You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Reward Programs

    Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India

    Hi Members,

    The new topic of Group Discussion is Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India. In India we are witnessing many movements related to regionalism and the sons of soils arguments.

    Being an Indian we are proud of our diversity. We believe in the unity of diversity. It is true that India is blessed with so many cultures and traditions. If the Maharashtra people try to pull out all north Indians from Mumbai or such incidents are coming from different parts of the country.

    Same as the argument for more states like Telangana. Regionalism is also growing in different parts. In this context members can discuss about the topic Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India.

    Members can participate in this GD by posting your responses. Try to post your views in 3 or 4 posts. More than 4 response will treated as spam.
  • #125603
    Regionalism or the argument in favour of son of the soil is not good for the National integrity of our Country. Our Country is woven on the concept of Unity in diversity. India is the only Country in the world which has diversity in terms religion, caste, Language etc. Despite these odds still India is the number one democratic Country in the world and we should be proud about that.

    The regionalism or the philosophy of son of the soil is envisaged by some petty politicians with their vested interest. I am sure people of our Country are more matured than these politicians and they will not accept such ideology. Such ideology is detrimental to the National integrity and may lead to many other problems which cannot be controlled unless same is stoped.

    The Constitution of India guarantees the right to every citizen in the Country to live in any part of India and take up a job for his living. These so called politicians cannot take things granted and act beyond Constitutional provisions. If every State start adopting the concept of son of the soil then the days are not very far, we may have to take VISA to travel to another State in India.

    The Union Government should take strict action against these politicians and political parties. These problems need to nipped in the bud. Otherwise it may catch like a wild fire and spread to other parts of our Country. The Union Government should not hesitate to take action against the political parties which are canvassing such ideology including banning them from contesting the elections.

    With Regards and Best wishes,


    "There is no substitute for hard work"
    -Thomas Alva Edison

  • #125615

    Hi friends,

    From my point of view, practice of regionalism is followed mainly by the politicians for vote banks, for example parties like Shiv Sena make the best use of regionalism only for vote banks and this makes them to release some statements which has no logic. But the most important part is that these parties forget the fact that Indian people are mature enough to identify good from bad, as mentioned by Krishnadas sir.

    It would be great if these parties have National spirit, than concentration for a particular regional and issuing statement against the spirit of the country. I guess it is in the hands of the Election commission and Government to take necessary steps to ban thee parties and I am very such sure instant punish for those who use caste, region and religion against the National Spirit, will result in the better progress for the development of the country.

    India is cultural rich country and parties like Shiv Sena and MNS are definitely a black mark for our country.These parties have no rights to ask people from other states, not to come to Mumbai, because as an Indian we have the freedom to move to any part of the country.

    Regionalism will definitely be an hurdle for the progress of the country and the Government must make sure that those who are hurting the feeling of Indian spirit must be punished.

    Proud to be an Indian. JAIHIND

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #125641
    Hello Friends

    Once upon a time we used to be extremely proud of the unity in diversity of our country. Despite the cultural and regional differences between different states people were united at heart and we were a role model for others.

    Somewhere down the line somehow this integrity was lost and hatred starting emerging giving rise to regionalism. How did the scene change? I feel it has been created politically. In the 'survival of the fittest' culture this seemed to be the only way our politicians thought they could survive. Their sole aim was to fulfill their own selfish motives with an eye on elections.

    Dividing a state would directly increase in the number of political posts. This is what the politicians are looking for as this will give them more power.

    They are responsible for bringing this regionalism out in the open creating rifts in the minds of people. They started influencing the minds of people at an emotional level where it hurts the most. Their aim is to divide on the basis of region and religion.

    Regionalism was followed by jingoism and politics at the lowest level. Our respectable politicians started a wave of rhetoric and even personally maligning each other.

    I hope every citizen of India would use its sense and sensibilities and see beyond and not allow these forces to succeed. Let us all try and think beyond boundaries and region and grow as a nation.

    No it is not good for our country at all which is currently fighting with sky high inflation. It will be definitely taxing financially if the number of regions is increased. People will have to bear the brunt of this financial burden viz a viz toll taxes etc. It is not economically and socially viable and is certainly not the solution to this problem. This issue should be resolved at the earliest so that it does not emerge again in future.

    Let us decide once and for all whether we want to be known as Natives (of a state) or Nationals (Of a country). Regionalism can never be and never should be above Nationalism.

    Best regards


  • #125649

    Hi nitst , you are absolutely correct. The spirit of Indian was very high at the time of freedom but when we missed many good politicians, we really missed many things and also gave way to some selfish politicians who started their own parties just for the sake of their own benefits. There are many parties, which have the motto of serving people of a particular caste of region.

    I feel that for our country to become developed, we must eradicated these parties who show no national interest. Some parties don't no even their motto. So the development of our nation really depends on the present youth and they must make sure that don't follow these politicians.

    This is the right time for the Government to take necessary step for eradicating these parties from the country, and if the Government doesn't take any decision, then these parties will take advantage of this and cause more problems.

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #125652
    Regionalism or Son of soil argument is obviously not good for India.

    We pride ourselves in unity of diversity. We stand out from other countries because of variety of cultures and languages in India. People of these country speak different languages, accept and respect each others culture, celebrate festivals irrespective of religion and still live in harmony. Where we can be an example for other countries, these kind of cheap politics is making us ashamed.

    We need to show the other countries that we stand as one, but these things are creating rifts amongst us. When pakistan sends terrorists, we fight as one, we stand as one and support each other against outsiders. But what do we do when insiders attack us creating language and religion difference? When Sena claims to be son of soil, why do they only want to become son of Mumbai's soil? People believe in being an Indian rather than being a mumbaikar or delhite or hyderabadi, and we are taught to pledge on our soil i.e our country. And the sena are unnecassarily making a chaos of being son of soil. Let them show their patroism for India rather then Mumbai!! And they were not the people responsible to make Mumbai what it is today. The city stands because of ALL the people living there, from a taxi driver to a businessman.
    Regionalism is another toy that everytime some other politician plays with to seek attention! These people are not concerned if regionalism and son of soil is good for India or not, they are more worried about their political games.

    People have started realizing what is good and what is bad and it was good to see people speaking against Sena in the SRK issue. It is high time such political parties are banned who do nothing but create unnecessary nuisance in peoples life.


  • #125656
    If one who is born here in India with the knowledge of how our forefathers have fought against the foreign rule, and they never cared for their lives, will never accept the statement ‘Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India’, somewhere long back we have heard that when the India got its independence and the previous rulers have said that ‘Indians are not fit enough to rule, but they are fit to be ruled’, now few state outfits are proving that statement, in my view there should not be any second opinion or thoughts except banning such outfits, those who destroy the internal security of a country should be treated on par with terrorists.

    The statements, vandalism are nothing but a cheap politics, just to spread the hatred between the people and it shows how they are working against the fraternity in the name of the regionalism, religion and game, that state outfit has targeted Sachin Tendulkar, Shahruk Khan and Mukesh Ambani, these people are the legends in their own field, these dirty politicians will never reach their heights in their life.

    The only solution left is the intervention of the judiciary, they are fit to be banned in all respects, what they are doing now is a clear case of violating the fundamental rights ‘Any Indian can live anywhere he likes may be for his livelihood or something else, in my view this is the part of right to freedom.

    As the state outfit which is in question is in their evenings, the leader of that party is old enough to visit hospitals quite often as they are totally blind to lift the party’s image no other way they found, it is totally rudderless. They have lost their glitter with one point program ‘Sons of the soil’, it is a clear chauvinistic way of living, the recent statement from that party says ‘Mumbai being used as an ATM, who brought so much money to the state, it is not only people living there since their birth but it includes even the hardship of the people who are from other places.

    As some legislation is the only solution to ban such outfits, not only in Maharashtra, one might have seen such fanatic parties in most of the states in the country, if such legislation is introduced uniformly through the country, then these so called moral policing parties will be vanished, but instant ban on such parties may pose more problem to common man, as it may be counterproductive as the fanatic members of that brigade may resort to vandalism and more violence, it will make the life of common man much miserable than what they are now.

