Editorial, The Imphal Free Press
Sometimes, mending fences is the best way to mend relations. The familiar illusion of “time-immemorial fraternity” which has caught the imagination of so many amongst Manipur’s “unity campaign brigade” must be viewed under this new scanner too. For one thing, the illusion is being exposed for what it is time and again regardless of who fails to learn the lesson or see the reality. And this reality says that the hill valley divide is far from being bridged, and on the other hand the chasm is widening. This revisionist illusion, whereby the past (or at least what was believed to be the reality of the past) is sought to be revised to suit present contingencies, has other serious ramifications. It tends to produce a policy philosophy that places too much faith in a centralised bureaucracy based on the assumption that the challenge of governance is to deal with the aggregate of a homogenous public will. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religion, multi-linguistic society, this presumption of a workable aggregate will of the people has been proven to be a myth repeatedly. A lot has already been said about the ills of bandhs and blockades, but a scan of the declared objectives of these disruptive protests will again reveal among others, the nonexistence of this aggregate will. In fact, it will be discovered that on more occasion than not, different manifestations of public will, work at cross purpose. If there are some groups agitating for Sadar Hills district status, there will also undoubtedly be others preparing to agitate against any move to create such a district. The present imbroglio over school affiliation is just the latest example of this unsettled and segmented nature of public will. Such tussles are far too many to be treated only as aberrations and not falling into a definite pattern.
A total overhaul of policy philosophy then may be what is called for in the bridge building effort. The new orientation must no longer be about seeking absolute unity, but of federating into autonomous units. It must literally be about mending fences or erecting new ones. That is to say, draw lines to demarcate varying aspirations. In the present case of school education for instance, maybe the government should give a serious thought to the idea of having separate education directorates for tribals and non-tribals, or hills and valley. If these directorates feel the need for some degree of variations in their syllabuses, especially in some areas of humanities study streams, maybe this should be allowed. As for science and mathematics, since they are so universal and fundamental, there cannot be anything different in what is taught about these subjects anywhere in the world. These directorates can also be given the freedom to choose their medium of instruction, as well as languages to be taught etc. The government must stop being influenced by obscurantists who are bent on enforcing single rectilinear norms of governance, erasing in the process the reality and beauty of variety.
Good fences, they say make good neighbours. With a government remaining as the benign overseer, let Manipur mend its fences too. Give the hills the intellectual and spiritual space it demands and rid itself of the ill feeling of being subjugated and encroached upon by the valley. It is however equally important now, to let the valley have its own space too, and live to actualise its own genius without the guilt of having deprived anybody else of his rights and entitlements. But let it also be realised that hills and valley form one composite geographical and ecological region. They simply cannot be separated, just as the mountains that feed the rivers, or the lakes the rivers in turn feed, cannot be separated from each other. To ask for such a separation would be unnatural and amount to asking for trouble – big trouble. Manipur is witnessing precisely this. The way out is to realise the inseparability of what nature has bonded, and also at the same time the distinctness of every natural entity. The hills and valley may be bound by nature, but they are also distinctly different. They coexist and they cannot but coexist, but this does not mean they are one and the same thing. Let the new generation policy philosophy be built on such a foundation.
==================================
'Let readers decide who is anti-Manipur'
By : A Staff Reporter 9/21/2007 1:24:58 AM
IMPHAL, Sept 20: Executive editor of the NE Sun, Deepak Dewan, expressed surprise at the reaction of the Manipur Government spokesman to a report on a memorandum submitted by a civil society body called Senior Citizen’s Society, Manipur, and to him for writing it, calling it "subverting the interest of Manipur”.The journalist said it seems chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh and his spokesman are not aware of the visit of the senior citizens to New Delhi to meet the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, UPA chairperson Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Union home minister Shivraj Patil, defence minsiter Pranab Mukherjee and the leaders of other political parties. The editor said a copy of the memorandum is with him and among the members of the Senior Citizens for Society are retired ministers, politicians,lecturers, advocates, and almost all its office bearers are from the valley.Four of them met the Prime Minister and other the other Central leaders, he said.It is the paranoia of chief minister Ibobi and his spokesman that must have made them to believe it to be a ‘Conspiracy’ against Manipur he said.Dewan further said due to space constraint the full text of the memorandum could not be published in the current issue of the NE Sun but he will do so in the next issue as his integrity has been questioned.He said let the people of Manipur know the truth and decide who is anti-Manipur.As a journalist, he said he has merely done his duty when he got to know from his sources in New Delhi about the visit of the senior citizens from Manipur, and managed to get a copy of the memorandum they submitted.After all the memorandum has raised issues concerning the interests of the Manipur civil society and the current political scenario in the state, he said.Therefore the question of me being ‘anti- Manipur’ as alleged by the spokesman of the Ibobi Government is a blind accusation and an attempt to divert the issue raised by the representative of an important Manipur civil society organisation, the editor said.Surely, an issue concerning the welfare of Manipur and it's citizens cannot be termed as ‘Anti-Manipur' he said.
