Meitei was never tribe : A reply
|
Dr L Krishnamangol Singh
Contd from previous issue
In fact, in primitive society, there were tribes due to historical factors or economic and social factors, which are already known. And, in most countries of the world today, the tribes are now transformed into non-tribals or the general citizens of the country. That is to say, there has been tremendous or a lot of socio-economic transformation and changes in the process of development of the ancient tribes or primitive tribes towards modern civilisation and development although there are still some vestiges of tribes in some pockets of the world.
A quick examination of the world constitutions and world history, and different theories and policies of economic development and economic policies and reforms have revealed that the peoples are treated as the general citizens of the countries in terms of human development. And, they are all equal in the eyes of the laws. Again, where poverty exists specific programmes of poverty alleviation and employment generation were taken up by the governments to tackle the poverty issues in order to bring them the government into the mainstream of economic changes and development. Thus, they seek to achieve social and economic development of the people with dignity. In fact, human develpment with dignity and participation of the peiople in the development process has now become the main focus or central them of the overall economic policies and development programmes in different parts of the countries in the world including India and her small states like Manipur.
Thus, the choice of word/the use of the term/concept in development needs to be carefully checked and reconceptualised and new theories of development need to be evolved/developed in order to avoid the conflicts and controversies in the process of developmen. For example, the use of the term “ Red Indian” in America has already been banned. Again, in about the fourteen and the fifteenth centuries, most of the tribal organisations in European countries had decayed and there was transition from feudalism to capitalism. Also, it is well known that in the political and economic history, the use of the term “slave” which was once a mode of production or mode of social relation had already been banned long time back. And, even today, many peoples in the world still continue to remember that the former American President Abraham Lincoln ended his life for freeing “slaves” from the American society (i.e. for freeing the slave mode of production or mode of relation that established between the slaves and the slave masters or slave owners.)
In fact, it is now well known that the use of the term “slave” is now derogatory as it openly involves “social humiliation” and illegal exploitation of the people. Thus, there should not be race for the concept of tribe or tribals. As, for the tribes or tribals, some scholars prefer to use the term lineage members or lineaged based society. And some other i.e. the rest prefer to use indegenous peoples. Again indigenous peoples also include a non tribal and tribals. But the better term for the tribe are considered to be lineage members or lineage-based society which indicate their ancesters in the historical contexts. And the earlier ancient people are treated as general population or indigenous peoples. Again the tribes or tribals are small group or sub-group of the large communities. They are conjecture to or a form/group in the sense of togetherness conjectives or conjunction to the major community in the economic doctrines of history. Here, it can be remembered that the orthodox of criteria of tribes or tribals are now orastically changed. Most of them have now become undernised. Thus, rejected and now criteria for development needs to be formulated/conceptualised. Thus, the old criteria of tribes should now be development should be forward looking. Today, any form of derogatory concept should not be used in the development process of any country.
To conclude, in his Asian drama, the economist Nobel Laureate Gurnar Myrdal clearly pointed out that sometimes, we dismissed the data that are not reliable and controversial. Instead, we looked at the system (i.e. the political , economic, cultural and other factors to determine the status of civilisation and historical level of development). We cannot also solely rely on the data whether census or otherwise conducted by the British as they were the colonists ( controller of the settlers) who subdued and subjugated the Meiteis and other communities and established that they were the masters/political masters, administrative controllers etc. This does not mean that the Meities were superior community in the process of civilisation. It is observed that the tribals or other communities had also many human qualities in those days. However, the history divided between tribals and non-tribals in Manipur under the same Independent Kingdom of Manipur.
Thus, the Meities (officially recognised and historically usage term) should not jump into the tribal sector. a concept which should be under the government of Manipur or State Government (In fact tribals should be detribalised in the present stage of civilisation of Manipur. In this connection, the India constitution needs to be ammended. It is worth considering that the report of the Second Backward Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (1979-1980) have rightly mentioned the term (s) as economically weaker section of the society. In fact, poverty alleviation programmes need to be still strengthened within the same conceptual framework of economic deprivation and modern development. In this connection, the Indian Constitution needs to be appropriately amended to promote economic and social development of the people with dignity, self respect and self-esteem. On the whole, Manipur was an Independent kingdom or nation state with Monarchy (as a princely state) before her merger with the Indian Union. Thus, the question of safeguarding the whole state of Manipur mainly rests with the Government of India and the Goverment of Manipur as under the constitution of the country and the existing rules of the state.
