Uttar Pradesh rejects regionalism

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

The very name Uttar Pradesh smacks of regionalism. And all your posts about it... regionalism gone berserk!

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

The very name Uttar Pradesh smacks of regionalism. And all your posts about it... regionalism gone berserk!

--> It
would make perfect sense if the nationalist leaders of U.P. like Pandit
Nehru wished to retain the initials U.P. of United Provinces so that it
would be convenient for people across India to keep referring to the
state by the same name they were using earlier, and the best name they
could come up with was 'Uttar Pradesh'.

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

The very name Uttar Pradesh smacks of regionalism. And all your posts about it... regionalism gone berserk!

--> It
would make perfect sense if the nationalist leaders of U.P. like Pandit
Nehru wished to retain the initials U.P. of United Provinces so that it
would be convenient for people across India to keep referring to the
state by the same name they were using earlier, and the best name they
could come up with was 'Uttar Pradesh'.

Haha... so they chose a regionalistic name because it would have good initials? Regionalism gone berserk, it sounds like!

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

Correct me if i am wrong but was it not Karnataka which elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha. The constituency she won from (Chikmagalur) is in Karnataka.

Rashmun wrote:it is not possible to accuse people of the stature of Pandit Nehru of regionalism.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:By your own logic: Andhra Pradesh rejected regionalism 20 years before UP finally figured out how to do it. AP elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha although she is from UP.

Correct me if i am wrong but was it not Karnataka which elected Indira Gandhi to the Lok Sabha. The constituency she won from (Chikmagalur) is in Karnataka.

So Karnataka was also ahead of UP when it came to rejecting regionalism, per your logic! Sounds like UP is a real latecomer to the party of "rejecting regionalism."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medak_%28Lok_Sabha_constituency%29#Members_of_Parliament
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chikmagalur_%28Lok_Sabha_constituency%29#Members_of_Parliament

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:it is not possible to accuse people of the stature of Pandit Nehru of regionalism.

Why not? If he chose the name for UP, he did choose a regionalistic name. If he chose it because of what initials it would have, that was a classic case of regionalism gone berserk!

Rashmun wrote:it was to make it convenient and easy for people across India to keep referring the state as U.P. so that the inconvenience caused by changing the name from United Provinces would be minimized.

charvaka wrote:Dude, some sincere, bordering-on-friendly, advice for you. Before you come up with your next stupid logic, please ask yourself: "How easy is it to poke a hole in this logic?" Try to poke some holes yourself; think of other cases that parallel the argument you are making, and see if you are comfortable with those parallel arguments.

For example, let's say your argument is that "electing out-of-state people to parliament" proves that "the state rejects regionalism." At that point, instead of plunging headlong and posting it on such, ask yourself: "Did any other states do this?" Do some research. If you find some states that did just that before UP, ask yourself, "am I comfortable saying that those states rejected regionalism earlier than UP did?" If you are comfortable with the findings, then and only then, go ahead and post.

charvaka wrote:

Rashmun wrote:it was to make it convenient and easy for people across India to keep referring the state as U.P. so that the inconvenience caused by changing the name from United Provinces would be minimized.

If you pick a regionalistic name just so the initials would come out right, I think it's reasonable to say that's regionalism gone berserk.

Rashmun wrote:

charvaka wrote:Dude, some sincere, bordering-on-friendly, advice for you. Before you come up with your next stupid logic, please ask yourself: "How easy is it to poke a hole in this logic?" Try to poke some holes yourself; think of other cases that parallel the argument you are making, and see if you are comfortable with those parallel arguments.

For example, let's say your argument is that "electing out-of-state people to parliament" proves that "the state rejects regionalism." At that point, instead of plunging headlong and posting it on such, ask yourself: "Did any other states do this?" Do some research. If you find some states that did just that before UP, ask yourself, "am I comfortable saying that those states rejected regionalism earlier than UP did?" If you are comfortable with the findings, then and only then, go ahead and post.

--> i knew all along that Indra Gandhi had been elected from Chikmagalur, Karnataka after she lost Lok Sabha elections in U.P. I am not denying that Karnataka has also rejected regionalism. One example of Karnataka rejecting regionalism is the fact that no regional party has been able to come to power on its own.

--> My argument with respect to Indra Gandhi is that she was a former Prime Minister. People who preferred her knew she would develop their constituency significantly (and more than her rivals) if they voted for her. It is therefore more significant that Jaya Prada and Azharuddin were able to win Lok Sabha elections from U.P.

--> In fact an argument for U.P. being regionalist is the fact that the current Chief Minister Mayawati is from the Bahujan Samajwadi Party which is a regionalist party. Except for the fact that the Bahujan Samajwadi party now has a presence in many states across India (because of the dalit vote bank) and is considered a national party now.

--> I was waiting patiently for when you would drop the nice guy mask and start getting personal and attacking me instead of attacking my ideas. Thanks for not disappointing me.