thumb_up 0

COMMENTS

bayern, What you said in your post is absolutely true and hope greater sense prevails. There are more pressing problems waiting to be addressed.

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

 

Moving on to migration:

• If Nvda thinks this way (stop this migration line), there would be many amongst the so called "educated" who also do.
• We live in a democracy, of the kind where the crying babies get their milk first.
• 1000 people crying out against migration may be enough to unsettle a city which is unknowingly on the path to cosmopolitan-ness

There are a good number of people who think the culture of the state would be at risk as its capital city loses its regional character. They may be wrong, they may be right, but there is a need for some steps to take in the moderates (which I trust is the majority) amongst this set. Essentially, the government needs to do something before a Kannada Navnirman Sena is born here (JD-S is lurking, its needs an identity, and extreme regional is the way waiting for it).

So, how do you deal with this in constitutional and pro-active way? Let me make some observations first:

• Why is it that most of your apartment security guards are not from Karnataka? Two reasons 1)they are willing to work for less 2)they work harder as they can't just jump around to find jobs - no contacts, no local roots.
• Where do your maids and security guards and drivers live? The ones who migrated are much worse off than the locals who have luxury of having homes or at least a permanent address in far suburbs.

What I am coming to is that The problem to be solved here is urban poverty, and not migration.

• If you bring poor to the city, shouldn't you be made responsible for providing them with health insurance, acceptable housing and such.
• Why not a notion of "urban minimal wage" to work on the problems of urban poverty from the "supply" side? In the setup where 1 lakh people in the city make more than 50k a month, and can afford to hire help and services at world-war-II prices, everyone is sitting happy. "Oh, my maid/driver stinks, why doesn't he take bath in the morning." Well, ever thought about how they manage water everyday and how much they pay for it. In theory, this "happy" setup will exist till every poor family in the nation has been sucked into living life as urban poor at least once.

Perhaps Nvaada is worried more about loss of regional identity than urban poverty here. But we'd do better if we turn the priorities around. Putting the problem up that way is perhaps a better way of dealing with it, though I wouldn't say I have thought of the best solutions here. Talking more on the subject:

• Setting up "soft" culture barriers would be an extreme way, but could be tried under the guise of "it will help increase the employability of those who migrate". what about, "if you want to hire non-skilled labour from outside the state", you must bear the cost of making them learn the local language.
• Why not bring up the "mixed medium of instruction" idea (hail tarlesubba here) as well. Teach local history, civics, arts and goegraphy in local language, and the so called employable teaching (maths, science, economics) in the global language.

PS: Nvda - do come to a Praja meeting, some of us would be glad to see you.

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

SB, Nijawada, Srivastha and others,

 The issue and problem of immigration and allegation of "you don't belong here" lies at the core aspiration of our existence on this earth. Each one of us would like to live a good life and with prosperity for eternity.

 Why do people migrate? For better living, better job and better opportunity. Sometimes it is real, other times it is perceived. Some succeed and a good percentage don't. Until recently the bond to local "MITTI" deterred a vast majority from moving to other place and even if moved due to jobs, tried to return to the birthplace. Due to various factors and uneven development/progress there is vast divide between Urban and rural living conditions.

 For migrants, it is a pure quest and zeal to better their lives. In that quest what is wrong in moving to a big town, small city or big metropolitan city? Even going abroad? The constitution allows it, no legal or physical bar on such migration. Often times it is easy and convenient way of improving one's condition. I can take care cover under "I am Indian", "One Nation" slogans.

On positive side, I bring new ideas, new cultural exposure, I pay taxes, buy local goods, use local businesses and effectively I am helping the local economy and progress.

On negative side, I may be encroaching a local job, latching onto a dwelling space which could have gone to a local, I may promote my own ideas and culture which could create frictions, I may add to the existing civic problems, I may add to the more infrastructure requirements and in extreme cases I may work against the locals and their interests.

 Should I decide on my own or should I allow somebody to decide where I should live?

 From a local resident perspective, the apprehensions, accusations and allegations of "Its all your fault" also lies at the same quest that a immigrant had. I am a local resident and I feel it is my right to have the best out of my local environment. Immigrants should help my cause for my better living and doesn't have a right to enjoy the fruits of progress. A good job, good place to live, good civic amenities and infrastructure is my birth right and I alone should enjoy the fruits of this local land.

 Shouldn't I be deciding this or should I have to share my booty?

As Srivasta said, no easy answer and not so quick. Because, in both perspectives one needs to be of "SAINT" class to allow the other to decide my share and progress.

