Telangana Monitor

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 12 Dec 2009 02:34

yvijay wrote: Please stop peddling this BS about Telengana people. I have had enough of this dhimmified, acting victimized, being lazy, don’t want to study lies and BS. They are as dhimmified and as lazy as rest of telugu people. They strive to educate their as hard as other people.

Please read from political angle not from people angle. Don't impute those words to me for normal people.
We have finest politician PVNR apart from NTR. PVNR came from Nizam education he was neither Dhimmi nor lazy.

yvijay wrote: As munna said, people talk about this telugu pride and that, but andhras themselves make fun of telangana dialect and accent. Boasting Andhra telugu is the only the pure one. People talking about telugu pride and wanting to have telugu medium are the first ones to send their kids to the English medium schools.

Accent may be funny but language is not. Each district accent is made fun of by other districts. My own district accent is made fun of for many decades in films. We take it for fun. Making fun of Telengana is recent phenomenon after movie industry moved to Hyderabad. That movie industry created a lot of employment for Telengana writers who most of the time make fun of their accent in movies not by non-Telengana guys alone.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:02

The Congress party, which leads the central government, formed an alliance with a party dedicated to the creation of the state, the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS), in 2004, but the TRS accused the party of reneging on its word.

I would like to know who in the congress party quickly announced this.

I do not trust the liberal left Angresi papers to do their job.

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 12 Dec 2009 03:22

Manny wrote:When India decided on States based on languages, Bangalore and Trivandrum came under Tamilnadu. Since Karnataka and Kerala was left with no big cities, Tamilnadu had to give up Bangalore to Karnataka and Trivandrum to Kerala and to compensate Tamilnadu, A good portion of South Andhra was given to Tamilnadu. During the Cavery water problem, many Kanadigas went about beating up Tamils and they resented that there are so many Tamil land owners in Bangalore. They are clueless that these Tamils did not come over to Karnataka and take land. they have always lived there for generations.

Thats why you have lots of Tamilians with properties in Bangalore and Trivandrum and Lots of people in North Madras are Telugus.

Not many people know this part of History.

{Mullah Nayakuddin! U may want to return to LMU caves.. Bredator Fauj out in force..}

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 12 Dec 2009 03:24

Make the states more manageable by breaking them up into smaller size, gives the cretins to develop other cities as capital and stop mooching of revenues from the existing capital.

Look at Bangalore !! Ready to collapse because of the migration stress.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:42

RamaY,

Thanks for that map.

Travancore had KanyaKumari (Cape Comrin), Nager Koil and Trivandrum. The king of Travancore ruled all those places. Because there were heavy Tamil speaking population Kanyakumari and Nagerkoil (but for Trivandrum) went to Tamil Nadu, even though they were all part of Travancore. I am originally from Kanyakumari and my mom is from Trivandrum. She and her parents owned lots of properties in Trivandrum-1 (zip code 1). We are Tamilians not Malyalaies.

Same with Bangalore.

Its not about which kingdom who owned these places.. its about the majority language of people who lived in those places. Like Hosur, Bangalore was predominantly Tamil speaking.

Same goes for Palghat. It was also predominantly Tamil speaking. But due to geographical necessity Palghat went to Kerala.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:44

Nayak,

YOU MIND YOUR LANGUAGE!

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Dec 2009 03:46

Manny wrote: Its not about which kingdom who owned these places.. its about the majority language of people who lived in those places. Bangalore was predominantly tamil speaking.

When?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Dec 2009 03:48

Manny wrote: Same with Bangalore.

Its not about which kingdom who owned these places.. its about the majority language of people who lived in those places. Like Hosur, Bangalore was predominantly Tamil speaking.

Who told you Bangalore has predominantly Tamil speaking people? or that it had in the past? There is no record of Bangalore being a tamil majority place. please refer to my earlier post on the current increase in tamilians in Bangalore.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:48

pgbhat wrote:
Manny wrote: Its not about which kingdom who owned these places.. its about the majority language of people who lived in those places. Bangalore was predominantly tamil speaking.
When?

