Divisive Policies

During the last few days there have been protests and demands for new states all over India. Each and everyone have come out to claim his/her share of the pie and want to create new states. The supporters say, that it would help in the better development of the regions. Whereas, those opposing it say, it would divide the country. Many bloggers including a dear friend Pallavi (http://taxfreethoughts.wordpress.com/2009/12/14/divide-rule/), have written for or against this move. Before taking a stand based on emotions, let us first analyse the situation rationally.


1.)    Better Development: The overall development would be better no doubt. With a small state, the cash would be spread out more evenly over the whole region. I was talking to Mayur yesterday and he said that his hometown, Nagpur comes in the Vidharbha region, which is quite underdeveloped compared to the regions near Mumbai. May be because the funds never reach the area or the area gets overlooked each time. Whatever the case, he didn’t sound very pleased with the results. On the other hand we have seen, how Haryana which was a rather underdeveloped area has grown after it was separated from Punjab.

2.)    Better Management: It is difficult to manage a large area, whereas a small one can be managed easily.

3.)    New Jobs: Each new state will have new departments and more employees would be needed. For the development of the state, new schemes would be given out to attract entrepreneurs and factory owners.

4.)    Improved Lifestyle: The per capita income of the people will increase. Take the case of Chattisgarh, the per capita income of the region was below INR 20,000 before it was carved out from M.P. Now the statistics show that the per capita income is around INR 28,000.

5.)    Health Sector: More money would be available to spend on the health sector. It would be easier to manage it over a smaller area and population.

6.)    Improved Education: As I have said, better management and more money to spend on this sector, would ensure that the literacy rate increases.

7.) Better Infrastructure


1.)    Division: This is the biggest drawback. Dividing a country into nth smaller parts, would be a catastrophe. ‘United we stand, divided we fall’ is an old and true saying. And we know how the various invaders from Muhammad of Ghor to the British were able to tap into our weakness and rule us.

2.)    Corruption: Corruption would not go down but it would increase.

3.)    Increased Spending: More money would be needed to pay the army of Bureaucrats and workers, employed under the government.

4.)    Pan State Groups: Pan state groups and parties would rise. Every state has them. They do not think about the country as a whole but only about their people and region. According to such groups, the people of other states are not welcome to theirs.

5.)    Political Instability: A large number of small regional parties would increase. A multi party system has more disadvantages than advantages. A lot of money would be spent during elections. Chances of hung assemblies would increase. And we have seen how the politicians fight amongst each other in the Parliament.

6.)    As the number of parties increase, the chance of them fighting in Parliament also increases. The ruling body would be based on coalition amongst various parties. There would be walkouts, hung decisions and……etc. Overall the tax payers money would be spent and no work would be done.

7.) Sometimes people demand new states just because they are power hungry.

As we can see that new states have both its advantages and disadvantages. The only thing is, that we should not hold the country to ransom like the way the protesting party did in Andhra Pradesh and do all over the country.

8 Responses to “Divisive Policies”
  1. Gaurav says:

    Good listing of pros and cons. I support creation of smaller states because of the development and better lifestyle. As I said in my blog, states should be divided for better development and not on religious or linguistic lines. I live in Vidarbha (in Maharashtra) and I know the situation here. This region is in absolute shambles.

  2. Bikram says:

    As you have yourself mentioned the pros and cons are equal, but the thing is looking at history and the way our ploticians behave, do we think we can afford another Mr. Badal from Punjab, or Mr Chautala from haryana.. Instead of making a new state why dont we do something for the state that would happen if it is broken up.

    Its true haryana has Come up a bit, but it has not changed so much, there has not been such a big difference other than the beaurecracy has made mayhem.

    I am a strong beleiver that divided we do fall, no matter what, Both in punjab-haryana or Himachal the poor have Got more Poorer, the rich have gone more richer.. There are still places in himachal where roads haven’t reached. Moreover if you look at the election results the party initiating this move has actually lost seats. So if we look calmly , logically the majority of people also dont want the division, this being a democracy we should respect the wishes of the people in the state..

  3. Prateek says:

    Both of you have given valid arguments. But lets see. And as you can both see,for the time being, I am staying neutral on this issue. That is the reason why I didn’t comment on your posts regarding this issue in your respective blogs.

  4. Sapna says:

    Good Analysis Prateek.

    @Bikram: “Instead of making a new state why dont we do something for the state that would happen if it is broken up.” is a good concept but difficult in realization. It took a good forty years of struggle to get a high court Bench in Dharwad, Karnataka. That too was achieved after lots of strikes, bandhs, satyagraha and finally a threat/demand for a new state.

  5. Mayur says:

    Smaller territories are better managed. So I’d accept the argument of dividing the states into further smaller groups. But there has to be a logic. There are some politicos wanting to make a separate state just like that. Such power hungry opportunistic people should definitely be stopped.

    Taking the cause of Vidarbha ahead, Nagpur, if you see, was never a part of Maharashtra. It belonged to a territory called Central Province during the time of British Raj. When Indian republican states were formed, Vidarbha initially belonged to Madhya Pradesh. However after the ‘Samyukta Maharashtra’ movement, it got embedded with Maharashtra.

    Vidarbha also has a link to mythology. Rukmani, Lord Krishna’s first wife was said to be the princess of Vidarbha. In recent past (300 years), Nagpur region of Vidarbha came under the Bhonsales, who were an off shoot of Peshvas and Raja Shivaji. Hindi was the official language of the dynasty then.

    We have a rich history and excellent geography being misused.

    Vidarbha holds two-thirds of Maharashtra’s mineral resources, three quarters of its forest resources and is a net producer of power. Throughout its history Vidarbha has remained much calmer during the communal troubles than the rest of India. But it is plagued very much by poverty and malnutrition. It is less economically prosperous compared to the rest of Maharashtra, primarily because of the politicians from Mumbai and around. Though rich in minerals, coal, forests and mountains, we were always underdeveloped because of the continuous dominance of the political leaderships from the other parts of the state.

    Tell you more, Nagpur has been voted as the second greenest and cleanest city in India, behind only to Bangalore. It has consistently featured in the 10 best cities to live in India.

    The literacy rate in the major cities in Vidarbha (8 of them) is higher than the whole of Maharashtra put together. And we are still underdeveloped.

    Need I say more?

  6. Mayur says:

    Prateek, with your permission, I’m copying the comment above to make a new post on my blog. Hope you dont mind. I’ll leave a track back

Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] } I commented on an on going debate on Prateek’s blog. I thought it should serve a good purpose of further elevating the cause of the separate […]

  2. […] many places. Latest one being the aggression for Telengana and Gurkhaland. I had written a post ( Divisive Policies) on the merits and demerits of creating small states last year. But it seems here again, the people […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: