Desicritics Comments on Satire: Dear Marathi Manoos Thackerays

Comment by Vivek Oberoi

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:51:42 EST

A lot of the confusion in the above comments arises from people thinking Bombay is Maharashtrian. Actually perhaps one-third of the people of Bombay are Maharashtrian. Soon the city will become a state of its own like Delhi -- I predict within the next five years. Then the Marathi Manoos can retreat to Poona (which is apparently doing quite well economically) and carry on building Marathi pride back where he belongs. And give Bombay back to the Bombayites.

Comment by FF

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:40:45 EST

India gives right for every state to choose its own type of government, communist/socialist/or any other form Never did I say that India has no rights reserved for its states. However there is lot (and when I say lot I mean it) of scope for the center to let go the leash it has on the common people. What I am more concerned is the underlying wave about the current arrangement which favors itself to having more and more strong center rather than an arrangement which ideally would favor more and more dissemination of power away from center, in turn making the center (the concept of country as one strong nation) increasingly redundant with passage of time.

Comment by Sonal Panse

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:06:34 EST

@#68updike Yesterday I encountered two supposedly 'decent' people, who think what is happening is totally justified. The guy said, "Well, maybe we could have done without the violence, but it is just a side effect. You can't avoid side effects." Or to paraphrase, Donald Rumsfeld - Things happen. Regarding some policemen joining in with the 'go back' viewpoint, he said, "Well, they are only human after all, the police - and with what is happening, it is only natural that their 'Marathi asmita (pride)' has awakened!" Listening to him made me lose more of my pride in being Marathi. The girl said, "I don't see why all those people have to come here anyway. Think of it this way - what if your house has room for only 10 people and 100 people try to squeeze in? Perhaps we should make a law that they can come only for 5 or 6 months, like when you go abroad on a visit visa and can't stay for ever. Or maybe we should impose an extra tax on them for staying here. What do you think?" I think fascism is just plain wrong. Whatever excuses and reasons you can find for it.

Comment by FF

Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:59:04 EST

You want common judiciary with different government U seem to be in some kind of hurry of missing the train...I said common judiciary for resolving issues between states and "not" between people of the same state. And that is because states will have to live in harmony with each other in case of conflicts. Your idea to me sound like that of separatists rather than a unifier. Yes I may sound like one, and i have no regrets, because i believe that governance and nations are mere tools for people and not other way around. Right now every state has a semi-autonomous status, imagine if it becomes autonomous, why would Punjab give its crop? why would Haryana leave its water for Delhi, why would north east give its tea? Maharashtra its funds for economic development, at the same time it will be a huge task for factories in Maharashtra to get the raw material. First of all when I propose more autonomous governance, many states "may" turn out to be even smaller than what they currently are. Secondly, It is no shocking to conceive such idea, since Indian (sub continental) civilization has existed for at least 5000 years under similar arrangements. Europe with its numerous countries is an glaring example of success of such ideas and today it stands to challenge and overtake "The big brother USA" in every department. Indeed some countries in Europe are smaller than many states in India. Even USA has relatively more autonomous governance for its state than what a monolithic country like India has. Secondly, I do not see any need for Punjab to gift crop to others or for Haryana to gift Yamuna to Delhi or north east to gift its tea garden or Maharashtra to share its factory produce with others. I think we are all aware of something called trade and business. Let people of each state choose how to collaborate with others. The single most important entity of a state are its people. A state would vanish and give way to others to, if it does not or is not able to care for its people. To amalgamate and collaborate should be left totally to the states(and its people). The underlying idea is not to tie up people up by some kind of constitutional or virtual force, but rather to encourage them to specialize and collaborate. Current system limits the choices available to people by enforcing people to live per certain defined terms decided by someone else even before his birth. More diversity would indirectly imply more choices available to people and allow them to hop from one place(where they may not be fit) to another place where they are deemed more fit. Obviously all this comes at the cost of increased responsibility of Individual making that decision, but then making people more responsible towards where they plan to live is the underlying strength of this idea.