Around 1947.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Dec 2009 03:50

Manny wrote: Around 1947.

Source?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Dec 2009 03:51

Manny wrote: Around 1947.

Any proof of that??

My family has been living in Bangalore since 1940s and no one remembers Bangalore being a tamil majority place. It was even more kannadiga dominated than present. The tamil influx began only after 1947 when the PSUs started.

if it was tamil dominated, wouldn't the place in and around Bangalore have tamil names? why is it that all names are totally kannada?

please provide references to Bangalore being a tamil majority place!

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:53

RaviBg wrote:
Manny wrote: Around 1947.
Any proof of that?? My family has been living in Bangalore since 1940s and no one remembers Bangalore being a tamil majority place. It was even more kannadiga dominated then present.

if it was tamil dominated, wouldn't the place in and around Bangalore have tamil names? why is it that all names are totally kannada?

please provide references to Bangalore being a tamil majority place!

You said this "Bengaluru was founded by Kempe Gowda. It was later ruled by Tipu Sultan and Mysore wodeyars. "

What would that have to do with the languages spoken there?

Look at the map in the earlier page. Kanyakumari and Nagerkoil is also part of Travancore (Kerala). but it was given to Tamilnadu? Why would those places be Tamil speaking if it was part of Travancore? Same reason Bangalore. You can accept Hosur is tamil speaking, but the next town Bangalore is not?

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Dec 2009 03:55

RaviBg wrote:
Manny wrote: Around 1947.
Any proof of that?? My family has been living in Bangalore since 1940s and no one remembers Bangalore being a tamil majority place. It was even more kannadiga dominated than present. The tamil influx began only after 1947 when the PSUs started.

if it was tamil dominated, wouldn't the place in and around Bangalore have tamil names? why is it that all names are totally kannada?

please provide references to Bangalore being a tamil majority place!

Jayanagar was Jayanagaram, JP Nagar was JP Nagaram, Malleshwaram is the only one remaining, that and Chinnaswamy Stadium.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Dec 2009 03:57

Manny wrote: Look at the map in the earlier page. Kanyakumari and Nagerkoil is also part of Travancore (Kerala). but it was given to Tamilnadu? Would those places be Tamil pseaking if it was part of Travancore? Same reason Bangalore. You can accept Hosur is tamilspeaking, but the next town Bangalore is not?

Hosur is a border town and people speak both kannada and tamil there. In current times, Hosur is close to bangalore. 40 years back, Hosur was around 40-50 kms from the actual city center. If we take your logic then since every city town is next to another, everyone should have same language speakers? Hosur is next to Bangalore, which is next to kengeri, next to Ramanagara and so on till mysore. So ergo, Mysore should have had majority tamil speakers and hence part of TN

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 12 Dec 2009 03:58

RaviBg wrote:
Manny wrote: Look at the map in the earlier page. Kanyakumari and Nagerkoil is also part of Travancore (Kerala). but it was given to Tamilnadu? Would those places be Tamil pseaking if it was part of Travancore? Same reason Bangalore. You can accept Hosur is tamilspeaking, but the next town Bangalore is not?
Hosur is a border town and people speak both kannada and tamil there. In current times, Hosur is close to bangalore. 40 years back, Hosur was around 40-50 kms from the actual city center. If we take your logic then since every city town is next to another, everyone should have same language speakers? Hosur is next to Bangalore, which is next to kengeri, next to Ramanagara and so on till mysore. So ergo, Mysore should have had majority tamil speakers and hence part of TN

No..as per my logic, a case can be made (either way) for all border towns. Its not so far fetched and "LAUGHABLE

"

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Dec 2009 03:59

Manny wrote: No..as per my logic, a case can be made (either way) for all border towns. Its not so far fetched and "LAUGHABLE "

Time to post sources of your claim.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 12 Dec 2009 04:00

Post Telangana, Maya seeks separate Bundelkhand, West UP
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/post- ... up/553038/

My comments: She is in power. I admire at her. Why dont she pass this resolution in the assembly if she has support for this.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Dec 2009 04:01

Manny wrote: No..as per my logic, a case can be made (either way) for all border towns. Its not so far fetched and "LAUGHABLE "

If you look between Hosur and Bangalore, the places are Begur, Bommasandra, yadavanahalli, Attibele and Hosur. Even the name Hosuru is kannada name. And you are telling me Bangalore was a tamil majority place?