    I strongly oppose such regionalism or sons of soil argument, yesterday it was Telangana today it is Maharashtra, who knows who will follow that bill tomorrow, as one of our member rightly pointed that a day will come we may require to get Visa to visit another state, let us hope we may not see or reach such stages.

  • #125687
    Hi all, I am born India, so my region is India. If I go outside my country, I must be called as "Son of my soil", so, the difference is clear that, both regionalism and son of the soil is important, the matter is where we have to use these two phrases.

    If somebody is living in his country, he has to talk about the regionalism that he is from the Region India, we can't say that I India is divided in many region, actually, some people are going to divide India in many region.

    So, I am strictly favoring the phrase "Son of the soil" because, I born in this country, lived in this country, eat in this country, etc.

    This is boon, that India got so much of variability in culture, language, food, etc. and this is also a curse that we are dividing ourselves due to different cultures, language, etc.

    In Maharastra, the issue is different, marathi people not getting the Govt. job, therefore they are angry.
    In Andra Pradesh, the issue is they want a new state means a new region, with the same language.
    In West Bengal, Gorkha people want a new region Gorkhaland.

    Tell me one thing if everything is divided, how can we say that we are Indian? We always use to say that we are Bengali, Marathi, Punjabi, etc. but nobody say that "I am Indian", is it like a shame to call as Indian?

    These things always bring violence, bitterness among people, it will bring more stressful life of ours. I don't know what these people think. The matter is that these people should give up and do something to get rid on these problem, which India is facing, like corruption, illiteracy, poverty, etc.

    Life is full of surprises and compromises!

  • #125695
    Yes, of course we are "sons of the soil" - but the soil of India, not of the States / regions where we stay.

    It is as Indians that we stand in a sinlge queque to pay our Bills - do we think "This lady in front of me is a Tamilian" or "The man behind me is from U.P."?!

    It is as Indians that we study in one classroom. Do we share giggly remarks about another student (or even about the teacher) with our desk partner only after finding out if he/she is from the same State?!

    It is as Indians that we make friends. Have you ever made friedships by first noting a person's community or from the State where he/she originates?

    Let's take the city of Mumbai. Waiting for a bus, Mumbaikars casually start a conversation with others. Regularly commuting in a train on a daily basis to & from work, Mumbaikars share gossip & even food with co-passengers. All these casual conversations & encounters often become life-long everlasting friendships. At no point does a Mumbaiker ask another "Are you Marathi?" Unfortunately, this scenario will slowly change if the absurd policies of ranting political parties comes into effect. Why on earth must they create a ruckus and encourage disharmony in a city where everybody gives everybodyelse their space? Why do they wish to create volatile situations needlessly?

    We have always been Indians. Let us remain that way.

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #125742
    Hi Every members here,

    First of all I would like to thanks Jose Mathew sir that he posted a very good topic for GD.

    Regionalism is a a factor which leads into a loss of Indian development. Our past is the real proof of it. As we have seen in the past what Britishers have done with us. They have ruled in India for thousands of years. What was their techniques? They were using a divide and rule policy. Indians that time were not united for which the profit is gained by them. As the emperors were just trying to save their empire and was not even aware that what is the plan of the Britishers.

    So that situation is coming once again in our nation. Not from the outsiders but from us only. The north Indians are harassed by some political parties in Maharashtra. As here they don't know or they seem to be unknown that all Indians are free to go any where in any part of the country. They must not harassed by people like this as if we goes to count the loss and damages that are done in this attack then whose lose it is. Not a single person or an organization but yes the whole country. Yes my friends its a lost of India for which these people have to suffer.

    So which should take some steps which stops this act as we can see normally this politician do this type of thing when the elections are nearby. But for purpose to win the elections as by this they don't know that some Marathi people can be happy but what about other state people. I will suggest them that some thing like the full country gives you support. As if you do something for our soil, you will be in the eyes of every people. As by this political parties can easily come up with good results.

    The unity is the only thing which can never be broken if we altogether tried to be. A finger is weaker than a punch which is made by joining each other. So we must not try to differentiate with the names of cast, religions, regions and etc. things.

    This was all about Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India from me.

    Thank you,
    (Silver member)

  • #125759
    Hi everyone,

    As the topic is Regionalism and son of soil argument is good for india I would support the regionalism is good for india.

    The regionalism has been the talk of the indian coutry for some people as the struggle for seeking separate state is increasing day by day in India. The reason behind the people who are supporting the regionalism is the problems they are facing in their everyday life by the majority people of the state. If they are not asking for separate state then it will lead to the clash between the people of India belonging to same state and same language. If the clash got severe and involved people death, then the other countries who are exclaiming the unity in diversity, will start to hinder on India and it will lead to a big blow for India at the stage of world countries. So as Prevention is better than cure it is better Indian government shall give separate state for the people than letting them to fight together.

    The son of soil has also been the good to feel as we are son of indian soil. We the indians are brave from the ancient indians that we are optimised thinkers that character only matters and nothing else like diversity by state, cast,etc., We the people are having friendship with one another without thinking the background of one another and thinking only the behaviour how the approach between one another.

    So regionalism and son of soil are good for india and not a curse

    R.Shankar Ganesh

    R.Shankar Ganesh

  • #125785
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]
    I am KAMAL DEEP from chandigarh and doing b-tech in CSE in 2nd year....

  • #125800
    Emotionally charged views expressed by distinguished members like Mr Ravi, Ms Vandana and others notwithstanding, the idea of regionalism is embodied in the very constitution of India. Exactly sixty years ago, India adopted a federal system of governance wherein the central government controls and coordinates the sufficiently empowered state governments.Since each state government represents the aspirations of the citizens of a certain region, regionalism indeed is at the heart of Indian constitution.

    Unfortunately formation of Indian federation is rather top to down than bottom up one as in case of USA. Various American states came together to form the United States of America. Whereas the British transferred the Indian Territory to Indians and the states were formed later. The decision of formation of states on linguistic basis in 1960s is backfiring now.

    This topic of discussion seems to be inspired by recent developments in Maharashtra and Mumbai. Shivsena and MNS are being criticized by all and sundry – and rightly so. But surely this is not the first time regionalism has surfaced in India. Violent agitations in >B>Nagaland, Asam, Punjab, Kashmir, AP etc demanding special privileges on regional grounds have hit the national scene all through the last sixty years.

    Why does the demon of regionalism come up every now and then? Politicians are often accused of deliberately perpetrating linguistic and / or regional fervor for their own cause. But the fact remains that they only exploit the discontent among the people. This discontent is because of unequal development. India has achieved substantial development since independence, but its fruits are not being distributed evenly. It is this sense of being deprived often acquires the shape of regional or linguistic face.

    In democracy, people’s aspirations for better living conditions should be fulfilled, and if they are not, they have right to protest. Unfortunately common public falls prey to the politicians enacting political melodrama. It is such politicians who propagate hatred and division in the name of regional identity. India does not need such politicians. It needs a true leader, a visionary who can take along the whole country. Alas, such a leader is nowhere on the horizon!

    My opinion : There's nothing wrong in harbouring regional aspirations. It can be helpful in crate competitive environment amongst states. Instead, the petty politicians are misusing the son-of-soil slogan for furthering their own cause in the name of lending voice to regional discontent.


  • #125809

    The only possible solution to overcome the regionalism problem in India lies in the hands of the students, because they never care about the state of caste for becoming friends with others in schols and colleges. These parties,like Shiv Sena, MNS, must consider the students as example and must try to change their attitude. These politicians must have the feeling of an Indian first rather than thinking about the state of caste.

    Lot of problem arises due to regionalism, and these parties making things worse in the name of regionalism. They are attacking candidates from other states who came to Mumbai for attending Railway exams. These parties have no rights to stop any Indian citizen traveling to different parts of the country.

