a couple of years ago, motivated by a certain impulse, i tried to check how many colleges, of all kinds, existed in all the regions (which today constitute the state of andhra pradesh) in 1948 (the year hyderabad state became a part of the indian union). i found this page on the ugc site useful- here are the results i had jotted down and saved:
vedaand sanskrit college..nellore 1926
a. u. college of science and technology , vizag, 1932
a.j. college, bandar. 1910
agricultural college, bapatla, 1945.
andhra christian college, guntur, 1900.
a.u.college of arts, sciences, 1931
andhra women's sanskrit college, rajahmundry, 1931
besant theosophical college, madanapalle, 1915
college of engineering, anantapur, 1946
college of engg., kakinada, 1946
college of fine arts, hyd., 1940
dr.gururaju homeopathy college, gudivada, 1945
govt., city college, hyd, 1924
govt college for men, kadapa, 1948
govt college for women, guntur, 1944
govt degree college for men, anantapur, 1916
hindu college, guntur, 1935
hindu college, bandar, 1928
islamiah arabic and tibbi college, kurnool,1923
n.s.z., college of music and dance, narsapur, w.g.,1934
p.g.college, secunderabad, 1947
pithapur rajah college, kakinada, 1852,1866,1884
osmania medical college, 1846
s.r.r and cvr govt degree college, v'wada,1937
s.v.j.v.sanskrit college, kovvur, w.g.,1912,
sir c.r.r college, eluru, 1945
sri maharajah college of music and dance, vizianagaram,1919
sri narasimha sanskrit college.,bandar, 1923
sri venkateswara arts college, 1945, tirupati
st.joseph's college of education for women, guntur, 1946
university arts and science college, warangal, 1948
university college for women, kothi, hyderabad, 1924
university college of agriculture, hyd, 1946
univ college of arts and social sciences, hyderabad, 1918
university college of engg, hyd, 1929
university college of engg., vizag, 1946,
univ college of science, hyd, 1919
univ college of technology, hyd, 1929,
vr college, nellore,1920
gudivada, bapatla, narsapur, bandar (machilipatnam), kovvur, madanapalle, anantapur, eluru, kadapa-- not many outside andhra pradesh would've heard about many of those towns. some of them have not crossed a population of one lakh even now.
i might've missed some names, the list itself might not be exhaustive etc, etc., but it does give you an idea of the status of educational infrastructure in both the regions. of the importance the ruling classes attached to education. it also indicates the aspirational levels of the middle classes in both regions, maybe. 28 colleges in the coastal andhra-rayalaseema region and 11 in telangana (all of them, except for one, in hyderabad-secunderabad). there were more than a dozen towns in andhra-rayalaseema where you could pursue higher education, or a graduate degree (as it is now called) in andhra-rayalaseema. and in telangana?
please note that the list does not include colleges in madras which was the major destination of a large number education-seekers in the andhra-rayalaseema region.
another important fact that one notices is that while almost all of the colleges in telangana (or hyderabad city, to be more accurate) were started (reluctantly, it'd seem in the last stages of the feudal rule) by the government, private initiative seems to have played a major role in the establishment of colleges in the andhra-rayalaseema region. you might ask what were the jagirdars of telangana doing? their major and only contribution to the field of education was the jagirdars' college (which was/is actually a school), now called the hyderabad public school. and to think that many among them actually owned tens of thousands acres of land (one actually owned over 1,50,000 acres)!
some lies rankle, and some half-truths rankle much more. the rosy picture of a glorious hyderabad and telangana that some learned people, professors and retired dons, try to paint rankles like hell. british india was definitely better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
44 comments:
Impressed kuffir!
What a tale a list such as this can tell!
i'm still not certain what i feel about a separate telangana (statehood need to translate into equitable distribution of anything, after all) but do you get the feeling that most of the anti-telangana reaction is the moaning of the very privileged who do not want to let go of the supposed jewel in the crown?
