>If the present powers that control these orgs do not agree to unification -
>then the ordinary members should quit en masse. That should give them a
>wake-up call.
*** What are the chances of your suggestion being heeded :-)?
Very slight - but I do know that discussions like these will make these leaders(?) stop and think where exactly they are trying to lead the community.
>I would suggest that a "plebicite" (the eteranal dream of >many non-Kashmiris - :)) be held in the upcoming Convention at Houston in >this regard. Let the people decide if they want ONE org or 10.
*** I would agree that could be one approach to try. But what percentage of the community would such a plebicite represent? And what are the chances of a plebicite like that brought up to vote you think :-)?
I think some kind of plebicite can be brought about - and people should be able to mail in their votes. My guess would be for a group of young men and women to get -together, and arrange for something like this. It doesn't have to be at the 2004 meet. The tabulated results could be published publicly.
I would like 100% of the community to be represented - but whoever takes up the responsibility to conduct this will have to try and reach every family by mail. There would be expenses - but I am sure that in a community that can spend 40 - 50 grand on yearly bashes will have no trouble with that.
In any case, this is just a thought and I am a novice at these things.
>And if anyone suggests that one can effect a change in policy/philosophy by
>joining an org is trying to pull a fast one (or is in utopia).
*** If the point is phrased like you do, you would be right. However it could be phrased differently as well.
Like: If people get involved, take active part in the deliberations and the activities, then they are likely to be able to effect change. Not so if they are out of it.
Would that make sense?
Could be. But lets take the example of an org. in which the leadership only has tunnel vision. Any suggestion made by an upstart is immediately taken to mean subversive (or they are trying create an org. against us). And yes, as indicated before - a few will conrol, the rest will follow.
Unfortunately, I have had some first hand experience a few years ago. It was just so damned biased - every small detail/question was usually taken as an affront. Of course there was "democracy", for names sake. But unless anything met partyline thinking - nothing happened.
Staying out of orgs. has disadvantages - but the best advantage is I am not beholden to any group - and do what I feel is right.
But at the moment, wild horses wouldn't be able to drag me to become a member of some orgs. I have seen enough of their dealings in the past, and have wisely kept away.
*** I see it very differently on this point.
: Those who do the most get heeded the most. And those who do most and also are vocal and/or articulate, get to be the VISIBLE leaders. They call the shots and prevail, EVEN if their decisions might not always be palatable to everyone.
Those are the facts of life, as I have known them :-).
First off, I have to say, that what little the Assamese community enjoys today is because for the foresight and vision of some of the early founders/leaders in the society. These people today are members of the majot orgs. Hats off to them. They are people who should again take the lead in unification.
But over the years - we have seen/experienced a lot of the fragmentation because some people held on to their egos more than the interests of the community. It is these people that have broken the community into so many orgs.
Are these facts of life? - perhaps.
But do we have to resign ourselves to this? Can we not change our thinking? I don't know.
Yes - there will always be few who will take up the lead, the rest either do not want to be involved, or are ambivalent. Thats no surprise here. But some people do have to take that leap - we cannot forever remain in doldrums?
Regards Ram
>of running the show are still in the hands of a few die-hards who will never
>give up. For anything to happen - these DIE-HARDS have to leave - they are
>just plain anti-social, and divisive. The other members of course just do
>their bidding like sheep.
c-da
At 9:14 AM -0500 8/27/03, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>Hi Chandan da:
>>*** Are you practicing for a comedy club appearance :-)?
>>
>
>Ha! Ha! - I was referring to the relationship between AANA/AFNA. I really
>don't see massive upheavals being caused to the community because of the
>relationship they may/may not have. If it does - I want to be on Mars (you
>know its getting closer these days). :)
>
>>*** Allow me to take that question and attempt to answer it:
>>
>>It is because some people DO NOT want that. Why, you ask? Well, some people
>>do not like to socialize, hang out or cavort with others they don't care
>>for. That is exactly why they have private social clubs, where they know
>>each other, have similar tastes, hold similar ideals and attitudes and
>>demeanors. There is comfort in that.
>>
>>Do you have a better idea?
>>
>>Go ahead, we are listening :-).
>>
>
>Well! if experienced people like you have given up - my solution probably
>will not be that palatable or even better:
>Nevertheless - here is an attempt:
>
>If the present powers that control these orgs do not agree to unification -
>then the ordinary members should quit en masse. That should give them a
>wake-up call. I would suggest that a "plebicite" (the eteranal dream of
>many non-Kashmiris - :)) be held in the upcoming Convention at Houston in
>this regard. Let the people decide if they want ONE org or 10.
>
>You know, what should surprise the diaspora the most --- the almost
>defeaning silence that seems to emanate from these so-called leaders. Where
>are they? What is their response to a UNIFICATION?
>
>I will hold my ground - if there is no serious attempt in bringing about One
>Organization, then I like many others will just not join any org. I will try
>and attend the yearly hangamas, the Bihus etc thats about it.
>
>To me, to join all orgs. in order to appease everyone is totally baseless
>and a big waste. Why should one have to bend over backwards to please these
>leaders and orgs.
>
>And if anyone suggests that one can effect a change in policy/philosophy by
>joining an org is trying to pull a fast one (or is in utopia). The controls
>of running the show are still in the hands of a few die-hards who will never
>give up. For anything to happen - these DIE-HARDS have to leave - they are
>just plain anti-social, and divisive. The other members of course just do
>their bidding like sheep.
>
>A couple of the younger crowd have given some good suggestion. Instead of
>ignoring these ideas - I urge our leaders to seriously review these.
>Sometimes, a child shall lead them.
>
>With Regards
>
>Ram
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Enter for your chance to IM with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige
>using MSN Messenger http://entertainment.msn.com/imastar
_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
_______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
