Telangana Monitor

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Sep 2011 00:24

Inequitableness in land-ownership is not that significantly apparent in the lead up to the Partition in case of Bengal. There were big landholders among both Muslims and Hindus. Religion could be used as a factor by the Muslim elite to gain in the land-grab and preservation of feudal privileges - because the other religion had been undermined through various political and educational processes, and had been sufficiently corerced by the Brit-UP-Congressite-bloc to have ceased to be a good identity to mobilize people.

If the Telengana conflict is explored, we can trace all the much touted "language pride" etc etc, issues, all connected to attempts to implant alternate favourites of the season - depending on the particular Islamic sectarian affiliation of the rulers. Shia-sultanate-Mughal-sunni - Urdu-Dakhani-vs-other local languages - all are manifestations of issues about control over land, feudal rights, and the right to dominate the state machinery. The so-called coastal-Telengana divide roused on "subnational" waves - are creations of fertile imaginations of inetrested elite - who are on boths ides of the contest over feudal powers and ownership. Once created, of cours ethey get woven into the narrative of the people, and layered over and self-sustaining. Eliete son both sides deprive the non-elite and pass on the blame to the elite on the other side - and their "identity". The common students get martyred and their bloodied shirts get displayed as iconic banners in "language movements" [ I forget the figures of those arrested in 52 - lakhs I think]. More fuel for the elite.

While we seem to revel in apportioning guilt to subregional "people" as a whole, and accept the politician's plea that they are innocently trying to make the best of very intricate situations - we forget that is they - who put spins on language or other issues as a cover for their own predatory instincts in the first place. Yes politicians are trying their best - to get further benefits for themselves out of creations of other politicians before them.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 25 Sep 2011 00:28

EJ's could be as much fodder for the game being used for whatever their utility is - as much as the EJ's are trying to gain from the mess. It should be explored, and not thrown away as only a one-sided attempt.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 02:25

If there is a place to see a big chip on shoulder of folks on BRF this is the place to be .

; if you guys despise the so called T-vadis so much then I would say Godspeed to the Telangana movement, you have only vindicated their stand.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 02:37

vnadendla wrote:I started it. So let me answer. I have told it before. so I'll be precise.
1947 India independence
1948 My Mom is born. Her middle name is Andhra. So you can guess the feelings at that time.
1953 Andhra Formed. my Grand pa is left in TN. He stays put
1956 AP formed
1948 - 1960. My grandpa has 5 more children
196X I was born in AP. My Brother in TN next year.
1965 - 1985. 5 of the 6 children had to leave TN for andhra because there are no opportunies for them. I am frequent visitor to Madras. Had a nice time. People are great. I speak broken tamil. They reply in broken Telugu. But when it comes to important things in life (job etc) networking is important. While a person may not be discriminating the system may be.
One of my uncles is Gold Medalist. Don't tell me he is not qualified for a simple job in TN.

I do not wish to sound condescending but how is above different from most of the Indians who are having to migrate from their native places to metros or bigger cities in search of jobs ? I have lived in TN for more the 4 years so I think I know a bit about the state and it's people, the so called discrimination you talk about is present everywhere regardless of region/language/caste or even religion.

Asking 50 lakh people to uproot families, leave jobs and businesses and move somewhere else is crazy. The governance in India is still not stong enough to ensure the safety and complete rights to ALL those 50 lakh people if hyd is part of Telangana. Of course without Hyd Telangana will be very poor. If someone knows the solution 2G will make you CM.

Who is asking for 50 lakh people to relocate ? Are you crazy ? Do you think every statement that emanates from a political outfit needs to be taken seriously ?

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 03:37

negi wrote:If there is a place to see a big chip on shoulder of folks on BRF this is the place to be . ; if you guys despise the so called T-vadis so much then I would say Godspeed to the Telangana movement, you have only vindicated their stand.

You claim that you don't know the demographics of Hyderabad. Yet you ridicule the fear that so called settlers have by quoting the sacred constitution.

If telanganites despise andhrites or vice versa, there is a reason, as they are fighting for separation. This will last few years in the heat of the movement and things will comeback to normalcy as it happened in the past.

But what I don't understand is where your 'despise' is coming from, making sweeping aspersions. As I said the Nation as a whole doesn't support division. Everybody knows this is a slipper slope for the country. It can happen to any state or language or culture in future.

Instead of reacting to posters and their individual style, if you understand the subject of the thread and content of the post, something fruitful can come out of this discussion.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 25 Sep 2011 04:06

negi wrote:If there is a place to see a big chip on shoulder of folks on BRF this is the place to be . ; if you guys despise the so called T-vadis so much then I would say Godspeed to the Telangana movement, you have only vindicated their stand.

Typical, now going on a tangent..

SriKumar · Post by **SriKumar** » 25 Sep 2011 04:14

Negi, I have followed a lot of posts of yours over a lot of threads, and hence took your posts here seriously. My mistake yaar, one that I am not going to make again. My salaams and pranaams to you and I'm calling it a day. The only reason I am responding to your post is to clarify that I personally do not despise anyone (desi or martian). Not sure you meant it at me but wanted to clarify at large. ciao.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 25 Sep 2011 04:24

Take it easy SriKumar garu. negiullahs objective is different

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 04:29

Stan_Savljevic wrote: Argumentative Indian they may be, but ideological masquerading they are too.

and I would like you to point out to me where I accused Tamil people of "scheming" to divide AP? if you can find one post like that, I will apologize.
What exactly was the reference to Cholas playing Eastern and Western Chalukyas all about? What am I supposed to read into that? Do you know what you talk or you fit nails to your hammer?

In any case, calumny and vituperations on Rajaji on this dhaaga is also unnecessary. Rajaji was on the right of the divide, Nehru on the left. Both saw linguistic reorganization as a threat to a nascent state just coming out of slavery for years on end. The flavor of the season was Bandung 1955, Panch-sheel etc. In the Madras Presidency, the fights were intra-party, inter-party, inter-language and often inter-caste. Tanguturi Prakasam was no saint, nor was Rajaji. At the end of the day, everyone was a flawed politician who in his or her wisdom and ideological predilections was focussing on what he/she saw as moral certitude. In 1953, most people were burning their midnight oil on the Kula Kalvi thittam of Rajaji, 1960 deadline for national language, and how to get the criminal caste label on Maravars (Thevars) lifted. Up north, the post-Op Polo aftermath left enough problems in its wake. While the Nizam was Rajpramukh, he started showing his opposition to many new policies including anti-zamindari moves and nationalizing Salar Jung. Qasim Rizwi was in jail, but the MIM was reorganizing and by 1957 had come completely overground. Its easy to throw stones with hindsight as a crutch, but life is more complicated living forward. Or so said, Kierkegaard.

I got the argumentative and ideological masquerading part, as evident above. What is your point?

