Good Lord - where's Radcliffe?

Ø Gorkhas want a separate homeland.
Ø ULFA is trying to liberate Assam from the evils of Indian government.
Ø Raj Thackrey (and his cronies) feel Marathi must be your father tongue if you want to migrate to Mumbai
Ø The Karnataka government wants only Kannadigas to use public transport (almost all signboards in buses are in kannada)

And then you have Nagaland, Arunachal, Kashmir!!! My God – is there an India somewhere?

Now when Cyril John Radcliff was appointed by the British Imperial authority to head the Boundary commission, the aim was to divide India in such a manner that it would create enough opportunities for secessionist to thrive and ruin the social fabric of the sub-continent forever. The Brits have always been good at doing these kinda things. They used the US Jewish lobby to force Wilson in throwing his weight against the Germans in the First War – by promising to assist the Jews in overthrowing the Ottomans so they could have complete control over the coveted Holy Land.
So with a similar aim to destabilize a populous and promising nation (that had the potential to ruin the industry in Manchester), the brits got Sir Radcliff in to divide India on a simple basis of religion. To the hardboiled and dampened culture of a medieval british political machinery, Religion was the only basis to split a vibrant and rich community. What more can you expect from a race that still believes in monarchy, street-fights over football and wears black every evening to the Pub!

But little did Radcliff (or any of his peers and successors) know that the Indian people were better in divisive politics than the mighty british.

While the brits left us with 17 states, we have nearly doubled in the last 60 years – or should, in the next 5. Nehru let the cat out of the bag by appointing a commission that started dissecting states on linguistic biases and basis. Not to take away the great efforts of many revolutionists and martyrs – it is kind of impossible to attempt dividing India on the basis of languages given the wide diversity and variety of people in this country. Here, every 100 kilometers you will find a class (or sub-class, I wouldn’t call them a race) that speaks some different dialect, if not a lingo in itself.
The saga continues - the causes have been differing with time, place and context. I don’t even know why Chhatisgarh was carved out or what Jharkhand (my home state) would mean linguistically in 21st century. All it means to me is the burden of extra administrative machinery, resulting in further drain of taxpayers money. Albeit, that’s what politics is about – reusing the taxpayers money for personal benefits.

So for the classes (races, if you would insist) that doesn’t have a state tagged to their racial (or Class-ial, if I may) identity, there’s a cause to create political leadership by cheap tricks. But what does a Marathi or a Bengali do if s/he wants to become a leader?

Enter Raj Thackrey or Mamata Banerjee.

The rest of the story is known, or can be guessed with minimal application of mental prowess.

However, there’s a moral to this story here. The unstable situation created by the Brits in the western provinces of the Indian subcontinent is now a major threat to the entire world. In effect, Sir Radcliff’s actions have created a situation congenial for the development of various terrorist organizations that are bred in Pakistan & Afghanistan. No denying the credits of US too – in that respect – by having actively supported the antisocial movement against Najibullah (that eventually became Taleban) and building a Frankenstein of Saddam.

What if we had only 3 of the 4 Traditional Arithmetic Operations? No points in guessing which one should go!