Please post source which lists Bangalore as a Tamil majority place and was handed over to karnataka because it had no big city to support your claim!!

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 12 Dec 2009 04:04

Muppalla:
I do not know the answer to your question. But if that is the perception or take you have about those leaders, then so it is. Elaborate whenever you feel there is a need.

All:
Guys let us all cool down. Let us be aware that ALL of us take pride in our culture - language is one aspect of it. If one just skims history we know how much inter-twined we were and are now. Let us respect each culture's contribution to the whole of Bharat. Without such contributions Bharat is not what it is now and will not be in the future too.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 12 Dec 2009 04:07

It is interesting to watch this debate from the perspective of a person, who has lost his home land. I am envious and jealous, that you have something to fight for.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Dec 2009 04:26

Any cultural identity we use to separate populations out into territories - is always problematic. Wherever you draw "boundaries" - boundaries and borders become a gray zone of "frontier". Here elements of both sides mingle inseparably. Any distinguishing mark (unless a hard exclusive religious belief) created by man is likely to be blurred at the "contact region".

The relatively less controversial boundaries are those that are based on natural features - independent of human construction. For Bharat, it is the rivers which nurture and hold together people and generate culture or language groups. Mountains separate.

If we really cannot get over our "created identities", and need some arbitrary cultural context to justify or identify subdivisions - why not consider the mothers of Bharatyia civilizations - the rivers, as giving identity to populations? Let hills, mountains become the focal points of contiguous populations separated by different river systems - as the meeting points, not borders and boundaries. Most of our hills or mountains are sparsely populated compared to the plains, and are accorded various spiritual positions.

But from a practical viewpoint, such less populated areas as boundaries create less potential for identity conflicts, and since rivers are independent in their function from language or ethnicity they cannot be used for "identity politics". Moreover the possible "water crises" and "water conflicts" can no longer take place. People are forced to think and work together based on the fundamental driving engine of our societies - natural irrigation and hydraulic systems.

munna · Post by **munna** » 12 Dec 2009 04:36

As I see from a fairly cold blooded perch of a small state that has witnessed two partitions one international one (good riddance) and one national, the issue can be treated in a fairly calculated and calm way than the rho-dho observed here. Any dynamic and energetic polity seeks to change or reinvent itself in phases of realignments. Immediately after independence or 1947 we were given a land that was rank poor in terms of human resources, whose capital base had been raped through to it last vestiges and a political system that was thought to be impossible for a developing country to sustain.

As we did with our constitution (that is a large part of it was derived from Government of India Act 1935 of the British Parliament) similar was the realignment of the administrative units whereby we merged various princely states into the adjacent former crown provinces of British India to make up new states. These provinces were a result of either the chronology of the British conquests or the needs of the crown to keep the subjects militarily subjugated. In short the provinces did have a historic basis to their formation but from a very British perspective and as per the whims and fancies of the crown.

Beyond 1947 due to the fragile economy and the impending external threats to the nascent nation the polity of the nation sought to find security in numbers dependent on some commonality of interests within the population. Due to the bitter experience of the partition religion became a taboo basis of seeking favors from the centre thus linguistic plank became the effective vehicle of popular mobilization. However what needs to be understood is that language was just a vehicle and not an end in itself. Language often masked the undertones of ethnic differences (TN and AP) or religious overtones (reorganization of Punjab). Hence from 1960s onwards language became the vehicle of expression for various regions and communities to seek a separate state within the union.

Moving onto to turbulent 1980s and 1990s we observed a liberalizing India where certain regions within the linguistically organized states were well placed to exploit newer opportunities and the same was true for certain castes. Thus first we saw caste mobilization and a simultaneous mobilization within backward regions. Both the movements were a ring bell for the more fortunate Indians and co-statists to heed the poorer guys and ensure equitable growth. But given the pulls and pressures of the politics this has not been the case and people on ground now want to take matters in their own hands and be masters of their own castles.

We should be happy that they are reposing their faith in the Indian union by asking for a small place within the large ecosystem of India. They should at least be heard with compassion and sincerity before the case is dismissed or labeled with dangerous labels. To all the angst ridden fellow posters I can only say that kids are grown up now and they are demanding their space we can delay their actions but denial would be counter-productive. If the division is to happen let it be peaceful so that no bad blood is generated after all it is the younger brother asking for his share of ancestral land, he might succeed or fail in the future endeavors but let us not call him a rascal for that.

Demand for Telangana, Gorkhaland and Trifurcation of UP signify coming of age of the Indian polity whereby people with backward economic growth are coming together to reduce the distance from power by concentrating their voice in smaller state assemblies and administrations even if it means to take a break from the path of larger ethnic or linguistic group. Listen to them dispassionately before any action. Think about the under currents before discussing the agents like INC, BJP, Mayawati, TDP and Jagan &Co.

Munna

PS: More on the political angle later.

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 12 Dec 2009 04:38

I can already feel the temperature rising in this thread, it's as if people are fighting over ancestral property and as if different countries are fighting with each other over some prized real estate.

The way i see it... At the beginning of the day, everyone was a citizen of India - New states come into play - End of the day, everyone is still a citizen of India. So, where is the problem??

The Thackerays talking of Maharashtrians being "oppressed" in Belgaum is so much humbug!! Someone should ask them for an explanation of what "oppression" means to them!!

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 12 Dec 2009 04:59

Guys,

Let's leave aside the silly parochial battles and see what if any are implications of the Telengana developments. Are there any security implications? How will this impact the Maoists' activities? Do we have any learnings from previous such splitting of states (Jharkhand, Chattisgarh and Uttaranchal)?

My own view is that one important reason for the demands for splitting states is the over-concentration of power, money and spoils in the state capital. In most large modern democracies, local Governments are extremely powerful. The Mayor of a city controls most of the services that citizens access, including the police, education, infrastructure etc. The mayor of a large city in the US is often more powerful than the Governor of the state it is in and mayors of megacities such as Chicago and NYC have power and prestige even at the national level. This is good from the point of view of provision of services and from the point of view of equity - taxes from a city support a good proportion of local services in that city, with no diversion from one city to another or one region to another.

By contrast, we have a system where the state capital wields infinitely more power than the local Government. How many of us even know the name of the mayor of our cities? What grade of politician aspires to be a mayor? The only mayor of a major city in the last 20 years that I even remember is Stalin, who was elected mayor of Chennai during the period when mayors were directly elected. And in his case, without the fact that his father was CM, he would not have got the fraction of the attention (or powers) that he got.

It was not always like this. During the time before independence, local Government was quite powerful. Political heavyweights vied to lead the local Government. Several national level leaders started their political careers at the local level. Of course, it was partly because that was where the opportunities for political activity was highest. But it was not just that. Powers of local bodies were far higher in pre-independence days than after.

Thus the solution is to empower local Governments. Not just make them responsible for service delivery, but also make them financially viable and independent. If we do this, the angst that a Mumbai feels about being part of Maharashtra with its associated costs, or the feelings of neglect that regions within each of the large states feel will considerably reduce. Efficiency of Governments will increase. And they will become more accountable to people. Political participation of city folks will also likely increase.

But then who will bell the cat? Which politician wants to lose the power and privileges he/she has enjoyed so far? Such changes will only come about because they are forced on the politicians by the people. There is precedent for this - for instance the Right to Information Act, which for all its flaws is still a big step forward, would not have happened without pressure from citizens for more accountability and transparency.

vina · Post by **vina** » 12 Dec 2009 05:18

But seriously. I really really don't understand the need for R&D from all the Rayalseema and Coastal Andhra folks.

