From: raj@aelle.cs.odu.edu (M. P. Krishna Raj)
Subject: Re: I HATE TAMILS (2)
Organization: Old Dominion University Dept. of CS, Norfolk VA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 14:02:53 GMT




In article <l8rdg3INN7im@talitha.usc.edu> sramacha@talitha.usc.edu (Sudarshan Ramachandran) writes:
>
>Continuing on my earlier post...
>
>
>1. TAMILS ARE EXTREMELY JINGOISTIC ABOUT THEIR REGION:
>
>"Everything these Tamils do or talk about centers around their region alone.
>Logical or not, anything that begins with a "Ta" and ends with an "il" and 
>an "M" (yes, Yum ;-) )in between gets them crazed. These are people
>responsible for spearheading lingua-based seperatist intentions in our
>country. By an outright rejection of Hindi, they destroy a convenient channel
>of communication running through the nation. And they support an international
>terrorist organization, i guess,  because "TAMIL" is a part of its name.
>Take the Telugus for instance.  Their language happens to be widest spoken 
>in the South. But this doesn't stop them from accepting Hindi so sportingly, 
>and more important, without violence.

Andhra was the first state to be carved out on 
linguistic basis. There is no separatist intention from any Tamil lovers.
Whatever they wanted is more power for the states.
(For every state ,not for tamil nadu alone). That too they
withdrawn after 1962 war. Hindi is not convenient channel for 
communication as you said. A legislation was passed to implement
that as official language. It barely passed in the voting.
The only one extra  vote was cast by the president Rajendra Prasad.
Hindi became official just because of that one vote. 
>
>Take the Kannadigas for instance. Ask them a question in Tamil, they will
>answer back in Tamil. Talk to them in Hindi, and they'll try to talk back
>in the same tongue. 
>

Tamil also do if they know the language.

>But why are these Tamils so rigid ? Why can't they accept anything that
>doesn't spell T-A-M-I-L. "
>

They accepted every thing which is acceptable. Rajendra Prasad should
not have voted in that way. He was not elected as President in that
way. When he loved Hindi and voted in favor of it, he was the
rigid person. What he done is not good for this country. He reduced
vast population as second class citizens by his single vote.
His action is the mother of language crisis in India.


>2. TAMILS ARE FANATICS:
>
>"What else would you call such a group ?  Which has people who would burn 
>themselves just because a *film actor* did something or didn't do something. 
>Which has among its followers, men  with cyanide around their necks."
>

Many did the samething in North India during Anti-reservation stir.

>Non-Tamils form their opinions based on such portrayals. (Maybe it is similar
>to the Americans' view of India - "Do you still travel only on Camel backs ?")
>

There are so many stupidities out there.

>3. TAMILS HAVE A GREAT CULTURE BUT ...
>
>"... but how will others know about it unless they stop propagating it in
>Tamil alone."
>
>----------------------------------------
>Now suppose these have been the observed characteristics of another 
>linguistic / cultural group.
>

Many states were under Congress rule continuously. 
That is why other states are subdued in the language issue.
Laloo Prasad Yadav already kicked out one elitist language.
(Mythili)

>What opinion would we form ???
>
>Thanks to all of you who shared your opinions on the subject.
>Special thanks to the following for mailing their opinions:
>
>Shirdi Prem      Amruth    Ranbir Singh     B.G.Mahesh
>Chandra          Bapcha    Ron Hira.        Arasu
>
>I'll soon post a summary.
>
>
>To Continue ....

The whole problem is with the self appointed establishment.
Not with the tamil lovers. These opportunists loved English
during british rule. Now they love Hindi and taking that
sportingly. Tommorrow they may love whatever the 
language of the conqueror. Whoever the ruler they
will be the establishment. Tamils will be the downtrodden. 

Tamils want friends not masters.


Raj