Comment by updike98

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:14:39 EST

It is true that the Media distorts opinions-but we saw perfectly sane mumbaikars saying that north indians had taken away their jobs.Amid all the heated letters to and froing on this issue my original point-complicity with the sena's 1992 genocide has come back to haunt the non- marathi hindus, has not been disproved.Modi's misdeeds may reappear like Banquo.Karma is powerful.

Comment by Kunal

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:03:09 EST

I don't know if this Vick guy is for real, or someone from our good old neighbors just trying to piss us off...

Comment by SD

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:38:57 EST

64 Vick: To get a more educated view of who exactly the "Marathi Manoos" is you should read the following article: http://desicritics.org/2008/02/14/112253.php The Marathi Manoos is simply Marathi Man...Dadsaheb Phalke was one. The MNS only claim to represent him. It is stupid to assume that the MNS and the Marathi Manoos are one and the same.

Comment by Aditi Nadkarni

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:36:09 EST

Vick: Let me try to address your diatribe as best as I can. You have to understand that my world being bigger than yours it is difficult for me to come down to this level and address your petty, pseudo nationalist insecurities. 1. While I think a lesson in History/ Geography is due for you, DC authors/ editors don't owe you one. So the "Which great nations?" question will have to find an answer on the internet, or better still, in history books. 2. People don't always understand each other and the change that this friction brings about is what keeps a nation moving forward. I think it gives people healthy competetive edge while keeping the differences alive. The only thing that could turn this ugly is insecurity: Insecurity on part of one community, may it be Marathi, Gujrati, Begali etc. The insecurity that somehow another coomunity is getting an edge over them. Only loosers look over their shoulder in a race this universal. 3. Now coming to the "use of a foreign language" concern, I suggest you find it in yourself to evolve a bit. English is a global language. The top universities and schools in our nation teach in this language. The popular media uses this language. Why? Not because we are "slaves to the English man" as is alleged by the pseudo nationalists BUT because progressive people are confident enough not to be threatened by a basic communication tool such as language. Such people look beyond the means and towards the goal. The means being use of language and the goal being getting the message across. Which may explain why you are typing out YOUR COMMENTS in English!! :) 4.India's cultural heritage encompasses all Indians: North, South, East West and therefore none of the individual cultures can threaten it. Our culture and most importantly PEACE is in fact under threat from people such as yourself who in their zeal to adhere to conservative, restrictive ideas are disrupting the peace of a nation that is rich in culture, history, languages, religions and has the strength to overcome the perceived differences. The rest of us can only find solace in the fact that since the fittest survive, your brand of ideas will eventually die out. 5. I watch foreign language films as well. I love them and appreciate the art they represent. I can do that because I know that language is merely a tool for expression. I have never woken up feeling like my cultural validity was suddenly fading away as if it were superficial make-up. Cultural identity should be stronger than that I think. 6. Lastly, about your concern of "criminal elements": criminal intent does not have language or regional barriers. In my days in Mumbai I have seen as many Marathi goons as any other. So please, spare me. For me a it is a crime to violate somebody else's rights and freedoms. And in that sense all the pseudo nationalists disrupting national peace, integrity and unity are the biggest criminal frauds of all times. I am not sure HOW these criminals can sleep at night after everything they do all day to pull back a nation so determined to move on.

Comment by Vick

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:15:14 EST

Ms Panse, I wasnt aware that DadaSaheb was Marathi Manoos of MNS type. Well internet provides new information every day. So A Marathi Manoos started the film industry which brought in ugly North Indian culture and people in the city. Now another Marathi Manoos with support of others wants all of them out. BTW Why would a Marathi Manoos will start Hindi Film industry? Out of love for Hindi Speakers or a business venture?