One of the cogent posts I have seen on this topic supporting seperate Telangana is by cvennela in racchabanda
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/racchabanda/message/21407
But Kuffir knows the ground realities in Telangana better than most. I wonder what his fears are. That it will be taken over by the same 'elite' who were in power during Nizam's time. To some extent it is the same in other regions too. I wonder whether the benefits that came to non-elite groups is some sort of trickle down.
anu,
unfortunately, the education situation in telangana was much more pathetic than that list actually shows. the fact that hyderabad had some colleges might mislead a few into believing that the situation in both regions is comparable.. in reality, except for those few colleges, there was no primary/secondary/ higher educational infrastructure anywhere in the rest of the 9 districts. nothing.
Kuffir,
>>there was no primary/secondary/ higher educational infrastructure anywhere in the rest of the 9 districts. nothing.
Current picture?
What reasons does a 60 year old democracy come up with for absence of basic educational resources in some (large) parts of the country –geography, history, politics?
Wonder if similar lists and their implications overlaps with Vidharba, N Karnataka, Jharkand…..
How much of this disastrous situation for the common people of these regions is facilitated by education being on the concurrent list? You are absolutely right to bring this vital element into the debate of state/s formation. It is got be central to the discussion.
Thanks, Kufr.
What rankles our t feudal s is that they did not transition from land owning feudal class to a capitalist class (albeit casteist capitalism - still hugely better than casteist feudalism) like their kosta counterparts. the reasons are there in your present blog and previous one.
But t feudals chose a politically convenient bluff - Kosta people stopped them from transition. One can argue far more persuasively that kosta people contributed to the present progress especially in education and politics in telangana.
Separation may just start a race to the bottom for telugu people. t entreprenuers are giving up a huge oppurtunity in the future to exploit the resources that a sea provides. They will also be missing out the benefits that the support of a huge state can give them.
It will impact andhra entreprenuers as well who may find reduced state support for their activities. generally t people found more oppurtunites in andhra owned firms than non-telugu owned firms where kosta people pre-dominate numerically (just look at employees in banks and central organizations). Separation may be a huge shooting in the foot for telugu people
just to add ..through out the world language provides the most sound basis for political organization. France is for french, germany for germans, england for english, japan for japanese etc.
space bar,
'most of the anti-telangana reaction is the moaning of the very privileged who do not want to let go of the supposed jewel in the crown?'
one can say the same about the very privileged sections of telangani society: that they want to grab and corner the cut and polished crown jewel all for themselves! they definitely do not want a telangana without hyderabad.
if by the term 'very privileged' we mean the rich or custodians of industrial capital etc, i can't really see how a division would affect the interests of pure industrial capital. it's in the nature of capital, in developing countries, to move to areas where the rulers are very friendly.. smaller states in india have usually thrown up rulers who are more than friendly to crony capitalists-- witness the devastation in jharkhand and chhattisgarh and venality of the rulers there..
the question you raise is very important and requires a much broader inquiry. but the underlying assumption, that it's only the privileged who have big investments who are bothered about the creation of a new state is too..let me say, is too pat or simple an answer.
i think the anger and resentment in the kosta-rayalaseema region is very real and one has to look beyond mr.rajgopal and other businessmen-politicians to understand its depth.
anu,
current picture?
the current picture is that telangana has more engineering, medical, business and law colleges than madhya pradesh, chhattisgarh and gujarat combined.
but primary education scenario is always more important and as i've said many times only those states/nations are truly ready for development which have managed to ensure over 90% literacy.
yes, north karnataka or hyderabad karnataka which was under the same rulers would definitely have reasons to complain. vidarbha i think was much better.
anu,
'the current picture is that telangana has more engineering, medical, business and law colleges than madhya pradesh, chhattisgarh and gujarat combined.'
i should've added probably, i think.