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 06:19

Srikumar that is another mistake you made i.e. forming an opinion about me as a person based on my posts on BRF is not done .

My major beef with your line of argument is it is primarily based on the claim that people in favour of creation of Telangana will drive away the so called settlers from Hyderabad ; to that when I asked as to how will anyone be able to identify a Telanaga resident vs Telugu guy in the city I did not get any response. People are drumming up sentimental rhetoric about divisive agenda , bharatvarsha and other stuff but at the same time they somehow distrust their own people in the Telangana region and fear that latter will drive them away from their homes . My question is if there is so much distrust between the two parties then why talk about united AP ? Also if there is any truth to the claims of T-vadis driving 'settlers' then why/whom are they waiting for ? They can very well do it now, no ?

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 06:28

The real test for government comes from group1 exams starting today. This is the ultimate challenge for T agitation and CM Kiran Kumar Reddy. If T protagonists stop the exam, they will continue to tout the success of the 'sakala janula smme' . On the other hand, CM Reddy would like to prove that the agitation has no impact. This will be a significant event the current agitation.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 06:40

Dasari wrote: You claim that you don't know the demographics of Hyderabad. Yet you ridicule the fear that so called settlers have by quoting the sacred constitution.

Well having apprehensions with regards to one's future when a new state is formed and being driven away from one's house are two different things; unfortunately things have been blown out of proportion in media and it is being lapped up here . The system in India might not be efficient but things have not gone to such a level where lakhs of people in a major city will have to be displaced just because of formation of a new state. No sir I simply do not buy that .

If telanganites despise andhrites or vice versa, there is a reason

I for one somehow cannot believe that there is so much hate amongst the people against each other but then since I have not lived in AP I cannot vouch for my belief. Having said that obviously the grievances against the administration have manifested themselves in form of ugly incidents in public but then such things happen all the time in India be it Gujjar agitation, the people of Jammu or even folks from Uttarakhand Kranti dal they all have resorted to violent means in the past to make their presence felt.

But what I don't understand is where your 'despise' is coming from, making sweeping aspersions.

What sweeping aspersions have I made, please substantiate.

I am only pointing out the disconnect in the debate in general here i.e. talk of united AP, bharatvarsha and at the same time distrust of Telanganavadis this somehow does not make sense to me. Frankly speaking have Telanganavadis indulged in acts of violence against the so called settlers , yet ? The movement has been going on for decades now.

As I said the Nation as a whole doesn't support division. Everybody knows this is a slipper slope for the country. It can happen to any state or language or culture in future.

Oh please, do not speak for the nation . If you can articulate your pov that should be enough for now.

Instead of reacting to posters and their individual style, if you understand the subject of the thread and content of the post, something fruitful can come out of this discussion.

I usually do not do that; if you would notice I usually do not even quote people, unless I am forced to.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 25 Sep 2011 06:40

Reddi vachche modal aadu - the local elder came, lets start the play from the beginning.

Negiullah: your comment falls in that category.

There was no mistrust of t-people from AP side to begin with. AP side responded to all the claims (historical, cultural, linguistic, cuisine, looks, taste what not) thru media, meetings and other communication channels.

Then there was the call for t-emotion/sentiment. SKC was formed by the same UPA govt (not AP people) that made Dec 9th comment.

The paki statements started only a couple of years ago. There were calls for expelling AP people for more than a year. There were instances in OU where AP students were threatened and sent home.

You might be ignorant about it, but the non-locals in hyderabad are asked to be identified on the basis of mulki-rule and or based on their birth certificates. Please go read old news papers to understand how t-radicals wanted to identify non-local telugus.

A better way to get some background information is to read the previous pages of this thread. You will find media links, quotes etc.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 25 Sep 2011 07:58

negi wrote:Srikumar that is another mistake you made i.e. forming an opinion about me as a person based on my posts on BRF is not done .

My major beef with your line of argument is it is primarily based on the claim that people in favour of creation of Telangana will drive away the so called settlers from Hyderabad ; to that when I asked as to how will anyone be able to identify a Telanaga resident vs Telugu guy in the city I did not get any response. People are drumming up sentimental rhetoric about divisive agenda , bharatvarsha and other stuff but at the same time they somehow distrust their own people in the Telangana region and fear that latter will drive them away from their homes . My question is if there is so much distrust between the two parties then why talk about united AP ? Also if there is any truth to the claims of T-vadis driving 'settlers' then why/whom are they waiting for ? They can very well do it now, no ?

Negi if you lived in Hyderabad I would expect you to know that historically Andhra colonies have been easily identifiable as there was de facto segregation, not sure what the exact situation today. Anyone from a certain generation would treat the question as naive and ignorant.

Telangana has some genuine issues which deserve to be addressed in a less combative and defensive way by seemanndhra folks but I can say with all the confidence I can muster that separate Telangana movement is fundamentally inimical to productivity and even egalitarianism.

I think there are a lot of distracting sub threads going on but there is a qualitative difference between the observations of people who are steeped in the political economy and culture of the state and those that try to force-fit theories based on what appears to me to be superficial knowledge.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 08:21

negi wrote:Well having apprehensions with regards to one's future when a new state is formed and being driven away from one's house are two different things; unfortunately things have been blown out of proportion in media and it is being lapped up here . The system in India might not be efficient but things have not gone to such a level where lakhs of people in a major city will have to be displaced just because of formation of a new state. No sir I simply do not buy that .

Negi,

Do you know what this thread is about and what we are discussing here?

For your information the united AP exists today and as you eloquently put the constitution protects everybody, regardless of any false apprehensions you may have. That is the theme line of united AP. The system in India might not be efficient but things have not gone to such a level where lakhs of people in a region are discriminated by people of another region (BTW, this is your line).

Isn't it what you are preaching ? So Sir, now you tell me what are you afraid of united AP. What are your apprehensions to live in the state that already exists for almost 60 years (with full constitutional rights)?

Since you may not be knowing, Telangana region elects 119 MLAs, while Andhra elects 123 and Rayalaseema 52 to the state assembly. Sir, do you still believe in constitution and representative form of govt?

Apparently you have no clue on what comes first or what started what. If you want to have any credibility, you better do some reading on andhra pradesh history before you post.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 09:20

Ha ha nice try twisting my lines. You seem to have overlooked the fact that there is nothing constitutionally wrong with dividing a state and we have ample examples from history to substantiate it. This tendency to raise a red herring by repeatedly talking about united AP is amusing when there is a huge section of people demanding for a separate state for themselves. Unity of India as a country has nothing to do with division or creation of new states, in fact if one is to go by past examples the formation of new states have benefited both the state and the country. Instead of telling me what to do; why don't you first try to make a coherent post ? You speak about representation and throw some numbers here but did you check what those representatives have been saying ? Hasn't each one of them talked about creation of Telangana ?