Comment by Vick

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:09:29 EST

Ms Nadkarni, Which great nations are you talking about here? Which are those nations where countrymen cant understand each other and have to borrow a foreign lanugage for conversation? Where almost in every part of the country their are people demanding that they are let out. Where central government sends militry from time to time to keep things in control? I think India is spending too much resources(human and economic) in keeping everyone together forcefully. I am sure one day all of us will realize it and will go our own way peacefully. I wasnt talking about getting rid of Hindi film industry because of marginalized portrayal(like it potrays tons of North Indian any better. I am sure all Biharis are portrayed as good ppl, right?) of Marathis, but it will definately help in reducing the number of North Indians(NI means Bihari and UPite here) in Mumbai. Why would you want an Industry which doesnt speak your language, spreads ugly north indian culture among your city? A lot of criminal elements also will go away with this industry as they finance it. Mumbai will become a peaceful place inhabited by MNS/SS folks. There will be lot less whoring, pimping, gambling, drinking, eve teasing....all those bad north indian things.

Comment by Kunal

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:06:39 EST

Mr. FF #60, Your post baffles me to no end. You want common judiciary with different government, you want laws to be the same but constitution to be different in every state????? First as far as I know about India, and you can say I know $h!t, India gives right for every state to choose its own type of government, communist/socialist/or any other form. Bengal has always been under communist rule, UP has been under casts based parties, South Indian politics have always been a language based politics. So I do not know what else you mean by having different type of governance. Your idea to me sound like that of separatists rather than a unifier. Right now every state has a semi-autonomous status, imagine if it becomes autonomous, why would Punjab give its crop? why would Haryana leave its water for Delhi, why would north east give its tea? Maharashtra its funds for economic development, at the same time it will be a huge task for factories in Maharashtra to get the raw material. And you give a great example of Panchayat system, the ones who give orders to women to march nude, anul marriages, Hindu Muslim tensions etc. I guess Panchayat system should be scrapped out completely. They have their own laws, their own justice system, own punishments.

Comment by commonsense

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:20:45 EST

Anurag: ""India has failed!!! We have failed as a nation. All the chest thumping that we do everyday about a rising power is pure bs."" The only one who seems to be thumping his chest at the moment is you. Even though you forgot to put the exclamations marks after the second sentence...

Comment by FF

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:09:54 EST

I am with vick when he says that country should be divided into smaller states for all practical means of governance. Each state should be self sufficient as far as all governance is concerned. The only tethering force should probably be a common military and that too because its collective might can protect all the states from external aggression more potently(Unity being strength). But given that world overall is moving towards concept of global village, even that need may get weakened in times to come. At max you could have a common judiciary so that issues between states can be resolved amicably and justifiably. One of the underlying concepts behind this idea is that the more close is daily governance to the people, the better is its performance. Panchayat raj is an excellent example of why and how this principle has worked(and always did) among rural masses so effectively. A large nation where people are separated by miles from the ruling class is nothing but a monolithic rolling stone which can never gather any moss. People should be segmented and allowed to flourish as independently as possible in order enable diversity. Whether they want to adopt socialist, democratic society or a regimental governance or a capitalist one should be left to people of that state to decide. If one is worse that other in terms of welfare of people, it will soon be forced to give way to other in light of fierce competition from other(or neighbouring) states. People should be encouraged to collaborate and compete(even if fiercely), but should not forced at any cost to remain together as is done by one constitution policy of countries like India . If people feel the need to come together they would always collaborate in just those specific areas and not in anything beyond that. The corner stone of Indian kind of democracy is the assumption that people are fools who need somebody to govern them. This stinks of colonial mentality and undervalues self managing ability of people by making the state look like some kind of demi-god or maharaja who is supposed to look after its praja. This results into an awfully large gap between the people who pay taxes and the service providers (e.g. politicians, bureaucrats, govt bearers) with practically no accountability. The idea of one single nation though may seem very lofty and patriotic but is destined to fail, if it is not overhauled soon.