elurtersIndia started with 15 states, now there are 28. I wonder if there was so much hue and cry every time a state was divided into two or more parts. At least no such thing happened in 2000, when 3 new states were created. The division wasn't exactly on linguistic basis(Hindi is the official language of all the 6 states that were formed as a result of division, including the 3 new ones). I am not a native of AP, but I stay in Hyderabad.Many such outsiders like me want Hyderabad to become a UT instead of T capital. I am not against them, after all, a UT is certainly likely to be more developed (and migrant-friendly)than a state capital. But what I don't understand is the attitude of Andhra people about this. Apparently they will accept Telangana if Hyderabad becomes a UT( Read in a major newspaper headline Today that Central Government is proposing to make Hyderabad a UT to slow down the anti-Telangana protest). Why? How is it going to help the cause of a United Andhra? Doesn't it show some kind of vested Interest on part of Andhra people? I wonder that in case Telangana is formed against the wishes of Andhra people, why should it be deprived of its only city. As someone not belonging to this region and not knowing the realities of development and all, I wanted to be impartial, but such hypocrisy bothers me. I could not stop myself from writing this comment here.
Can those who deny that there is no such think as telugu cause please explain the following :
when NTR thundered telugu atmagauaram how would you explain the tremendous response in telangana ?
why did burgula ramakrishna rao pass a resolution in hyderabad state assembly in 1956 recommending merger of telugu areas with andhra ?
why did pothana in 16th century warangal called his bhagavatham as Andhrabhagavatham ?
why did madapati hanumanthrao set up andhra mahasabha in hyderabad when telugu was humiliated in your now lovely nizam state even by marathis ?
why did pv narasimha rao named his grand daughter as visalandhra ?
why did communist leaders from andhra actively participated in communist struggle against nizam ?
why did villagers of krishna district hosted..fed and protected telugu fighters of telangana against nizam?
when the the telugu from telangana anjiah was humiliated by young rajiv gandhi why did ntr thunder that the telugu pride was humiliated ?
why did tdp refuse to put up a candidate against pvn in nandyal saying he was telugu bidda ?
The point is simple - there is such a thing as a telugu cause
Kufr,
The reality is that much of the world is going under capitalistic mode of development. In such a mode the best way for telugu people to make their voice heard is to have independent telugu entreprenuers who can stand up to national or international enterprises atleast in the home turf. For that you may need a strong state support. Much o f modern science was developed in europe but most of the entrpreneurs are from USA. A simple example ..pizza was invented in italy but the worlds largest sellers of pizza are american. That is due to the support of large american state.
Division of state may have slight impact to andhra entrepreneurs in hyd ..i have already read somewhere that protection money is being demanded by trs/bjp cadre (most of trs cadre was originally bjp cadre)from andhra businessmen. But they can afford it and they also have the choice of buying muslim "protection" in hyderabad.
But telangana entreprenues may be hurting their future oppurtunities real bad if the state splits up - The opportunity of sea and the support of a large state.
Again a little bit to add ... a state powerful enough to stand up to global and national capitalists is also important and will be weakened with a seperation
kuffir,
no, i didn't mean to be pat. i understand that big business will not suffer one way or the other - if anything, a smaller state will ensure a bigger division of the spoils. i was wondering, why, under the circs, *they* were moaning.
the ones who really have things at stake are the ones we are not hearing from. the hiv bomb that's waiting to explode in mahbubnagar is just one of them. i am sure there are countless other examples.
swarup garu,
'That it will be taken over by the same 'elite' who were in power during Nizam's time. To some extent it is the same in other regions too.'
yes, division won't make a dint in the leadership profile of the three regions. in fact it might strengthen the status of caste/clans occupying leadership positions in all the regions. and that's only one aspect of the issue.
space bar,
'the hiv bomb that's waiting to explode in mahbubnagar is just one of them.'