Sometimes, mending fences is the best way to mend relations. The familiar illusion of “time-immemorial fraternity” which has caught the imagination of so many amongst Manipur’s “unity campaign brigade” must be viewed under this new scanner too. For one thing, the illusion is being exposed for what it is time and again regardless of who fails to learn the lesson or see the reality. And this reality says that the hill valley divide is far from being bridged, and on the other hand the chasm is widening. This revisionist illusion, whereby the past (or at least what was believed to be the reality of the past) is sought to be revised to suit present contingencies, has other serious ramifications. It tends to produce a policy philosophy that places too much faith in a centralised bureaucracy based on the assumption that the challenge of governance is to deal with the aggregate of a homogenous public will. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religion, multi-linguistic society, this presumption of a workable aggregate will of the people has been proven to be a myth repeatedly. A lot has already been said about the ills of bandhs and blockades, but a scan of the declared objectives of these disruptive protests will again reveal among others, the nonexistence of this aggregate will. In fact, it will be discovered that on more occasion than not, different manifestations of public will, work at cross purpose. If there are some groups agitating for Sadar Hills district status, there will also undoubtedly be others preparing to agitate against any move to create such a district. The present imbroglio over school affiliation is just the latest example of this unsettled and segmented nature of public will. Such tussles are far too many to be treated only as aberrations and not falling into a definite pattern.
A total overhaul of policy philosophy then may be what is called for in the bridge building effort. The new orientation must no longer be about seeking absolute unity, but of federating into autonomous units. It must literally be about mending fences or erecting new ones. That is to say, draw lines to demarcate varying aspirations. In the present case of school education for instance, maybe the government should give a serious thought to the idea of having separate education directorates for tribals and non-tribals, or hills and valley. If these directorates feel the need for some degree of variations in their syllabuses, especially in some areas of humanities study streams, maybe this should be allowed. As for science and mathematics, since they are so universal and fundamental, there cannot be anything different in what is taught about these subjects anywhere in the world. These directorates can also be given the freedom to choose their medium of instruction, as well as languages to be taught etc. The government must stop being influenced by obscurantists who are bent on enforcing single rectilinear norms of governance, erasing in the process the reality and beauty of variety.
Good fences, they say make good neighbours. With a government remaining as the benign overseer, let Manipur mend its fences too. Give the hills the intellectual and spiritual space it demands and rid itself of the ill feeling of being subjugated and encroached upon by the valley. It is however equally important now, to let the valley have its own space too, and live to actualise its own genius without the guilt of having deprived anybody else of his rights and entitlements. But let it also be realised that hills and valley form one composite geographical and ecological region. They simply cannot be separated, just as the mountains that feed the rivers, or the lakes the rivers in turn feed, cannot be separated from each other. To ask for such a separation would be unnatural and amount to asking for trouble – big trouble. Manipur is witnessing precisely this. The way out is to realise the inseparability of what nature has bonded, and also at the same time the distinctness of every natural entity. The hills and valley may be bound by nature, but they are also distinctly different. They coexist and they cannot but coexist, but this does not mean they are one and the same thing. Let the new generation policy philosophy be built on such a foundation.
==================================
'Let readers decide who is anti-Manipur'
By : A Staff Reporter 9/21/2007 1:24:58 AM
IMPHAL, Sept 20: Executive editor of the NE Sun, Deepak Dewan, expressed surprise at the reaction of the Manipur Government spokesman to a report on a memorandum submitted by a civil society body called Senior Citizen’s Society, Manipur, and to him for writing it, calling it "subverting the interest of Manipur”.The journalist said it seems chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh and his spokesman are not aware of the visit of the senior citizens to New Delhi to meet the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, UPA chairperson Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Union home minister Shivraj Patil, defence minsiter Pranab Mukherjee and the leaders of other political parties. The editor said a copy of the memorandum is with him and among the members of the Senior Citizens for Society are retired ministers, politicians,lecturers, advocates, and almost all its office bearers are from the valley.Four of them met the Prime Minister and other the other Central leaders, he said.It is the paranoia of chief minister Ibobi and his spokesman that must have made them to believe it to be a ‘Conspiracy’ against Manipur he said.Dewan further said due to space constraint the full text of the memorandum could not be published in the current issue of the NE Sun but he will do so in the next issue as his integrity has been questioned.He said let the people of Manipur know the truth and decide who is anti-Manipur.As a journalist, he said he has merely done his duty when he got to know from his sources in New Delhi about the visit of the senior citizens from Manipur, and managed to get a copy of the memorandum they submitted.After all the memorandum has raised issues concerning the interests of the Manipur civil society and the current political scenario in the state, he said.Therefore the question of me being ‘anti- Manipur’ as alleged by the spokesman of the Ibobi Government is a blind accusation and an attempt to divert the issue raised by the representative of an important Manipur civil society organisation, the editor said.Surely, an issue concerning the welfare of Manipur and it's citizens cannot be termed as ‘Anti-Manipur' he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment