Monday, August 26, 2013

Telangana: Grow up, Andhras, Let go!

[Originally published on other forums on 6th August 2013].

Today, when I see the slogan on the streets of Seemandhra, ‘Telangana Vaddu, Samaikyandhra Muddu’, I cannot help but wonder how insensitive you people are to the sentiments and aspirations of Telanganas.  First, you say you don’t want Telangana (‘Telangana Vaddu’).  That’s fine with us, because, you don’t want Telangana, and we don’t want Andhra.  We are on the same page.  So what’s problem?  Why are you protesting? 

Second, you want united Andhra (‘Samaikyandhra Muddu’).  Well, you can have it.  We never wanted to break up Andhra.  We are only keen on making our region Telangana a separate state without touching your Andhra.

So, when you say, ‘Telangana Vaddu, Samaikyandhra Muddu’, this is what we think of your demand. 


And looks like your demand is the same as our demand, so why all the fuss, coming onto streets to protest?

Giving you the benefit of doubt, if we were to assume that ‘Samaikyandhra’ actually means Andhra Pradesh consisting of Telangana, Rayalaseema and Andhra, then you need to understand why we find that slogan very insensitive and arrogant.  You need to understand a bit about Telangana people.  From the beginning, we never identified ourselves with the word ‘Andhra’ – you need to get this into your head.  May be, we are OK to be called ‘Telugu’ people, but we don’t agree to be called ‘Andhra’.  Imposing your identity onto us won’t help; it will only alienate us further.

Now, let me ask you this question – What did you do in the last four years after December 9th statement to make sure Telangana people abandon their aspirations for a separate state?  Did you try to understand the reasons why they come out onto streets to agitate?  Did you try to understand why their demand continues to remain the same for over sixty years?  

Did you try to implement GO 610 as a first step for reconciliation?  What changes did you make in yourself to make them like you and love you so that they want to remain with you in the same state? 

Instead, let me tell you what you guys actually did in the last four years.

You belittled, berated and insulted our movement and our leaders.  When we said our culture was different, you ridiculed it, demeaned our language, and told us we are not civilized people.   You mocked our agitations, celebrated when we failed to achieve our objectives, and expressed happiness when we were arrested, beaten up and mauled by the security forces.  Is this what brothers do?

You denounced our arguments which cited marginalization, and thwarted all our attempts to get a good hearing for our cases.  You refused to look at the evidences on the suppression and discrimination.  You ridiculed our youth when they committed suicides.   Your leaders wrote books rubbishing all our claims without citing any evidence.  Your leaders, instead of making overt attempts to endear us to you, spent time in Delhi to ensure Telangana is not formed.  Your leaders were more interested in making back-door maneuvers to stop and stall formation of Telangana instead of trying to make a case for United Andhra Pradesh.  

Your CM Kiran Kumar Reddy, in a response to our MLA Harish Rao, said, “Make a note of it. I will not sanction a single rupee (for the Telangana region). You do whatever you want”.  It shows what your leaders think of Telanganas deep down in their hearts.

Do you really think that these actions bring us close to you?

And four years later when Telangana is decided, you come out onto streets to express anger and frustration.  Anger and frustration at what?  At your leaders? That they could not somehow cunningly stop Telangana the way they did in the previous six decades?  That their craftiness did not deliver the right kinds of goods for you? That your leaders could not manipulate New Delhi the way they manipulated Srikrishna Committee?  That they failed to stop Telangana at all costs using their power and money?

Why don’t you understand this for once?  We are done with you!  We don’t want to stay in the same state with you.  This marriage is over.  This arrangement called Andhra Pradesh stands rejected.  We were not proud to be part of Andhra Pradesh.   We suffered.  We were humiliated.  We want to put an end to this.  We want to live our lives, on our own, with you telling us what’s good for us, without you ruling us like an internal colony.

And, there’s a big difference between you and us when it comes to the arrangement called Andhra Pradesh – and that is – we took our agreements and promises quite seriously while you looked at it is a toilet paper, to be scrapped and flushed as per convenience.   The Andhra leaders signed agreements and made promises which they never honored, because they did not have the intention of honoring them in the first place.  Entire history of our relationship can be summed up as follows – we expected all of us to follow those agreements and promises, but you never had the intention to abide by them.   You were neither sincere nor apologetic.

And you know why your leaders show so much surprise now that Telangana decision is made?  When they told the center they are OK for creating Telangana, they did not actually mean it.  They thought that they could nod their heads like gangireddu, and say yes, believing it will be considered as NO by New Delhi.

And the whole reason why we are not very happy about joint-capital for ten years is that we don’t want to spend another day with your leaders in any kind of arrangement - it is like a nightmare to all of us. 

You want a permanent joint-capital in Hyderabad?  Imagine the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu living in Bangalore.  Imagine State Assembly, Secretariat and High Court of of Tamil Nadu in Bangalore.  Imagine the MLAs, Cabinet Ministers, DGP of Tamil Nadu all living in Bangalore. Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? 

Your leaders want to live in another state, and you are OK with that?  What is making you agree to such ridiculous propositions?  Greed? Shortsightedness? Shamelessness? Or Ignorance?

Now, your leaders are demanding security for Seemandhra people living in Hyderabad.  We ask - so how about your Seemandhra brothers that are living in Adilabad, Medak, Warangal, Nalgonda, Mahbubnagar?  You don’t care about them?  Why special interest in Seemandhras living only in Hyderabad, but no concern for those living in other parts of Telangana?  Is this concern genuine or fake?  Or are your leaders more concerned in grabbing Hyderabad than providing actual security to your Seemandhra brothers?

The more you protest on the streets the more we don’t want to be with you.  Don’t you see what your ‘Samaikyandhra’ stands for?  It stands for imposing yourselves onto us.  It stands for pushing us back into submission.  It stands for making Telangana irrelevant once again in your state.  Maybe you don’t realize this now – but your movement is the one of the ugliest movements in the history of mankind – because it is not a fight for your own rights and freedoms, but it is about imposing yourselves onto other people depriving them of their rights and freedoms.

When you talk of ‘United we stand, Divided we fall’, we laugh at your hypocrisy.  If you really believe in that, you should go back and merge with Tamil Nadu and recreate Madras State.   Also, remember something, you asked for Madras in 1953, which did not belong to you.  Now, you are asking for Hyderabad in 2013, which does not belong to you.

Now that the decision is made, you have a choice on how you want to make the separation – you can act mature and let us go.  In the process, you can show your maturity at the discussion table so that the division is done amicably so that the two states can live in harmony.  Or you can act really immature, act like Lagadapati, try to scuttle the formation of Telangana, bicker, cry, and throw tantrums, and make the division really murky and painful for all of us.

Long ago, I compared Andhra rule with British rule.  But when British left, they left maturely, so that there was bonhomie between the ruled and the rulers – so much so that we even invited the last Governor General to continue his leadership.  

And just look at the way you are leaving.   Reflect upon it.

Can you not, at least, make the separation little graceful?

131 comments:

  1. >>Now, your leaders are demanding security for Seemandhra people living in Hyderabad. We ask - so how about your Seemandhra brothers that are living in Adilabad, Medak, Warangal, Nalgonda, Mahbubnagar? You don’t care about them? Why special interest in Seemandhras living only in Hyderabad, but no concern for those living in other parts of Telangana?

    Exactly.

    I pity on their current situation. Because they took the stand of 'United' they can't really make any de-merger demands. lol.

    I would be glad if they show the real 'Unity' atleast in there new state. I am sure they fight to the death each other for capital.. to start with :))))

    ReplyDelete
  2. Grow up Telanganas and let Hyderabadis go, That sums up your entire article.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But I am not aware of Hyderabadis demanding a separate state.

      I am aware of Seemandhras living in Seemandhra fighting for a separate Hyderabad so that they can continue to exploit it.

      Delete
    2. Your awareness seems to be pathetic. How can one teach idiots.

      Delete
    3. Ok then get aware. Danam and Mukesh asked for a greater hyderabad state with 34 constituencies. If you are not aware that's not the world's problem.

      Delete
    4. What do you mean by exploit? People come there to make a living. Some politicians might have exploited but what is new? It is the same story in Mumbai or Bangalore or Hyderabad. It will be the same even in Telangana state if it forms. I wonder if you will happily accept exploitation by Telangana leaders!

      Delete
    5. What do you mean by exploit?
      There are nearly 100 articles on this blog related to Telangana which detail what we mean by exploitation. There is also a report published by us to Srikrishna Committee where we detail the exploitation. You seem to have have woken up now. We have been explaining this for the last four years.

      Delete
    6. "There is also a report published by us to Srikrishna Committee where we detail the exploitation"
      There are a thousand representations given to SKC. Which submission are you talking about and why does it matter now? Instead you should talk about the report given by SKC, but you conveniently ignore it saying that it was influenced by SAs. The Congress party should explain why it went with the second best recommendation from SKC instead of the first. They gave no rationale for their decision so far even though they know very well that SAs vehemently oppose separation, especially after seeing reaction after Dec 9th. Let the Govt (Congress party) announce in Parliament that people of SA exploited the people of T and for that reason they decided to go with this option to punish the people of SA.

      Delete
    7. Mano:
      Here is our submission to SKC.
      http://www.telangana.org/TDF_report_to_SKC.asp
      And here's our take on SKC Report.
      http://www.telangana.org/skcreportinjustice.asp

      Let the Govt (Congress party) announce in Parliament that people of SA exploited the people of T and for that reason they decided to go with this option to punish the people of SA.

      We don't believe Telangana is being created to 'punish' people of Telangana. It is referred to as creation of a state to fulfill the aspirations of people of Telangana.

      The conclusion of exploitation comes out from non-implementation of various GOs, commission recommendations, supreme court verdicts, and violation of agreements.

      Just so you know, British did not admit they exploited and ruled India as colony while granting the Independence, and yet our entire freedom movement was based on those issues.

      Delete
    8. I find it amusing that you value all the previous commission reports to the letter, but when it comes to SKC you have major disagreements! I have neither time nor inclination to look into your submission and your rejoinder because I think those dont matter.

      Delete
    9. I have neither time nor inclination to look into your submission and your rejoinder because I think those dont matter.

      I thought so too!

      Not many Seemandhras have inclination or patience or interest or enough empathy to try to understand Telangana Movement. That's why I don't see an 'amicable solution' because we are not on the same page on the issues.

      This is where I keep saying British were far better than Andhras as colonists. Mostly because there was lot of literature and columns appearing in Great Britain on trying to understand Indian Independence Movement - nothing of that sort happened in Seemandhra.