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 25 Sep 2011 09:27

negi wrote:Ha ha nice try twisting my lines. You seem to have overlooked the fact that there is nothing constitutionally wrong with dividing a state and we have ample examples from history to substantiate it. This tendency to raise a red herring by repeatedly talking about united AP is amusing when there is a huge section of people demanding for a separate state for themselves. Unity of India as a country has nothing to do with division or creation of new states, in fact if one is to go by past examples the formation of new states have benefited both the state and the country.

Apart from the fear about persecution of Telugu speaking community I am yet to see a valid point against the formation of Telangana.

Do you want fries with that!

Perhaps you can go through SKC report and discuss. We need to see why SKC didn't want to separate as final opinion.

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 25 Sep 2011 09:39

Stan_Savljevic wrote:

Hyderabad need not be given to Telangana if they want to separate. This has nothing to do with Tamils as such.

...
There are parallels with today: many Telugu speakers had parked their cash in Madras City and hence assumed that that alone was sufficient reason to demand a City where they were in a minority. Wonderful logic that even Nannaya cant compose even if you gave him a million years. Btw, what became AP had chosen to side with the Communist Party [Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Sta ... tion,_1952] and it was the CPI which walked out of the Parliament when Potti Sriramulu's death was not honored due to fear of precedents of stalling a nascent state with dharna of a new kind. The much-hated commies were in the forefront in having AP recognized. They were also in the forefront in Op. Polo and the drive against the Razakars. That was a quick change from their language based nationality policy of the early to mid 40s to becoming parochial for the sake of political consolidation in a nascent state which they believed will drop in their laps.

So, instead of dissing at the Commies at the drop of a hat, as is the fashion of brf, you guys should learn your own history. At least we Tams love our godless hypocrites who have served us so-so. You guys diss at all the godless idiots who have helped you in the past. Some of you with deep historical insights stretching to the Kakatiyas, Chalukyas (was it the eastern or the western cousins), Chozhas, Satavahanas, etc. just forgot only the post-47 history. Wonderful rendition of dharm-rakshaking by those who are sugar-coated in agmark-brand dharma. What to do, we are in dharm-yug where satya vachan is spoken in so many forms.

Now, back to scheduled programming . Can I have an encore on the chest-beating cries please?

PS: In my super-excitement, forgot this: Jai Telengana .

I'm not sure godless idiots as you put it weren't not honored for their service in the past. Dissing some current godless idiots as you put it doesn't mean dissing their forefathers. Most of TDP rule had their support and they are integral part of AP politics but they themselves can't gain power like in Kerala or WB.

PS: Good that you have some stand. I'll not reply to rest of rants.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 11:01

ShyamSP wrote:
Stan_Savljevic wrote: ...
There are parallels with today: many Telugu speakers had parked their cash in Madras City and hence assumed that that alone was sufficient reason to demand a City where they were in a minority. Wonderful logic that even Nannaya cant compose even if you gave him a million years. Btw, what became AP had chosen to side with the Communist Party [Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Sta ... tion,_1952] and it was the CPI which walked out of the Parliament when Potti Sriramulu's death was not honored due to fear of precedents of stalling a nascent state with dharna of a new kind. The much-hated commies were in the forefront in having AP recognized. They were also in the forefront in Op. Polo and the drive against the Razakars. That was a quick change from their language based nationality policy of the early to mid 40s to becoming parochial for the sake of political consolidation in a nascent state which they believed will drop in their laps.

So, instead of dissing at the Commies at the drop of a hat, as is the fashion of brf, you guys should learn your own history. At least we Tams love our godless hypocrites who have served us so-so. You guys diss at all the godless idiots who have helped you in the past. Some of you with deep historical insights stretching to the Kakatiyas, Chalukyas (was it the eastern or the western cousins), Chozhas, Satavahanas, etc. just forgot only the post-47 history. Wonderful rendition of dharm-rakshaking by those who are sugar-coated in agmark-brand dharma. What to do, we are in dharm-yug where satya vachan is spoken in so many forms.

Now, back to scheduled programming . Can I have an encore on the chest-beating cries please?

PS: In my super-excitement, forgot this: Jai Telengana .
I'm not sure godless idiots as you put it weren't not honored for their service in the past. Dissing some current godless idiots as you put it doesn't mean dissing their forefathers. Most of TDP rule had their support and they are integral part of AP politics but they themselves can't gain power like in Kerala or WB.

PS: Good that you have some stand. I'll not reply to rest of rants.

I didn't see this post earlier. I can certainly see the Grudge in trying to show telugu people were settlers in Madras. It really infuriates me. I can also site wikipedia reference and the conspiracy of Rajaji. Here is the wikipedia link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_State and here is the summary:
In 1953, Telugu speakers of Madras Presidency wanted Madras as the capital of Andhra state including the famous slogan Madras Manade (Madras is ours) before Tirupati was included in AP. Madras, at that time was an indivisible mixture of Tamil and Telugu cultures[1]. It was difficult to determine who should possess it. Panagal Raja, Chief Minister of the Madras Presidency in the early 1920s said that the Cooum River should be kept as a boundary, giving the northern portion to the Andhras and the southern portion to the Tamils. In 1928, Sir C. Sankaran Nair sent a report to the Central Council discussing why Madras does not belong to the Tamils. Historically and geographically it was a part of the Andhra region. It was Damerla Ventakadri Nayakudu of Recherla Velama caste was provincial governor in 1639 from whom the English sought to take permission to set up a factory. The increasing political dominance of the Tamils from early 1920s at both Central and State level politics caused Madras to remain in the Tamil region. According to the JPC report (Jawahar Lal Nehru, Bhogaraju Pattabhi Sitaramayya, C. Rajagopalachari) Telugu people should leave Madras for Tamils if they want a new state.

Nobody here is accusing any injustice done to telugu speaking people as we clearly understand the norms of separation. All we are saying is that If you want to break away from the rest of the state, there are sacrifices to be made as Telugites did when they sacrificed Madras. I don't know why these guys have to foster some grudge from this.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Sep 2011 11:35

Dasari wrote: It was Damerla Ventakadri Nayakudu of Recherla Velama caste was provincial governor in 1639 from whom the English sought to take permission to set up a factory. The increasing political dominance of the Tamils from early 1920s at both Central and State level politics caused Madras to remain in the Tamil region. According to the JPC report (Jawahar Lal Nehru, Bhogaraju Pattabhi Sitaramayya, C. Rajagopalachari) Telugu people should leave Madras for Tamils if they want a new state.