Politicos like the Lanco dude and the others of their ilk who have invested massively in the real estate bubble in Hyd which cannot be monetized without a hand in the levers of power that can be used to twist rules and brazenly violate regulations will be hit once you lose power. That part I can understand. But for the ordinary Abdul in Vijyawada, Tirupati etc, I simply dont get it!.

It is not as if anything is going to change at all in the new Telangana. People with roots in coastal Andhra, Rayalseema etc will continue to live there and thrive there. No one is going to put a stop from Rayalseema and Coastal Andhra folks going there and living there in future as well. Nothing will change for anyone.

Class III and Class IV recruitment in Govt job is always local based. So it doesn't matter if you are from coastal or rayalseema or Telangana. If you are from that local area you get it.

Telanagana has got a terribly raw deal. Literally nothing has been done from all accounts except for Hyderabad which got developed as a capital and thanks to CBN, took off in IT/Vity (If Kangress had been around, that too wouldnt have happened).

Telangana is a reality. I think it is time to accept it . It is like an idea whose time has come.

Coastal Andhra would be just fine. It has resources, indutries and skill base and can easily develop perfectly well without the Telengana mill stone around it's neck.

The region that will get the short end of the stick is Rayalseema. If Rayalseema stays united with Coastal, it will get the short end of the stick for sure . It has no large vibrant economic centers of big enough size and will look towards Chennai and Bangalore which are less than 100 kms away from most parts of that region (esp south). I guess, Rayalseema should really push hard to be part of the Bangalore-Chennai industrial belt and push for a six lane super highway connectin Bangalore, Chittoor and Chennai with a spur going up from Chittoor to say Cudappah.

Build that infrastructure, the entire Northern TN, Tirpuati, Chittoor and the regions close by will be one massive highly industrialized continuum, a gigantic area rivaling Guangzhou /Shenzen .

vina · Post by **vina** » 12 Dec 2009 05:23

Raju wrote:
the south Indian version of map making revisionist.

Ah.. But werent you and Dileep the ones whining about the "heavy hand" of the "Thekkans" in Thruvananthapuram ?. Who was the one tom tomming the "Maravar" origins of Mallus and the hills around Munnar etc.. If that ain't nostalgia and longing of for the "good ol days" , what is ?

.

Dasari · Post by **Dasari** » 12 Dec 2009 05:40

vina.

If loss of Hyderabad as capital doesn't impact Abdul or Apparao in Vijayawada or Tirupati , how does it impact Abduls or Apparaos in Nizamabad or Karimnagar. It can also be argued, why can't they form Telanagna without Hyderabad? In fact historically that was how the region that wanted to separate was treated. Perhaps you can make an argument that without Hyderabad they can develop better.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Dec 2009 05:49

yvijay wrote: As munna said, people talk about this telugu pride and that, but andhras themselves make fun of telangana dialect and accent. Boasting Andhra telugu is the only the pure one. People talking about telugu pride and wanting to have telugu medium are the first ones to send their kids to the English medium schools.

As I see it, how will Telengana survive - i.e economy. The wealth, and water will remain with Andhra. Telengana is arid. Apart from that people will stand to lose trilions in real estate in Hyderabad, and other people will make those trillions in the new capital Vijaywada where fertile agrcultural land will be used to make new capital city.

vina · Post by **vina** » 12 Dec 2009 05:52

RamaY wrote:I do not know if Telangana is a good thing or not. What I know is that the manner it all unfolded doesn't strengthen India

I happen to think it is a wonderful thing. Telenaga is inevitable. it is an idea whose time has come. It is actually going to be liberating for everyone. Telengana has been shafted by the rest of Andhra since the state was formed and for a long time before that by a exploitative and totalitarian monarchy.

I think we can expect two big cities (one in coastal and one in Rayalseema) to come up, along with the growth engines.

In fact the Andhra state changed the natural geographic linkages and comparitive advantages into a political "Andhra" construct. Now with Rayalseema and Coastal Andhra coming out and having to swim on their own, these linkages will get restored.