      Today, one Seemandhra lady spoke on TV quite emphatically that there was never a people's movement in Telangana - and when asked what about those big agitations - she said the people were all brought by force - or by inducement of money.

      With such understanding - do you expect a reasonable dialog?

      Not really.

      Delete
    10. Anyone can see who is being reasonable. People say many things on TV, you cant come to conclusions and paint with a broad brush based on that. I read ALL of your blog posts, I read SKC report in toto. I clearly mentioned why I dont want to read your submissions. After SKC report, we have all seen how the crux of T movement changed from lack of development, discrimination etc to atma gouravam!

      Delete
    11. Mano:
      After SKC report, we have all seen how the crux of T movement changed from lack of development, discrimination etc to atma gouravam!

      Once again this is a gross misreading of the Telangana Movement. Like most other Seemandhras you seem to following Telangana Movement only through Seemandhra media channels.

      For example, here is the article I published on 10 Jan 2010. SKC Committee was formed in Feb 2010. SKC Report was released in Jan 2011.

      Telangana 34: Self-rule and Self-respect

      http://sujaiblog.blogspot.in/2010/01/telangana-34-self-rule-and-self-respect.html

      Clearly we were talking about self-rule and self-respect much before formation of SKC Committee.

      Delete
  3. So the collective effort from SeemaAndhra in Hyderabad should be abandoned ?
    Stalling of Telangana formation in 2009 and approving it in 2013 are both bad policies from Congress, neither of the groups need to rejoice. You can't expect someone to build a city and give up the fruits of their hardwork to lazy people.

    If nizam suppressed you innocent people then do not show your anger on Andhrites. If Telangana never merged with Andhra it would have been backward like other Nizam areas like in Nanded, Parbhani and Aurangabad. Instead of burning with jealousy your politicians should develop Telangana area, or be part of booming Hyderabad along with all from state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the collective effort from SeemaAndhra in Hyderabad should be abandoned ?

      If Seemandhras fight for rolling back the decision to create Telangana, then definitely people of Telangana will consider it to be another attempt by Seemandhra people to keep Telangana as an internal colony. Therefore, all such attempts to stop the formation of Telangana will be considered anti-Telangana.

      If you keep working against the interests of Telangana, why should people of Telangana accept it?

      Why should Telangana be part of united Andhra Pradesh when none of its demands and concerns were met in united Andhra Pradesh? Why didn't Seemandhras pass GO 610 in the last four years to show their love and affection towards people of Telangana?

      Why do you think you can assume you can live with a region against its will?

      Delete
    2. If nizam suppressed you innocent people then do not show your anger on Andhrites.

      We raised arms against Nizam when we were suppressed. It is called Sayudha Poratam.

      We raised protests Andhras when we were suppressed by Andhras. It is called Telangana Movement.

      Delete
    3. When you raised arms against Nizam that was justifiable.
      Now we are in a democracy and protests against Andhrites are meaningless as telangana politicians have enough power to empower telangana, as is the case with any region in India.

      Delete
    4. If Seemandhras fight for rolling back the decision to create Telangana, then definitely people of Telangana will consider it to be another attempt by Seemandhra people to keep Telangana as an internal colony. Therefore, all such attempts to stop the formation of Telangana will be considered anti-Telangana.
      >> You are not in a colony, its a democracy. Technically each and every person has equal weightage, you need to exercise it.

      If you keep working against the interests of Telangana, why should people of Telangana accept it?
      >> How is SeemaAndhra working against Telangana ? It is called competition, raise up to it.

      >> Why should Telangana be part of united Andhra Pradesh when none of its demands and concerns were met in united Andhra Pradesh? Why didn't Seemandhras pass GO 610 in the last four years to show their love and affection towards people of Telangana?
      In a democracy and real world there is no spoon feeding. If you want equal rights you need to show equal responsibilities. Telangana has been irresponsible in electing incompetent politicians like most of India. Elect the right people and Telangana will be on par with other regions.

      >> Why do you think you can assume you can live with a region against its will?
      In a democratic country a particular group of people do not own a region, Telangana is as much yours as anyone else.

      Delete
    5. protests against Andhrites are meaningless

      Our protests are for creation of Telangana as a separate state. Why is it meaningless? Didn't Andhras fight for a separate state from Madras State in 1952-53?

      Delete
    6. You are not in a colony, its a democracy. Technically each and every person has equal weightage, you need to exercise it.

      I think that's a simplistic, and I would rather say, a very naive and foolish view of how a multicultural, multilingual, pluralistic society actually works. Article 3 of Indian Constitution was envisioned to ensure that minority regions get justice. So, don't assume that every person has equal weightage. Laws, rules, administrative zones, reservations, states, are made to impart equality.

      When the existing system is not able to impart that equality Indian Constitution provides mechanisms to make the necessary changes - and one of those changes envisioned in Indian Constitution is Article 3 - empowering the Parliament (not State Assembly) to create new states.

      This article in the Indian Constitution was created with the then demand of Andhra State in mind. So, Andhra State was formed because Andhras felt they are going to lose all opportunities to the well-read, well-entrenched, and majority Tamils.

      The same article today will deliver a statehood to Telangana.

      Delete
    7. How is SeemaAndhra working against Telangana ? It is called competition, raise up to it.

      Thankfully Indian Constitution, Indian Administration, Indian democracy does not share your view point. There is no competition between states or regions to grab resources and opportunities. Access to opportunity and resources, thankfully, is not treated as Olympic Games. Each region is entitled its fair share. If that region does not get its due share in an united state, they can make a case for a separate state, like how Andhras did in 1952-53. It is not about a competition wherein Tamils now get onto streets to oppose the formation of Andhra State. Back then Gujarathis let Maharashtra go, and Tamils let Andhras go. But today, Seemandhras launch themselves into the Ugliest Movement in the World to oppose formation of Telangana, against the wishes of Telangana, coercing and forcing them to stay united against their wishes.

      Delete
    8. >> Our protests are for creation of Telangana as a separate state. Why is it meaningless? Didn't Andhras fight for a separate state from Madras State in 1952-53?
      Andhrites fought for separate state when India's democracy was in infancy. The merits of linguistic states are questionable. Just because Hyderabad was part of Telangana before merger, doesn't mean the effort and money put in creating international standard Hyderabad after merger falls exclusively in Telangana's rights. Hyderabad's rise is due to collective effort, not Telangana's sole effort.

      Delete
    9. In a democratic country a particular group of people do not own a region, Telangana is as much yours as anyone else.

      Not really.

      Andhras own Vizag and Rayalaseema people own Tirupathi and not Tamils or Oriya people.

      You can go and live in any city as free citizens, but Telugus cannot go flood Mangalore and then claim it as part of Andhra Pradesh.

      Delete
    10. In a democracy and real world there is no spoon feeding. If you want equal rights you need to show equal responsibilities. Telangana has been irresponsible in electing incompetent politicians like most of India. Elect the right people and Telangana will be on par with other regions.

      That's a warped logic. I am happy to know that world view does not share your devious thinking.

      If there is no spoon feeding, why did Andhras fight for Andhra State?

      Indians had elections, and they elected their own leaders, like Nehru, Patel, as their leaders in British Government, and yet, we asked for self-rule, why?

      British could have said that 'Indians have to pay the price for electing incompetent leaders and therefor deserve to be ruled by us'.

      Thankfully, they did not go by your warped logic.

      Sorry, but you need to grow up a bit before you can discuss these topics. I mean, we cannot discuss Theory of Relativity with a six-year old, can they?

      Delete
    11. >>>> You are not in a colony, its a democracy. Technically each and every person has equal weightage, you need to exercise it.

      >> I think that's a simplistic, and I would rather say, a very naive and foolish view of how a multicultural, multilingual, pluralistic society actually works. Article 3 of Indian Constitution was envisioned to ensure that minority regions get justice. So, don't assume that every person has equal weightage. Laws, rules, administrative zones, reservations, states, are made to impart equality.

      When the existing system is not able to impart that equality Indian Constitution provides mechanisms to make the necessary changes - and one of those changes envisioned in Indian Constitution is Article 3 - empowering the Parliament (not State Assembly) to create new states.

      This article in the Indian Constitution was created with the then demand of Andhra State in mind. So, Andhra State was formed because Andhras felt they are going to lose all opportunities to the well-read, well-entrenched, and majority Tamils.

      The same article today will deliver a statehood to Telangana.

      >> Telangana politicians are seeking protection from their incompetency, in the form of separation. With sizeable representation in Assembly and Parliament if they could not do justice to Telangana, what would they be able to achieve after separation ? Its just comfort zone Telangana is seeking when faced with competition. Equal opportunity should be provided to all citizens no matter which part of the country they come from. Lack of equal opportunity is not an excuse to keep splitting the states.

      Delete
    12. >> In a democratic country a particular group of people do not own a region, Telangana is as much yours as anyone else.

      Not really.

      Andhras own Vizag and Rayalaseema people own Tirupathi and not Tamils or Oriya people.

      You can go and live in any city as free citizens, but Telugus cannot go flood Mangalore and then claim it as part of Andhra Pradesh.

      * Andhrites do not own Vizag exclusively, Rayalaseema does not own Tirupati exclusively. All the folks in the country have equal claim on them.

      * No one creates states by moving to a region, they compete where they are and make a living. When you want a state to be split and bring in protectionism for telangana folks and kick out SeemsAndhrites, its not ok. There will be fight back that you see now.

      Delete
  4. >> In a democracy and real world there is no spoon feeding. If you want equal rights you need to show equal responsibilities. Telangana has been irresponsible in electing incompetent politicians like most of India. Elect the right people and Telangana will be on par with other regions.

    That's a warped logic. I am happy to know that world view does not share your devious thinking.
    * World view is to be competitive, protectionism only leads to unproductiveness.

    If there is no spoon feeding, why did Andhras fight for Andhra State?
    * What was done eons ago has no bearing today, as the capital city has been collectively developed.

    Indians had elections, and they elected their own leaders, like Nehru, Patel, as their leaders in British Government, and yet, we asked for self-rule, why?
    * And India was still under Queen's command. Telangana is not under Andhra's command they have their politicians and they should work in developing Telangana region. A Telangana MP has as much weightage as any other MP in the country.

    British could have said that 'Indians have to pay the price for electing incompetent leaders and therefor deserve to be ruled by us'.
    * You are in a pure democracy prior to independence you were in autocratic rule with limited freedom/democracy. You are comparing apples and oranges.