yes, the worst sufferers of governmental neglect are in mahbubnagar, nalgonda and in the adivasis areas. but the movement is strongest in karimnagar and warangal- areas which have 'developed' in the sense that they've managed to produce a vocal, somewhat prosperous middle class like in pockets of coastal andhra.
kiran,
the case for a separate telangana, at the national level, was built very painstakingly over the last few years. but it was essentially built on very legalistic grounds.the case for a united state needs to be built on sound socio-economic premises with the objective of ensuring justice for all three regions. i hope you agree with me.
rupa,
your views are interesting. thanks for expressing them here. welcome to this blog:)
Kufr
"the case for a separate telangana, at the national level, was built very painstakingly over the last few years. "
are you suggesting that a lot of thought has gone in to the issue at national level? the manner in which the decision was taken and the fact that many allies of upa themsevles have opposed it does not sugest so to me.
In fact I hold the opposite view..the national leaders and officials are clueless about this demand and its nature.
"the case for a united state needs to be built on sound socio-economic premises with the objective of ensuring justice for all three regions"
I agree 100% and the very first step is to collect honest data about the conditions throughout the AP. Right now pseudo-intellectuals such as Jai shankar are the only guys who provide instant quotes on data most of the un-referenced or referenced at different times to make them irrelevant noe.
kiran,
'are you suggesting that a lot of thought has gone in to the issue at national level? the manner in which the decision was taken and the fact that many allies of upa themsevles have opposed it does not sugest so to me.'
who built the case, kiran? the local activists/leaders obviously. whatevever gave you the idea that i mean there's some mind or group of minds and souls devotedly working towards finding a solution for the problems of either telanganis or telugus in delhi or the centre?
why do you think i sometimes write under such weird categories as 'dismember the centre' or 'time to dismember delhi'?
because i believe (have believed for ages) delhi exercises arbitrary power over the lives of the indian people. that the balance of power is heavily tilted in favour of the centre and the democratic/federal character of the indian union is a myth.
when too much power is concentrated in the centre it's stupid to expect the rulers over there'd remain human. they can only be arbiters (like in a khap panchayat)-- and they can hear only a few of the thousands of issues that come up before them(thousands of issues come up before them because they still refuse to let go the powers they have grabbed from the states, because you can be satisfied with 'enough' power, you keep on wanting more.. and the issues that get the most attention are those made by the most vocal advocates or groups (or those with large money bags) or those that produce strong evidence, strictly legally speaking.
now, the telangana movement always had strong 'legal' evidence, even in '69. there were 'legal' agreements that were made as early as 1912/1956 to the latest g.o.610 that were clearly violated. but their case was not presented as strongly, in 'legal' terms as it has been over the last few years..
now delhi looked, cursorily, purely at this 'legal' evidence to make a decision. it's almost an ex-parte decision, to use a legal term again, because the case for unity (not the case of andhra-rayalaseema, please note) was not made at all. neither in 'legal' terms, or political terms or on the grounds of social and economic justice.
so the job of those who want unity, for the larger good of all three regions, is to make delhi hear all aspects of the issue, not just the purely 'legal' evidence. and more importantly, the people need to be made aware of all these aspects of the need for unity.
kiran,
'because you can be satisfied with 'enough' power, you keep on wanting more.. and the issues that get the most attention are those made by the most vocal advocates or groups (or those with large money bags'
i should've said- 'because you can never be satisfied with 'enough' power..
Rupa,
UT status is a preferred choice between the two evils, if at all separate state is imposed on AP.
I'm not surprised from your views and it validates that everybody is looking for their interests. Right now the Telangana movement is built on hatred against the people of andhra and rayalaseema. People like you, as long as you are not from Andhra and Rayalaseema, are OK to live and steal the jobs of telanganites. We will fight against Raj Thackeries when it matters to us, but here as long as it is only against andhrites, let us turn blind eye on this. Talk about hypocrisies..
Kufr,
while i agree with what you say about delhi ..i am a bit puzzled about the legal case for telangana. i am more than open to change my opinion but these is what i think about it at the moment.
