Do you think it would benefit the people of India if all Indians started seeing the states they belong to as their ‘religion’ and maybe those who belong to other states as threats?
But how does one decide which state one belongs to?
For example, it seems, learning/speaking Marathi does not make you a Marathi manoos. Maybe this applies to some other Indian states too.
“Just because one can write, read, and speak Marathi does not entitle him/her to local jobs,” he said. “For getting a job in Maharashtra, one should be a Marathi by birth. Knowledge of reading and writing the language will not do” [link]
“If you teach them Marathi, they will open Marathi schools in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar and claim jobs in Maharashtra. What will then happen to the local people?” [link]
But who are these ‘local people’?
Those who have been living in a state for a certain period, say three generations? But I know of families who speak the regional languages, have been studying and teaching in local schools, and cook, pray and celebrate like ‘local’ people but have surnames (and sometimes skin color and facial features) that they have inherited from their great grandparents from other parts of the country.
Would you consider them ‘locals’?
Does anybody who has been living for a certain amount of time, within a certain distance in any direction from a place become a ‘local’ in that place?
Or do they also have to have grandparents who spoke the language that the majority in that place speaks? Or do they also need to have the right ‘genes’?
Why do you think should those who live within a certain distance have more right to employment/other rights in a place?
By this logic should every Indian live in the states their grand parents were born in? Then what happens to those whose parents are from two different regions/religions?