    Thankfully, they did not go by your warped logic.
    * In face of an argument, only warps are visible.

    Sorry, but you need to grow up a bit before you can discuss these topics. I mean, we cannot discuss Theory of Relativity with a six-year old, can they?
    >>Juveniles throw a fit and want their own space when they can't compete. Now the topic from Telangana has crossed over to theory of relativity. Sure enough I am not competent to discuss theory of relativity neither am I six-year old. May be you are reincarnation of one of the 4 scientists who truly understood it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What was done eons ago has no bearing today

    We do not agree with that. We believe that we in Telangana are paying for the foolishness of getting into an arrangement called Andhra Pradesh based on Gentlemen's Agreement. Our constitutional protections were violated, our GOs are unimplemented. We no longer subscribe to this experiment called Andhra Pradesh. So, what was done eons ago has a strong bearing on what is happening today in Telangana. So, we cannot escape it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You probably were not even born when it was done, but seem to oppose vehemently four generations later. Your politicians need to implement the GOs. The demographics of then and now Hyderabad is not the same to do simple attach detach operation. There are crores of people involved in migration to the capital.

      Delete
    2. our politicians need to implement the GOs.

      They cannot because they are a minority in a state which is ruled by the majority of Seemandhra - hence the demand for a new state. Hope you get it now ;-)

      Delete
    3. The demographics of then and now Hyderabad is not the same to do simple attach detach operation. There are crores of people involved in migration to the capital.

      That has not stopped creation of Maharashtra, or Andhra State. That has not stopped creation of Jharkhand or Chattisgarh. Changed demographics is not a good enough reason to stop formation of a state. If that is the case, no state would allow immigrants into their cities.

      Delete
    4. >> our politicians need to implement the GOs.

      They cannot because they are a minority in a state which is ruled by the majority of Seemandhra - hence the demand for a new state. Hope you get it now ;-)

      * Partly true, absolute total numbers are not in Telangana's favour, but similar backwardness is present in uttara andhra and rayalaseema, and the politicians from there could have easily related to Telangana's plight.
      * Telangana politicians will need to collaborate other region politicians and get their GOs implemented if they are justifiable in this age. If you demand for you rights only, there is bound to be a fight. And very likely there wont be clear majority in hypothetical Telangana state, now whom are you going to blame ?
      * If any state split had happend with public threating like 'we will kick you out' followed by empty rehtoric like 'you are safe here'. Those splits would have never seen the day of light

      Delete
    5. * Partly true, absolute total numbers are not in Telangana's favour, but similar backwardness is present in uttara andhra and rayalaseema, and the politicians from there could have easily related to Telangana's plight.

      It is my prognosis that Rayalaseema will be a separate state pretty soon - can't say when. There is a palpable disenchantment already. One thing you can do after Telangana separates is that you take care of Rayalaseema so that they don't feel the same way about you the way Telanganas feel today.

      There are many lessons to be learnt if you pay attention to Telangana Movement.

      Telangana politicians will need to collaborate other region politicians and get their GOs implemented if they are justifiable in this age.

      The assumption here is that the leaders of other regions are ready to honor the agreements signed. The assumption is that the people of other regions understand our case.

      In fact, you are a good example. You are actually a testament to our profound belief that you will never be able to understand our concerns. After four years of struggle, you come up and ask some basic questions about our Movement - clearly you have not put efforts to understand our demands.

      If you did, as an act of good faith you would have implemented GO 610 - which you didn't.

      Delete
  6. as the capital city has been collectively developed.

    Is the Samaikyandhra Movement all about Hyderabad or is it about staying united?

    If it is about staying united, what are overt moves made by Seemandhras in the last four years to ensure Telanganas let go of their aspirations to stay united in Andhra Pradesh?

    Name one such move.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lets call a spade a spade. The three major regions were developed on the sidelines, but primary focus was in building Hyderabad the capital city.

      The sense of entitlement of Telangana wont stand. Politicians of Telangana have to develop it. Whatever efforts went into making Hyderabad as to what it is now was done by three generations later after the merger.

      Delete
    2. We believe that Seemandhras have to find a new capital for themselves and develop it. Their love affair with Telangana and its cities has to end - because we reject that love and affection.

      Coming to sharing of property - as in case of divorce - cities are not shared. They stay where they are. You can seek compensation or whatever package from New Delhi.

      Delete
  7. No one creates states by moving to a region, they compete where they are and make a living. When you want a state to be split and bring in protectionism for telangana folks and kick out SeemsAndhrites, its not ok. There will be fight back that you see now.

    You are getting confused between too many topics here. What is your essential argument against bifurcation? Is it hyderabad or is it united AP?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Naive maybe the question, but neither region cares about anything other than the capital Hyderabad. And rightly so, as the focus was in bringing Hyderabad to international standards.

      Delete
  8. Naive maybe the question, but neither region cares about anything other than the capital Hyderabad. And rightly so, as the focus was in bringing Hyderabad to international standards.

    There is a gross misunderstanding of the reality in that assumption - when you say - "neither region cares about anything other than the capital Hyderabad."

    Not true.

    Telangana sentiment was always alive for the last sixty years - though it may have been pushed into the background - mostly due to Naxalite Movement. And Hyderabad as a city did not feature as the moot point in that sentiment, because it was naturally assumed that Hyderabad is inside Telangana - which it is.

    I think that most Seemandhras believe that Telanganas are fighting only for Hyderabad, because they tend to see their own reflection - which says that that they oppose formation of Telangana only because they don't want to let go of Hyderabad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is true that the intention was not about Hyderabad to begin with -- I will give you that. But the reality now is that it has become bone of contention. Neverthless what has happend 60 years back has nothing to do with past few generations which have developed Hyderabad collectively, so no one can be kicked out overtly or discreetly with protectionism.

      Delete
    2. But the reality now is that it has become bone of contention.

      Seemandhras have made it a bone of contention by making unreasonable demands like making Hyderabad a UT, or centrally administered, or as joint-capital. They should have just let go of Telangana, but they don't.

      Delete
    3. If our energy has been spent for Hyderabad, it callous to say 'let go'

      Delete
    4. If our energy has been spent for Hyderabad, it callous to say 'let go'

      Is it more callous than saying Telanganas can't have a separate state just because of your love for Hyderabad?

      Let me ask you one question - why did you develop Hyderabad? Why did you not develop other cities in Andhra? Why did you have so much affection for Hyderabad, especially after our 1969 Telangana Movement? Did you not realize that we would become separate one day?

      We always knew in our hearts that we would become a separate state one day.

      If you did not realize our aspiration, that's not our problem. You are paying the price today for your apathy by losing Hyderabad, the way we have paid price for sixty years to live under subjugation for our foolishness of merging with Andhra State in 1956.

      Delete
    5. >> Is it more callous than saying Telanganas can't have a separate state just because of your love for Hyderabad?
      * What has been jointly developed stays joint, what hasn't can be claimed individually. This generation is effected by what happend in past 2 decades.

      >> If you did not realize our aspiration, that's not our problem. You are paying the price today for your apathy by losing Hyderabad, the way we have paid price for sixty years to live under subjugation for our foolishness of merging with Andhra State in 1956.
      * Whatever aspiration you folks have, is irrelevant when folks from everywhere came to the capital and developed and invested legally. Your argument has weightage if it was a different country, its not, wake up.
      * And again, in democracy there is no subjugation

      Delete
    6. What has been jointly developed stays joint

      That's a nonsensical notion. May be that's how you are taught history in Seemandhra - no wonder we see them participating in the world's ugliest movement.

      Almost everything in India is joint-developed. Every port, every public institution, every central institute, every city, every dam, every canal, every road, every railway station.

      And yet, new districts are created, new states are formed. And when new districts or new states are formed, the infrastructure that is developed in a town or a city or a state which goes with the separation is not claimed by other region - because it leads to extremely nonsensical and ridiculous scenarios.

      If such ridiculousness were to prevail, every city will have to be divided, every port will have to be divided, every town will have to be divided, every railway station has to be divided.

      History has many examples to let you know why such attempts have failed and therefore are not mooted.

      Seemandhras, naturally, with really skewed education, are now out on streets armed with warped logic.

      You should read about what happened when Madras was claimed by Andhras, and when Bombay was claimed by Gujarat. You will get insights into such claims and you would stop making such ridiculous claims - of course, the assumption here is that you will make sense of it. If not, you will continue to babble like Lagadapati.

      Delete
    7. Its ugly when Andhra protests democratically but pleasing when Telangana protests, do we smell hypocrisy ?

      Its simple logic, investments and energy were spent in India and in their state capital, and they are callously asked to let it go ? and we talk of tyranny in modern day India ?

      Now our education is questioned, which is the very fact that you folks feel threatened ?

      When you loose an argument, it becomes warped logic. You folks don't want to address your problems, you want to fight for your rights, but with minimal responsibility in making of Hyderabad.

      Delete
    8. Its ugly when Andhra protests democratically but pleasing when Telangana protests, do we smell hypocrisy ?

      Its ugly not because of their protests, but for the underlying reasons for their protests. Their protest is to keep united, against the wishes of Telangana people, coercing them.

      How come not a single Seemandhra person in those protests wakes up and realizes, 'hold on a second, we are asking for unity with Telangana, don't we need their support to maintain this unity? how come Telanganas are not part of this Samaikyandhra movement? How can we call it united AP movement without participation of Telangana?'

      There is something glaringly missing in the romantic image you have created for yourselves and nobody seems to notice it. That makes it really ugly.

      Now our education is questioned, which is the very fact that you folks feel threatened ?

      We don't feel threatened. We just don't like what you did to us all these sixty years using the clout of majority. There's a big difference.

      You guys think we will not prosper after the separation. But we strongly believe we will prosper after the separation, once we are free from the tyranny of your majority.

      Delete
  9. Name: Softy

    Separation seems to be near and in a way, Seema Andhra people can consider the separation to be a good riddance of Telangana people, esp. if the latter really hate 'Andhrollu'. On the average, Seema Andhra walas have better potential than their indolent and 'amma bailellinado' counterparts. Some Telangana people whose sense will prevail will lament the separation after a few decades. However, such sensible people in Telangana will be very small...

    See the so called educated people in Telangana like Mr. Sujai compares the Andhra walas with Britishers. What to speak of common people in Telangana? Even if Mr. Sujai is true that Andhra people are like the British, let's understand that British were better and more rule bound than their Nizam. [For KCR and his followers, Nizams were the best!]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Softy:
      That's exactly what we want. We don't interference from Seemandhras anymore, so that we can hold our own politicians accountable and get the things we wanted for our people for a long time - for example, water.