    These parties exists just to set a bad example for future generation as the future Generation will definitely have bad impression on politics.India is a county which follows 'Unity in Diversity' and therefore we have different states following different cultures and this doesn't mean that one is superior over other. As a matter of fact people start to misuse the concept regionalism, when they feel that their state is better than the others, as they give their first priority to caste/region rather than Nation. If they consider they are Indians first, then I am sure that there won't be any problems in our country in the name of regionalism.

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #125839
    India is a nation of 'Unity in Diversity'. Each district has got its own differences. We are diverse in caste, creed, language, customs, geography and life style. The common aspect which connects us all is mother 'India'. Why do we forget about the common bond? What happened to our spirit of unity? Is it a victim in the hands of the politicians?

    Before independence, an urge for freedom had brought all Indians under one leadership. But now we do not have an intense problem like the fight for freedom. We have a democratic nation, which gives equal rights to all its citizens. When we do not have major issues, we start quarreling about petty issues. This is the root cause of regionalism or son of soil issue. We all are Indians. We never bother to think of the caste, creed, or language of an Indian, when we meet an Indian abroad. He is our brother even if he is from the other end of your nation.

    Each state is not leading an isolated life. South Indians reaches North India in search of job. The whole nation depends on the food grains from Punjab. What will be the future of our daily life when we stick on to Regionalism. Will each square kilometer provide food, job and industries required for every one living in that region. Life exist only through dependence on others. We can never live in compartments. Son of soil calls have to be stopped at any cost.

    We have the citizenship of not our state, but of the nation. We all come under the same category – Indian citizens. Why fight for a minor issue, which if made a trend can destroy the unity of our nation for ever. We are free to live in any part of our nation. So why become victim of these narrow minded issues?

    Let us all work to eliminate the cancer of the decade which has affected our nation badly. I am talking about terrorism. Why cannot we deviate our energy and time to excavate the roots of terrorism from our land. Let us not divide mother India in the name of our selfish motives. We have to stop these acts from destroying our nation. Otherwise, today's demand for new state can give way to the demand for a new nation in the future. We should never give any chance for such petty political issues to grow.


  • #125858
    I have different openion about this political drama.British ruler used to say that indians are born to be ruled because they can not rule them self.I think they were not much wrong.Our politician not only thoroughly corrupt but also do politics at the cost of nation.Should they deserve to the lead our nation.No not at all.
    The family feud of thakare can not be solved at the cost of the nation.For survival these thakare brother can go upto any limit but what about these politician who can do politics on the other platform also.
    Our people do well out side the country but do not do well in our own country only because of these dirty politics.Iknow some of the people who does not to be a even peon but they are officer but at the same time some people were forced to do at 4th grade although they deserve to be a officer.why not he will help the un social elements.
    Son of the soil means son of the indian soil not soil of the kasba or village.

  • #125904

    The Son of soil argument will be good, if we consider this from Indian perspective, rather than using it for a region. We are proud to be an Indian and therefore we mist give our first priority to our country.

    The main reason why there are many states in India is for administration purpose and the Government made sure that it would be convenient for administration if they have various states according to the language spoke in the region. So we must make sure that the feeling of Indian is more powerful than these regional or caste feeling.

    We can very easily understand that there are political parties in India who doesn't care about the benefit of the people, rather they want to earn money and so they use the name of religion , caste and region for the vote banks.Eradicating those parties is the only solution for the steady progress of the nation.

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #125924
    Dear friends,
    Lots of ideas have come out through various postings given above. Everybody agrees in spirit that regionalism is not to be encouraged. No doubt, it is a correct stand.

    There are several aspects which need consideration here. Why this type of attitudes are growing among certain groups ? As already discussed one major reason is 'vote'. Another reason is very often the attitude of the governments in power. Those in power should try to see India as a single nation. Giving more perks to the constituency or the State where from he was elected, will definitely create ill feelings among others. Of course, creating chaos through raising regional spirit is not a remedy for this. But when, they are not heard, they go to any level.

    One can work anywhere in India, as per constitution. But, when they find that their brothers are unemployed, people from other parts come and work in their area. This is a problem of unemployment. Creating employment is one of the solutions to tackle this problem. The number of persons going after these types of propaganda will definitely come down, when they have a job.

    During the time of independence struggle, all the leaders had an aim. Now, many of the leaders are in the dark as far as aim is concerned. Several political parties are formed just because of personality rifts. One cannot find any difference in their ideologies. It is perhaps a stepping stone to the power. In a democratic system like the one we are having one cannot control this mushroom growth of political parties.

    The worst thing is certain groups originally formed on the basis of religion, caste, language or regionalism use a new name and become a political outfit. They contest election and somehow manage to get a few seats. Major national parties who are short of majority, go after these new generation parties for support to form Government. Naturally, these smaller parties make use of the situation to satisfy their whims and fancies. So, national parties should think twice before joining hands with them.

    There are several other points to be discussed on this topic.


    Gold Member,ISC

    Gold Member ISC

  • #126008
    The regionalism was made for the people who are living as a big group in an area. For an example as the place Tamilnadu had lot of tamil speaking people it was named Tamilnadu and a separate state was given to them. Like this all the states of India were separated with respect to some criteria. But now the problem is, the people who are living in a certain state are not unique in all the phenomenons. They are differ in some other phenomenons like caste, religion etc., As we are in a society we have to live with somebody and have to be sharing something with them. We shall call it Friendship

    It is most common that problems coming in friendship. As the problems are coming between the prestigious people here, the result of the problem is a quarrel between people. This quarrels cannot be stopped while they are living together. Because the problem will be getting bigger and biggest day by day as they have to be seeing their faces everyday.

    So one of the powerful solution for this problem and to prevent the loss of souls is separating and giving states for the people who feel disturbed because of this living in same state system and raising their voice to the government.

    R.Shankar Ganesh

  • #126017

    Hi Shankar Ganesh , you are correct, because the idea for the formation of states is mainly for administration purpose, but at present the concept of states and region is misused.

    The Iron man of India,Sardar Vallabhai Patel did a great job and with his help more that 500 princely states become part of India, but the recent situation in Maharashtra is really worrying since parties there try to split the country again.

    India is such a wonderful country to live and if these political parties stop their ugly politics, our country will be a paradise in earth.

    Power of India is Unity.. Let us work for that.

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #126045
    Some members are referring to the subject of regionalism in the sense of insistence of separate States. Please note that the pros & cons of demanding separate States has been discussed in an earlier GD. In this GD we are discussing regionalism in the sense of people of a State vociferously creating a ruckus about 'locals' vs. those who come from other States. So let's discuss this central point, namely whether it is good for the nation to raise a voice for the sons of the soil of a State.

    It is not just annoying, but downright dangerous to differentiate between those who have been residents of a State since many years (maybe since birth) and those who settled in the State much later. Why on earth should we differentiate between them is what I am questioning. As pointed out by some members, every Indian has a right to work anywhere in the country.

    Just look at a geographical map of India. You can see the borders of States clearly demarcated. Now travel in a train from Chennai to New Delhi - does the train come up against such borders that stop it from journeying south to north? Travel by road from Maharashtra to Goa. Are there are chalk marks on the road that create actual boundaries between the two States? The only actual point where you realise you have entered a different State is probably where you meet a checknaka / toll booth. We are free to travel anywhere in India. We do not need a passport or visa to go anywhere within our own country.

    This freedom also encompasses the right to settle down anywhere in India. Look at our wonderful Armed Forces - the Officers & soldiers are constantly shifting base. Aren't they the sons of India and not of individual States? Dare any political party tell these brave men & women that they are not 'locals' so cannot set up base in a State, that their families cannot settle in a State where they were not born?

    Regionalism & sons of the soil argument is not just a curse - it is a plague which must be controlled here & now before it is too late for a cure.

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #126144
    Senior ISC member Ms Vandana has observed that the issue of regionalism is being linked with that of demand for smaller states and according to her it is not appropriate. I see that it is very natural and the demands for various states are direct result of regionalism.

