
Don't try to drag SUMANTA into your statement.
 
See, heh heh
RB

>But before I try to show the short coming of your statement, I want you to note and confirm again that the following is your own statement which you believe, and not of Sumanta Chaliha or somebody else and that you are simply trying to tabulate to spice up the arguments for the sake of arguments.
"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
*** I am NOT in the habit of blaming somebody else for what I write Rajen. The Devil does NOT make me do it. Did I create an impression otherwise?

----- Original Message -----
From: Chan Mahanta
To: Rajen Barua ; [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese

>So no Bengalis in your independent Assam unless they become Assamese etc. No Bodos in >independent Assam they identify themselves as Assamese etc....


*** Is that what YOU imagine as a result of Sumanta's plan? Or is that what you imagine as an extension of MY explanation ? And is that the only result you can imagine?

*** Just so it is clear Rajen, your concoction of this scenario is NOT the only possible result for the indigenous Bengalis of Assam. If you insist it is, then either your imaginations are rather stunted, or you are being very disingenuous.

Take your pick.






At 3:05 PM -0600 12/28/05, Rajen Barua wrote:
"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc. Assam is NOT the homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
If you cannot answer, (and what it seems obvious to the netters) people will understand, but you don't have to change the subject now to independent Assam and bring old issues trying to show how bad a person I am by showing what I wrote in the past and what I did not.  This is rather an old trick to camouflage your inability to address the questions. Exactly like your inability to address the question how to achieve independence of Assam from India, you are trying to take the same escape route. Our present discussion on the issue was not based on an independent Assam, and if you are thinking netters have a short memory, I wish you luck. Even than you did not answer many questions which directly pertains to independent Assam.  So no Bengalis in your independent Assam unless they become Assamese etc. No Bodos in independent Assam they identify themselves as Assamese etc....

So what do you say, let us close the chapter and put in in archive?

 
RB

 

_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to