Increasing political dominance from early 20s was there only for tamils?? Not for telugus? How do you explain the formation of language based groupings in the Congress, much of it was the telugu group bulldozed? In fact, INC grew more sympathetic to language based demarcations primarily cos of the vociferous telugu groups. How do you explain the interactions between Bengali lefties and Telugu lefties in the 20s and 30s? How do you explain the preponderance of telugu speakers in the early Justice Party and its clones? Ah, they were all non political??

Everywhere in India, there was a new found confidence to stand up and fight for one's rights. The Dravidian movement was not linguistically parochial in the 20s, it was casteist not linguistically too sub-divided to make much of the tam vs telugu difference. So this "tams were increasingly politically dominant from the 20s" is just a canard to cover up the fact that Madras came to what is now TN on its own merit and explain away complicated numbers with random excuses.

Why whine about the JPC members? Three Brahmins; one telugu speaker, one tamil speaker, one national level leader supposedly unbiased at least on the issue of Madras city even if not so on linguistic states; one on the left (JLN), one on the right (CR), one mostly neutral (PS); all three with enough legal acumen to sway the other 2 if they argued right, etc. And yet the point about 49% to 38% does nt make much sense, but only the argument that "big state small state" and how it should be reciprocated. If you guys had so much whine about the JPC in a post-dated manner, why not crib about it before instead of sending PS to take part in it? May be you should diss at PS instead of CR for not swaying the committee.

Shyam SP and others, why dont you guys make a case as to how Madras city going to Madras state is the parallel from which Hyd city going to Telengana has to be seen? Makes zero sense to me. Seriously, what is a good estimate for "settlers" in the twin cities, most reasonable estimates come with 1 million out of ~7.5. Even if you give or take and say 2.5 million, thats just 33%. I dont get these random 5 million number that gets thrown by Costa-Seema people, cos ~40% of Hyd is Muslim, thats 3.5 million out from 7.5 in one shot. With 38%, you guys want Madras city, with at best 33%, you want Hyderabad also. How come this lack of logic escapes the posters here? Sure, for all the parking of investments over the last so many years, you guys need some re-assurance that you wont lose your shirts, which is not coming satisfactorily, but other than that, what is the issue with Hyd going to Telengana?

pradeepe · Post by **pradeepe** » 25 Sep 2011 11:57

negi wrote:
pradeepe wrote:Negi, the governance argument cannot not make sense and should be considered in all seriousness. Buts thats not the platform and agument made by the Telangana proponents. They have shifted and weaved when trying to understand what it was they were looking for. And no, not just random folks venting, like one gent on this forum, but just look at the utterings of the top echelon of the Telangana front. They might have rallied and sounded off with the telangana cry as nothing more than a political opportunity, but the subsequent monster they have created and the scent of blood they are using to rally it further is scary. The folks being played are just cannon fodder.
Well Pradepe I am not talking about the political front running the Telangana movement I am actually talking about the people on ground who are being taken for a ride; there is no clear demarcation as to who is for or against Telangana as far as politicians are concerned everyone has made a promise that they will carve out a state by that name. I have always been a firm believer in the fact that when someone living under a same roof wants to have his share it's always better to oblige as there is no point in trying to make things work for both parties will suffer at the end of the day. People are asking for a different state within republic of India I for one don't understand what's the problem here; all this talk of oh he called me a settler is just so kiddish .

Negi,

These are only my opinions.
1. I would like to avoid telugu people being split.
2. I personally am emotionally and financially invested in Hyderabad and so is much of our family. I would like these to be secure.

My cousin runs a small hospital, she has been the target of extortion. I only state one case, because I can stand by it. There are lots of extortion cases going on per conversations with people. Walk through any of the business streets of hyd, you will notice something very odd. Nice opulent fancy glass buildings, but there's an eye sore with all of them. You say the fear is irrational. Is it really. Would someone who can back it up with a guarantee stand by it. Do you know what the T leaders are openly saying?

I can't get my mind around things if they are not simple enough. So my question is even simpler - for what reason? I would like one good valid reason. As someone who has a concern of the fallout, however irrational it might be as per you, I am entitled to a reason, because someone asked cannot cut it. If theres no real issue, but to pander to the wishes of telangana proponents, then one has to consider the cost against the perceived benefits.

In any case, IMHO, so much venom has been churned out of this whole process. It needs a vent. A division, if its needed will happen. Let it be so. We will deal with the aftermath as best as we can. Afterall as a person on the ground, I can't lay faith in assurances that the republic of India provides security. The GoIs record has been piss poor.

Btw, I think presidential rule might be coming on. Or atleast, preparations for elections. Congress has gone on a drive to pander. Rachabandall programme, Rs1/kg rice and other sops being enabled.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 13:04

Stan_Savljevic wrote:
Dasari wrote: It was Damerla Ventakadri Nayakudu of Recherla Velama caste was provincial governor in 1639 from whom the English sought to take permission to set up a factory. The increasing political dominance of the Tamils from early 1920s at both Central and State level politics caused Madras to remain in the Tamil region. According to the JPC report (Jawahar Lal Nehru, Bhogaraju Pattabhi Sitaramayya, C. Rajagopalachari) Telugu people should leave Madras for Tamils if they want a new state.
Increasing political dominance from early 20s was there only for tamils?? Not for telugus? How do you explain the formation of language based groupings in the Congress, much of it was the telugu group bulldozed? In fact, INC grew more sympathetic to language based demarcations primarily cos of the vociferous telugu groups. How do you explain the interactions between Bengali lefties and Telugu lefties in the 20s and 30s? How do you explain the preponderance of telugu speakers in the early Justice Party and its clones? Ah, they were all non political??

Everywhere in India, there was a new found confidence to stand up and fight for one's rights. The Dravidian movement was not linguistically parochial in the 20s, it was casteist not linguistically too sub-divided to make much of the tam vs telugu difference. So this "tams were increasingly politically dominant from the 20s" is just a canard to cover up the fact that Madras came to what is now TN on its own merit and explain away complicated numbers with random excuses.

Why whine about the JPC members? Three Brahmins; one telugu speaker, one tamil speaker, one national level leader supposedly unbiased at least on the issue of Madras city even if not so on linguistic states; one on the left (JLN), one on the right (CR), one mostly neutral (PS); all three with enough legal acumen to sway the other 2 if they argued right, etc. And yet the point about 49% to 38% does nt make much sense, but only the argument that "big state small state" and how it should be reciprocated. If you guys had so much whine about the JPC in a post-dated manner, why not crib about it before instead of sending PS to take part in it? May be you should diss at PS instead of CR for not swaying the committee.

