Rise of political regionalism in India
The plight of migrants from North India in Maharashtra was not a pleasing sight for right minded people living in any part of the country. Rising political regionalism and chauvinism in many parts of country has changed the political discourse.
THE PLIGHT of the ‘Bihar migrants’ in Maharashtra was undoubtedly not a pleasing sight for any right minded citizen residing in any part of the country. The atrocities unleashed by Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) led by Raj Thakeray on the North Indian population in Maharashtra violated Article 19 of the Indian Constitution that ensures the individual the freedom to reside in any part of the country on free will.
What began on December 15, 1953 as a fast unto death by Telugu nationalist leader Potti Sriramulu turned out as a launch pad for 'Political Regionalism' in India that has changed the course of politics and regionalism in the country?
Thus, Andhra Pradesh courtesy Potti Sriramulu became the first state to be reorganised on linguistic basis. The States Reorganisation Committee suggested the formation of 16 states and 3 Union Territories based on linguistic preferences. Thus began the politics of Regionalism in India.
In order to understand the politics of regionalism in India, it is extremely important to understand the term Regionalism. Regionalism can be defined as a political ideology of a particular group of people belonging to one community. Regionalism often relates to strengthening politics or economic power in order to influence the autonomy over different states. Regionalism post independence meant constant struggle of each state to overpower the other. India has witnessed a tremendous growth of regionalism and struggles post independence era.
The recent MNS attacks on North Indians from Bihar and UP added fuel to the existing fire of regionalism. According to the claims put forth by Raj Thackerey, chief of MNS, the adding migrant population in Maharashtra had resulted in a lot of Maharashtrians remaining unemployed. This resulted in chaos in Maharashtra and MNS activists took to the streets. They beat up several north Indians and forced them to go out of the state. However, this hasn’t been the first case of regionalist claims. One of the earliest regionalist claims was made by Maharashtra Shiv Sena against Kannadigas on the pretext of Marathi pride.
Andhra Pradesh has been one of the states that has been under the scanner for its regionalist claims for quite some time now. For long the people residing in the Telengana region have felt neglected by the Andhra Pradesh government. Telangana has till date remained a backward region whereas the Andhra region had been progressing quite well. Thus the people of Telangana demanded separation of Telangana and Andhra.
Although it is important to understand the socio-economic-political scenario post independence. The brand of regionalism that evolved post Independence was more justifiable, indisputable and rational. It echoed the voices, views and aspirations of the people in the country. The struggle stood for long standing wishes of the people to be divided on linguistic basis.
Thus, Andhra Pradesh courtesy Potti Sriramulu became the first state to be reorganised on linguistic basis. The States Reorganisation Committee suggested the formation of 16 states and 3 Union Territories based on linguistic preferences. Thus began the politics of Regionalism in India.
In order to understand the politics of regionalism in India, it is extremely important to understand the term Regionalism. Regionalism can be defined as a political ideology of a particular group of people belonging to one community. Regionalism often relates to strengthening politics or economic power in order to influence the autonomy over different states. Regionalism post independence meant constant struggle of each state to overpower the other. India has witnessed a tremendous growth of regionalism and struggles post independence era.
The recent MNS attacks on North Indians from Bihar and UP added fuel to the existing fire of regionalism. According to the claims put forth by Raj Thackerey, chief of MNS, the adding migrant population in Maharashtra had resulted in a lot of Maharashtrians remaining unemployed. This resulted in chaos in Maharashtra and MNS activists took to the streets. They beat up several north Indians and forced them to go out of the state. However, this hasn’t been the first case of regionalist claims. One of the earliest regionalist claims was made by Maharashtra Shiv Sena against Kannadigas on the pretext of Marathi pride.
Andhra Pradesh has been one of the states that has been under the scanner for its regionalist claims for quite some time now. For long the people residing in the Telengana region have felt neglected by the Andhra Pradesh government. Telangana has till date remained a backward region whereas the Andhra region had been progressing quite well. Thus the people of Telangana demanded separation of Telangana and Andhra.
This gave rise to debates and arguments on the proposal. While the people of Telangana welcomed the idea, the people of Andhra protested against it vehemently. The demands had died down till Chandrababu Naidu; the former Chief Minister of Hyderabad started executing his plans of Cyberabad. This infuriated the people in Telangana and the demands resurfaced. Regionalism in Andhra Pradesh meant demands of a separate state in order to ensure equal justice done to all the citizens of the state. It meant ensuring all the citizens were equal in terms of socio-economic and political status.
The United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) too had launched an attack on Biharis and Bengalis was yet another example of strong regionalist sentiments.
The clashes were a result of clash of interests between the Biharis, Bengali community and the Assamese interests. Thus the ULFA intervened and adopted violent methods to drive out the migrants from the state of Assam.
Regionalism has witnessed a drastic change in the means and methods adopted to achieve the same. From the non-violent means like fasting unto death by Potti Sriramulu to extreme violent means adopted by the ULFA and MNS today.
However, formation of regional parties at the center and state level has proved to be a boon for the country. They voice the opinion of the region at the center level and ensure that their voices are heard. Growing regionalism is therefore not a cause of worry for India since in spite of regionalism every individual who resides in India remains a citizen of India irrespective from which state he belongs to. Thus India should not worry too much about the issue of regionalism so long as it brings regional development.
The United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) too had launched an attack on Biharis and Bengalis was yet another example of strong regionalist sentiments.
The clashes were a result of clash of interests between the Biharis, Bengali community and the Assamese interests. Thus the ULFA intervened and adopted violent methods to drive out the migrants from the state of Assam.
Regionalism has witnessed a drastic change in the means and methods adopted to achieve the same. From the non-violent means like fasting unto death by Potti Sriramulu to extreme violent means adopted by the ULFA and MNS today.
However, formation of regional parties at the center and state level has proved to be a boon for the country. They voice the opinion of the region at the center level and ensure that their voices are heard. Growing regionalism is therefore not a cause of worry for India since in spite of regionalism every individual who resides in India remains a citizen of India irrespective from which state he belongs to. Thus India should not worry too much about the issue of regionalism so long as it brings regional development.
 | Previous Post |
.well I don't think its a separatist movement like ULFA / LITTE etc. Its just the way to remind the other state people to get mixed with the state culture and language and not to show their separate politial / cultural existence. North Indians are show that they are different and behave in the way as if they have created and built the city like Mumbai where as the complete credit goes to local people and their state government. Mumbai is not because of outsiders, the outsiders are there because of Mumbai and progressive state of Maharashtra. If they don't like this and think that they have ability to build the city like this then why don't they do that in their own state?
.Can any one gave a thought why we Marathi People are doing this? diversity is unity of Bharat, why to cross that boundary! It's time to talk open about the rights!!!!
Login
 Login through Social ID
|