At the very high level if the agreements were legally enforceable as you say why are the activists not knocking on courts door but seeking a political solution instead ? I believe gentlemens agreements were political promises and not legal contracts. Go 610 is an exception and i dont think the situation is that bad in telangana ..most of the state employees in that region were from that region except in hyd which is a debatable point. i personally think that employees even in secretariat apart from APPSC group B officers should be recruited from local regions..and local cannot mean whole of telangana.
If I know things correctly the 1969 agitation was for continuing the gentlemen s agreement which was about to lapse in 1970 not against any lapses in enforcement of gentlemen's agreements.
but all said and done ..all of us need to share information about others and observe it empathatically for all people..krishna and guntur do not define kostha ..there is srikakulam and vizainagaram as well..lets hope our society will throw up such men or women atleast now.
@ kufr ..
because you can never be satisfied with 'enough' power, you keep on wanting more.. and the issues that get the most attention are those made by the most vocal advocates or groups (or those with large money bags)
And that, my dear friend, is a strong case against a United Andhra.
Excerpt from another blog: "Why seemandhra politicians are against Telangana state?
1. Monetary Interests. Can an AP politician settle a land dispute in Chennai? Can an Andhra politician get away from being busted in Chennai? Can an Andhra politician buy 100 Acres of Land in Chennai for Rs 10,000 per acre? This list goes on. The influence of Seemandhra politicians gonna wane once Telagana is created. However, this is not the problem for those who settled there and are working. It is a problem for putrid power brokers from Andhra and Seema regions. "
--Idler.
@ Kiran ..
just to add ..through out the world language provides the most sound basis for political organization. France is for french, germany for germans, england for english, japan for japanese etc.
Kiran.. are you making a case to merge all the Hindi speaking North Indians states into one state? Or are you making a case for separate countries for each language?? A Telugu country, a Tamil country, a Malayali country. What level of granularity are you proposing for organizing geographic territories? Country level? State level? Whichever you may pick - there are many counter-examples.
Why the double-standard? It is ok to have many Hindi speaking states, but not ok to have many Telugu (even though different dialects) speaking states. The linguistic basis that you propose does not hold very well either: Assume a person from Ranga Reddy goes to Nellore. They do not understand each other.
Idler wrote
'And that, my dear friend, is a strong case against a United Andhra'.
Pay attention to the sequence of events. The case for united andhra comes because there is no case for separate Telangana. First address the actions of separatists before you analyze the reactions of unionists.
Whether it is money power or political power, politicians and intellectuals on both sides are cheating their people. If KCR exploits people, we have to assume that he is doing for the welfare of Telangana, and if lagadapati is doing he must be doing for himself. This itself is an example on how vocal groups are setting the agenda.
Idler wrote
'The influence of Seemandhra politicians gonna wane once Telagana is created. However, this is not the problem for those who settled there and are working. It is a problem for putrid power brokers from Andhra and Seema regions. '
Same thing can be said about why Telangana politicians like to separate. It doesn't make any difference to the lives of common man. But it definitely helps putrid power brokers of telangana. Your words, not mine..
The case for united andhra comes because there is no case for separate Telangana.
And.. how have you established that there is no case for Telangana? Care to explain? A false dilemma based on petitio principii!
Nor have you established a case for a United Andhra - any more than the Madras Presidency, united south Indian state (all southern states merge), or a united Indian state (all states coaelease and form the largest state possible).
But it definitely helps putrid power brokers of telangana. Your words, not mine..
Yes, but restricted to the region of Telangana. And the powers of Seema-andhra politicians restricted to their areas. The current case for a united Andhra is only because seema-andhra politicians want a bigger pie, while Telangana leaders would be content with their pie. The lesser the sphere of influence for politicians, the better for people.