    What is regionalism? The dictionary meaning suggests that regionalism stands for politically separate identity and autonomy for a particular geographical region of a country. Going by this definition, the protagonists of new statehood for Telangana, Vidarbha, Gorkha Land etc all are indulging in regionalism. Not only that, the past leaders like Seetaramulu, Devi Lal, S.A.Dange etc who fought for separate states (AP, Haryana, Maharashtra) should be branded as regionalists.

    The word regionalism has suddenly become fashionable ever since Shiv Sena and MNS started agitation against north Indian ‘invasion’ of Mumbai. I see no difference between K.C.Rao leading violent agitation for Telangana (including a wealthy Hyderabad) and Thakres fighting to keep stronghold in Maharashtra including cash rich Mumbai. But it is ironic that while there is an all round and fierce criticism against Raj and Bal Thakre, KCR is being lauded by all and sundry.

    Members have sought to arouse emotional sentiments by appealing to keep India united. I think this is oversimplification of ground reality. The fact of the matter is that even though we are Indian citizens, each of us has a regional identity. According to me, it was a grave blunder to federalize the country on linguistic basis. There is no denying the fact that India was badly fragmented before independence. The great leaders of 50s and 60s missed a golden chance to defragment the country and instead, formed linguistic states thereby bowing seeds of regionalism whose fruits are tormenting India.

    Some members say Any Indian citizen can go and work anywhere. Let me remind them of Article 370 which prohibits any non-Kasmiri to reside permanently in J&K. If agitation by MNS against Biharis is wrong, what do you call chasing away of Kashmiri Pundits from Jammu valley? The ULFA agitation against outsiders was as much against Biharis and Bengalis as it was against Bangla Deshis.

    AS I have said in my earlier post, arousing regional, linguistic sentiments like son of soil can be judiciously used for better development, competitive environment. Son-of-soil sentiments have been cleverly used by Narendra Modi for taking Gujarat on top. These sentiments can be and have more often than not been counter productive because of simmering frustration among people of a particular region. The sense of being marginalized, being discriminated against, leads to unrest. Regionalism is not just an issue of locals vs. outsiders as Ms Vandana has observed. It has various economic and socio-political dimensions.

    MNS and Shiv sena stand is being seen as struggle to keep Mumbai in control. Forget Mumbai. I belong to Marathwada region of Maharashtra. This region is bordering with Andhra Pradesh. The railway network in Marathwada falls under South Central Railway division whose headquarters are in Hyderabad, All the stations in Marathwada have Telugu station masters. Most of the employee staff is Telugu. Works contracts are awarded to south Indians. Tormented by all this, people of Marathwada have been agitating for getting separated from SCR and asking to be connected to Central Railway. Now what do you say is this agitation an example of regionalism? What is wrong if the locals want fair representation in the employees working at their stations?


  • #126159
    It is quite optimistic to accept Mr.Malhar’s voice of concern, though he defends the way the regionalism is required by some vested interests. But why few will air their concern when their community denied some opportunities, if that is the real count then I accept Malhars’s arguments. Though we accept or not it is going not now but from many years, but recently it is taking some violent turn on certain occasions. Here the main intention is not to decide who is right or who is wrong, let us dig the root to know its legitimacy of the concern of few leaders, the solution should be to resolve the problem not to increase the problem. The way it has been asked by few leaders of the state outfits ultimately may break up the country. In my view we may not fare well as regions but as a whole we may succeed, the thoughts of certain leaders are not based on the constructive ideals, it is just taking advantage of others weakness, for anyone it is very easy to find fault than being above the fault, let us think what will happen if such people come to power, it is chaos, maladministration etc., nothing beyond that, under any circumstance one should not support such stupid activities, he may loose his one eye in the agitation but his followers will loose both the eyes as they follow him stupidly, such leaders are never amicable.

    Where was such leaders when everything was fine with out old leaders, these people have spoilt the total atmosphere foe the sake of their selfishness, if they are really concerned about the state’s developments let them concentrate on those activities.

    Though I am not sure, this trend of talking has been started recently, I have not heard these issues from many days, where as the Telangana issue was there since when Andhra Pradesh was formed, that issue was never solved before, because as being Indians we have seen divide and rule policies since from many centuries, let us think honestly is regionalism is really for the good of the people for whom the leaders are fighting for? Never it is for their own sake, let us live in unified India, for which we fought for so many years, lost so many lives, let their sacrifice be not wasted in the name of regionalism.

  • #126162

    There is a known proverb which states " Too much of anything is good for nothing" and we can very well related this proverb to our topic. because if we have the more feeling towards our region and caste, then there is a greater chance that it might test the patriotism.

    Each state follows a different culture, tradition, language, but we must ensure that our top must priority is being loyal to our country rather than believing too much in regionalism. we can very well understand this misconception of regionalism has provoked some parties to concentrate more on their region and caste than that of their country. Still worse is the case where these parties use regionalism or their votes, as mentioned earlier.

    So it is our duty of the Indian citizen to not support those parties who try to split the feeling of our national spirit in the name of regionalism.

    with regards,
    Raaghavan Krishnamurthy

  • #126173

    “Regionalism or Son of soil argument is good for India”

    The son of soil argument can never good for the any country, today we are talking about globalization.

    The think within boundaries will always restrict you to get best solution of your problem and this can give you only success not success with pleasure and you can’t celebrate that success. A person who keen to go at moon by breaking of earth boundary and on his/her success entire world celebrate success and this success is real achievement of life.

    Today India’s economical condition is very good in the world that not because of regionalism, if we can grow with 9% GDP that is possible with the attitude to think within boundary.

    In our country we all are using English language, which connects to us to entire world, and the fighting no I so and so and will use only Hindi, Marathi, Tamil language which will put you within the boundary.

    I can say the one thing we should always play for a happy memory.

    Virendra Mishra

  • #126197
    Malhar says "What is wrong if the locals want fair representation in the employees working at their stations?"
    - here again the word 'locals' crops up: Why?

    Should not jobs be given on the basis of qualification and merit, irrespective of which State the candidate is from?

    If I go and settle in Chennai and apply for a job, say as a computer operator, should not my merits be considered first rather than the fact that I am not from Tamil Nadu? I can understand if there is a specific requirement that I should know the Tamil language, but then here again if a person from another State fulfils this criteria surely he/she should be considered for the job too and not just a 'local'.

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #126213
    I agree with Vandana, in fact what is meant by son of soil, in general terms one who toils and plough lands and he is near to that land who respects the mother nature, but where are the agricultural lands now. Today people are moving so swiftly and briskly where the opportunities are calling them, only by birth he can consider certain place and can call himself son of soil, but where as working and educational opportunities which forces him to migrate to other places cannot call himself as an son of soil where he is working, then what he must do when some locals ask him to vacate or forcing the authorities to consider only locals.

    The very doctrine of son of the soil looks to be ugly and it replicates nothing but the negative aspects of regionalism, as one can call it not only an negative aspect because such thoughts forces one to practice and also to propagate against the people who belongs to other regions but it is against the country at large, in my view such thoughts negates the very constitutional ethos where many freedom fighters envisaged, particularly from the spirit of fraternity and brotherhood in common.

    As being Indians we are going through a phase of social and economic transformation, then how for this doctrine of son of the soil is valid when certain transformation like disparity between rural and urban people, certain aspects leads to large scale migration to urban areas by rural people for the sake of occupation, when these so called son of the soil of those cities consider them as outsiders and feel they are threat to their own jobs, language, culture and also for their identities. Under the said circumstances the much debated doctrine of ‘Son of Soil’ needs to be analyzed seriously, as the said version is the core theme for this discussion.

    This doctrine of son of the soil is well utilized by few regional outfits for their own parochial goals, certainly these doctrines will help them to make their political careers bright, for instance the same party has criticized their own people about their stand against North Indians, the reason is obvious it is the vote bank politics, ultimately we can say as long as such parties are in existence and when they are in a stage to struggle for their own survival the doctrine of ‘son of the soil’ doctrine will have a long life, it could be in any levels right from taluk to state levels.

