anupam chakravartty c.anupam at gmail.com
Mon Mar 22 16:33:02 IST 2010

Who are you people to decide whether Gujarat's image is tarnished or
not? Why are you bothered about a thing like image?

When you say, "Image", it also means that something deliberately
constructed so that it appears as one whole.

>From the above discussion, it appears that if people are suffering in
a given geographical area, its image is going down. so this discussion
is aimed to attract more foreign investments to Gujarat? isnt? how
parochial can you get here by discussing an issue with such a heading?
Gujarat belongs to me too. I have suffered, enjoyed and experienced
the people here in all hues -- if i bring forth certain issues
pertaining to its people, am i tarnishing its image? that means there
is something to hide. that means there is one set of people, who are
hellbent on covering up the real issues of people by invoking this one
image...that should be constant all the time.

On 3/22/10, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Bipin jee
> My views:
> 1) I have already stated and I would repeat it: let us debate and discuss
> not through using perceptions (although they are important and their forming
> is not wrong), but through statistics or logical arguments. To state that
> SC/ST and Muslims are poor because of themselves, without any statistic to
> back you, or any logical arguments doesn't bring about any value of the
> things which you have said, to this debate or discussion.
> The same can be said about the rest of the mail too, particularly when
> reservation is being claimed as a method to increase one's own section of
> the population.
> 2) Secondly, the very subject title as tarnishing Gujarat's image is
> absolutely wrong. Different people can have different images of Gujarat. For
> a person like you, Gujarat may be in the Golden era. For me, it can be in
> the Disaster era. For someone else, it may be same as say Maharashtra.
> Gujarat has as many images as people wish to see. Just because my thoughts
> or my reading or interpretation of events doesn't support your image of
> Gujarat, doesn't mean that the image of Gujarat is tarnished. (though in
> your eyes it may remain that way because how I look at it doesn't support
> your theory or perception)
> Yes, you can say that lies are being spread about Gujarat. But to the best
> of my knowledge, there are no lies being spread about Gujarat on this forum.
> I, and even others, have used data from relevant and authentic sources to
> put across the same.
> 3) The arguments made by you make it seem like you are an insider in
> administrative politics. I am not one to comment on whether Railway reform
> was ongoing or not, and right now I don't have facts (or the time to find
> them out) regarding railway reforms being carried out or not. What I do know
> about Laloo being the Railway Minister is this:
> i) all long distance trains were declared as Superfast trains by him, and
> hence for each train, passengers who reserved seats had to pay the Superfast
> charge. This was not the case before he became the Railway Minister.
> ii) Earlier, for freight transport, there were certain restrictions to be
> followed as per law, regarding the tonnage limits of any wagon. These were
> relaxed.
> The end result was higher earnings of the Railways Ministry. I even don't
> know what's the argument about accounting formula used under him, which was
> brought to notice by Mamata Banerjee in her white paper.
> 4) I haven't met anybody in my life who believes that due to reservation
> being provided to his/her community, he/she should produce more children. So
> I can't comment on that. May be you can advise such people to understand
> such things are dubious for their own health and their own economic
> standards.
> Rakesh

More information about the reader-list mailing list