      Seemandhras have to let go, and leave us to our own fates. Whether good or bad.

      Even British thought that India would go to dogs. Whether we would have been happier being part of British or not is an irrelevant question - nobody in the right mind would like India to be back in British Empire as a colony.

      Delete
    2. Its oxymoron, your politicians are accountable now and later. Separation does not make them more accountable. If they have excuses now, they will have later too.

      Softy:
      We need not be vengeful for Telangana, its unfortunate that Nizam ruled Telangana. But none of the past wrongdoings of Nizam give an excuse for separation of collective work as in today's Hyderabad.

      Delete
    3. Separation does not make them more accountable.

      It does, that's why we form our own state.

      Delete
    4. But none of the past wrongdoings of Nizam give an excuse for separation of collective work as in today's Hyderabad.

      You are deliberately missing the picture. We want a separate state, not because of what Nizam did to us, but what Andhras did to us in the last sixty years.

      You have to mature up and face the harsh reality, that we are no longer ready to be suppressed anymore in united state through your tyranny of majority.

      Delete
    5. In democracy there is no suppression, and tyranny is pretty strong word. You folks have an illusion that Andhrites have taken the role of Nizam, which is ridiculous to think in a democracy.

      In the past 60 years crores of people have moved from every part of AP(India) to hyderabad and developed it, one fine day you cant ask them to get out.

      Delete
    6. >>Separation does not make them more accountable.

      It does, that's why we form our own state.
      * You form your own hypothetical state and when the ruling government has no majority like now, you will be back to square one. Your politicians are as much accountable now or in future. They are presently giving excuses of Andhra domination for your lack of development.

      Delete
  10. In democracy there is no suppression, and tyranny is pretty strong word.

    It democracy, there is scope for suppression. And it is called tyranny of the majority.
    [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority]

    Seemandhra is a text book example of tyranny of the majority. You need to read further and become more educated.

    We in Telangana have educated ourselves and I can say with confidence that none of your leaders or activists can engage us in any sensible discussion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is tons of information on web that will conflict your textbook examples, get into the real world.

      If SeemaAndhra behaved as a majority as you allege, Rayalaseema and north Andhra would not have been backward (as comparable to Telangana). Plain and simple your leaders and leaders from Rayalaseema/uttara-andhra were never enterprising and lost the boat.

      Are you serious ? Have looked at KCR and his relatives participate in discussions ? Don't turn a blind eye, introspect.

      Delete
    2. If SeemaAndhra behaved as a majority as you allege, Rayalaseema and north Andhra would not have been backward

      It is up to North Andhra and Rayalaseema to fight for better development. And when they do fight, we will extend our support. As far as we are concerned, just because they don't rise up doesn't mean we will not. Not all colonies rose up against their colonial masters at the same time. Some colonies started their fight only after seeing independence of other colonies. We believe that North Andhra and Rayalaseema will soon rise up. And it all depends on how your new state will treat them. If lessons are learnt from Telangana Movement, it will be good for your new state.

      Plain and simple your leaders and leaders from Rayalaseema/uttara-andhra were never enterprising and lost the boat.

      But if the same apathy that you express here continues to dominate your polity, then creation of new states out of Seemandhra is inevitable.

      Thanks.

      Delete
    3. Your intention is not be constructive, if absolute numbers were not in your favor you could have formed alliances.
      No, you folks are divisive and its clear that you want SeemaAndhra to be broken more. Sorry I don't think there is an intellectual connect here. You win, I loose.

      Delete
    4. No, you folks are divisive

      Yes, we are divisive. And we see nothing wrong in it.

      its clear that you want SeemaAndhra to be broken more

      No. Not really. I do not wish for it. But I see that you guys refuse to learn anything. After four years of our movement, your knowledge about our movement and demands is NIL. It is not just about you - but entire leadership in Seemandhra.

      Therefore, it is my prognosis that there is a very good chance that Rayalaseema will be separated. And that is not a wish to separate you, but my reading of your attitudes and how that will contribute to another breakup.

      I also believe that if you go through an introspection and understand why Telanganas wanted a separate state, may be you will find some good answers - and my hope is that those answers will help you in addressing the issues and problems of Rayalaseema and Uttara Andhra. And if you do that, my feeling is that your state of Seemandhra will remain united for a very long long time.

      But it all depends on what you learn from Telangana Movement - my reading (I could be wrong) is that you have not learnt anything.

      Delete
  11. Your politicians are as much accountable now or in future.

    Disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sujai,

    You are expecting too much from Andhra! When people from telangana like you hate andhras to the core and you expect them to love you? haha..

    I am aware of give and take policy but it seems you don't agree to this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But we are not the ones who are promoting 'unity'.

      Delete
  13. I wish Gandhi should have thought like you and wonder where India would be. Just a thought. As you are full of hatred for Telugus. When people suffer a lot then only they can hate others. Glad that people from Seemandhra do not hate telangana as smuch as you hate telugus. It's ok, after all the pain you went through, you need to get something. I think, telugu people should let it go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you saying that only Seemandhras are Telugus?

      Delete
  14. How did Nizam become one of the richest in the world?What were the produces of Hyderabad state that were exported to fetch him immense wealth?Was agriculture contributed to the exports? or was it the coal?
    Before we are flooded with answers to these questions we can recapitulate that Nizam in fact sold Coastal area to British and ceded Rayalaseema to them and got money.And also he ignored other parts of his kingdom and nourished only Hyderabad.Thanks to the formation of AP, people of Telangana region got rid of Kannada and Marathi speaking cousins.After 1956 also,the practice of developing the capital city at the cost of other parts of the state is continued.Now T-vadis want to get rid of Coastal and Seema people to enjoy exclusive right over Hyderabad...This is day light robbery

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks to the formation of AP, people of Telangana region got rid of Kannada and Marathi speaking cousins.

      Why do we have to thank AP for that? Why is it a good thing? For all you know, may be we would have been better off in Hyderabad State with our cousins, than with Seemandhras - because Hyderabad State had well-established Mulki Rules which were honored. In the united AP, Seemandhras did everything they can to dilute or throw away those Mulki Rules.

      The breakup of Hyderabad State was engineered partly by Andhra State leaders so that they can get Hyderabad as their state capital.

      They tried to get Madras as their capital - they failed. They tried to get Hyderabad as their capital - they succeeded - but for only 57 years.

      Now, they should build their own capital city instead of trying to rob other people of their capital cities.

      Delete
  15. Now I understand why you are unable to carry out any meaningful discussion..you pick up some irrelevant point and harp on it.
    When I said 'Thanks to the formation of AP...', like a schoolboy you took the literal meaning of ' thanks to..'.Surely any grown up would know that ' thanks to' means because of ( without any gratitude cropping up).In that harping on you conveniently ignored my questions...how did Nizam become one of the richest?
    My point is thatHyderabad owes its eminence to not onlyTelangana people but also to their Telugu speaking brothers and Kannada and Marathi speaking cousins.That being the case you can not claim sole right over Hyderabad ..
    I am amazed that people in this age can talk reverently about archaic mulki rules!!
    There is a tinge of stereotyping in your views..What happened during Andhra state formation can not have a bearing on the present day agitation.Those leaders are long gone and to stereotype the present day leaders with them would be meaningless..Itis much worse than meaningless.It leads to faulty reasoning.
    Iam sorry to say this ..but you are being arrogant while posting the last sentence.
    When Jai Andhra movement started ( demanding separation without any claim on capital) why did T-separatists keep quiet?Why did they not take advantage of the agitation going on the other part and achieve their so called long cherished dream? It is simply because 1969 movement was engineered by unemployed politicians and they did not want to start it after 3 years again.KCR spoke against 610 GO ,Kadiyam ,Devender,Nagam praised Andhra teachers...mind you , when all of them were in power....in the state Assembly!
    I talked about arrogance because you can not dismiss the claim of Seemandhra people just like that ( please try to answer the questions Iraised). If you assume that posture it is you, who would like Seemandhra people getting robbed of their genuine share.
    Please do not forget that the Congress decision was purely based on electoral gains..remember Digvijay broaching merging of TRS in the next breath?..You did not get Telangana because you deserved it..it was awarded to you by petty calculators ...

    ReplyDelete
  16. You did not get Telangana because you deserved it..it was awarded to you by petty calculators ...

    The same can be said about Independence to India in 1947, and the formation of Andhra State in 1953. Political compulsions and other extraneous events have played a role in both these two events. But that does not make those events any less significant for the people who benefited from it, namely, the Indians and the Andhras.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Sujai for proving my point that you are not capable of any meaningful discussion..
      When I said that Telangana was awarded to you by petty electoral calculators , I was still continuing my argument that Seemandhra people have a genuine claim over Hyderabad and it was unfair on your part to ask them to ' go and build your capital ' because you have not earned a legitimate right over Hyderabad ( neither have you earned separate state. It was due to a (mis)calculation of number of MP seats).Only to point out that your stance would boarder on arrogance I said about separate state was awarded.As it is your wont you picked up the wrong interpretation and harped on it and left the other points in my post unaddressed.
      When in power almost all T-politicians had no complaint against andhra dominance..till the beginning of this century.Then why call it a struggle of 60 years?
      And by the way .. How did Nizam become one of the richest in the world?

      Delete
    2. bharadwaja:

      Seemandhra people have a genuine claim over Hyderabad

      What claim do Seemandhras have over Hyderabad, that is so different to the claims Telangana people have over Vizag, Rajamundry, Kakinada, Guntur, Vijayawada, Tirupathi, Anantapur, Sriharikota, harbors and ports?

      it was unfair on your part to ask them to ' go and build your capital'

      It is not unfair. If a state gets divided or district gets divided, a new head quarters are built. This happens the world over in any division. And it happened nearly 16 times in India with respect to state divisions, including when Andhra State, though briefly, held its head quarters in Kurnool for 3 years.

      Delete
    3. It was the taxes paid directly or through French,British,Portugese etc by Seemandhra region was partly responsible for the establishment of Hyderabad..And after 1956 it goes without saying.
      You remember that I asked you a couple of times the secret behind Nizam becoming one of the richest in the world and you chose to ignore the question?Andhras have legitimate right over Hyderabad period because they have contributed to Nizam's wealth.
      That is why it is unfair to ask them to go and build your capital.In fact the onus of building a capital should be on those who are crying for separation.What already happened 16times has no relevance to the present scenario.