Shyam SP and others, why dont you guys make a case as to how Madras city going to Madras state is the parallel from which Hyd city going to Telengana has to be seen? Makes zero sense to me. Seriously, what is a good estimate for "settlers" in the twin cities, most reasonable estimates come with 1 million out of ~7.5. Even if you give or take and say 2.5 million, thats just 33%. I dont get these random 5 million number that gets thrown by Costa-Seema people, cos ~40% of Hyd is Muslim, thats 3.5 million out from 7.5 in one shot. With 38%, you guys want Madras city, with at best 33%, you want Hyderabad also. How come this lack of logic escapes the posters here? Sure, for all the parking of investments over the last so many years, you guys need some re-assurance that you wont lose your shirts, which is not coming satisfactorily, but other than that, what is the issue with Hyd going to Telengana?

As usual you try to obfuscate the problem with your fake superficial details. It doesn't matter whether they are three brahmins or three dalits or left,right or middle (they have to be unbiased..because you said so). In any case, all they said was that you cannot have separate state and take capital city too. Period. That is the dharma of separation. Don't apply anymore of your pigment of imagination here.

Since you bring up settlers issue again and again, let me make it clear. It is Tamils that settled in Madras that was founded when an andhra king granted a piece of land in his kingdom to the east india company. In fact the legend goes that the chennai name came after the king, Damerla Chennappa Nayakudu. So much for your parallels. I don't know where you got the 38%, but I'm sure as days passed the number would have come down further. But it doesn't alter the fact who were settlers. So the parallels are clear.

Now as far as Hyderabad, I fail to understand your numbers, as usual randomly making up whatever you like - 1 milliom, 2.5 million. Though census doesn't ask who is settlers and who is not, there is a way we can find. TRS leadership repeatedly threatens that they will stop all 3 million settlers from coming back after they go to their native villages (in Semmandhra) for Sankranti. That go to be the minimum number as quoted by TRS goons. Further, in 13 assembly constituencies in and around Hyderabad, 11 of them belong to INC, TDP and MIM. Nobody ever believe these candidates/parties ever stand for separation, regardless of their outside posture. Finally, in last Municapal elections, TRS, a party that loves to resign and get elected, decided not to expose themselves to the wrath of Hyderabadis and didn't contest. If any plebiscite is done, 100% certain that Hyderabad will not go to Telangana. T protagonists know this, therefore they counter this argument by switching to historical geography. Don't worry we can't undo Madras now.

In any case I won't construe this as some grudge you have against Telugus for what happened in 1953. Obviously we will forgive you for so much love you have for the other telugu people which you had no quarrels. Keep it up.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 25 Sep 2011 14:06

Dasari wrote:
Since you bring up settlers issue again and again, let me make it clear. It is Tamils that settled in Madras that was founded when an andhra king granted a piece of land in his kingdom to the east india company. In fact the legend goes that the chennai name came after the king, Damerla Chennappa Nayakudu. So much for your parallels. I don't know where you got the 38%, but I'm sure as days passed the number would have come down further. But it doesn't alter the fact who were settlers. So the parallels are clear.

Boss Telugu King yes in 1639, but a little research would have shown that the villages around which the Madras city came up , i.e Tiruvelikeni(triplicane), Mylapore, Amenthkarai(Amjikarai), Nungambakaam, Tirvotiyvur etc etc the list goes endless were Tamil villages. Being Ruled by Telugu Kings does not make the population Telugu.

Many of these villages have long Tamil histories and Telugu people have been in these villages since Millenia.

Lets leave this X was settlers, Y were Settlers etc. etc and get back to Telegana where Hyderabad today has become hostage to strikes. and how somehow Andhra leaders lost Madras for Andhra people- Thats not true.

Negi- I have witnessed in 2009, how cars with Registrations Nos indicating Vijayawada or Rajamandry were deliberately attacked by ~~goondas~~ stuedents of Osamnia university near the Tarnaka bridge. So the Paki threats ( not white Collar workers) but the Push Cart ( Bandi sellers), menian labourers is very much there. KCR and his progeni have been making statements which logically should have put them in jail.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Sep 2011 14:31

Dasari wrote: In any case, all they said was that you cannot have separate state and take capital city too. Period. That is the dharma of separation. Don't apply anymore of your pigment of imagination here.

May be you dont get what I said before. So let me state again known facts.

First of all, if you look at the JVP report that abandoned Madras city to the then Madras state, it was not on the principle of "having separate state and having capital city also." In Pattabhi Sitaramaiya's words, "no second largest minority can get the city for itself over the head of the first largest community." Source: The Hindu, editorial, dated May 12, 1949. This was also the view of the SK Dar-led SRC which said, "Andhras' claim for Madras city was weak as more than two thirds of the people spoke Tamil." Source: p. 111 of the SRC report. The SRC used the 1931 census data if my hunch is right. That is why you have the 2/3 figure. The 49%-38% is based on 1951 census and is reported by Time mag, see my post earlier. It is also quoted in A.R. Venkatachalapathi's book on "How Madras came to Tamil Nadu" or some such name (I dont recall it off hand).

Pattabhi Sitaramaiya in the same editorial (as above) noted that, "at best Andhras' should ask Madras city to be made Joint capital for some time." The SRC report said, "even the claim for a Joint capital is untenable."

The biggest opponents of PS and the most vociferous critics of "abandoning the claim to Madras city" were Tanguturi Prakasam and S. V. Ramamurthi. In fact, PS had made no grand claims to Madras city if you go by his demands before the Congress Working Committee even in the 30s. I can cite exact words of his arguments with Chittaranjan Das and Annie Besant, but thats gonna take me ages to fish around and type. So there was no justification in such false charges of "abandoning" when a realistic claim was not even made. According to PS, "Both Tanguturi Prakasam and S. V. Ramamurthi admitted the correctness of leaving Madras out of Andhra." Source: His autobiography, Chapter XXXIII, p. 6. According to many, echoed by John Leonard, Prakasam acted as "the 'Spokesman of the Telugus" in Madras city and Madras was his constituency."

So there you go, the principle for "abandoning" Madras city on the part of Telugu speakers if any is the population ratio of Tamil to Telugu speakers in the city at that time. It was not about one part splitting away and having less claims yada yada as you make it. Most definitely, the SRC and Pattabhi Sitaramiya did nt think so. Even more concretely, some grandiose claims to Damarla Chennappa Nayudu or others cannot make Madras city Telugu origin. If you go that route, we can go all the way back to Thiruvalluvar (and more) who wrote his Kural (from much attribution) in Mylapore. We can go to Kapaleeswarar Temple with 7th century origins to Pallavas. We can go to St. Thomas Mount for the early days of the Christian era. The question is where do you guys want to stop: with Kakatiya rule or much earlier.

So if one goes by "principles", which is how PS worked, then the question of how many so-called "settlers" vs. "Telengana origin" peoples are there makes most sense? You cant also ignore the fact that you cant chip away a capital city in the middle of a contiguous territory and make it a Joint capital. SRC deliberations and deliberations by many including PS, which sets the "principles" for any reorganization, make such demands untenable. Now given this, some iron-clad safeguards are needed. Given the gross mis-application of any safeguards in India, what could they be? May be Costa-Seema can threaten Telengana with water wars if so-called "settlers" are mistreated? May be impose an unofficial embargo? Slowly common sense will sink in, after all it did in what became AP and Madras State very quickly after the 53-56 period.