The "natural" scheme is a vast highly developed and indutrialized belt stretching from Kochi, Coimbatore, Salem, Mysore, Banagalore, Chittoor, Tirupati, Chennai, Nellore, Guntur, all the way to Vizag , developing if the natural trade and competitive clusters are allowed. What prevented that from happening is the "near soverign" states and their autarkic nature in all things ranging for resources, indutrial base, people and revenue base. We should start learning to manage things like the Tri State area , the Chicago, Minnesotta, Iowa and the the Great Lakes belt or even like Cincinatti where the airport and the GE engine plant are in the Kentucky side, while the city is in Ohio.

For that the moronic barriers to interstate trade in India like Octroi, entry taxes , differential market access of "home" vs "foreign" goods and services have to be broken down. If Rayalseema and Coastal coming out of Andhra and they start thinking on these lines , rather than try to create another self sufficient Rayalseema and Coastal Andhra , it will be a big boost to everyone.

That arc from Kochi, all the way to Vizag with spurs going deep into other parts of the respective states to tap into industrial bases will be one massive unrivalled industrial zone, rivaling Guangzho or anything anywhere the world has seen. That is what will create prosperity and jobs for everyone.

In the end it is all about piss, plogress and plospelity. Don't get taken in by the current vested interests of the politicos and the money bags and their ill gotten wealth

raghava · Post by **raghava** » 12 Dec 2009 05:59

shiv wrote:
yvijay wrote: As munna said, people talk about this telugu pride and that, but andhras themselves make fun of telangana dialect and accent. Boasting Andhra telugu is the only the pure one. People talking about telugu pride and wanting to have telugu medium are the first ones to send their kids to the English medium schools.

As I see it, how will Telengana survive - i.e economy. The wealth, and water will remain with Andhra. Telengana is arid. Apart from that people will stand to lose trilions in real estate in Hyderabad, and other people will make those trillions in the new capital Vijaywada where fertile agrcultural land will be used to make new capital city.

Shiv Garu,

You are very correct.

Word on the ground is Vijayawada land rates being quoted in the last 24 hrs have already gone up 40 - 50% ... and there are buyers...

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 12 Dec 2009 06:14

I find this discussion and the hand-wringing going on very interesting. Back in 2000 when the NDA was in power, Bihar, UP & MP were divided and many people like myself felt the problem was that the State Governments had too much say in day-to-day affairs; and the better solution was having a road network similar to western Europe or US, coupled with a less corrupt state government and high courts. By dividing these states, you now have a duplication in state level bureaucracies and another set of crooks & criminals running yet another state. The expenditure is huge.

Well, I was laughed at and told these states were too big and needed to be broken up, plus some esteemed BRF members compared the lawlessness of Bihar to be the same in all of UP & MP. Just a notch above or comparable to the thuggistanis next door to the west insisting the people of these states carried guns all day. Those who were laughing were primarily those who had not lived or spent time in these northern states. Now the same is happening in AP and should I laugh at these "southies"?

All I can say is bring it on and go ahead and now divide TN as well.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 12 Dec 2009 06:40

Well, octroi has been dismantled. VAT is in force and the GST will soon come onstream. States have lost a lot of discretion in inter-state commerce matters.

IOW, all the ingredients for facilitating increased trade and commerce (not to mention industry and services) through a vastly improved road and rail network in the southern zone are now in place.

Of course state say in property taxes, law and order etc remains as large as ever.

SO it all remains thrown up in the air. Let us see if this new round of non-linguistic state divisions benefits anybody at all or not.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 Dec 2009 07:02

RaviBg wrote:
Manny wrote: Around 1947.
Any proof of that?? My family has been living in Bangalore since 1940s and no one remembers Bangalore being a tamil majority place. It was even more kannadiga dominated than present. The tamil influx began only after 1947 when the PSUs started.

if it was tamil dominated, wouldn't the place in and around Bangalore have tamil names? why is it that all names are totally kannada?

please provide references to Bangalore being a tamil majority place!

