mrpr: Thanks for the background info. Quite interesting. You seem to be quite knowledgeable on this issue. But I guess there are still unanswered questions here
who is gonna be helped by a separate Telangana state? and how? (I mean other than generation of employment opportunities for a few hundred politicians.)
The infrastructure belongs to the govt and not to an individual. (Might have belonged to an individual before 1947, not sure)and if the govt sees no harm in spreading over the use of them, how does the individual lose out?
If I say that the rails/roads and buildings in my state can ONLY be used by people from the state (or by a particular sect living in that state), could that be called progressive in a country like ours? Dont you this kind of arguments can only lead to more fragmentation and less unity?
About people 'losing the identity'- how would that happen? Every state in India has people of more than one linguistic/dialectical/religious/cultural background coexisting. Do they lose their identity by co-existence? and what is unique in the Telangana identity over the AP identity that CAN and SHOULD be conserved ONLY by forming a separate state? ('Unity in Diversity' comes to mind)
Also, how does pillaging public property promote a cause EVEN if it is just?
If you would like "people to understand the issue before commenting on it", then am afraid you will have to at least share a summary of your version of the long story. Fair enough? :-p
mrpr: Thanks for the background info. Quite interesting. You seem to be quite knowledgeable on this issue. But I guess there are still unanswered questions here
who is gonna be helped by a separate Telangana state? and how? (I mean other than generation of employment opportunities for a few hundred politicians.)
The infrastructure belongs to the govt and not to an individual. (Might have belonged to an individual before 1947, not sure)and if the govt sees no harm in spreading over the use of them, how does the individual lose out?
If I say that the rails/roads and buildings in my state can ONLY be used by people from the state (or by a particular sect living in that state), could that be called progressive in a country like ours? Dont you this kind of arguments can only lead to more fragmentation and less unity?
About people 'losing the identity'- how would that happen? Every state in India has people of more than one linguistic/dialectical/religious/cultural background coexisting. Do they lose their identity by co-existence? and what is unique in the Telangana identity over the AP identity that CAN and SHOULD be conserved ONLY by forming a separate state? ('Unity in Diversity' comes to mind)
Also, how does pillaging public property promote a cause EVEN if it is just?
If you would like "people to understand the issue before commenting on it", then am afraid you will have to at least share a summary of your version of the long story. Fair enough? :-p