Dasari, you can assume N things about my grudge or a lack thereof vis-a-vis Telugu speakers. I have enough credibility in real life on these matters, enough said. I come here only when idiotic claims on Madras city are entertained in an unreasonable way. I come when people come with half-baked understanding of even post-47 historical matters with their selective interpretations. When history is misinterpreted and selectively applied just to Chenappa Nayudu days, I have a right to question the moral principles on which such claims stand. I stand by some principles, just like PS did for his.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Sep 2011 14:53

All those who are nurturing massive grievances on Madras city going to the then Madras State based on some random claims had to do only one thing: wait for 20-30 years by sticking to Madras Presidency. The continued skewing of the Tamil to Telugu speakers due to internal migration because of many reasons, not small being that So. Indian cinema was centered in Madras city would have ensured a majority of Telugu speakers in Madras city by 1971 or 1981 or so.

Now if that logic sinks in deeply, even a KLPD smilie wont do justice to the full range of emotions. We call it alternate history in some select circles

. Oh then, you would nt have had NTR as CM, he would have been fighting with MGR or on the same plank as him. Would have made EJs job easier than today. Mu Ka would nt have been a petty thug he was, we can all sing that we have won the dharmic war.

PS: Oh btw, the Sri Bagh House where the Sri Bagh agreement was signed is actually rotting, if anyone cares about that. The Amrutanjan smell has also gotten down over those days.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 25 Sep 2011 15:00

Stan,

Why did they do this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pra ... daries_Act

If this is acceptable why not splitting Madras into two is NOT acceptable? The perception of it may be the powerful persons work will not easily die. TN politicos always has a handle with Gandhi-Nehru family folks where as the dumbo Telugus

does not have same means. For example see the current UPA ministires. INC got 35 MPs from AP and few brokers like Chidu from TN. The TN folks whether it is DMK or INC ended up as FM/HM, communications ministry etc. AP INC folks inspite of large contingent are on the sidelines as duffers.

The perception that it was the same trend in 1940s 50s will not die too. Other than PVNR no one has made a mark because they are not in the good books of JLN or later Gandhis.

This thread reaching 109 pages and the topics getting revisited (Reddi vachhe modalu) is the proof of "height of indecision". Both AP and India has congress government, they declared in Dec 2009 a state called Telengana, retracted it back with a commission and later the commission gave the report. It will always be a zero sum game as far as formation ot T is concerned. You cannot bridge the divide and the parties, government has to choose a side and the slap from the other. They should have to guts to create Telangana and what is stopping the Chidus, Dadas and the Yuvrajs? I am actually visiting India to see the inaguration of Telangana.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Sep 2011 15:35

From what I could google, it shows up as the H. V. Pataskar award leading to an amendment to the First Schedule of the Constitution. It settles a long-standing boundary dispute between the 2 states. Pataskar was asked to mediate by both the CMs. He was Law Minister after the demise of Shri. B.R. Ambedkar. And given that the heavyweight was no more, and Pataskar was a politician-expert on matters of transfer of territory from one province to another, he was found to be the right person. He was later the governor of MP. More on this can be read here: http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/705046/

Once you understand the genesis of this settlement, how is splitting Madras city and that too now relevant? How practical is it and that too today given the geography? How morally justified is that as a demand?

Your [or wider] perceptions on the political acumen of TN politicians and a lack thereof vis-a-vis AP politicians is not sufficient evidence to label this as a TN vs. AP debate. It clearly is not. If one has to cast stones in this framework, I can cast many stones. And the gravy train wont stop. May be what you call political acumen comes with regional outfits that operate strictly under the self-respect paradigm and hence demanding enough of the Union to acquiesce. If that hypothesis is the case, the realization is may be that one cant escape one's legacy? I dont know. May be AP needs more NTRs who speak about atma gauravam. And speaking alone is not sufficient, wider propaganda is a bigger part of this outreach. Without propaganda, DK and DMK would have been nobodies. TN perhaps reaps the reward now for its outlier efforts in the 40s-60s. It had the moral conviction to stand up against the language imposition and that set in a whole lotta circle of events. The fact that what we now have is a useless set of hypocrites doing the back and forth does nt cloud the moral justifications that led to their rise and growth.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 16:22

"The JVP Committee, at the end of its study, recommended postponing linguistic provinces by a few years with one caveat - it made an exception and gave consent to creating an Andhra province with a condition that said, "If an Andhra Povince is to be formed, its protagonists will have to abandon their claims to the City of Madras." The Congress working committee accepted the JVP report.

The Telugus were unhappy with this clause because madras for them was an integral part of Telugu Land. Madras belonged to the Telugus for centuries, and Vijayanagara kings of Charagiri handed the region to he British.

However, Dr Pattabhi sitaramayya reasoned with Telugus that all not lost. His interpretation of the JVP clause regarding Madras was that it would neither be part of andhra nor Madras Province. He reasoned that madras would be admnisited as a separate province giving equal access to boy Telugus and Tamils."

However with powerful political lobby of Rajaji and Nehru's anti linguistic stance, that was not possible.

This was extract from My Telugu Roots page 186-187. Actually there is lot more on this subject hat i can quote.

Stan, Don't bluff here with half baked knowledge. If you think that you are scholar that is fine, good for you. This debate is nothing to do with Madras or Tamils. It is drawing parallels with what happened before and apply similar logic here. I don't know whether it is your love for Telangana or pure chauvinism you go tangent with your show off.

May be Costa-Seema can threaten Telengana with water wars if so-called "settlers" are mistreated?

BTW, seemandrites are in no position to threaten Telangana with water wars as they are down stream. Nice wish from your part though. At least recognize the geography of the state to go along with self proclaimed scholarly ego.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 25 Sep 2011 16:51

Eeks, Pattabhi Sitaramaiah when questioned that the JVP report "abandoned" claims to Madras city said something to the effect, "the fact that it is not in the AP state does nt automatically make it a part of the Madras state." Now that is bullshitting, if it is not part of AP and is inside Madras state, how can it become "shared?" The fact that people elsewhere in what became AP bought into his charade by PS makes it pitiable.

The Chandigarh model was developed in 1966 and that too only cos Chandigarh was in the boundary. Madras city was not in the boundary. Nor will Hyderabad be. Who was he kidding? How did Prakasam Pantulu come around to accepting the lost case? Since you are looking for answers, let me also give you the answer: it was lost from the start. Pattabhi Sitaramaiah has hardly made any strong demands for Madras city esp in the lead up to the JVP report.