My spouse family have been in Blore from 1900 and also around hassan. This is the first I am hearing this.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 12 Dec 2009 07:26

brihaspati wrote:For example, "Bundelkhand" comes from a particular period in Indian history. But parts of the state were ruled by the Marathas (after initial allied agreements with Chatrashaal) and were ceded to the British as a result of the Anglo-Maratha wars. Why should not Maharashtra not claim a piece of Bundlekhand?

Because there is no significant Marathi speaking population there, and Maratha presence in Bundelkhand was too brief to leave a lasting impact. The major long-term influence on the political boundaries of this area was by the Bundelas, who ousted the Muslims and Gonds way back in the 15th century and established their own states, which lasted till the 20th century giving the inhabitants a shared history that distinguished them from nieghbouring regions.

brihaspati wrote:When was there a single "Rajasthan" as a rashtra? Why not divide up this state?

The Hindu Kingdoms in Rajasthan (Rajputana) also had a shared history distinguishing them from neighbouring regions from at least the 14th century. Linguistically there are four regions of this vast state: Marwar, Mewar, Dhundhar, and Hadoti. Administratively there are can be two geographical regions, namely the dry plains of Marwar and Jangaldesh in the west, and the forested hills and fertile plains in the east.

Although there has been an old demand for such a Maru Pradesh in the west, it does not have mass support. Tourism is a big earner for all of Rajasthan, which is packaged as a unit for tourists, and has acquired a global brand name. Dividing the state may not be advisable, but for catering to the administrative needs of far-flung regions, a system of rotating capitals (like in J&K) may be better.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 12 Dec 2009 07:30

ShyamSP wrote:
You may not read that Telengana people, not poltical elites, were enthusiastic to join other Telugus. That sense of Telugus was slowly brain-washed away from Telengana people.

Telengana political elites that were Dhimmified felt victimized under Nizams were left clueless as to who to blame once Nizams were gone. They then found or brainwashed to find, non-Telengana Telugus as source of their victimization. This became political exploitation point.

Congress prodded and exploited the Telengana victimization sentiment for various political advantages and continue to use for political experimentation.

Communists used that sense of victimization and continue to encourage that sense to propagate their ideology even after Nizams were gone.

Telenganas own leaders continue to exploit that Takleef to outrule other AP leaders and get benefit from Telenagana packages given under various governments.

One correction regarding the communists: the communists who took part in the fight against the nizam in 1947-48 were for a united AP. These people participated in the 1952 election and joined the democratic process. They have been pro-united AP all along. As part of their fight against the Nizam, they hijacked the Andhra Maha Sabha and the united Telugu people cause, back in the 1940s. It is the naxalites who came later that are looking for an opening to come to power by the back door, re-establishing themselves in the new state after they have been thrown out recently.

KCR has made no secret of his alliance with naxalites. The rhetoric coming out of KCR, Kaloji Narayana Rao (supposedly a respected intellectual) and various naxalite fronters has been downright fascistic, spewing venom against non-Telangana AP-ites. I hae seen very little coverage in English media about this aspect.

ShyamSP · Post by **ShyamSP** » 12 Dec 2009 07:39

KV Rao wrote:
ShyamSP wrote:
You may not read that Telengana people, not poltical elites, were enthusiastic to join other Telugus. That sense of Telugus was slowly brain-washed away from Telengana people.

Telengana political elites that were Dhimmified felt victimized under Nizams were left clueless as to who to blame once Nizams were gone. They then found or brainwashed to find, non-Telengana Telugus as source of their victimization. This became political exploitation point.

Congress prodded and exploited the Telengana victimization sentiment for various political advantages and continue to use for political experimentation.

Communists used that sense of victimization and continue to encourage that sense to propagate their ideology even after Nizams were gone.

Telenganas own leaders continue to exploit that Takleef to outrule other AP leaders and get benefit from Telenagana packages given under various governments.
One correction regarding the communists: the communists who took part in the fight against the nizam in 1947-48 were for a united AP. These people participated in the 1952 election and joined the democratic process. They have been pro-united AP all along. It is the naxalites who came later that are looking for an opening to come to power by the back door, re-establishing themselves in the new state after they have been thrown out recently.