Make the politicians accountable to their local population. After separation: Telangana leaders can no more say "mommy! Andhra politicians have stolen our resources".
idler,
'Monetary Interests. Can an AP politician settle a land dispute in Chennai? Can an Andhra politician get away from being busted in Chennai? Can an Andhra politician buy 100 Acres of Land in Chennai for Rs 10,000 per acre?'
yes, stranger things can happen/have happened. and you don't even have to be politician to accomplish all that anywhere in india.
thanks for your comments.
anon/yogip,
thanks for your comments too.
idler,
Exceptions strengthen the rule. hindi states are an exception as hindi language is backed by centre and the risk of losing political weight of hindi peoples is minimal even with having multiple states.Question of double standards does not arise.
And yes ...we are practicially citizens of the telugu country..we manage the centre because of its power..the centre does not manage us..as NTR once said kendram oka midhya ..and when it tried like recently we paid a huge price. Division multiples the power of centre over our lives.
The state all over understands fairly standard telugu otherwise we wont be having such a huge media and news industry.T separatists ironically use more sanskritized telugu on tv ...kosta people let in more proletarian english substitutres.
@kiran, thanks! we saw the unifying power of Telugu in kosta during 88/89(vijayawada), and also several times in our college hostels.
yogijp,
What you are saying is that when thieves are robbing houses in a village or city, your solution is split the neighborhood and make sure each set of thieves get exclusive rights to rob only that part of the neighborhood where they hail from.
That is great logic man!!
@ Anonymous @ 6.45 AM
And your logic is: The thieves from Andhra have been stealing from Telangana and that should continue. Andhra people can't control their thieves from looting Telangana and when the people of Telangana say we won't allow your thieves, you have a problem with that?
FYI.. the thieves that you refer to are your great leaders and politicians, and the system built to loot people is called democracy.
The thieving system is perpetrated (and perpetuated) by representational democracy, people elect representatives from their area who are supposed to decide on how to go about stealing. However, Telangana has only 119 of the 294 seats, which is not a majority. The stealing continues because of the drama of voting system - two wolves and one sheep voting on "whats for dinner?"
You think Andhra thieves are morally superior and they have rights over the entire state and Telangana thieves do not have the rights on their own region?
No thieves are superior. It needs courage and determination to stop thievery. All the demagoguery you guys exhibit by arguing that your thieves are better than other thieves, or your victims are more important than other victims is very cowardly act. Instead the same effort should be put in bringing these thieves to justice regardless of who they are.
everyone,
i don't like deleting comments. all comments/commenters are welcome here, but please refrain from commenting if you can't stop yourself from making unpleasant references to other commenters' parents etc in your arguments. i'll have to consider those comments as spam.
It needs courage and determination to stop thievery.
Which the people of Andhra lacked when they asked for a separate state from Madras Presidency. You hold the people of Telangana to standards which you don't have. There is a word in English for that: double-standards.
All the demagoguery you guys exhibit by arguing that your thieves are better than other thieves, or your victims are more important than other victims is very cowardly act.
And, yet somehow, Andhra thieves are better than the thieves in Madras Presidency and therefore you asked for a separate state. And now, Andhra thieves are better than Telangana thieves - and we need to be united. ROFL!!
Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt.
The standard of measuring courage, determination, demagoguery, playing victims, cowardice - are quite opposite to the stand your Andhra brethren have taken when asking for Madras Presidency.
Instead the same effort should be put in bringing these thieves to justice regardless of who they are.
Consider a farmer with 119 goats. His neighbours have 175 goats. The farmers patch of land is not fenced. All the goats graze in his land. The farmer wants to put a fence and make sure only his goats graze on his land. This is his way of bringing goats to justice. In case you are not aware, fencing is a standard way to demarcate boundaries. Most countries fence their borders when they have problems with "other goats". Carving out a state is a fencing strategy.
How can anyone characterize an enntire population as theives ? The phrase "andhra theives" is fascist.. but it was done repeatedly..on media ..on print by t separatists..with not even token protest from many of the other sections of telangana. Is this the sasmkaram that telangana has ?