      Delete
    4. It was the taxes paid directly or through French,British,Portugese etc by Seemandhra region was partly responsible for the establishment of Hyderabad..And after 1956 it goes without saying.

      No matter how much taxes you pay while living in a city, or contribute to its growth through taxes, that city does not belong to you when separation happens.

      Many Telugus live in Bangalore and pay taxes there but they cannot claim the city for themselves. When division happens, the region which doesn't have the city within geographical limits has to let go of the city.

      Though Gujarathis claimed they were the ones who built Mumbai, the city was awarded to Maharashtrians who were seeking separate statehood. The same applies to Hyderabad - Seemandhras have to let go no matter how much taxes they paid to built it.

      The reason is very simple. Vizag, Rajamundry, Kakinada, Vijayawada, Guntur, Tirupathi were all built using the taxes collected from Telangana people. Once the division happens, Telangana people have to forgo their rights or claims over those cities.

      Delete
  17. ok Sujai, what else we should let go?
    We are letting go our jobs for telanganas,
    We are letting go our schools for telanganas
    we are letting go our colleges for telanganas
    we are letting go our lifes hard earned money/investment oppurtunities for telangas
    we are letting go our home values in drain for telanganas
    we are letting go our development for telanganas.

    what should we let go? any more ? tell us
    are you satisfied ?
    or should we let go our homes and families and clothes and go naked? then you will be satisfied ?
    what should we let go? any more ? tell us

    what is this picture of samikandra? its not samaikandhra its seemandhra. this is what you think in your heads.
    once telangana is formed loot of andhras can now begin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should let go of Telangana. Period. You can keep your jobs, your schools, especially your clothes! :-)

      Delete
    2. You Telanganas should let go Hyderabad. Period. You You can keep your jobs, you can play, and especially your drinks :)

      Delete
    3. but you people need not to go any period , any period u enjoy ur recording dances :))).

      Delete
  18. First Telangana. And then like this video says http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awWwvRfzEAg&feature=c4-overview&list=UUC2T59lhmffYZ8KK_nPS86w

    The intentions are beyond just a separate telangana.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Bharadwaj: it is pointless to talk with Sujai, he is very irrational. I don't see any difference between Sujai and the way KTR/Harish Rao speak their mind. You can't fix stupid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >>it is pointless to talk with Sujai,

      Yet you keep come back and talk, halarious.

      Delete
    2. This is coming from someone who posts anonymously in his own blog? lol

      Delete
  20. Samaikyandhra movement does not make any sense given that most of the Telanganites do not want to be part of united Andhra Pradesh. The state should be divided into TG, Andhra and Rayalaseema (to prevent future issues between Seema and Andhra). Hyderabad should also be made a separate state (not UT) so that we are fair to Hyderabadis who don't consider themselves Telanganites. When I say Hyderabadis, I mean not just Seemandhra people but also others like Muslims (who constitute about 40% of the Hyderabad population) and other non seemandhra Indians. I agree there is a percentage of ethnic telanganites in Hyderabad that want Hyd to be part of TG but they are minority. This can be proved very easily by elections. For example, TRS never won in GHMC polls because of this very simple reason. Also, ministers like Danam Nagendar and Mukesh have been talking about Hyderabad being a separate state for years now despite they both being Telanganites themselves. The reason is simple, because that's what their constituents want. Now Sujai will ask why are there no Dharnas or agitations by these people asking for separate Hyderabad state. That is because they don't want goondas with pink kanduvas chasing them. Many of these people are educated and working class people or they have businesses and they don't want to deal with this mess but if there is a referendum or elections, they will speak their mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Raj:

      This can be proved very easily by elections. For example, TRS never won in GHMC polls because of this very simple reason.

      We believe that most people in Seemandhra are OK with bifurcation. They do not want to keep the state united. The reason is simple, all the political parties of Seemandhra agreed for bifurcation and they were elected. Therefore it is clear that almost all people are supporters of bifurcation.

      ;-)

      Delete

    2. We believe that most people in Seemandhra are OK with bifurcation. They do not want to keep the state united. The reason is simple, all the political parties of Seemandhra agreed for bifurcation and they were elected. Therefore it is clear that almost all people are supporters of bifurcation.


      Seemandhra parties were elected because they never took a strong position on TG. All they gave was vague statements like it is up to the central government or we are not against division etc. So nobody (in both regions) took them seriously. Seemandhra people voted for those parties for other reasons like free electricity, 2 Rs/kg rice etc.

      But TRS is not like those evil Andhra parties. TRS is a udhyama party. Its sole purpose of existence is to achieve Telanganga and nothing else. If you are voting for TRS, it means you strongly want separate TG state. So we want TRS to win few seats in Hyderabad and prove that the sentiment exists in Hyderabadis as well.

      Nice try though :-)

      Delete
    3. Raj:

      If you are voting for TRS, it means you strongly want separate TG state.

      But you need to understand that every other party came to Telangana to tell people of Telangana that they are the only party who can bring Telangana.

      The cause of Telangana was embraced by all parties - when the local leaders spoke to Telangana people, they all promised to deliver Telangana. Congress leaders said only Sonia can deliver on Telangana. TDP leaders said that Naidu is the only one who can give Telangana (and they even tied up with TRS). PRP came in to cite Chiranjeevi's speech in which he clearly endorsed Telangana.

      Therefore, people who wanted Telangana voted for TDP, PRP, Congress, BJP and TRS. Only MIM was against bifurcation.

      In a democracy, a mainstream cause is embraced by all parties and therefore electoral wins of one party alone cannot be the measure of the sentiment.

      If you are mature and intelligent you will understand this.

      Delete

    4. Therefore, people who wanted Telangana voted for TDP, PRP, Congress, BJP and TRS. Only MIM was against bifurcation.


      I agree with you that it was the case before 2009. After December 9th 2009 statement the true colors of all parties came out.
      CBN took U turn and provoked seemandhra TDP leaders to do mass resignations.
      PRP took samaikyandhra stand.
      Jagan showed samaikyandhra placard in the parliament.

      Because all these parties changed their stand, congress also used that excuse to revert their decision on Dec 23rd 2009.

      At this point, all these parties were branded as anti-telangana and no one would believe that they would genuinely grant TG. But we have seen in local body polls in Hyd and some parts of TG that these parties have won and TRS lost. Wonder why?

      Delete
  21. Raj:

    Hyderabad should also be made a separate state (not UT) so that we are fair to Hyderabadis who don't consider themselves Telanganites.

    Yes, we should make all cities in India separate states, because none of the cities in India have majority local population. Bangalore has more immigrants than Kannadigas, therefore Bangalore should be made a separate state. Mumbai has more immigrants than Maharashtrians, therefore Mumbai should be made a separate state.

    Therefore, I propose the following to you. Please make states of Bangalore and Mumbai before we start addressing Hyderabad.

    but also others like Muslims (who constitute about 40% of the Hyderabad population)

    Muslims of Hyderabad have not asked for a separate state - so you must be seeing a movement which doesn't exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How come you (Sujai) never respond to genuine questions or fears raised by so called settlers in Hyderabad such as the one raised by Raj: "That is because they don't want goondas with pink kanduvas chasing them"

      I am sure you are not going to post this comment or may be you will just to make a point that you are rational. You cannot guarantee safety to common people in Hyd nor does the new government.

      PS: you edited my comment and posted as per your wish. You are just pathetic.

      Delete
    2. Raj said:

      That is because they don't want goondas with pink kanduvas chasing them

      One can create artificial fears saying the people who have such fears are not coming out in open to express it because they fear reprisals. That's a lame excuse.


      I could go on argument saying that many Dalits, BCs of Vizag don't want to be with Seemandhra and therefore they should get UT. The same with Tirupathi, Rajamundry, Kakinada, Guntur, etc.

      It leads to some ridiculous conclusions when you start accounting for some imaginary voices.

      Raj includes support of Hyderabad Muslims into a demand for separate Hyderabad state. Please cite a single reference where Hyderabad Muslims demands separate state for Hyderabad.

      Delete
    3. Sujai said:

      Yes, we should make all cities in India separate states, because none of the cities in India have majority local population. Bangalore has more immigrants than Kannadigas, therefore Bangalore should be made a separate state. Mumbai has more immigrants than Maharashtrians, therefore Mumbai should be made a separate state.

      If the residents of those cities do not want to be part of their current state then they can have elections and vote for a party with a single point agenda of creating a separate state out of the city. If it's proved that an overwhelming majority of the city's residents do not want to be part of the current state, then they totally deserve to be a separate state. Just like how TRS proved the sentiments of people in TG districts.

      It make complete sense to make cities as separate states if the people want it that way so that they preserve their cosmopolitan nature. All ethnic groups will have representation in the government so nobody feels threatened or feel marginalized.

      For example, if Hyderabad becomes a separate state, Muslims get higher representation and their standard of living will improve. Seemandhra people will feel secure because they are not called 'Settlers' and they are not extorted.


      Raj includes support of Hyderabad Muslims into a demand for separate Hyderabad state. Please cite a single reference where Hyderabad Muslims demands separate state for Hyderabad


      I never said that Muslims are demanding separate Hyderabad state. All I said was, they don't call themselves Telanganites. BTW, MIM said they are opposed to dividing the state. They are also opposed to making Hyd a UT because UT will have only MPs and that means even less representation for their constituents. I don't know their official position on Hyd being a separate state. Anyway that point is moot since they are not ok with the division in the first place.


      One can create artificial fears saying the people who have such fears are not coming out in open to express it because they fear reprisals. That's a lame excuse.


      That is not a lame excuse. JP Narayana (a sitting MLA) was beaten up in the assembly. Nalamotu Chakravarthy was beaten up in Hyderabad because he published a book supporting united AP. Seemandhra employees are beaten up in secretariat. Many telugu actors were harassed and their shooting equipment was damaged because they were forced to say Jai Telangana and they refused to do so.

      Simple question: What happens to me If I stand anywhere in Hyderabad with a placard saying 'Hyderabad should be a separate state'
      We all know the answer.



      I could go on argument saying that many Dalits, BCs of Vizag don't want to be with Seemandhra and therefore they should get UT. The same with Tirupathi, Rajamundry, Kakinada, Guntur, etc


      TRS went to polls with a single point agenda of demanding separate TG state with Hyd as its capital. It won with record margins in most districts proving the people's sentiments. At the same time it lost badly in Hyd proving that Hyderabadis do not share the same sentiment.