KCR has made no secret of his alliance with naxalites. The rhetoric coming out of KCR, Kaloji Narayana Rao (supposedly a respected intellectual) and various naxalite fronters has been downright fascistic, spewing venom against non-Telangana AP-ites. I hae seen very little coverage in English media about this aspect.

Thanks for correcting. I meant to say naxalites/CPIML not regular communists like CPI/CPM. CPI and CPM in Telengana are for united AP

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 12 Dec 2009 07:46

Airavatji,
no need to take my earlier post that literally or seriously. As you can see, it was more a sarcastic look at typical reasonings behind claiming a distinct subidentity as basis for a new "state". When I said "why not divide up Rajasthan", it was not meant as my personal leaning towards breaking Rajasthan up. If we look at Rajasthan as a shared cultural unit, commonalities turn up. If we are hell-bent on showing "divisions", we can filch up enough details of the bloody internecine conflicts, and complex history of betrayals and "foreign" collaborations or differences of attitudes towards "outsiders", to trash all claims of commonality.

This was my point - if we are interested in seeing commonalities, we will not see the "divisions/conflicts/distinctions". If we want to setup our own small fiefs, we will look at every piece of distinction available between peoples.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 12 Dec 2009 08:30

The very phrase "internecine conflict" means a fight within a group with shared commonality. And so the well known history of internecine conflict does not "trash" commonality.

Rajasthan is the biggest state of the union, but because of its global brand value, should not be divided. Rotating capitals can do more for administrative needs of various regions than divisions. Even now while Jaipur is the state capital, the Rajasthan High Court is located in Jodhpur.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 12 Dec 2009 09:12

Oh! So THIS is the dhaga that has been giving such acid tummy to the Fauj!

Most of the confusion here is because of Manny's rather interesting take on the history of South India. Manny: I believe that there are more Tamil-speaking people in New Delhi than in "Palghat" so you should consider including Delhi too in Greater Tamil Nadu.

Some terminological genealogy:

"Kanya Kumari" (that would be "houri" in Pingreji) was KanyaKumari LOOOOONG before it became "Cape Comorin" on the maps of the illiterate Firanghis. Similarly, it's not really "Pal Ghat" it is Pala kaad (forest of Pala trees). These are terms from Malayalam which was the language of the locals prior to the migration of Tamil speaking people from the dry, semi-arid region east of the Palakkad Gap of the mountain range that stops the southwest monsoon, making for a drastic change in climate within 20 miles. If you take a close look at culture and habits, there is quite a lot of difference between those of the Tamil-speaking people, who retain their culture born in dry, arid Tamil Nadu, and those of the Malloo-speaking ppl who come from the Land of the Kera Vriksham. Over the past 100 years, no doubt, Palakkad became more and more Tamil due to economic migration and the fact that hard-working ppl to farm the land were more readily found from across the Gap, but it was originally very much Malloostan.

Kanya Kumari has indeed been Tamil majority for a longer time than Palakkad. As for Thiru Anantha Puram ("Trivandrum" to the illiterates) being really part of Tamil Nadu,

the kingdom of Thiruvithamkoor ("Travancore" to the illiterates) has been there for a very long time. The Malloo spoken there is core Malloo, and Thiru Anantha Puram is very clearly Deep Malloo. No room for doubt there about Mallooness of the place in ancient times.

I am going to delete any further digression into Tamil Nadu and Kerala, neither of which have any part in the current tamasha. Can't say the same about Karnataka or states north of there, so discussion on those is fine, I guess.

So many buses being "improved" in Hyderabad, and ppl waste their energies on Palakkad!

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 12 Dec 2009 09:35

{Mullah Nayakuddin! U may want to return to LMU caves.. Bredator Fauj out in force..}

'

Errr esteemed admin,

Should I post my apology in kannada, tamil or sign-language ?