[Assam] Assam is for Assamese
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at charter.net
Thu Dec 29 10:56:09 EST 2005
>ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE ASSAMESE.
*** Legal according to WHOSE laws?
At 9:45 AM -0600 12/29/05, Rajen Barua wrote:
> >I provided you with my OWN interpretation, which you had trouble
>comprehending.
>
> >That is because you could not differentiate between the concepts
>of nationality and ethnicity, It is that 'damned English language
>problem', not just with >yourself, but you have company I know.
>
> >Would you argue with the concept of India for Indians? And if you
>would not, it is exactly the same for Assam for the Assamese. And,
>of necessity, it assumes
> >an Assamese Nation ( as in the Indian Nation), and it includes a
>diverse milieu of ethnicities.
>
>It is not the damn English language, it is damn Chandan Mahanta. You
>are absolutley wrong. In fact your following definition of Assamese
>does not show Assamese as a Nation, it shows Assamese as a group of
>several ethnic groups..
>
>"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their
>homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos,
>Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for
>Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests
>there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation.
>But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis
>but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" -
>Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
>
>On the other hand my definition, as noted below shows the Assamese as a Nation
>
>ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE ASSAMESE.
>
>This definition goes well with definitions of Indian, American etc.
>We donot say Indians consits of the following ethnic groups or
>American consists of the folloiwng ethnic groups like you are
>showing the Assamese people.
>
>*** You do deserve a NOVEL prize foe discovering it and enlightening
>humanity with it.
>
>I will take it
>
>RB
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>Chan Mahanta
>To: <mailto:barua25 at hotmail.com>Barua25 ;
><mailto:dilipdeka at yahoo.com>Dilip/Dil Deka
>Cc: <mailto:assam at assamnet.org>assam at assamnet.org
>Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 7:52 AM
>Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese
>
> >I just wanted to show that 'Assam for Assamese' theme simply does
>not work whichever way we look at it.
>
>
>*** That is YOUR opinion, and you are entitled to it.
>You started off with saying you do not agree with Sumanta's " I
>donot necessarily support his Assam for Assamese Jatiotabadi
>writings. "
>
> > In my opinion, Sumanta would not have interpreted the definition
>of 'Assamese' the way Chandan did.
>
>But you NEVER told us WHAT his 'jatiyotabadi' writings proposed or
>included. You are the one who was privy to what Sumanta had in mind.
>Or are YOU guessing here?
>Since you would NOT tell us what Sumanta had in mind I provided you
>with my OWN interpretation, which you had trouble comprehending.
>
>That is because you could not differentiate between the concepts of
>nationality and ethnicity, It is that 'damned English language
>problem', not just with yourself, but you have company I know.
>
>Would you argue with the concept of India for Indians? And if you
>would not, it is exactly the same for Assam for the Assamese. And,
>of necessity, it assumes
>an Assamese Nation ( as in the Indian Nation), and it includes a
>diverse milieu of ethnicities.
>
>What you cannot handle is the concept of an Assamese Nation. As a
>result you went about attributing weird meanings to what I wrote
>when I submitted myself to your inquisition with the hope of aiding
>you with your profoundly muddled thinking process.
>
> >In my opinion we should try to avoid using the word for political purpose,
>
>*** Why? Because it holds the connotation of an Assamese Nation? Or
>for some other reason, like a problem with the English language?
>
>
>
> >and only definition which will work for Assamese is this: ALL THE
>LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE >ASSAMESE.
>
>
>*** You do deserve a NOVEL prize foe discovering it and enlightening
>humanity with it.
>
>
> >While keeping this definition, Assam should ask for cultural protection
>
>*** From WHOM? Who has the RIGHT to take it away from Assam to begin
>with, so that Assam has to begging for it from someone else?
>
>And WHY has that NEED arisen?
>
>When you can answer that, you can understand the need for the
>concept of an Assamese Nation.
>
>But I won't hold my breath.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 12:25 AM -0600 12/29/05, Barua25 wrote:
>
>>Sure we need to move on to the next topic.
>>
>However this was an important topic for everybody interested for
>welfare of Assam.
>
>I just wanted to show that 'Assam for Assamese' theme simply does
>not work whichever way we look at it.
>
>In 1979, Assam Gana Andwlon failed exactly for this reason. The
>student leaders became over ambitious and went for 'Assam for
>Assamese' theme, and in the process failed to assure the minority
>groups in Assam that by 'Assamese; they intend to include the
>minority groups too, and that this revolution was not against them
>but for them.
>
>
>
>Chandan came forward like a nopota phukon (for reasons of his own)
>to interpret the "Assam for Assamese'' theme, for and on behalf of
>Sumanta Chaliha, eventhough he flatly claimed that he had not idea
>what Sumanta stood for. This is simply a very dangerous game. In my
>opinion, Sumanta would not have interpreted the definition of
>'Assamese' the way Chandan did. That definition is outdated in my
>opinion. Assamese need to have a better definition of the word
>Assamese. In fact those who are aware of the debates going on in
>Assam knows that even Oxom Xahityo Xobha and others are busy in
>their writing tables trying to revise the definition of the word
>'Assamese'.