Even those real estate inclined people from kostha seem to prefer land only near Hyd which about 5% of the land of telangana ? ..its clear what is driving the people who love to stereotype an entire population as theives..grabbing hyderabad.
And the irony is far a vast majority of andhra people in hyd etc ..only law and morality are on their side as of now for protection.On the "we want justice" side its the mob..threats to evict them..bad mouthing them day in and day out etc.
kiran,
there are a lot of people who don't approve of the vulgar characterization/s, by any side, you talk about. in fact, my last post, and in a way, all of my posts (on this issue) have been about these hate-mongering tendencies. in my dashboard is a recent draft which deals specifically with the subject..yes, it does talk about fascism, but i'm not sure i should post it..maybe i will.
there are a whole lot of public personalities out there who have popularized the idea that abuse is the best form of argument and the disease seems to have spread wide.
kiran,
'Is this the sasmkaram that telangana has ?'
that goes against your own good sense. no point in going along that route, dilutes your own earlier, arguments.
yogijp wrote
'Consider a farmer with 119 goats. His neighbours have 175 goats. The farmers patch of land is not fenced. All the goats graze in his land. The farmer wants to put a fence and make sure only his goats graze on his land. This is his way of bringing goats to justice. In case you are not aware, fencing is a standard way to demarcate boundaries. Most countries fence their borders when they have problems with "other goats". Carving out a state is a fencing strategy.'
The MLAs are poor sacrificial lambs simply grazing in the fields. Right?? This is the demagoguery of separatists I was referring to.
BTW, this analogy is more stinking than your other analogy that kufr has deleted. Keep it up.
Kufr,
"kiran,
'Is this the sasmkaram that telangana has ?'
that goes against your own good sense. no point in going along that route, dilutes your own earlier, arguments."
I am not referring to telangana people as whole who have repeatedly shown through elections what they think of trs and their style of speech. But the fact is I would have loved to see more people who identify with telangana to come out in the public and say "not in our name this poisonous hate". But hardly anyone came..everybody prefferred to be defensive against KCR. There could be many reasons but this is undoubtedly a moral failure on behalf of t civil society.
I have said previously how andhras avoided the debate and seen this through political cynicism . but if there's are acts of ommission it is virutally acts of commission on behalf of t intelligentsia.
Perhaps as you said there is not much point in mentioning this at this moment and neither am I super keen to take the route. The bright spot is the ordinary people on both sides ..if t people rejected the trs style of udhayamam...others (ordinary students form kostha/rayalseema)still stuck to telugu solidarity carrying placards saying they want developement of telangana inspite of the daily hate they surely must have watched on tv. But will our leaders match up ?
yogijp wrote
'Consider a farmer with 119 goats. His neighbours have 175 goats. The farmers patch of land is not fenced. All the goats graze in his land. The farmer wants to put a fence and make sure only his goats graze on his land. This is his way of bringing goats to justice. In case you are not aware, fencing is a standard way to demarcate boundaries. Most countries fence their borders when they have problems with "other goats". Carving out a state is a fencing strategy.'
It is preposterous to compare politicians with Goats. They are more like Tigers, the sherkhans that create havoc. It is people that are qualified to be called as 'Gorrelu' (to be precise, 8 crores of them). When 294 sherkhans are creating havoc, your solution is to create a fence so that 119 sherkhans will feast on 3.5 crore gorrelu and other 175 sherkhans will create havoc on the remaining 4.5 crore gorrelu. Everything else is honky dory. That summarizes Telangana separatist movement.
For those who have been looking for a literary reference(I think they mean published in a journal) regarding the data about telangana backwardness.
Check the article (River Water Politics in Drought prone areas of Telangana) by S.Simhadri in Economic and Political Weekly) dated 1997 long before TRS formed.
Post a Comment