    But one thing we can say certainly from the point of economic angle such doctrines are unlikely to have a great future, one more thing we can whether it could be city or state cannot be self reliant for a long time, it needs to depend on each other, and we can strongly say the jobs which these outfits fear may be taken away by the outsiders according to them, but in reality it is not so, in the present context of liberalized time certainly jobs will to people where skill still exists.

    According to me it is only one soil, we should think that we are living in a country first as a whole, not necessary to impose the linguistic barriers, many people have been migrated to Mumbai long back to pursue their dreams, their aspirations and their hopes, their efforts too might have brought the name as financial capital, it is not only the efforts of locals and we should not forget the efforts and sacrifices of other region people too in this aspect.

    Finally to say under any circumstances the integrity of the nation should not be compromised, in the present globalised economy such slogans of son of the soil will not work out, I too prefer to preserve our own culture but can be done in many other ways, not by hurting other people’s feelings.

  • #126498
    I feel that people are getting brainwashed by politicians and groups concerned only with their own selfish interests in mind. They feel that by propounding regionalism and the absurd local sons of soil argument, they will be able to take over the power mantle and rule over the people they have brainwashed. They are merely expounding the old British colonial rulers principle of Divide and Rule. By doing so they are creating needless volatile situations that are slashing at the united India that our freedom fighters so bravely succeeded in achieving.

    If people - politicians or otherwise - continue this diatribe of regionalism and locals, it could go to the extreme that we will soon be saluting independent State flags.

    Let us remain nationals of India and not regional citizens.

    Let us continue to salute our Tiranga as one people.
    Jai Hind!

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #126547
    The core reason for India having many states is its unity in diversity. As it has lot of language speaking people, it is a real tough work to manage all the people speaking several languages. Just imagine that India has not been regionalised. Then, ruling will be quite tough. If all the Indians are living in a shed, then the neighbours will be different languagespeainkg people. One day small small groups of people will start to form and the fights will be converted into quarrel and war one day.

    As they are separated in the name of stetes, they are seeing the other language speaking people rarely and respect them. Regionalism in India is the states. As the states are divided, the affection on their languages has become the regionalism among the people. If we look at the history of India, the war between two regions(states) has not happened. The quarrel between two religions has happened but not betweent he regions. So it is very clear that regionismis not bad for India.

    The regionism has given to us two governments in the name of state government and central government. This two stages help us lot. We couldhave seen while the disasters happened in India that when the earth quake happened in Gujarath, the people from the other states were eager in helping the affected people in the sense of money, food and dresses. Here we can't see the regionalism.

    So the regionalism in the Indian people is good for India.

    R.Shankar Ganesh

  • #126676
    Let us not forget that denouncing regionalism is betraying our own constitution. India is not a nation state but a federation of states. This arrangement of governance has been adapted to ensure that the resources of a particular region are used primarily for the welfare of the people of that region. The demands for separate states come up precisely for this reason. Regions like Chhatisgarh and Jharkhand are very rich in natural resources. But people of this region were not being benefited by them. Hence demand for separate states came up which was entirely justified. The same is the case with Telangana where the agitators don’t want to part with Hyderabad.

    Going by the same logic, Mumbai is the major financial resource of Maharashtra. Hence people of Maharashtra should be the prime beneficiaries of Mumbai. But if someone is putting this argument, whole of India is branding him as being divisive. I know that some of the political parties are adapting unconstitutional means to establish this fact, but the substance in their argument can not be overlooked.

    Region is a very subjective word. For the rest of the world we belong to South Asian region. In Asian context we hail from India. For the rest of India, I belong to western region. For rest of Maharashtra I am from Marathwada region. At each of these levels, I have a sense of regional pride. At each level, I am the son of that soil. In a sense nationalism is also regionalism.

    India is far too complex a society to be oversimplified as my friends Ravishankara and Ms Vandana are seeking to do. The concept of regionalism is for all round development. That the practitioners of regionalism are having malafide intentions is an altogether different thing.

    More dangerous ‘isms’ are proliferating in India. While regionalism aims to unite all the people in a state, irrespective of religion and caste, it can not win elections for the parties. It is the religious and casteist considerations that count in electoral politics. Look at Laloo Prasad Yadav. He is now blasting Thakres for regionalism. But we all know how cleverly he is manipulating caste equations in Bihar to remain in power since last thirty years. All the parties, Congress and BJP included, take recourse to religious and casteist postures to grab power. If only these leaders had cared for development, the issue of regionalism whether it is good or bad would not have come up.

    Today thousands from UP and Bihar are flocking Mumbai and the infrastructure is being severely strained (and which is the primary reason why Shiv Sena and MNS are opposing the influx). They are running to Mumbai because they don’t have any job in their state. Laloo Yadav boasts of transforming Railways. Why could he not transform Bihar into a developed state in his (and his wife’s) tenure as CM? Had he brought his lofty talks of social justice in practice, people of Bihar wouldn’t have run towards Mumbai in search of jobs.

    In the end, I would like to mention that all the talk of one India and one flag etc sounds very emotional and these are the very tricks employed by brazen politicians who talk big but do little. People are fed up with these hollow talks. They want development at their doorstep. Development of each village, each city, each state will ultimately lead in strong nation. Regionalism is the vehicle to ensure that it is achieved. To deny regionalism is to deny everybody a chance of equitable growth. Just because of the Thakres etc. the theory of regionalism, pride of being son of soil and principle of federal polity can not be denounced.

    I hereby conclude my third response in this discussion. I appeal to members not to take any remarks personally. I would like to reserve my fourth response for future deliberations if needed.

    Thank you.


  • #126783
    Regionalism or son of the soil? India is a vast country with diverse culture, language and even appearance.Everyone take pride of being an Indian when he is abroad and associates with fellow Indians but regionalism defines an Indian among Indians.
    Regionalism at present is a political issue. Common people are happy being associated with their state and cities. They have their own problem to worry about than think of creating their own region.
    But, politically regionalism is good for growth of a particular region. Consider Jharkand, which was not given enough recognition. Now it has a growth of almost 9%. Similarly with other states which have been created recently. The basis for higher growth in smaller states is smaller the state better the control and execution of any plans.
    For people, patriotism comes first and then regionalism. Its only the politicians who divide the people and create the difference in theeir sentiments.

  • #126834
    Further to continue my argument where I stopped in my previous post, I fully do not endorse or encouraging either ‘son of soil’ or ‘regionalism’ as we have seen and read in many ways that Mumbai is not the only city where as one considers a magnet for outsiders in pursuance of searching for economic opportunities and taking a chance to make one’s life with better futures for there own sake. The present demographic profile of many of the metros we have at present has been altered dramatically from time to time, in the wake of partition long back many of old residents who belongs to Delhi found themselves outnumbered in front of refugees who came from West Punjab. Then the migrants from Punjab in turn made way for migrants from UP and now the East Delhi has been dominated by Biharis now. Even in Kolkata the municipal limits I believe there are more Biharis than Bengalis, as one can find no other city has the major share of community which is mounted such a shrill campaign than to keep out the non locals.

    Recently we have seen many intimidation by the Shivsena in the recent offshoot and another outfit MNS become successful to manage with hate campaigns against those who do not belong to Maharashtra, the party’s single point platform or agenda for blaming woes of Mumbai is responsibility of outsiders who are in rapid deterioration from the point of view of civic services and also infrastructure due to the influx of these migrants.

