[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

I believe we should refer to these fellow countrymen as 'out of state workers' or 'workers from other states' and not as migrants. In recent years the phrase 'migrants' or immigrants' has acquired a tainted tone thanks mouthings of politicians {e.g. Trump} and portrayals in the international & Indian media. In their shoes we, the so called educated, may not have behaved very differently.

Completely agree! I had this discussion elsewhere as well.

Originally Posted by poloman

Atleast we are not using 'aliens' like US does much before Trump? You know how insulting that is?

Not as insulting or discriminating as referring an Indian in India as a migrant. This is not like a Mexican in United States or say Turkish in Germany.

[KMT]

It appears that the more 'intellectual ' one becomes, the more pedantic one becomes about symantics.

A spade is a spade. Whats wrong in calling it that.

In a country like ours that has clear divides between faiths, castes, regions, economic strata, language and so forth, we might as well stick to the big picture. Getting bogged down with the terminology is just spinning wheels.

Today the Deccan Hearald has an article saying that the term 'Social Distancing' is inappropriate. Well everyone has an opinion, but once the die is cast there is no point in raging against symantics.

In a federal system, one of the downsides is that we are all linked to our 'home state'.

For instance, whats wrong in accepting that a software engineer in Bangalore who is from another state is in essence a migrant worker.
There is no opportunity for him to get the same job in his home state and there is no local in Bangalore who is able to do it.

One who has migrated from his native place is a migrant.

What is wrong with that?
Definitely nothing at all for him to be ashamed of.
Such migrants are the backbone of many economies.

Or should they be called 'guest workers', or 'non indigenous citizens'? Does that sound more respectful?

This lockdown has brought the plight of migrant workers in the unorganised sector to light.

It also has shown that the rights of workers who are 'voters' in that geography are better protected. Free food rations and other economic support is extended by each State in India to people who are deemed to be Natives of that state due to our federal system. People who dont have a local 'vote' seem to be ignored by the public welfare system.

[whitewing]

I voted: can't say, not enough data.I assume that the goal of the lockdown was buy time to flatten the curve, we seem to have gotten by manage-ably well, due to

• The lockdown
• Due to some fortuitous "resistance" of the general populace
• We are in a fools world and the data is under reported.

If it was due to

• The lockdown: wouldn't diluting it be counter productive? The country and its people have made sacrifices (economically and socially) to keep the curve flat (and succeeded). Now, by diluting the lockdown, would those sacrifices amount to nothing? Or is it that we are now having a better understanding on management of the situation?
• If it is Indians are resistant: we don't yet know if this is true, unless proven, it is too risky to open up.
• Under reported data: we don't know if this is true. Anecdotally seems to be false because, we have not heard of the hospitals and mortuaries being overloaded. Though there was that BBC report...

Given the above, why would the lock down be removed/Diluted? Economic fallout?? In that case why was a nationwide lockdown instituted and we didn't follow America's approach?

Originally Posted by _chikku

Migrants complaining about food was also reported in Bangalore by bangalore mirror. Migrants say they are not used to South Indian food.https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.c...w/75189239.cms

Imagine the plight of these guys, stuck in tin sheds in middle of summer. Being given food that is not natural to them. Wouldn't there be discontentment? It is not as if they are convicts in a prison and whatever the state throws at them they have to eat.These are fellow citizens of ours who have journeyed across the land with hope for a better material life. And we expect them to be brimming with gratitude towards the measures taken?This is not to take away due credit to the selfless NGOs and its volunteers and the government servants, especially ones who are on the ground.

Originally Posted by carboy

There are 2 stats here - 44% of households do own agricultural land.- 7% household owns 47% of land.The first stat means that almost 1 out of 2 families own agricultural land. The 2nd stat means that most people who own land don't own large pieces of land. Lang pieces are owned by a small percentage of land. This doesn't mean that the rest of the agricultural land owners don't own land or are landless. It means, they own small pieces of land. The 2nd stat doesn't negate the first one.

Yes, and what is the implication of that? Does it mean 44% can now be self-sufficent with regards to food needs? Like a family that had planted wheat, would have chopped away a part of the crop to sow some quick growing veggies in Jan, in anticipation of the homecoming?

Originally Posted by poloman

Regarding food, I don't have problem in people being fuzzy about food. But the discussion here was turning one sided saying migrants are dying of hunger. So this needed a correction. This is not the time to bother about such likes and dislikes. So what do you suggest? Not report any such incidents or censor them since some one will misuse the news.

The thing is in a country as large as India, and there will be specific instances of superlative delivery and inadequate delivery(and human behavior). It is upto one's wisdom to judge if these are specific instances or more general trends.

[AMG Power]

Originally Posted by KMT

For instance, whats wrong in accepting that a software engineer in Bangalore who is from another state is in essence a migrant worker.

True. Not just software engineers - every person working in Bangalore at any level who is not from Karnataka is essentially a migrant worker having migrated either in the current or earlier generation.

Anyway this is just semantics. The main protagonists don't care what you call them as long as they have work, a place to stay and are paid.

[GeneralJazz]

Originally Posted by poloman

So what do you suggest? Not report any such incidents or censor them since some one will misuse the news.

You missed my point. Such incidents happen and they need to be condemned. I don't remember mentioning anywhere about censoring. Please don't make stuff up. What I'm trying to convey is that if you want to share news of such incidents, please do so from verifiable news sources. Outlets such as Marunadan Malayali, Opindia etc. have their own agendas, as you very well know. They always twist the narrative to fit their version (not that other major outlets don't, but they have their limits). The very same link you referred is now forwarded quite a lot in Whatsapp with some dangerous comments. I mentioned some of them in a previous post, but the mods rightly found them not worthy to be posted here, so not going to do that again. Here is a news clip better explaining the situation. Not related to the incident you mentioned, but similar.

Kerala’s Additional Chief Secretary Satyajeet Rajan told ThePrint that one of the major causes for the discontent was food — the migrant workers weren’t happy by the endless supply of rice being served from the Kudumbashree Community Kitchens, which are entirely run by women workers.

“We changed that,” Rajan said. “We began making North Indian dal, chapatis, pickle along with rice. We also began handing them raw material so that they could cook according to their taste. We altered the diet in a few places, like for instance serving sattu khichdi in camps that had labourers from Jharkhand.”

Of course, you can keep arguing that "these" people are in no position to make demands and so on. "Go back to where they came from" is another thing going on. Sound familiar? I wont comment any more on that.

Also, please keep the discussion civil. Its extremely easy to be rude and nasty. The situation is not going to improve if we start attacking each other.

Originally Posted by tsk1979

I read the article. Nowhere did they refuse food. ------
Please be a little cautious in twisting words, esp in these times.

Exactly my point. The next person to see the message will only read the part about refusing food and not go through the article. He will forward it to the next person with his own version and so on.

This is what I suggested that we all avoid.

[Eddy]

Originally Posted by Eddy

The govt is allowing the opening of the IT sector from 20th April onwards.

If I need to buy a laptop, can I?

Will it have to be ordered online via Amazon, or will the likes of HP and Dell physical stores also be open?

If this report is to be believed, laptops (and other non-essential stuff) are a no-go till the lockdown ends. No relaxation on 20th April.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/coro...=home-bigstory

The supply of non-essential goods by e-commerce companies will remain prohibited during the lockdown period, the Home Ministry said today.

[lapis_lazuli]

A simple question to the learned members, who have been regularly contributing here: is the lock-down showing distinct positive results, at a local and national level?

Is there a simple measurement criteria that establishes the answer (positive or negative) ? Or is this going to stir another hornets' nest?

Of all the opinions, counter opinions, facts and snippets, this is the only question that still remains unanswered, especially with >60% of the privileged community voting FOR the lock-down.

[mohansrides]

Originally Posted by KMT

..A spade is a spade. Whats wrong in calling it that...For instance, whats wrong in accepting that a software engineer in Bangalore who is from another state is in essence a migrant worker...One who has migrated from his native place is a migrant. ..What is wrong with that?.....

I actually agree with you that we are getting caught in semantics; and I personally do not have a problem with the word migrants. Like you pointed out, many of us are, or have been, migrant workers ourselves. So, why all this hoopla!!

But, if I may, I think the reason that people are suggesting that we term this differently is that the rampant usage of the word 'migrant' has maybe created a sense of disownment in the general population where we don't see these people as a part of regular society. So, while we freely identify with the plight of the frontline workers during this pandemic, very few people are even willing to acknowledge the human tragedy unfolding in front of us.

In fact, members on this forum have directly or indirectly asked "..why is this problem being brought up for discussion when we in the middle class are helpless in this regard, and when we didn't put these people in this circumstance?" The other line popularly being bandied around is that "...unless one is willing to act to help the migrants, then one should not talk about their plight."

First, we are aware by now the measures, both big and small, that are being taken to help the migrants. That aside, let us be clear that the plight of these migrants is because of the lockdown which is a measure that was enacted by our government on our behalf. So, the plight of these migrants is very much tied to our lives and our choices. There is no question about it.

Now, let us talk about the elephant in the room. Any discussion of the migrants' plight is taken as a criticism of the lockdown; which I admit that it could very well be. But, here is the even more troubling extrapolation. Any criticism of the lockdown and its fall out is being interpreted as a criticism of the government, or worse, a lack of support for the government.

So, let us lay this to rest right here right now.

EVERYONE appreciates the difficulty of the government's position with this virus. And EVERYONE understands that..

a.) if a lockdown was not enacted, the government would have caught a lot of flak for it.

b.) if the opposition was in power, they would likely have enacted the same exact lockdown.

So, people who are discussing the migrants' plight and other economic aspects of the lockdown are discussing that, and only that. We have no interest in attacking the government whatsoever. At least, I don't.

Incidentally, we have all read the stories of anguish and suffering from the migrants. But, here is one that will gladden your heart. This is an article from today's news about a Mr. Mahesh Jena who pedalled 1700 kms with nothing but a song in his heart. This story made me sad; but also happy and hopeful. Partly because the authors have decided to write this as a road story thus bringing out the hope and the sense of freedom that only the road can stake claims to. But, also because of Mahesh himself - a guy who despite being caught in a vicious economic cycle has nary a complaint. He talks matter-of-factly about his family and his life; and discusses the decisions that he took with a civilized dispassion that is more appropriate in a corporate boardroom. Here is a man forced to pedal 1700 kms for no fault of his own and yet he decides to adopt a tone of generosity, and to talk with unmistakable gratitude for the string of strangers who helped him get to within shouting distance of his family. As I was reading the story, I found myself cheering for the man, "Go Mahesh Go.." to the point where my wife came into the room and asked me if I was ok. I told her that I haven't felt hopeful until this morning.

After they are done with that article, anyone who feels up to it can also read this article and see if they find parallels.

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by AMG Power

True. Not just software engineers - every person working in Bangalore at any level who is not from Karnataka is essentially a migrant worker having migrated either in the current or earlier generation.

And what do you define as being from Karnataka? Speaking Kannada as your primary language? Or being from a bit of land in present-day Karnataka, though it may be non-Kannada speaking.

Either way, it's a slippery and parochial slope.

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by AMG Power

True. Not just software engineers - every person working in Bangalore at any level who is not from Karnataka is essentially a migrant worker having migrated either in the current or earlier generation.

Anyway this is just semantics. The main protagonists don't care what you call them as long as they have work, a place to stay and are paid.

Its not just semantics. The crux of the problem is there in the post - a person from one city considering someone from another city (in the same country) as a migrant. S/he could be from Mumbai, Kochi or Mysore and working in Bangalore, or any other city in India. In my view that person should not be referred as a migrant. When the world is getting smaller, these thoughts are actually in the opposite direction.

[AMG Power]

Originally Posted by vb-san

Its not just semantics. The crux of the problem is there in the post -.

That post of mine is ONLY about semantics.

The fact that it is wrong on many levels to refer to them as "migrant workers" has been highlighted in far greater detail in an earlier post of mine. (which has since been deleted).

[Chetan_Rao]

Constitution of India 1949, Article 19, Section 1, clause (d), (e) and (g) says everything that needs to be said on the subject.

(1) All citizens shall have the right:
...
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and
...
(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

Exceptions, as applicable, are also listed and while they give the State (capital S, meaning country) certain leeway to make decisions in public interest, it calls out clearly that discrimination is unacceptable.

Nothing in sub clauses (d) and (e) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the rights conferred by the said sub clauses either in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe

Nothing in sub clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause, and, in particular, nothing in the said sub clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to,
(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise

I could call my maid who doesn't reside in my apartment complex a 'migrant worker' one fine morning when she comes in, and it would be as absurd an argument as any other made on the subject.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

Constitution of India 1949, Article 19, Section 1, clause (d), (e) and (g) says everything that needs to be said on the subject.

This is the one of the most important things in the definition of a Country - citizens of the country should be able to move around freely inside the country (talking about regular times, not lockdown). If someone thinks otherwise, then they should start a secessionist movement in their state. If you don't want people from other parts of your country to come to your state, that essentially means you don't want to be part of the country.

[sunishsamuel]

According to the International Labour Organization a migrant worker means:

85. Under Article 11(1) of the Convention, the term "migrant for employment" means a person who migrates from one country to another with a view to being employed otherwise than on his or her own account. The scope of Convention No. 97 excludes frontier workers, the short-term entry of members of the liberal professions and artistes, and seafarers (Article 11(2)).

You can read more -> Migrant Workers

This makes sense. And any lawful citizen moving within the country need not be addressed a migrant or a guest worker or any other fancy name(s)

However, wikipedia and some grammar websites have a different view of Migrant. Sometimes even confusing with Immigrant.

Hope we can rest the migrant related discussion here. Let's focus on the Lock Down and related issues. Peace and good health to all.

[Hayek]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

Constitution of India 1949, Article 19, Section 1, clause (d), (e) and (g) says everything that needs to be said on the subject

Well said.

We are going dangerously off the Lockdown topic, but I must say that the idea that we can call an Indian who chooses to move within the country a migrant, or even worse, as some have, call someone who has spent all his life in a city like Bangalore or Bombay, but has a different mother tongue from the majority language of the state, a migrant boggles the mind. Please note that even when Trump rants about migrants, he is talking about people traveling from overseas to the USA - not about Americans from Oklahoma who move to New York. Freedom of movement is fundamental to the construct of a Nation State, hell it is even fundamental to a Supranational body like the European Union.

Returning to the Lockdown topic, of course there are people from within the country who have family and a support system elsewhere, and will want to return to that home town in times of trouble. That is not surprising - but it is dangerous when one is trying to contain an epidemic, and restrictions on people moving under such circumstances are fully understandable. It is for the state governments to make arrangements to ensure that those who want to travel but can't are taken care of.