      Let Vizag, Tirupati, Rajamundry and Guntur also have elections and see what people vote for.

      Telanganites want self rule and self respect. That is possible as long as TG is a separate state. Whether Hyd is included or not, you will have your own state, your own government, your own jobs in your state, you are still an upstream state so you get your fair share of river waters. So tell me, why should HYD be part of TG?

      Sorry If I'm asking hard questions, but please post this comment as I want a healthy debate on this topic. Thanks

      Delete
    4. Raj:

      If the residents of those cities do not want to be part of their current state then they can have elections and vote for a party with a single point agenda of creating a separate state out of the city.

      Voting for a single party with single point agenda to get a state is a stupid and ridiculous notion – one cannot bank on such a scenario in a democracy. If one were to expect such a scenario 16 states would not have formed in India. Andhras did not vote for a single party to get their Andhra State in 1953. To wait for that kind of a unanimous verdict to a single party with single party agenda to form a state is foolish in any democracy. If it happens, it is because of certain rare circumstances, like the way it happened in 1972 with TPS. But even that mandate was eventually hijacked.

      Usually the vote always gets divided amongst various parties in a democracy. That’s because the minute the sentiment grows to become mainstream, then most other parties also stand in line to tell you that they have embraced the same agenda – thereby diluting the votes. That’s what happened in Telangana. Every party promised Telangana to get a share of the vote.

      Indian constitution does not hold referendums. Even if it did, holding referendum the way you describe could result in ridiculous solutions. Suppose every pocket in Maharashtra is asked to vote. Gujarathis could breakaway a quarter of Mumbai, Tamils could take up a quarter, Biharis could take up another quarter. The same applies to Bangalore. Malayalees, Tamils, Kannadigas and Telugus can easily break city into four states. I describe the fallacy of breaking cities into states in:
      http://sujaiblog.blogspot.in/2010/03/telangana-53-raj-in-bangalore.html

      Delete
    5. Sujai, nobody said break up the city into multiple states. Hyderabad can be ONE separate state if majority of Hyderabadis want it that way. Hyderabad is greater in size and population than some states in India (ex: Goa) so it is a totally viable option.

      You didn't answer my question: How does exclusion of Hyd from TG state affect your self governance, self respect, jobs, river water etc?

      Lets say hypothetically you are given only two choices:

      1. Samaikyandhra
      2. TG state without Hyderabad

      I know I know, "Nothing short of TG with Hyd as its capital is acceptable to us". We have heard this statement way too many times from leaders on TV but lets just say for the sake of argument, you were presented with only the two options above. What would you pick? Hint: A genuine telanganite should any day go with option 2. At least you are getting your own state without others governing you.

      Let me ask you some more questions:
      What happens if congress does not deliver on its promise of creating TG with Hyd in next 6 - 8 months?
      If not, do you think a future government can grant TG? What if they have political compulsions like coalition partners from seemandhra who will threaten to withdraw support like CBN did when BJP was in power?
      Do you anticipate any less resistance from Seemandhra going forward?

      If the answer to the above questions is no, how/when do you think TG with Hyd as its capital will ever form?

      Delete
    6. Raj:

      How does exclusion of Hyd from TG state affect your...

      It does not make sense. Hyderabad is right in the middle of Telangana.

      Delete
    7. Raj:

      Lets say hypothetically you are given only two choices:
      1. Telangana with Hyderabad as capital and Seemandhra.
      2. Break up Seemandhra into eleven pieces.

      Which one would you choose?

      ;-)

      Delete
    8. Posing a counter question is not a response :) Anyway, you didn't clearly specify what those eleven pieces are so I don't have enough info to make a decision but assuming that one of those eleven pieces is separate Hyderabad state then I would pick option 2.


      It does not make sense. Hyderabad is right in the middle of Telangana.


      So what? It is not in the middle of different country. Instead of having two different states as neighbors (like Delhi), it will have only one state as neighbor.

      If I were you, I would look at ways of resolving this problem as soon as possible and not drag it on for the next 60 years.

      Delete
    9. Raj:

      You did not read the choices properly. I said 'breakup Seemandhra into eleven pieces'. So, Hyderabad is not one of the eleven pieces.

      Delete
    10. Raj:

      If I were you, I would look at ways of resolving this problem as soon as possible and not drag it on for the next 60 years.

      We know how to resolve it. Telangana is formed with Hyderabad as it capital city. Seemandhra creates a new capital city as soon as Telangana is formed. There won't be a joint-capital.

      No dragging business for next 60 years.

      Delete
    11. Raj:

      What happens if congress does not deliver on its promise of creating TG with Hyd in next 6 - 8 months?

      We will make sure Telangana is formed with Hyderabad capital before 2014 elections. We will also make sure that joint-capital business is thrown out discussions.

      Delete

    12. We know how to resolve it. Telangana is formed with Hyderabad as it capital city. Seemandhra creates a new capital city as soon as Telangana is formed. There won't be a joint-capital.

      No dragging business for next 60 years

      We will make sure Telangana is formed with Hyderabad capital before 2014 elections. We will also make sure that joint-capital business is thrown out discussions



      Sujai baba ne jyothish bol diya tho ab sab vaisa hi hoga. Chinta karne ki koyi zaroorat nahi :)

      I love your optimism Sujai. If congress high command decides to take a U turn there is absolutely NOTHING you can do about it other than writing another blog post like this: http://sujaiblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/telangana-xxv-congratulations-andhra.html. Yeah sure, you can do all the agitations again like you did after the Dec 24th 2009 second announcement but that might not change anything. So DON'T be so sure.

      Delete
    13. >>Lets say hypothetically you are given only two choices: 1. Samaikyandhra 2. TG state without Hyderabad

      First choice will for sure win in the Parliament, second one .. no way.

      So only a fool can give that second choice to pickup. Assuming Congress is not that much fool.

      Delete
  22. Raj: We propose that Tirupathi, Vijayawada, Vizag should be made UTs because there are many people in these cities who do not believe they are Seemandhras. They are not coming out because they fear Seemandhra people.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hi Sujai, I like your blog even though I disagree with your comments on Telangana. You seem to be very rational in all subjects but in case of Telangana your views are bit extreme sometimes. Let me clarify, I'm supporter for some more states in India may be around 5 more which have a strong case like Telangana, Vidarbha and reorganisation of UP to 3 states.I feel a state should be created based on considerable geographical size, population, avalability of resources, economic criteria, a Developed language, history, culture and identity (not on one of these alone). Telanagana and Vidarbha, UP re-org qualify on these parameters and other state demands dont form a very strong case.
    Old Andhra state was divided from Madras as per linguistic basis.This demand was based on linguistic organisation of states which congress party initially promised during independence time but didn't implement it. Contrary to what people say Andhra Pradesh or Vishalandhra(old andhra state which is now called seemaandhra + Telangana from old Hyderabad state) is not formed by agreements. It was formed as per lingusitic re-organisation states as per 1st SRC report on 1st Nov 1956. On the same day Kerala and Karnataka were formed, so AP is not formed uniquely. after few years Maharashtra, gujarat and other lingusitic states formed. Please refer to the news paper reports in 1955,1956 and 1st src report you will get to know the information. Yes in 1st SRC report there is a mention of Telangana and Vidarbha but 1st SRC didn't oppose Vishalandhra either. It also supported Vishalandhra on some criteria and also mentioned of Telangana state on some other criteria. Yes It also mentioned about some apprehensions of telangana people.
    Many telangana supporters say AP was formed by lobbying , agreements and for HYD which is not true. Communist party and few other leaders in old andhra and telangana were keen on Vishalandhra and there was a movement for it on both sides even though people of telangana had some apprehensions. 1st SRC report was released in 1955 well before formation of AP. There was a debate in HYD assembly on 1st SRC and Vishalandhra and more than 2/3 in HYD assembly spoke for Vishalandhra and few were against (KV Reddy etc were against). Yes HYD was better than kurnool during that time as it had the needed infrastructure for captial of telugu state and leaders referred to HYD suitability as capital but to say AP was formed for HYD alone is wrong. Vishalandhra movement was reponsible for AP formation and 1st SRC report. same for Bangalore and Mumbai for capti Leaders in old andhra state in 1950's were not so strong to influence the centre based on lobbying. So AP was formed democratically and not by lobbying or agreements.
    After SRC report, Later some congress politicians from Old andhra state signed gentlemen agreement with telangana leaders which is infact a private agreement between leaders (though its not wrong) and has no constitutional basis. Any disputes between states etc can be sorted by courts, Central water comission, tribunal (for water disputes) in a democracy but politicians shouldn't sign agreements privately. As per the constitution of India, article-3 Central goverment has a right to create state by passing a bill in parliament by dividing exisiting states, merging exisiting states and thats how AP was formed. So how can we say AP formation is wrong and formed without a basis? Similarly creation of Telangana is also not wrong as per Article3. We can't ignore peoples opinion from long time. If govt decides not one language-one state but one state-one language and creates Telangana, I'm absolutely fine with it. (Maharashtra is larger than AP in area and demographics. UP is more than twice the population of AP) however Govt should follow the same principle across India and tell the people accordingly just the same way AP was created initially

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sujai,
    In 1969 the argument was only economic basis for T agitation. Self respect and self rule came around 2009 after it was proved that Telangana is not backward on average compared to rest of AP or many backward states in India. Democracy means self rule. To summarise T supporters changed their arguments from Economic criteria to Sentiment, identity, self respect and self rule in 2009. If identity and self rule are the reasons those should be the reasons from Day1 of 1956. The arguments of T supporters were not consistent. Anyways its point arguing on these now and better to create T state

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anil:

      In 1969 the argument was only economic basis for T agitation. Self respect and self rule came around 2009

      Not true. That seems to be the impression indoctrinated in Seemandhra. We in Telangana who have studied the pamphlets published during 1969-70 understand that it was always about self-rule and self-respect.

      The arguments of T supporters were not consistent.

      While we believe we were quite consistent in our demand and articulation of our demand from day one - Seemandhras tend to see an inconsistency where there is none.

      That's because you were completely misguided by Seemandhra media which focused all its energies to discredit KCR and TRS. In retrospect, this manic obsession with KCR and TRS has benefited Telangana Movement in couple of ways -
      1. It allowed the grass root movement to do its real job - which became the bulwark of the movement.
      2. It also united various Telangana groups because of the virulent attack that was carried out against TRS and KCR was seen a veiled attack against all Telanganas.