    But according to history the ironical point is that the Marathas who they claim now as ‘son of soil’ tag were they themselves were outsiders as they have come from the hinterland in the 19th Century as the seven islands named after the honour of the deity Mumbadevi and these were originally inhabited by Koli fisher folk. As the Portuguese captured the island in the midst of 16th Century and later it was handed over to East India Company and later it was developed by the Britishers as a major harbour and also as a commercial hub, as these developments attracted many Gujarathis, Parsees and many Christians in and around 18th Century, as a matter of fact before division as Bombay in around 1960s there were equal population or representation by the Gujaratis and also by Maharastrians, and later Bombay was split on the basis of linguistic ground and a hectic arguments were took place to keep Bombay with a separate status and not to incorporate to either of these two states, till then Bombay has seen several developments with the help of Gujaratis, Parsees, Christians, Bohras, Khojas, Punjabis Sindhis and others, as many institutions have come up with the help of these communities which also includes some known hospitals, theaters, many colleges, stock exchange and even in film industry, and now the arguments of these people pushing them to the second status of citizens as one might have seen the major attack is on the people who recently migrated from Bihar and UP.

    As we cannot put entire blame for fiasco on the state outfits, a little blame is goes to the system of electoral, as for instance one needs to get elected to become an member of the legislature atleast he should get 30-35% of the votes as a normal circumstance there could be more than four contenders and this results in reducing the margin of votes secured by the winner and next immediate looser may not be much, the failure of such system is also fueled not only by the crude ambition of politicians but due to system of electoral above defined.

    Right from Telangana to Mumbai fiasco the main intention is to create division and take benefit out of such situations, and this causing the main problem now a days. Under any circumstance one should not allow such evil thoughts to gain upper hand in any states, we are Indians first that we should not forget.

  • #126901
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]

  • #126912
    Hi all,

    As I see, many of us participated in this GD which is itself a great thing , because this is a platform for all of us to give or convey our messages to others.By this means, if a single person changes his mind than it will be worth it.

    Well as the topic based on Regionalism,in my opinion it is not new, it is from decades happening in India. Now the time has came where it is has been highlighted in terms of division of lands.

    Now, every party wants to rule in his own state as his private property. Telangana,Gorkhaland in Assam they all are demanding to have their own seperate piece of land, which is some times seems to be very painful.

    Shiv-Sena just want that only Marathis have to stay in Maharashtra, Non-Marathis are not eligible to live in Mahrashtra. I want to ask them who are they to give suggestion, or tell who have to stay in Maharastra are not? Our Government helpless nature it self shows that,our government is very weak in terms of power.

    They are showing their power as they are land lords of Maharashtra,Government till date have not taken any serious steps against them.I think why government is not doing any thing, which can atleast realize them, nobody in India can just speak unnecessary things which leads to create a big issue. Serious action must have taken against them, for provoking other peoples to break peace harmony and Unity.

    Sometimes I personally feel that are they are not educated, haven't know about the Indian constitution,Human Rights. They only know about their Freedom Of Speech, But if some body else follow it, it will became an issue.

    Shiv Sena should be banned, until they not regret what they have done in Maharashtra.They are following the policy of DIVIDE AND RULE to be in power to remain in power.

  • #127027
    Hi All,

    The topic is very nice and easy to answer to this question by everyone “Regionalism or Son of soil” argument is good for India.

    We have few hundred cities in India, some major cities and some not as such, but almost all cities has more than 75% outsiders (including from other states and within states to particular city) and less than 25% locals (within same city).

    If we support and follow example as Mumbai only, can we do the same in all cities for outsiders? Is this healthy for developing India?

    I would like to inform all of you something personal over here that I had worked once in abroad and right now working in India it is subject to job/business opportunity availability, self wishes and it is one of the privileges of Indians/Country - we can work or do business wherever as we wish. It happens in every country and they have not much issue as such.

    Now, decide yourself, "Regionalism" or "Son of soil".

    By the way, my personal appreciates for all who posted in a different manner.

    Hafeezur Rahman

  • #127096
    "India is my country and all Indians are my brothers and sisters." These are the lines that I vividly remember from the National oath we used to take everyday in our school days.The meaning of this opening sentence clearly says it all. It means that we reside in India, and India is our home and all its inhabitants are our family members.
    The true spirit of Indianness lies in its unity in diversity.Then where does this regionalism or son of soil comes into picture. Fighting one's one brother or sister for division of rooms is what an ill mannered child does whereas sharing rooms with one's own family members is the quality of a good child. This division is the root cause of weakening one's strength as goes the saying that united we stand and divided we fall!
    In todays scenario certain ill mannered children are present in our political system who are using this illogical sense to garner political mileage and gather votebanks.This is putting regionalism in front of nationalism which demands to be condemned at every level.
    It is for us the common man to understand this divisive politics and always vote for issues which are going to help us in the long run viz. development, poverty, fighting corruption , etc.
    Regionalism or Son of soil argument will plant the seeds for a divisive India which is not in anyone's interest.

    Dr. Gyan
    Have a good time.

  • #127156
    Really this GD thread has attracted the attention of several members. Nice to note that the participation is similar to a live discussion forum. This is what is expected of every thread. Interested members should come forward to give their comments, so that new ideas also will come out.

    It is true that all topics may not be of interest to everybody, but what happens is that even those interested are not expressing their views. Come out and share your views with others. This is a friendly request.

    Gold Member ISC

  • #127215
    Hi friends ,
    Regionalism is at it's pinnacle at this moment and it cannot be worse than this . India is a Federal Democratic Republic , it is bound to be home of so many regions , so many communities . Whether regionalism is good for India or bad itself is a regressive point . India needs keep all the regions united in it . Having watched Regionalism in it's worst kind ,and watching people fighting over the piece of land namely Assam . While Ulfa wants sovereignty for Assam without knowing what Assamese people actually want , and there are others who are fighting for Bodoland , Kamatapur , Dimasaland and what not . Each and every tribe are thinking that they are are lagging behind the others or others are exploiting them . But who the others are , because all the others are fighing for separate lands barring a few .

    Coming to the all India scenario, Mumbai is being considered a personal property of Sena people . I honestly don't know what Marathi people of Maharastra are thinking at this moment. Do they want to cooperate with the outsiders or the sena or MNS . Would they like to keep their city out of the influence of Hindi Speaking people from the North who are allegedly spreading dirty politics there .

    Regionalism should be a force of healthy competition . One should proudly say , my Bihar or my Assam or my Maharastra is so developed , so clean .I should say we don't have corruption in my state Assam , there is no people Below Poverty Line in my state Orissa . It should sound like we produce highest quantity of rice, pulses or coffe in my state . But that is not happening . We blame one from a different sate for getting a job in my state . One person from a sub-divison of a district is restricted from joining in a job in other sub-sub-divison of the same district . It can get that worst .And each and every place where regionalism exist you will see none but Politicians are getting benefits out of it .

    India and Indians credibility is fast decreasing in front of the world . So instead of fighting or suspecting each other within the country one should actually try to improve our image as Indians in front of the world .

    Runa N. Borah.

  • #127384
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]

  • #127443

  • #127466
    The current situation can be like regionalism is a bad thing for India. But basically it is good for India. Because we all are from different societies and groups and groups have different language and different culture. If India has no divided lands in the name of states, then we all from different groups and societies can't live or co ordinate with other people as we don't have the same knowledge to communicate.

    The states are not separated. They are just have been divided. That is we have no hurdle to travel and go to the other state of India. We don't need a passport to go to the next state. But the thing is we have to show some identity for living the life in the state where we wasn't born. That proof like ration card also have been given in the sense of living in a same state for some years. So why should we call it a partiality. It is just a system created for the better life of the Indian people.

    So the regionalism or son of soil argument is good for India

    R.Shankar Ganesh

  • #127486
    Regionalism or Son of the soil argument is not good for India. Those who are creating differences i.e. Regionalism for their benifit have nothing to do with the integrity of the country. People can also become popular by doing things which lead to the welfare of the society, but on the grounds of dividing the nation seems to be seedy & evil idea.

    The promoters of regionalism in India are definitely ruining the effotrs of the legends who fought for our freedom,turned every stone to unite India as a nation. The contitution makers who gave us the pride to be called as a Democratic Republic.