The writer is an acadcemician economics author and columnist
He is also formerly founder General Secretary of Economic Development Research Group, Manipur
Contd from previous issue
In fact, in primitive society, there were tribes due to historical factors or economic and social factors, which are already known. And, in most countries of the world today, the tribes are now transformed into non-tribals or the general citizens of the country. That is to say, there has been tremendous or a lot of socio-economic transformation and changes in the process of development of the ancient tribes or primitive tribes towards modern civilisation and development although there are still some vestiges of tribes in some pockets of the world.
A quick examination of the world constitutions and world history, and different theories and policies of economic development and economic policies and reforms have revealed that the peoples are treated as the general citizens of the countries in terms of human development. And, they are all equal in the eyes of the laws. Again, where poverty exists specific programmes of poverty alleviation and employment generation were taken up by the governments to tackle the poverty issues in order to bring them the government into the mainstream of economic changes and development. Thus, they seek to achieve social and economic development of the people with dignity. In fact, human develpment with dignity and participation of the peiople in the development process has now become the main focus or central them of the overall economic policies and development programmes in different parts of the countries in the world including India and her small states like Manipur.
Thus, the choice of word/the use of the term/concept in development needs to be carefully checked and reconceptualised and new theories of development need to be evolved/developed in order to avoid the conflicts and controversies in the process of developmen. For example, the use of the term “ Red Indian” in America has already been banned. Again, in about the fourteen and the fifteenth centuries, most of the tribal organisations in European countries had decayed and there was transition from feudalism to capitalism. Also, it is well known that in the political and economic history, the use of the term “slave” which was once a mode of production or mode of social relation had already been banned long time back. And, even today, many peoples in the world still continue to remember that the former American President Abraham Lincoln ended his life for freeing “slaves” from the American society (i.e. for freeing the slave mode of production or mode of relation that established between the slaves and the slave masters or slave owners.)
In fact, it is now well known that the use of the term “slave” is now derogatory as it openly involves “social humiliation” and illegal exploitation of the people. Thus, there should not be race for the concept of tribe or tribals. As, for the tribes or tribals, some scholars prefer to use the term lineage members or lineaged based society. And some other i.e. the rest prefer to use indegenous peoples. Again indigenous peoples also include a non tribal and tribals. But the better term for the tribe are considered to be lineage members or lineage-based society which indicate their ancesters in the historical contexts. And the earlier ancient people are treated as general population or indigenous peoples. Again the tribes or tribals are small group or sub-group of the large communities. They are conjecture to or a form/group in the sense of togetherness conjectives or conjunction to the major community in the economic doctrines of history. Here, it can be remembered that the orthodox of criteria of tribes or tribals are now orastically changed. Most of them have now become undernised. Thus, rejected and now criteria for development needs to be formulated/conceptualised. Thus, the old criteria of tribes should now be development should be forward looking. Today, any form of derogatory concept should not be used in the development process of any country.
To conclude, in his Asian drama, the economist Nobel Laureate Gurnar Myrdal clearly pointed out that sometimes, we dismissed the data that are not reliable and controversial. Instead, we looked at the system (i.e. the political , economic, cultural and other factors to determine the status of civilisation and historical level of development). We cannot also solely rely on the data whether census or otherwise conducted by the British as they were the colonists ( controller of the settlers) who subdued and subjugated the Meiteis and other communities and established that they were the masters/political masters, administrative controllers etc. This does not mean that the Meities were superior community in the process of civilisation. It is observed that the tribals or other communities had also many human qualities in those days. However, the history divided between tribals and non-tribals in Manipur under the same Independent Kingdom of Manipur.
Thus, the Meities (officially recognised and historically usage term) should not jump into the tribal sector. a concept which should be under the government of Manipur or State Government (In fact tribals should be detribalised in the present stage of civilisation of Manipur. In this connection, the India constitution needs to be ammended. It is worth considering that the report of the Second Backward Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (1979-1980) have rightly mentioned the term (s) as economically weaker section of the society. In fact, poverty alleviation programmes need to be still strengthened within the same conceptual framework of economic deprivation and modern development. In this connection, the Indian Constitution needs to be appropriately amended to promote economic and social development of the people with dignity, self respect and self-esteem. On the whole, Manipur was an Independent kingdom or nation state with Monarchy (as a princely state) before her merger with the Indian Union. Thus, the question of safeguarding the whole state of Manipur mainly rests with the Government of India and the Goverment of Manipur as under the constitution of the country and the existing rules of the state.
The writer is an acadcemician economics author and columnist
He is also formerly founder General Secretary of Economic Development Research Group, Manipur