>
>In my opinion we should try to avoid using the word for political
>purpose, and only definition which will work for Assamese is this:
>ALL THE LEGAL RESIDENTS OF ASSAM ARE ASSAMESE. Any definition short
>of this will not work for greater interest of Assam. This
>definition will work for internal purpose. While keeping
>this definition, Assam should ask for cultural protection of the so
>called 'khilinjia' Assamese which may be defined as residents of
>Assam who had been living in Assam on or before 'such and such' date
>(TBD).
>
>
>
>Anyhow the above is purely my personal observation. I am sure others
>may have different opinion on this.
>
>
>
>RB
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:dilipdeka at yahoo.com>Dilip/Dil Deka
>
>To: <mailto:barua25 at hotmail.com>Rajen Barua ;
><mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>Chandan Mahanta
>
>Cc: <mailto:assam at assamnet.org>assam at assamnet.org
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 8:24 PM
>
>Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese
>
>
>Hey guys,
>
>Have you resolved this issue? Can we move on to something else?
>
>
>
>How about this new DGP in Assam? The media says he is clean and
>corruption free. How did he pay for two kids in US undergraduate
>schools with his IPS salary? I read the glowing report in Assam
>press. Should I believe it?
>
>
>
>I am ready to accept his clean record if some one from Assam attests to it.
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dilip
>
>Rajen Barua <<mailto:barua25 at hotmail.com>barua25 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>BLOCKQUOTE { PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } DL {
> PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } UL {
> PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } OL {
> PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } LI {
> PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px }
>
>It is very common in Assam politics for a person to flatly deny a
>statement in broad daylight. But I thought you are above that.
>
>Sorry my mistake in judgment.
>
>
>
>This is your writing. Chandan
>
>NOT SUMANTA's. Don't try to back off now.
>
>This is YOUR Assam, NOT SUMANTA's
>
>Sumanta did not make those statement.
>
>Don't try to drag SUMANTA into your statement.
>
>
>
>See, heh heh
>
>RB
>
>
>> >But before I try to show the short coming of your statement, I
>>want you to note and confirm again that the following is your own
>>statement which you believe, and not of Sumanta Chaliha or somebody
>>else and that you are simply trying to tabulate to spice up
>>the arguments for the sake of arguments.
>>
>"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their
>homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos,
>Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for
>Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests
>there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation.
>But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis
>but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" -
>Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
>
>*** I am NOT in the habit of blaming somebody else for what I write
>Rajen. The Devil does NOT make me do it. Did I create an impression
>otherwise?
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: <mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>Chan Mahanta
>
>To: <mailto:barua25 at hotmail.com>Rajen Barua ;
><mailto:assam at assamnet.org>assam at assamnet.org
>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 3:16 PM
>
>Subject: Re: [Assam] Assam is for Assamese
>
>
> >So no Bengalis in your independent Assam unless they become
>Assamese etc. No Bodos in >independent Assam they identify
>themselves as Assamese etc....
>
>
>
>*** Is that what YOU imagine as a result of Sumanta's plan? Or is
>that what you imagine as an extension of MY explanation ? And is
>that the only result you can imagine?
>
>
>*** Just so it is clear Rajen, your concoction of this scenario is
>NOT the only possible result for the indigenous Bengalis of Assam.
>If you insist it is, then either your imaginations are rather
>stunted, or you are being very disingenuous.
>
>
>Take your pick.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 3:05 PM -0600 12/28/05, Rajen Barua wrote:
>
>>>"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is
>>>their homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms,
>>>Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc. Assam is NOT the
>>>homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can
>>>be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of
>>>assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and
>>>Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time.
>>>That is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Dec 26, 2005)
>>>
>If you cannot answer, (and what it seems obvious to the netters)
>people will understand, but you don't have to change the subject now
>to independent Assam and bring old issues trying to show how bad a
>person I am by showing what I wrote in the past and what I did not.
>This is rather an old trick to camouflage your inability to address
>the questions. Exactly like your inability to address the question
>how to achieve independence of Assam from India, you are trying to
>take the same escape route. Our present discussion on the issue was
>not based on an independent Assam, and if you are thinking netters
>have a short memory, I wish you luck. Even than you did not answer
>many questions which directly pertains to independent Assam. So no
>Bengalis in your independent Assam unless they become Assamese etc.
>No Bodos in independent Assam they identify themselves as Assamese
>etc....
>
>
>So what do you say, let us close the chapter and put in in archive?
>
>
>
>
>RB
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://assamnet.org/pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20051229/b9c2e1c3/attachment.htm
More information about the assam
mailing list