You are quoting some random character with a random book and some random page no 186 and his selective interpretation and a whole lot of ululations, and I am quoting one of the three members of the JVP report and the editorial he wrote. Plus SRC report + page number. Whose word will you take? I quote census data and percentages from official GoI publications, you quote some Vijayanagar logic.

I know I have a giant ego. But that has nothing to do with facts. I dont claim to be knowledgeable on Telengana or its geography or what you guys can do to feel safe inside Telengana. I know little, I do admit it. But I do know enough on what happened during the language era politics, esp what happened inside the then Madras Presidency. So take your Nalamotu Chakravarthy propaganda where it belongs. Seriously dude...

And thankfully, even if you admit that this has nothing to do with Madras or tamils, there have been nuff posts here on how Madras city was "lost." And there are no shortages for canards on TN to be used. If you want parallels to be learned from history, here is one: No amount of propaganda can change inconvenient facts. And no amount of "we lost it because we were dumb/they were smarter/we had a bigger stake/[insert some random excuse]" will cut it. Madras city was lost cos you guys did nt have the demographics to tilt at windmills. The same demographics argument was what was used to establish AP in the first place. Now that it is back to bite you, its time to face the issue again.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 25 Sep 2011 18:31

wow..this is still going on on on... the same dead beat points and few like Stan, Negi keep bringing in some inconvinient truths now and then much to the chagrin of the group think that prevails.

I must admit that I am guilty of being absent on this thread largely due to my inability to allocate much time to reflect on what all different is happening in the state, progress on the issue, and also in part dissapointment at the utter disregard with which our democratic institutions are handling this crisis etc.

Well, on the on-going upswing on Telangana agitation, I gather that
- for the last five days or so there are no buses plying in Telangana; supposedly indefinitely
- schools and colleges have been closed for 5-6 days indefinitely
- no st. govt dept is functioning; it is doubtful that st. govt employees will get salaries on time
- trains have stopped running for the last 2-3 days
- normal life as such has been disturbed in Telangana
- dharnas have been going on but I did not hear of violent incidents;
- I hear that st and national media continue to block coverage or isn't covering as much as one may expect to see in such cases
- obviously, the life in coastal andhra and rayalaseema remain unimpacted

That the merger (between andhra and telangana) happened in the backdrop of an agreement to address Telangana greivances, that the same agreement was dishonoured by the original signatory and first CM of the combined state only to see this issue coming up after a few years, that these grievences has been recognized in the constitution (article 371) has been lost in the melee of resource and opportunity grab.

Nehru apparently remarked that this "vishalandhra" idea sounds much like "linguistic imperialism." His fear was well founded and I must say has materialized it its full glory. It remains to be seen how and by what means this issue is resolved.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 25 Sep 2011 18:56

Stan_Savljevic wrote:From what I could google, it shows up as the H. V. Pataskar award leading to an amendment to the First Schedule of the Constitution. It settles a long-standing boundary dispute between the 2 states. Pataskar was asked to mediate by both the CMs. He was Law Minister after the demise of Shri. B.R. Ambedkar. And given that the heavyweight was no more, and Pataskar was a politician-expert on matters of transfer of territory from one province to another, he was found to be the right person. He was later the governor of MP. More on this can be read here: http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/705046/

Once you understand the genesis of this settlement, how is splitting Madras city and that too now relevant? How practical is it and that too today given the geography? How morally justified is that as a demand?

Nothing is relevant today. Madras/Chennai is fine and the population is happy. Morally correct or not correct is all dependent on basis and definition of how a decision is arrived at. If a substantial portion of Chittoor district can be transferred to TN why not a large section Telugu speaking Northern Madras be not transferred to AP just like they transferred. The decision is clearly a clout based decision. It may be a correct one but linguistic basis for creation of the state is not completely followed in principle. There was a decision there where the principle was not followed wth the spirit. I am not saying that your google seached justifications are wrong. That may have their own genuineness.

What I am trying to say is these decisions irrespective of SRC reports and committe reports, the decisions are arrived at by use of clout with the leaders. It is the same situation now. Let us see if Andhra clout works and keeps the state united or Telangana fire prevails. I do not agree that some Godly reasons are used.

Your [or wider] perceptions on the political acumen of TN politicians and a lack thereof vis-a-vis AP politicians is not sufficient evidence to label this as a TN vs. AP debate. It clearly is not. If one has to cast stones in this framework, I can cast many stones. And the gravy train wont stop. May be what you call political acumen comes with regional outfits that operate strictly under the self-respect paradigm and hence demanding enough of the Union to acquiesce. If that hypothesis is the case, the realization is may be that one cant escape one's legacy? I dont know. May be AP needs more NTRs who speak about atma gauravam. And speaking alone is not sufficient, wider propaganda is a bigger part of this outreach. Without propaganda, DK and DMK would have been nobodies. TN perhaps reaps the reward now for its outlier efforts in the 40s-60s. It had the moral conviction to stand up against the language imposition and that set in a whole lotta circle of events. The fact that what we now have is a useless set of hypocrites doing the back and forth does nt cloud the moral justifications that led to their rise and growth.

I love this argument and this is a keeper for me.

So basically one needs to follow DK methodology of saying we don't belong to India or nationhood as defined/followed by rest of Indians to get the clout. Instead if a state or a community follows the national principles of one nation, one national language or other such stuff they have to live on the sidelines. I am personally fine if a Telangana is formed as opposed to being part of some mad fictious DK theory based community. Heavens are not going to fall.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 25 Sep 2011 19:26

KCR's Namaste Telangana reports the number of Telangana people in Sakalajanulasamme at 2cr. What happened to the remaining 2+ crore other Telangana population?

http://www.epaper.namasthetelangaana.co ... d=97871840

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 25 Sep 2011 22:07

Stan_Savljevic wrote: The Chandigarh model was developed in 1966 and that too only cos Chandigarh was in the boundary. Madras city was not in the boundary. Nor will Hyderabad be. Who was he kidding? How did Prakasam Pantulu come around to accepting the lost case? Since you are looking for answers, let me also give you the answer: it was lost from the start. Pattabhi Sitaramaiah has hardly made any strong demands for Madras city esp in the lead up to the JVP report.
.

They made some boundary and Madras was suddenly out of boundary by 50 KM. Now you claim Madras is out of boundary. They could easily have drawn line at river in Madras and said North was Andhra and South was TN. They could have taken Madras-Bangalore Highway (current) going on through North Arcot and Salem districts (Madras Presidency districts) rearrange to a different border. As I said a lot of Telugu villages went to TN along Northern districts of TN while AP got less number of Tamil villages. They have to draw line some where and they did what is the boundary now.

Hyderabad is distinctly not in the border as we had clear separation due to Nizam rule. Even there SKC suggested boundary rearrangement so there can be common capital. Look at the some rumor news below that Congress is working on some common Capital solution.

