dave@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Bharat Dave) (11/03/85)
India is not the only place where violent unrest has been surfacing time and again. Molluscs in Holland(?), Red Army in Japan and Italy, Basques in Spain, Irish in Britain, Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, BLA (70's) in USA, Mindanaoans in Phillipines, tribal unrest in many African countries (which usually topples a government), aparthheid in South Africa, troubles in South America and possible troubles behind the Iron Curtain countries. And, of course, we have our share of killings in India. Sikhs want to separate, there was a time when the Tamils wanted to separate and so did some Biharis. Dalit Panthers, Naxalites, Hindu-Muslim clashes. Shiv Sena wanting to throw out non-Marathas from Maharashtra. Assam, Nagaland and the most recent violences in Gujarat. More one reads and hears, less and less it shocks. I suppose the senses get deadened after a time. Just because you were born on a piece of land, or in a family that speaks a language or observes some religion, it is assumed that you have to safeguard every bit of it unquestioningly. We don't have to work to earn it. One accident and you are born as a Gujarati or a Malayali and you are done for the rest of the life. Even that is not inherently bad as most ordinary people want to live quietly, have some fun and die as quietly. So most of the troubles happen when the competition for resources becomes acute and a part of the society feels threatened. And that is when militancy- political, religious or economic, raises its head. So before condemning or justifying violence, stop and think: what would you have done had you been in the other camp. I don't know of any solutions except that charting some more borders around your home, is not going to help anyone (as it is, there are enough border disputes going around the globe). -- dave@cad.cs.cmu.edu.arpa