 In order to understand the reasons for migration, one needs to look beyond the high rises of Bengaluru, Mysore and Mangalore. One needs to taste the first hand accounts of life in remote villages. Year-by-year, unpredictable climate, not sufficient rains, failed crops, increasing cost of farm labor, negative return on Investment (ROI), increasing debt load, deplorable conditions of schools, literally no health care support, no supply chain structure for selling farm produce and grains, development and progress restricted to only cities and towns, children and offspring unwillingness to carry on family trade and professions and the big impact of WTO & global trade etc. All these have made the life in a village miserable and inhabitable.

 In such miserable conditions, shouldn't I be looking for another place where I can take care of myself and my family?

 There are quite a few steps that could mitigate the situation but not the one perfect solution. One, improve the living condition in rural and semi-urban area by providing the basic necessities, create conditions wherein villagers could earn a decent earnings that exceeds their basic needs and make urban living less appealing (more Taxes and less luxury).

 There is a way out. We could help build "RURAL-INDIA" for cities to be for locals only.

 

 

 

 

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

Yes it is true.

The people in and around tin factory area whose children are facing the problem everyday are to demand for a solution. A proper pedestrian underpass and proper traffic control especially the city buses is the urgent need.

Migration between different states especially into Bangalore is to be taken positively in the greater national interest.For a better perspective on the subject, the following reference may be relevent

Praja is rightly helping on focusing on such problems on the web platform, so that the concerned people get to know what is required. It is also important to evolve policies how to go about solving the cities infrastructure problems. Recourse to RTI is the tool available which is effective for organizations like praja.

Thanks silkboard, for the article.

PSA.

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments

Srivathsa,

I see that your interpretation of my stance is rather exclusionary on my identity here! You seem to quote your whim to live along with people from various Indian states as though hinting that I detest this very possibility in Bengaluru. But let me point at this fine difference between a wish to live amidst different state Indians, and the possibility of living amidst all these Indians in Bengaluru, even while every such individual speaks the language of the land, and behaves like a Kannadiga, has his/her heart beat for Karnataka, and other Kannadiga brethren. Only then will I consider this as a really gelled society or an apartment building, a city or a state.

A cosmetic integration of Indians, evident in your suggestion has been happening in every damn building in Bengaluru, I am sure, but of no avail for true integration. Why? Thats because there's no true integration happening there, with people having no "real" thread that can bind them together into real brotherhood. Why do you think we carved out linguistic states as individual elements of administration during 1956? That was because people at that time realised that a common language was what kept its people together. If we want this togetherness to stay, cosmetic togetherness is the not the way to go! The togetherness has to be in the real spirit, and that comes only when every migrant in Karnataka speaks Kannada and lives a Kannadiga life; so should every migrant in Rajasthan speak Rajasthani, and lead a Rajasthani life; so on & so forth for all linguistically unique states of India. And to this end, of course, comes the point #2 that ebi.schubert raised here - the one about having a system for cultural integration. If there's something constructive that a responsible citizen charter could do, talking about a framework for such an integration system would be one of it.

And let me repeat this once more - the subtle difference between the migration a Gulbarga Kannadiga makes into Bengaluru, and the migration a Delhite (speaking some other language) makes into BLR is in the delta-s that these two individuals see upon migration. The Gulbarga Kannadiga wouldnt not need more than a minute to adapt to the surroundings in BLR, and perhaps gel into the people of BLR (beware, BLR is not MG Rd, or Brigade Rd alone!). Whereas that would not be the case for this Delhite in BLR.

That apart we're talking about people crossing boundaries of major governance jurisdictions - if you're in Delhi, your jurisdictions are under the Delhi state govt. and get transferred to the Karnataka state govt. when you migrate to BLR. For a Gulbarga or Mandya guy, this doesnt change between Gulbarga/Mandya and BLR. While I dont say any such intra-state migration is necessary in the long term, that as I said, is food for another thread. The yogyate to debate that topic lies in the understanding of the importance of this topic - there being a need to have control over inter-state migration.

And as mcadambi has mentioned several times here with citations of many of the state's systems requiring 10 or 15yrs domicile in this state, there is reason to believe (regardless of any such polity in existence) that the entire state is one entity in provision for a Kannadiga, likewise is the entire Maharashtra a provision for all Marathis residing in it. A Delhite migrating to MH is a migrant, not a Pune guy moving into Mumbai. So is the case in Karnataka. Karnataka is of/for/by Kannadigas, and likewise for other states and its people. So this way everyone has his/her own land/state in India. To call Karnataka his own too, all a Delhite has to do is be a Kannadiga during his migration into Karnataka. Likewise I should be a Hindi-ga if I migrate into Delhi or UP. I should be a Maithili-ga when I migrate to Bihar. Only then am I a true Indian.

-Nijavaada

• thumb_up Like
• · login or register to post comments