    It is really a setback to Indian politics that such issues are rising, rather than the isuues of poverty, illiteracy & and welfare of the nation as prime concern. Breaking the country into such smaller units increases regionalism in indian poltics.

    According to the constitution of India, any person should be allowed to go anywhere in its boundaries, buy a house there and stay as long as he wishes. This should be the case with any sovereign country with a strong central authority, which is what our constitution desires us to be.

    India is like a huge, old banyan tree, whose branches have grown so much that they appear to be independent trees, We are so very ancient as a civilization and nation that the branches have grown far and wide, but still are one and the same tree.

    Regionalism argument is or never will be good for India because if we divide we will fall. Earlier we are divided by forieners who invaded India at different times, ruined our cultural heritage. Now we are dividing ourselves. Like this we will never free ourselves from the chains of divide & rule policy.

  • #127518
    This is time when we should say no to regionalism . If it would have done any good to our country than India won't have lost so much resources , so many lives in the form of youths fighting for their autonomous status for a particular region , in the form of Jowans who had lost their lives fighting such encounters with so called terrorists .

    Perhaps India is the only country where people look down upon their colleagues at work place on the basis of which state they belong too .As an indian we don't feel ashamed seeing people living in poverty if they live elsewhere than my state .

    It is true though as Indian we need a reason to feel our Indianness , our oneness as indians . Situations like Cargil War or an One-day match with Pakistan are needed to make us feel our Indianness . It was never "one India" except for BSNL plan ,history records the fact that we Indians have always been fighting against each other . But how long ? Our constitution which was formulated after lots of people had given their lives to achieve Independence has directed us to stay united under the title of federal democratic republic of India .

    So why wasting time and resource over a petty issue like Regionalism ??

    Runa N. Borah.

  • #127520
    Hi All,

    Nice to see increasing members participants for this GD, expressing their views, statements and most of them or almost all are favored for oneness and proud to be an Indian than regionalism or son of soil, this regionalism or son of soil can be used only whenever need arises that too just to identity ourselves to others for country discipline, principle and unity purpose and it shouldn’t be used for dividing purpose, selfishness or any harmful etc.

    We have two ways, one is Unity in Diversity and another one is Divide and rule.

    • In unity in diversity – you can fight for your rights – sooner or later you will get it.
    • In Divide and rule – Others fight for your rights – neither later or ever you will get it. (Divide and rules broken by our elders and thanks to them, elders were few known heroes and mostly unknown/unseen heroes.)

    Now decide yourself before reading the below descriptions.

    Every Indians should be respected, welcome their reasonable comments, respect and treat well for every states, languages, cities, districts, villages, streets, homes and citizens. Freedom to live and freedom to speech. There is no extra article for different state, different people or influence or poor people.

    Subsidy or Preference or Quota is different than Indian Article.

    Here, I had observed from these thread that Kashmir state comes in, but we need to go back to its history and agreement of Kashmir before it is treated as other Indian states which has little different and big story in terms of buying or selling home or land over there, I would like to mention over here is because few of them here may not aware about Kashmir agreement or Tashkand/Russia agreement for Kashmir state which happened in the past by the International level agreement – Senior people or the one who study about this subject may aware about Kashmir state in India, it is not an easy to explain that agreement and procedures over here in this thread. There is no such rule for other states in India as Kashmir and in fact an Indian Article 19(1), Indian can live in any part of India under democracy rules, there is no any article against this one, who disobey this article will be subject to punishable by Indian law and order.

    Many Thanks,
    Hafeezur Rahman

  • #127658
    [Response removed by Admin. Read forum policies.]

  • #127827
    Since a lot of interesting thoughts have been expressed by various members after my last post in this discussion, I would like to react to some of the points.

    Most of the members have expressed their vehement opposition to concept of regionalism primarily as a reaction to provocative stance of ShivSena and MNS against influx of Biharis. I would like to urge the members not to mix the ideology of regionalism with the pervert practitioners of regionalism. Our constitution’s federal structure ensures regional autonomy and equitable development of all regions. The fact that this equitable growth has not taken place in last sixty years, leads to unrest and this unrest is misused by politicians for their own cause. So my request is do condemn the Thakres for their vandalism – I also do – but please don’t denounce the constitutional provision of federalism.

    Members have cited constitutional right of Indian citizen to work and live anywhere in the country. But look at the terrible condition of Mumbai today. Just how much of influx can any city take? These migrants, mostly engaged in unskilled labour habitat the illegal hutments, thereby pay no taxes and their burden is to be borne by the authentic tax payers, the Maharashtra Govt and BMC. The leaders in UP and Bihar seek to score political points by criticizing ShivSena and MNS but why do they not take any steps to outflow of workers from their own state? Why the Laloos and Mulayams and Mayawatis don’t attract investments and set up Industries to give jobs to their citizen?

    I am glad that Mr Ravishankara has brought up the issue of changing demography of metros. May I remind that the Delhi CM Sheela Dixit too had expressed her concern on how the Biharis are making it difficult for Delhi’s residents. That brings me to the same question. Why has there been no development in states like Bihar, Rajasthan, UP etc? That’s only because of selfish politics and other states are suffering because of it. It is not only Maharashtra that has the problem of irritant Biharis. Punjab also witnessed stiff opposition to Bihari labourers. In Ravishankara’s own Karnataka, protest against Bihar’s youth appearing for Railway exams in Benguluru is not very old.

    Mindless urbanization of India in last two decades is proving to be very harmful. Government needs to dissuade the flow from village to cities, from underdeveloped states to industrial metros. The growth and development centered around these metros is not what was desired by Gandhiji. Gandhiji was a staunch supporter of decentralization. Today’s leaders are hiding their failure in the name of nationalism. If all of us behold Gandhiji as Father of Nation, it is our duty to stick to his ideals of taking development to masses. Regionalism is the tool to achieve this inclusive development.


  • #127908
    I think in past we are not united.All states governed by small kingdoms.In India every state even every part of the state is having different language,different wearings,different food ,different festivals.We all lived in a British rule up to 150 years and Britishers united all the small kindoms and prepared a united map of India.We all are living in free India but we are living alongwith our statehood and our state introduction.We are noy having one language or one God or one image or one ambition y unite all indians.Due to these every residents tries to shoe seperste identity and that creats conflicts.

    We have to work on it with proper planning and policy.We are not patriotic and we are thinking first about our self then our famely then our relatives then our society then our district then our region then oue state and then our nation. It means we are thinking about our nation at the last.It is not good and it showa lack of patriotism.The said order should be reverse.We should think first of all about our contry and we should strenghten our country by dedicating our gains.

    We are showing our neglegance by not filling accurate sales tax, income tax, without ticket travel in rails, nonobeying traffic rules,etc. All these small acts weakens the country.We should united and more patriotic by forgetting all differences then only we can make progress.

  • #127922
    I accept few observations made by Malhar that in Karnataka it so happened long back, but whether it is once or done repeatedly the mistake is mistake at all and moreover it does not matter whether such incidents happened in Karnataka or in other states it should be condemned, we are Indians first then comes the state issue.

    As we can easily say the plight of the migrants from Bihar to Maharashtra was not a pleasing undoubtedly any person who thinks rightly cannot accept that it is a clear violation of Article 19 of the Indian Constitution which clearly says about the individual freedom that any person can reside anywhere and in any part of the country of his own will.

    Yesterday it was Telangana, today it is Maharashtra who knows about the fate of other states tomorrow, the struggle and voice for regionalism started and still going on since 1953 and in my view it was the launch pad for in India as a political regionalism and ultimately it has changed the course of regionalism and politics in India.

    One can find the difference between the struggle and fight for the regionalism post independence this brand of regionalism which was evolved immediately after independence was clearly justifiable, rational and also indisputable, it had the echoes of many voices, their views and aspirations of all who belongs to this country, it was a long standing wishes as on the basis language the division was required, hence it was the turn of Andhra Pradesh to become the first state on linguistic basis and it was the beginning for the retched politics in the name of regionalism in India.

