Monday, February 4, 2008

Discrimination against Indians in Mumbai

While Indians were raving and ranting about the discrimination against Bhajji in Down under by the natives, Mumbaikars had to face one too.

The almost riots like situation on Sunday, Feb. 3 - 2008, came as a rude shock to the residents of Mumbai. Especially those who are from North India. It is no longer an issue of being an Indian and a non-Indian. But this has been decentralised and come to the very core of being an Indian.

Raj Thackeray and his party (Maharashtra Navnirman Sena) members have created chaos in Mumbai suburbs. Raj Thackeray made controversial comments against north-Indians and Amitabh Bachan is particular. He voiced out his belief that maharashtrians were being discriminated against when it came to jobs and other amenities. The northies seem to be all over Mumbai, making it their 'earning' home, but not accepting it full-heartedly.
This entire fiasco was more of a political propoganda and an attempt to woo the 'true mumbaikars'.

It is an expected thing that when the Big B is bad-mouthedc his extended family, Amar Singh - member of the Samajwadi Party (SP), has to come to his 'adopted' brother's rescue. And this is what happened. Amar Singh too indulged in a verbal spat with Thackeray, turning it into a violent clash between the two parties.

MNS attaked a theatre playing a Bhojpuri film and pelted Big B's house with liqour bottles in the wee hours of monday morning.

Thackeray should be told that what the mumbaikars really want is a state that has amenities to provide like water, efficient drainage systems during the rain, adequate housing amongst a few. Rather than indulging in verbal and violent games.

How does it matter if Big B is building a school in Up, if he is so concerned about the lack of education facilities in Mumbai - why doesn't he build one? But NO that is that the issue that he fought on. For him it was a case of people earning in Mumbai but spending in their home town. He claims they are not 'Mumbaikars' at heart.

What does he have to say about those 'Mumbaikars' who are maharashtrians, but not living in their home-town? They are not supporting the city in any way what so ever. They are spending in the cities/countries that they have adopted as home. Should they be called 'mumbaikars'?? Should they be allowed to come back to Mumbai if they wanted to??

On what basis is Thackeray discriminating against north-Indians? Should the other states too start treating the migrated-mumbaikars the way MNS has? Shall we all ask them to pack up their bags and return to their city?

If we start discriminating on people on the basis of inter-state, then where will India stand in the global community? We were dividing people on the basis of religion and caste. Are we now going to adopt the policy of discriminating against people on the basis of which state they come from?

The combination of caste + religion + inter-state is going to be a lethal one that could cause repercussions far and wide.

I love Laloo Prasad Yadav's response when Thackeray asked the obnoxious question, "Why are the Railways full of Biharis? Are Maharashtrians less able?"

"Localisation will not be tolerated in an era of globalisation!" Laloo retorted.

Yes, I completely agree with Laloo.

2 comments:

Shash said...

Cosmopolitan Bombay turns into parochial Mumbai. Cosmopolitan (or at least, more so) Madras turns into provincial Chennai. Will what's left of cosmopolitan India turn into a regressive Taliban state, or a run-down Yugoslavia?

I for one hope we can prevent at least that

IMJ said...

Shash, I would vote on the Taliban.
Remember all those moral-policing that happenned in Chennai and Bombay??

And now the police just doesn't do anything when it comes to women harassment!!

So Taliban it is!!