      Delete
    2. I beg to disagree Sujai.I was born after 1969, so can't comment on 1969 agitation much except what I read in media(primarly on mulki rules). But I want to say few things on TG movement. When I say consistent I meant from 1st Nov 1956 (KCR came only in 2001). While I support TG and few more states formation as I mentioned in my previous comments, I feel Half truths, Half Lies, Selective interpretations are being spread by T supporters (and SA vadis as well). If self rule/respect and Identity is the case for TG, AP wouldn't have been formed at all. Also twisting historical facts for current political convinience is being done which is not correct.

      Few myths and half lies/truths
      1)TG was formed by agreements and by lobbying and for HYD
      [Not true, Due to Vishalandhra movement and 1st SRC mentioned in my above comments "Anil August 31, 2013 9:48 PM"]

      2)Why did andhra separate from Madras?
      [Andhra formation from Madras was the initial point (when debates were going on on the criteria for states formation)for creation of states after India became republic and later GOI appointed SRC for states creation. Formation of Orissa from bengal by british and congress promise for Linguisitic states is basis for it)

      3)TG people, Nehru, leaders of TG were against AP formation

      [Then how come AP was formed? AP was formed along other states after SRC report and as per GOI policy. Nehru, Rajaji,Patel were personnely against Lingusitic states but they later agreed after debate]

      While I understand the griviences that TG being under Nizam rule was backward educationally, politically, econmically compared to British educated Andhra in 50's,60's that scenario doesn't exist now.

      Few more points

      1)andhra people dominate every where in HYD/TG and exploiting
      [Corruptions, feudalism, nepotism are everywhere in India and if we divide India into 1000 states also they will continue. If we have any evidences against corruption etc we need to gather them and drag to court. Whether its united AP or TG we live in the same country and same constitution. We can't say wait tomorrow when T forms we will look into this corruption.Vengence is not justice.
      It means that T leaders are also part of this corruption. We have seen the reports in media how the leaders T are extracting money in name of protection.]

      2)People from SA are in TG but not many people from TG are in SA
      [Even though assume for a momemnt this is true no one is stopping TG people to come to SA and do business, jobs etc. As mentioned in this blog Punjabis sindhis etc and people from rest of india are there in SA and HYD doing business, jobs etc. In 1950 a bengali won election in Vijayawada and also we had a TG people Shivshankar who won tenali election. PVN rao won election from Nandyal. T leaders are compaigning that no single T person is able to do business in SA which its not true and misleading. There are people from other states who became heroes in Telugu film industry as well(Rajasekhar, suman, Vinodkumar, Siddarth. of course now we many from TG in telugu film industry)]

      I support creation of some more states based on a policy by GOI which should be applied across india mentioned in my above comments Anil August 31, 2013 9:48 PM and not selectively dividing AP alone for electoral calculations

      Delete
    3. Anil,

      First SRC actually recommended to wait till next state general election. Nehru didn't like the Vishalandra idea. And Telangana people didn't like much either, so what's changed?

      The strong reason of AP formation is a desperate need for a capital city and revenue for Andhra state which is moving towards becomming a econamically failed state.

      you may want to see following comments to understand how Andhra state was desperate to merge with Telangana to avoid financial crisis(and why they accepted Gentlemen Agreement - because there is no other way).

      Check my Jan 18 comments in this link.

      It is Seemandra benefitted more by AP formation not Telangana.

      Delete
    4. Greenstar,
      This is another half truth. In 1953 its true that the Old andhra revenue was not satisfatory.Its due to lack of excise revenue as there was a ban on liquor in old madras state where as such ban is not there in HYD state. Its misleading to state that TG was more developed and old andhra was less developed and thats why union happened. Also I mentioned in my comments "AnilAugust 31, 2013 9:48 PM" why AP was formed

      Delete
    5. The only reason why AP was formed was communists made congress piss in its pants. Nehru was a spineless a**hole. So, he found an easy way out. That was the same reason Kurnool was chosen as capital. Had Vijayawada been chosen, AP would not have formed. Rayalaseema would have been separated out and joined TamilNadu and everything would have been hunky dory.

      Congress the cause of 90% of the problems nation is facing now.

      Delete
    6. Anil,

      The info(paper statements) you read in my link was took from the 'Andhra State' newspapers. It is those Andhra State leaders told all thos things.

      There could be many reasons why Telangana income in HYD state is more than Andhra State. But the fact is there is a big development scope in Telangana state if formed. But at the same time the future is not at all positive Andhra State (if Andhra pradesh is not formed). Again ... I am quoting the statements and articles from Andhra state leaders and local news papers.

      When AP was formed, SA was benefited with a readymade capital and its revenue, but I don't see how Telangana is benefited when compared to SA!!

      Delete
    7. Greenstar and T, Let me clarify I'm a big supporter of smaller states and TG, only issue I have is with the arguments on both sides.AP has a geographical size of 275K which is more than twice of TN, 50% larger than Karnataka and one of the largest state in india. TG also is larger than many states in india so TG has a strong case not just from emotional but administrative convinience and de-centralisation of power etc (so is rest of AP which has coast, Gas etc).

      True communists played a role in united andhra and even for other states like MH, Kerala etc. Also caste politics (TG reddys + seema reddy's) played a role too. They felt they can call shots in united AP and it happened but thats only 1 part of it. HYD, Andhra assembly (which includes all) has discussed, constitutional process was followed (agreements are private by congress leaders) same with any state formation and passed a resolution for merger else AP can't be formed. Leaders in Andhra were not that powerfull to influence Nehru and other central leaders.To visuialise what happened 56 years ago with current political situation will be misleading. To imagine how Andhra, TG would have been had merger not happened would be hypothetical. May be TG would have been developed? I'm not sure considering the current leadership in TG

      India was a predominant Agricultural state in 50's , 60's and not industrially developed (except some mills) there was not much difference between TG and andhra during that time. Excise is the major revenue.except very few industries and Nizam mills HYD was also not industrially developed. HYD was capital of HYD state and not TG, so there is a contribution of Marathwada and HYD Kannada.
      "The future is not at all positive Andhra State" may not be a correct statement because we have seen many states around india and world who turned around by adopting to changing times (ex: Japan who got destroyed in 2nd worldwar) and many fell down. OK lets agree for argument TG is more developed in 50's than andhra. Regarding your question "how Telangana is benefited when compared to SA!! " its all about adoptability to changing times else we will be out of race (ex: Nokia couldnt adopt to smart phone market and they are out of race now)
      ex: Andhrites (some dominant castes) invested initially in education, media and films (they were started before AP was formed). In 1970's they moved to contracts and 80's to industries (Andhra sugars was established well before AP formation, same with Telugu media and film industries and others started without political support in cities like chennai as well. But it didn't happen with TG Dora's and leaders and hence the current situation. Corruption and political support is in everystate in india.
      So whats prob in supporting TG now : Unknown fears by people and trust deficeit :-(. Vested interests by politicians. we need statesmen like leaders on both sides which is lacking

      Delete
    8. Anil,

      >>agreements are private by congress leaders

      nope, thats not true. Those are not private agreements. For example, central govt appointed a committee to find out how much Telangana funds are illegally transferred to Seemandra. Another good example is Supreme court supported Mulki rules. And you know, mulki rules and funds utilization rules are part of agreements. So that proves these agreements has legal validity.


      >>passed a resolution for merger else AP can't be formed.

      False information, there is no resolution passed in HYD assembly about merger.

      >>Excise is the major revenue.except very few industries and Nizam mills HYD was also not industrially developed.

      Telangana with Hyderabad has more chances to develope when compared to Andhra. Regarding industrial development, check this links which shows the Hyd and Andra status Check my Jan 18 comments in this link.
      http://sujaiblog.blogspot.ca/2011/01/telangana-73-are-we-condemned-to-repeat.html?showComment=1295293495708#c6649448960130212689

      >>HYD was capital of HYD state and not TG, so there is a contribution of Marathwada and HYD Kannada.

      No one denying that. I don't understand why you are mentioning that here.?

      >>how Telangana is benefited when compared to SA!! "

      You understood it wrong. I want you to tell me.... when Seemandra benefitted with readymade/well developed capital, what did Telangana got? When Telangana contributed Hyderabad to the new state, what did SA contributed? Why would Telangana want to share its HYD with SA when Telangana dont need to(no share?).

      >>But it didn't happen with TG Dora's and leaders and hence the current situation.

      That is exactly my point. Telangana didn't had enough development to have that surplus money to invest in some other place. If we had good projects and other infrastructure then we would have made something.

      >>Corruption and political support is in everystate in india.

      May be, so we are trying to fix these issue by having our own state.

      Delete
  25. Sujai, "Also, remember something, you asked for Madras in 1953, which did not belong to you". Dont mix up different issues. On Madras please read the history properly. It was ceded by a Telugu king to britishers and it was a cultural capital of telugus for long time. Madras is on the border. There was nothing wrong for the claim (atleast partially) in 1953. It doesn't mean telugus are claiming now. After 1953 no one has raised that issue and it was settled long back

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anil:

    After 1953 no one has raised that issue and it was settled long back

    After 2014, hopefully no one in Seemandhra will raise the issue of Hyderabad. And for that to happen, we in Telanganas have ensure there is no joint-capital with Seemandhra - not even for ten years.

    Madras was not a joint-capital though there was a demand. Mumbai was a joint-capital though there were similar demands by Gujarathis.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have no problem with it (if HYD is in AP or TG) as long my constitutional freedom is guaranteed
    My constitution guarantees free movement of labour to any part of India. i.e a person from seemandhra or rest of india can go to TG or any part of india and
    1)Work in a Central or private sector (They may not be eligible for state govt jobs which is fine for me)
    2)Do business as per his wish in any part of TG
    3)Can contest election anywhere in India (includes TG)
    Similarly a person from TG can go to any part of india (including Andhra) and work in central govt or private sector or contest election.
    You might be aware many TG'nites are in other part of india for ex in MH(may be becuase its bordering TG and many in TG are comfortable in hindi). Also andhrites are in other parts of india as well
    In Vizag there are many bengalis, tamils and rest of indians who are working in central govt, private sector jobs and doing business. Same in Vijayawada and other cities of Andhra. I'm not sure why many telanganites are not there in SA, I can say its not discrimination for sure as you can see people from other parts of india.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anil

      That was my concern too. It is not same as you go to Chennai/B'lore and make a living as against HYD. Pink panthers will be all over HYD in the business of extortions and kidnaps of non-telengana people. Criminals are everywhere but in HYD it will become organized crime in the name of protecting the rights of telangana people and supported by those who forms the government.