================
http://www.gulte.com/news/916/Congress- ... Telangana-
Congress 4 point formula on Telangana? September 24th, 2011, 09:41 PM IST
Though Congress is not giving much importance to the Telangana strike sponsored by TRS, one delegation from congress is yet to reach Hyderabad for discussing on the possible ways out. It is learnt that they will bring 4 point formula to T leaders. According to that, these might be the options in the circulation.

Option 1: Make Hyderabad as common capital of A and T, extended the borders to make Hyderabad as UT.

Option 2: Make T â€“ leader of their choice as CM for a particular period from congress or TRS

Option 3: Go for voting, which districts wants Hyderabad as their capital then creates new state based on the demand from districts.

Option 4: Create North Telangana state with Adilabad, Nizamabad, Karim Nagar, Warangal and Medak, rest of districts with AP.
=========================

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 23:25

Pradepe valid point and I will not even pretend to say that I inderstand for unless someone is in that situtaion he/she won't know. Having said that the reason why I did not want the debate to be centered around this driving away of settlers part is , fear does funny things with a person's mind it is obvious that all those who are doing well for themselves in today's AP will have aprehensions about their future in a new state and unfortunately imho there is little one can do to reassure people when they have sort of made up their mind.

Pardon me for again for kind of simplfying things but from my vantage point as I see things if the goons/radicals are actually harassing the people for the cause of a new state then shouldn't they stop after creation of the new state ? More importantly if they are doing it for other reasons then how is maintaining status quo going to help things ? Again don't you think in case of division of the state the govt of AP will be able to better safguard the rights of the Telugu speaking community for former won't have to pander to the Telangana cause any more (irrespective of which way Hyderabad goes) because afterall Hyderabad is where it's today due to the very people who live there be it a settler/non-settler; are we saying that Govt. of the day will be foolish enough to let go of these people who have contributed to the city's growth just because a few radicals think so ?

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 25 Sep 2011 23:37

ShyamSP wrote: ================
http://www.gulte.com/news/916/Congress- ... Telangana-
Congress 4 point formula on Telangana? September 24th, 2011, 09:41 PM IST
Though Congress is not giving much importance to the Telangana strike sponsored by TRS, one delegation from congress is yet to reach Hyderabad for discussing on the possible ways out. It is learnt that they will bring 4 point formula to T leaders. According to that, these might be the options in the circulation.

Option 1: Make Hyderabad as common capital of A and T, extended the borders to make Hyderabad as UT.

Option 2: Make T â€“ leader of their choice as CM for a particular period from congress or TRS

Option 3: Go for voting, which districts wants Hyderabad as their capital then creates new state based on the demand from districts.

Option 4: Create North Telangana state with Adilabad, Nizamabad, Karim Nagar, Warangal and Medak, rest of districts with AP.
=========================

Option3 will be very interesting. It is like getting their own medicine.

Option 4 is following the traditional dharma of separation as it was applied on Andhra some 60 years ago.

My guess is option 1 or option 2 will prevail. There is no other solution to this problem.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 25 Sep 2011 23:47

negi wrote: Pardon me for again for kind of simplfying things but from my vantage point as I see things if the goons/radicals are actually harassing the people for the cause of a new state then shouldn't they stop after creation of the new state ? More importantly if they are doing it for other reasons then how is maintaining status quo going to help things ? Again don't you think in case of division of the state the govt of AP will be able to better safguard the rights of the Telugu speaking community for former won't have to pander to the Telangana cause any more (irrespective of which way Hyderabad goes) because afterall Hyderabad is where it's today due to the very people who live there be it a settler/non-settler; are we saying that Govt. of the day will be foolish enough to let go of these people who have contributed to the city's growth just because a few radicals think so ?

Vir Sanghvi and Arundhotti Roy logic.

This is exactly how they thought before saying give freedom to Kashmir.

Sad to see this logic in the context of T-state.

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Sep 2011 23:56

^ Think before you post boss; had J&K be asking for a separate statehood by all means yes that logic would have made sense moreover people in the valley !=J&K yet they ask for the whole state to be given independence ; in this case however the Telanaga folks are not claiming the whole of AP , yes Hyderabad is a bone of contention but there is no similarity to the J&K issue.I also clarified in beginning of the debate that demand for a separate state unlike secession from republic of India in no way harmful to interests of India. Btw had you been reading threads you would have observed I have in the past supported the idea of division of J&K too. At the end of the day all these problems stem from the fundamental issue of inefficient administration if the system cannot handle a big state it's advisable to break it into chunks .

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 26 Sep 2011 01:17

Negi

If separation results in efficient governance, we have 600000 villages that can be administered at that levels. There is a structure and forum to address public grievances. Separate statehood is not the solution for all the social ills.

In the above post you recommend creation of Telangana just because some paki-minds threatened rest of telugus who settled in Hyderabad. For your kind information is Hyderabad is the capital of Andhrapradesh and rest of APites have a right to settle there, besides their constitutional right to settle anywhere in the nation.

If you are convinced of telangan-sentiment that is perfectly fine. But do not get to paki-logic to support that sentiment. One can support Telangana using genuine grievances and they will stand to logic and scrutiny of they have merit.

Bifurcation of staes must be made to provide better governance and administration. Not because a political party is capable-of and allowed-to take hostage of the state growth.

Would you give same prescription if Hyderabad city folks do the same to Telangana people in future? MiM and some of congress leaders are already indicating that.

At the end of the day, the ultimate loser is Telangana commoners. There is no visible and tangible improvement in their lives. That doesnt mean they have to be ruled by others. They have self representation like any other region in AP and rest of india. We are yet to see a single project demanded and executed by these so-called tparties in past 9 years. KCR himself was mines minister and we didnt see any value from his leadership.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 26 Sep 2011 01:19

I know you want us to believe that it is just a ploy to scare the non-locals so the agitation gains traction. Then the reaction from others is also a strategy.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 26 Sep 2011 01:23

negi wrote:^ Think before you post boss; had J&K be asking for a separate statehood by all means yes that logic would have made sense moreover people in the valley !=J&K yet they ask for the whole state to be given independence ; in this case however the Telanaga folks are not claiming the whole of AP , yes Hyderabad is a bone of contention but there is no similarity to the J&K issue.I also clarified in beginning of the debate that demand for a separate state unlike secession from republic of India in no way harmful to interests of India. Btw had you been reading threads you would have observed I have in the past supported the idea of division of J&K too. At the end of the day all these problems stem from the fundamental issue of inefficient administration if the system cannot handle a big state it's advisable to break it into chunks .

First come up with a criteria on what basis they will be broken. Recently when there was some noise from some other region of another state, the revered PC reaction was that it needs to nipped in the bud. We need consistent national policy, not based on some goondaism.