    The so called state front MNS which has attacked North Indians particularly from Bihar and UP is adding fire to the word regionalism, but one may remember another outfit from Maharashtra has attacked many Kannadigas in the pretext of Marathi pride as the recent attacks by the MNS was not the first incident, even in Assam the ULFA has many times attacked Biharis and Bengalis, these are few examples of strong regionalist sentiments.

    It clearly shows the reason for such atrocities as the Marathi people’s decreasing influence in Mumbai, I agree it is one’s right to preserve the identity but the way they followed that is the violent way was not proper, the actual problem lies in the bad administration and also Government’s poor policies of the Governments in the Northern states which ultimately failed to give opportunities to their own people by creating jobs which ultimately resulting in the migration to Mumbai as it is the most affluent and promising city in India.

    It is this fanaticism which won MNS few seats in the Assembly elections, they have shown what they are when they have attacked a opponent party member in the Assembly.

    The leader of that outfit is a clever man he usurped the politics within the Marathi people and took away the major share from their vote bank and more over ageing Bal Thackeray has to compete with this person who is his nephew as he cannot depend on his own son whom seems to be too passive.

    Is it necessary to support such leaders who are leading in their own path which does not have any meaning, not at all, this could be in our state today but tomorrow it may happen to our own persons from the state which we are today, let us support the people who really fight and struggle for the people as a country not in the name of regionalism, one should not forget their such fights are for their own sake and for their own upliftment not for the people in the state, let us condemn such fanatic activities in the name of regionalism.

  • #127941
    Regionalism or Son of soil argument is NOT good for our country,India.

    In my opinion fighting for regionalism or the tag as son of soil is not at all good which will lead to divide and rule policy and damage the image of our country. As we all know India is the only country, which has so many States with different languages.

    As Mukhesh Ambani, Sachin Tendulkar and Sharukh Khan said, everybody is an Indian first, and then comes the place of birth. Our recognition world wide is known by the nationality as "Indian", whether muslim, hindu, or christian, sikh.

    However, regionalism finds a deep root in politicians. Whenever they get a seat in Parliament, they will see to it that maximum facilities are extended to their region out of the way. This cannot be ruled out. This is happening right from the day of our independence.

    On the other hand, State Governments never co-operate with the Central Govt., claiming more and more aids on account of different projects. God knows what they do with all the sanctioned heavy amount in Crores for the projects.

    Very less development or no development at all. They all get super- active again when the next budget is approaching. If they have passion for their region, they why don't they look into the public interest.

    Not many industries/resources exist in a particular region. As level of education is reaching high these days, public just cannot afford to seek employment in their own region, sit tight and spoil their life. According to their qualifications, they expect to seek suitable jobs anywhere in the country. They do have the freedom and right to secure jobs anywhere suitable for them in the country and live there.

    We can go on and on; there will be no end to it. Finally, I conclude
    that Regionalism or Son of soil argument is NOT good for our country,India.

    Sushila Iyengar

    God gives every bird it's food but does not always drop it into the nest.

  • #128007
    Hi All,

    If we recall history of Mumbai city, it has trapped with many politicians from many centuries not only at present – also sources said that there were ruled by Sadahvahan, Vahadarar, Kalachuriar, Kongan, Mauriar, Chalukiyar, Rashtrakoodar, Gujrath Muslims, Portugese till British ruled, this is one of the mega cities in the world from long time, at present economically almost every city is growing in India but for Dream and Unemployment for few still they have to reach and seek something in Mumbai and it is one of main city to get job or business easily for their future sake (even though it is old thought) as the support and help of their own group provide there.

    We have to accept few reasonable points of Mr. Malhar regarding Bihari and other few state fellow and their concern state’s present situation, in my practical experience, not only few Indian states underestimate or attacks Biharis or Biharis creates unnecessary problem to locals but even other few Asian countries citizen does the same for them for their such practices also the Bihari’s and few others damage our country’s name when we discuss about international level, however, since they are our fellow citizens, some of them illiterate and considering their state present situation - concern State Government (the other state where they come to live) or state public or state politicians have to remind them in an official manner and not to attack them directly or indirectly and taking laws in their own hand to harass them. Considering and keeping in mind that they are already spreads almost all states in India for their basic needs as their state not developed unfortunately for their own politicians, their own personality or lack of education and other bad systems etc.

    Why most of the Indians preferred/need to reach to Mumbai city? Since it is commercial city from many centuries, even British once they moved their port from Surat (Gujrat) to Mumbai (Maharashtra), there were so many textiles companies moved from other states to Mumbai in the past for so many easy accesses. At present, there are so many reasons to reach to Mumbai, one of them is, if we need to get any foreign country’s job or visa, we have to reach to Mumbai to reach those countries Embassy or Consulate, if we need any overseas job or most of the time overseas interview will be in Mumbai, medical process in Mumbai, visa processes in Mumbai and even per abroad company’s contract “point of hire” airport will be Mumbai, so, other state fellow has to stay temporarily over there in Mumbai, some of these facilities not preferred by foreigners in other cities and some of these facilities even not available in other cities. Another one is even for educational certificate attestation; citizen has to reach to Ministry of Home department and Ministry of External office and local state Notary etc. in Mumbai before getting attestation from ministry of Human resource office and relevant country’s embassy in Delhi etc. This city is naturally man made and famous all over the world from many centuries, also there are so many reasons (unable to mention over here) that Indians need to reach to Mumbai to complete their formalities often as it has many conditions as same as above mentioned.

    History says not only Mumbai but other major metro cities in India also had many wars in the past and still continues (Us against Them attitude)… it is belong to whom etc. or why other state fellows enter others city etc. but finally Indian law accepts it under 19(1) – please search this article in Google for more information [freedom to live, freedom to buy and sell and freedom to speech etc. in all over India] and practically it allows you to change and transfer even your Ration card or ID card from one state to another state by abide by the laws and procedure made by the concern state Government for it.

    Hafeezur Rahman

  • #128018
    Hi All,

    Though i have not gone through all the posts,i think all should have expressed their true feeling. India is known for "Unity in Diversity". I believe in Unity. Though some people fighting for Son-soil, they are very few.

    All we know that no country can develop unless people trust other people. Though people try to get their own land later again they will subdivide it into many parts. So there is no meaning of getting own priority in land or in other sectors. Those who are doing, they must be hurt in anywhere due to region or son-soil or language issue. Our priority should be to help people and learn many things from others.

    Always proudly say that India is my country !!!

    Life Is Beautiful

  • #128123
    Hi All,

    It is nice to see such an overwhelming response to this GD. Now I would like to share my final view on this.

    I believe that nowadays the feeling of being an Indian is shading away very slowly and gradually, and things like being a Marathi in Maharashtra, Telangana movement in Andhra Pradesh, Gorakhaland movement (demand of Nepalis living in Darjiling District of West Bengal for a separate state for themselves) in West Bengal, and ignorance of Hindi as national language in many Indian states such as Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh, etc are taking the ride on people’s minds.

    Political parties like MNS, Shiv Sena spread poison among people for their personal gains, and a common man suffers in the hands of the leaders of such political parties. Thackeray’s remarks actually remind me of the British rule and their policy of Divide and Conquer.

    Before the British rule we always fought among ourselves, which always made easy for invaders to divide and rule upon us. Politicians’ trying to do the same shows that nothing has changed. If this is what such political parties think is correct, how we can expect anything from NRI's like LN Mittal and others to do anything for India. Scenario is similar at global level.

    We represent India regionally and globally. We are Indian. All other things as region, religion, etc are just secondary and unnecessary. The secular and democratic India should take strong stand against these anti-national elements. People should not care these politicians and live like Indians and be proud of being Indians.

    I would like to conclude by saying: In the end only one thing matters "United we win, divided we fall".

    “Never Say Never”

  • This thread is locked for new responses. Please post your comments and questions as a separate thread.
    If required, refer to the URL of this page in your new post.