      I am not opposed to the formation of TG with hyd as its capital. This is what happens if TG is a reality with HYD as its capital.
      You along with every citizen of India would lose their constitutional freedom in HYD.
      You could never do business in HYD without feeding so called pink wearing telangana freedom fighters.
      A person from TG is already going everywhere including US to do business and live a peaceful life but they deny the same in HYD for someone who is not from telangana, as you can see from the provocative statements of KCR and clan.
      You hit the nail on the head when you referred to discrimination of TG people in seemandhra which never existed.

      Delete
    2. I am basically andhra at heart, born and brought up in T (not Hyd) and when I speak telugu none of the T folks would get an IOTA of doubt :) and I feel pained by this partition. I don't oppose it and if center feels its better to have T then so be it. But you know what? I think its highly unlikely but if they ever try to show discrimination against andhras or andhras-at-heart, I am going to go underground and eliminate all of those crooked politicians. I am sure my T friends would join their hands with me :)

      Delete
    3. >>I'm not sure why many telanganites are not there in SA, I can say its not discrimination for sure as you can see people from other parts of india.

      But you see many telanganites in rest of other cities in India. So you think .. why?

      Delete
    4. Thats what I'm saying Green star. There are many people from Rest of India who are in Vijayawada, Vizag, Tirupathi. When people other states (who are not fluent in Telugu as well) are there in SA doing business, Jobs, even in politics (In Icchapuram, north andhra previous MLA is a marwari). why can't you? Its about skill sets, competition, adopting to changing times, smartness etc. You shouldn't say discrimination, its misleading.

      Delete
    5. I am not saying that Seemandraits discriminate any people who are not Seemandraits. You need to think why Telangana people can move to rest of the state but not to Seemandra.

      You don't need to agree with me.

      Delete
    6. Going by the animosity KCR and his cadre have towards anything related to Andhra, I think the only way for Andhras to be able to survive in T is to convert to speak in Hindi.

      Delete

  28. Sujai ,you are carrying arguments to absurd levels...You can not compare Andhras in Bangalore with Andhras in Hyderabad..Andhras are in Hyderabad because it is their capital.Andhras go to Bangalore and pay taxes on their own knowing fully well what they can expect.
    I am not only referring to the taxes paid by Andhras while in the united AP but also to the huge amounts Nizam received through leasing and sale of Andhra which contributed handsomely to the status of Hyderabad.

    Your argument that self respect and self rule have been in the agenda did sound like the astrologer's justification ..The mere mention of natural calamities in an obscure manner in their yearly predictions is enough for them to boast about their accurate predictions of tsunami or giant earth quake of Gujarath!!Can you provide evidence that self respect was mentioned in the assembly as a main objective before 2004\2009?

    Self rule is another big bogey..Telangana has its own elected representatives..That is called self rule..

    No one from West Bengal,Tamilnadu,Kerala,Orissa,Maharashtra and many other states has become PM of this country..In the parliament Hindi belt dominates all the remaining parts.Does it justify claiming there is no self rule in the aggrieved parts?

    More over look at what these T-representatives do..When in power they have no complaints about Andhra dominance or exploitation of T-region.( I am referring to pre2004 period.)

    Initially T- separatists were mainly claiming lack of development,loss of jobs, diversion of water etc..not self respect and self rule.Those excuses cropped up after Sri Krishna report!

    A person living as remotely as in Srikakulam was denied his share because most of the development all these days has been focused exclusively in and around Hyderabad.He has a flickering hope that things would change and one day part of the revenue from Hyderabad would eventually channelised to people like him.Now with bifurcation that hope is cruelly shattered...Hyderabad may be geographically in T-region but it is in the heart and hopes of every one inAP.

    Your argument about making Titupathi, Vizag and some other cities of Andhra into UTs is at best childish.I have a suspicion that your IQ takes a downward plunge the moment T is mentioned ( ...not unlike our rupee in recent times...) IF you have no valid reason to oppose Hyderabad becoming UT then it is OK..what purpose is served by posing counter questions and hollow arguments?
    Supposing Andhras have no abjection to converting those cities into Union Territories..are you game for Hyd becoming UT?


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >>huge amounts Nizam received through leasing and sale of Andhra which contributed handsomely to the status of Hyderabad.

      Indian Govt. or any current govt can not provide you justice for the events which happened before Indian govt formed. Nizam sold because at that time you and we are his property. You can not legally claim what British took from us when they were in the rule.

      >>Initially T- separatists were mainly claiming lack of development,loss of jobs, diversion of water etc..not self respect and self rule.

      We still do the same, but you people and media like to hear what ever they like.

      >>Telangana has its own elected representatives..That is called self rule..

      That is the same case for you in Madras state, and it is the same case for every Indian when British is ruling. At that time you people justified the self rule, twisted tounge right?

      >>A person living as remotely as in Srikakulam was denied his share because most of the development all these days has been focused exclusively in and around Hyderabad.

      We believe taxes collected in Hyderabad and Telangana spent illegally in Seemandra. Bhargava commettee and recent budget calculations prove that. I think this one you dont know, as per agreements the revenue generated in Telangana(that includes Hyderbad) must spent only in Telangana(that is how Bhargava committe calculated your loot). Do you have any evidence that the taxes collected in Seemandra was spent in Hyderabad to develop it? If not, you are excused.

      If you want to talk about the development, tell me the areas where Telangana (excluding HYD, which is already developed when AP was formed) beats Seemandra in terms of government developed infrastructure(Universities, canels, powerplants)?

      You guys took bags of money from Telangan but never give back a penny.

      Delete
    2. "as per agreements the revenue generated in Telangana(that includes Hyderbad) must spent only in Telangana" How justified is this? Even for a moment lets agree that as per agreement its to be done, in last 2 decaudes HYD development has been phenomenal. Asking all the Tax revenues generated in HYD (or any capital of a state) to be spent only on HYD/TG is unfair. Agreements can be relooked as per changing times. Coming to your logic of other cities in Telangana not being in part with other cities in Coast its not discrimination. Vizag has a port and seacoast and due to which some central govt organisations have started and thats how it developed. Vijayawada was already the publishing capital, agriculural capital before AP formation. Tirupati is due to Lord of Seven hills tourism. Political leaders in TG coulnd't capitalise on Warangal, Mahabubnagar development despite being near to HYD

      Delete
    3. You wouldn't have a state called Andhra Pradesh if your forefathers didn't agree on that revenue sharing. If you think you want to relook the agreements, then you must go thru Telangana approval, you can't simply say you are majority and you can do anything you want.

      Telangana never demanded to make HYD to the capital of AP, it is Seemandraits wish despite of such revenue sharing agreements.

      Forget about the agreement, Telangana not even getting the fair share(what ever your definition is) in spending.

      Delete
  29. @sujai
    can u tell me one state in this country or one country in thie world which was formed without taking the other side into consideration?
    wether the other party agrees willingly or circumstances force them to do so is a different issue, but dont u think atleast some sort of a dialouge is required?
    dont u think that congress high command should have atleast discussed with the seemandhra leaders about new capital, water sharing,etc before making the july 30th statelemt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok. Put this question to CBN, YSR, Chiranjeevi etc. They did not put any pre-conditions to Okay a separate state. There will be ample oppurtunities for u guys to discuss and seek justice and it will be part of the process of separation.

      Delete
    2. @deepak .. can u say y the central govt wasted 4 years to declare telangana formation, we suffered for that.. can u say y.
      Dialog when it is required.. when u allow anything to happen , first sit quit then ask what u want, but u and ur leaders are just saying samyakandhra.. what u people want , just fighting to oppose us thats all . In this 4 years so many committees , meetings happened so how can u say it as straight away decision . What u asking for water sharing, capital everything will come to discussions in assembly and loksabha..then u can ask for anything.

      Delete
  30. the problem is andhra cannot stand on its foot as its leaders will start infighting and so also people who get discriminated more on caste lines when in andhra . So AP is good for keeping seema and andhra united otherwise both will be at logger heads.

    ReplyDelete
  31. >> the problem is andhra cannot stand
    An unstable Andhra is a pain in the butt not only for Telangana but also for India. So, I guess we must hope Andhra prospers after separation and so does Telangana. Congress has proved its uselessness again in not doing anything to control the tempers of the Andhra population at large.

    Infighting is there everywhere. Caste based discrimination is there in Telangana too. As a matter of fact, Telangana did not get an opportunity to show its true nature in terms of a stable political entity as yet. Though the state of Hyderabad existed, it's a blatantly new political race at helm now. There's no comparison between the leaders like Burgula and KCR etc. Like India was all rosy and united during freedom struggle, T had a common uniting factor all these days. WIth all due respect to the martyrs, its an easier job to fight for a common cause than to making unadulterated use of one's freedom. When in distress, every person goes out of the way to set aside differences and personal agendas.
    But not so when freedom is achieved. Who would have dreamed about how Indians would loot their own country during the freedom struggle.

    So the way forward is to make sure everyone stays satisfied. Telangana got what it wanted. Andhra's feeling of being let down, though not entirely well founded, is not good for either Andhra or Telangana.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Some great Comments in this blog. a lot of strong views and info. Was searching on Google to find why people want to divide an existing state we call as Andra Pradesh. I am not from Andra Pradesh and never been there as well,so I cannot speak or give my opinion as it would be unfair and only you guys know the actual situation there.

    I have a strong view against discrimination in any form, may it be caste, relegion or region. But blaming it on people is wrong. We live in a Democracy and we elect our law makers. It is our right and duty to elect suitable leaders.Its happened time and again in India where our politicians play their political drama which only affects us

    About a year ago, almost all the political leaders in Andra Pradesh were in the streets demanding for a seperate Telengana. One would think things would be normal after green signal was given for a seperate state. Apparently, things are different. Politicians now are on indefinite fast to stop the seperation which has left hospitals without power which is very shocking.

    I wish and hope everything comes back to normal in Andra Pradesh. I have some wonderful friends from Andra Pradesh. Never could i tell whether they were from Andra or telengana.Lets also wish this seperation does not ignite speratisits movement in other states. As we all know castes still exist in india and one community always tries to supress the other. Seperation cannot be the answer.

    Unity should be sought among people of same region and not among same relegion or caste.

    ReplyDelete
  33. there was so many problems in Telangana area...
    ther is no water
    no current supply
    no roads...
    no devolpment ... in adilabad region ...too worst ...thats why to day we got "FREEDOM".

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.