Comment by FF

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:01:24 EST

I am with vick when he says that country should be divided into smaller states for all practical means of governance. Each state should be self sufficient as far as all governance is concerned. The only tethering force should probably be a common military and that too because its collective might can protect all the states from external aggression (Unity being strength) more potently. But given that world is moving towards concept of global village, even that need may get weakened in times to come. At max you could have a common judiciary so that issues between states can be resolved amicably and justifiably. One of the underlying concepts behind this idea is that the more close is daily governance to the people, the better is its performance. Panchayat raj is perfect example of why and how this principle has worked among rural masses so effectively. A large nation where people are separated by miles from the ruling class is nothing but a monolithic rolling stone which can never gather any moss. People should be segmented and allowed to flourish as independently as possible in order enable diversity. They should be encouraged to collaborate and compete(even if fiercely), but should not forced at any cost to remain together as is done by one constitution policy of countries like India . If people feel the need to come together they would always collaborate in just those specific areas and not in anything beyond that. The corner stone of Indian kind of democracy is the assumption that people are fools who need somebody to govern them. This stinks of colonial mentality and undervalues self managing ability of people by making the state look like some kind of demi-god or maharaja who is supposed to look after its praja. This results into an awfully large gap between the people who pay taxes and the service providers (e.g. politicians, bureaucrats, govt bearers) with practically no accountability. The idea of one single nation though may seem very lofty and patriotic but is destined to fail, if it is not overhauled soon.

Comment by FF

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:00:28 EST

I am with vick when he says that country should be divided into smaller states for all practical means of governance. Each state should be self sufficient as far as all governance is concerned. The only tethering force should probably be a common military and that too because its collective might can protect all the states from external aggression (Unity being strength) more potently. But given that world is moving towards concept of global village, even that need may get weakened in times to come. At max you could have a common judiciary so that issues between states can be resolved amicably and justifiably. One of the underlying concepts behind this idea is that the more close is daily governance to the people, the better is its performance. Panchayat raj is perfect example of why and how this principle has worked among rural masses so effectively. A large nation where people are separated by miles from the ruling class is nothing but a monolithic rolling stone which can never gather any moss. People should be segmented and allowed to flourish as independently as possible in order enable diversity. They should be encouraged to collaborate and compete(even if fiercely), but should not forced at any cost to remain together as is done by one constitution policy of countries like India . If people feel the need to come together they would always collaborate in just those specific areas and not in anything beyond that. The corner stone of Indian kind of democracy is the assumption that people are fools who need somebody to govern them. This stinks of colonial mentality and undervalues self managing ability of people by making the state look like some kind of demi-god or maharaja who is supposed to look after its praja. This results into an awfully large gap between the people who pay taxes and the service providers (e.g. politicians, bureaucrats, govt bearers) with practically no accountability. The idea of one single nation though may seem very lofty and patriotic but is destined to fail, if it is not overhauled soon.

Comment by Kunal

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:42:26 EST

In addition to Commonsense comment #58 Even all the hottest chicks travel on these metro things dude in contrast to Metro in Houston which is a hub of drug trafficking, homeless and real stink. You gotta take a ride on it, I mean metro, to know what you are missing on. BTW CS, that was a good one.

Comment by commonsense

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 13:25:12 EST

Anurag #38: ""All these metros (have you ever been to one of these metros - dont even try - they stink)"" Huh? the delhi metro is pretty clean and runs on time! which metro did you ride my friend?

Comment by Kunal

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:39:59 EST

Seriously????? lolz did you do that??? BTW what part??? :p Ok I am being bit too sleazy now......

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:35:57 EST

LOL.. well it is considered a personal attack. and that word can be used as an alternate form for female parts.

Comment by Kunal

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:10:47 EST

You know what the funny thing is... The word I used over there, I didn't know that was a curse, I thought it just meant "fool", and it got edited... wow

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:06:53 EST

shit! my computer is possessed by demons. pls excuse the multiple posts.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:06:30 EST

shit! my computer is possessed by demons. pls excuse the multiple posts.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:05:22 EST

well, his ideas do seem a bit odd. and he did say that he doesn't believe in India. but whatever... trolls.. can't live with 'em, can't deport 'em. ;)

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:05:21 EST

well, his ideas do seem a bit odd. and he did say that he doesn't believe in India. but whatever... trolls.. can't live with 'em, can't deport 'em. ;)

Comment by smallsquirrel

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:04:48 EST

well, his ideas do seem a bit odd. and he did say that he doesn't believe in India. but whatever... trolls.. can't live with 'em, can't deport 'em. ;)