Kashmir Unrest

bunty We has assho**s propogating the poision on sulekha too!! I think these pseudo elements need a kick where it hurts them the most, to catch them with their pants down when they bluff!! one such worthy is Anand Nair Regards

Raghuram,

You rightly raised the question, "why we want them together at all".

For simplicity, let us consider just two entities, each dominated by a distinct ethnic group (by way of composition of population). Should they remain as two separate nations? Or should they unite to form a single federal entity? Here are the possibilities:-

a) Both entities would benefit by forming the union. Neither would feel culturally threatened by being a part of the union. [The ideal case for forming a federation]

b) Neither entity would benefit by forming the union.[Clear case for remaining separate -- and no conflict]

c) One entity would benefit, but the other would lose [Conflict situation]

"Benefit" would need to be in terms of increased economic and social security that the group would accrue by being part of the union. Loss would need to be seen in terms of fear of marginalisation and loss of identity -- linguistic, ethnic, religious, ideological or cultural.

What is important to note is that the benefit and loss will need to recognized as matters of general perception of the people constituting the entities. We can influence this perception either way through arguments and through our actions.

According to me, arguing peacefully against or in favour of secession should be accepted as legitimate political discourse.

On the other hand, deliberately seeking to denigrate or marginalise any group of people constituting the Union (through word or action) should be recognized as  anti-national activity -- whether this is done for promoting secession or for creating a culture supramacist fascist regime. Needless to say, law must takes its course when any party indulges in violence, whatever the provocation.

Anand