Toying With A Dangerous Idea

Dangerous doesn't even begin to describe an idea that leads to or suggests India's balkanization. Am i being paranoid? Yes, and i think if we are not paranoid about it, we will keep suffering crazies suggesting it off and on like Goebbels in important discourses as well.


India does have freedom of expression although much of this freedom is available only in limited forums mostly apart from the so called mainstream. The mainstream media on the other hand tries hard to put on a facade of allowing space to even non conforming points of views even if it is only for those views that fits "their" mold of a dissenting voice.


So we are supposed to give a sympathetic ear to these non conforming points of views and also accept their victory in these make belief "debates". We are frequently made to read in the mainstream newspapers, magazines and hear them on prime time tv debates - their contention that it's good for humanity's sake to concede to Separatists in Kashmir, Maoists in the rest of India and some others of their pet subjects. It's high time we debated the consequences of the "ideas" that these liberals want us to toy with.


Do they seriously think that conceding to Separatists and Maoists will not have a domino effect in the rest of India least of all North East? will they be there to somehow "magically" prevent that from happening. What happened in Darjeeling after Telangana was promised is just an indicator. And when that happens what will happen to "democracy" in the balkanized states? When India divided into three parts after independence the other two came on the verge of being failed states ruled by tin pot dictators, if not became one. What will happen to the Armed Forces? Will all states get their piece and start settling out inter state disputes which exists even today with it? Will China and Pakistan be able to resist the temptation of fishing in troubled waters, like China trying to annex at least the North East while it can, and Pakistan trying to annex some of it's own to add to it's "strategic depth"?


Being unreasonably paranoid may not be the best attitude but dangerous ideas need to be emphatically refuted to prevent reinforcement of whatever agenda driven world-view being pushed by some. What do you think about it?


(Picture courtesy Economic Times)