1. The word "Bangladeshi" is grammatically incorrect. Bangladesh means: the land where Bengalis live. So the people who live in Bangladesh are Bengalis and not Bangladeshi or Bangladeshan. "Most unique" is grammatically incorrect, because the meaning of unique is one of a kind; therefore, "most unique" does not make sense. "Bangladeshi" does not make sense either.
2. One of the arguments I hear is that we need to include non-Bengalis that live in our geographical boundary and therefore, we should call us Bangladeshis. Bangladesh itself is derived from Bengali. I do not understand how Bangladeshi is anymore inclusive then Bengali. I am pretty sure the non-Bengalis of Bangladesh did not feel any more included by changing the name. The people of Chittagong Hill Tracks would have felt included if we did not rape, murder, and burn them for twenty years. They would have felt included if we did not take away their land and give it to Bengalis. They would have felt included if we kept our promises.
3. Another argument is that we need to differentiate from the Bengalis of West Bengal. This notion itself is communal. There are Bengalis all over the word. Why only differentiate with the Bengalis of West Bengal? Further more, why should we give up our right to the Bengali nationality? We are the only independent Bengali nation, and we have every right to claim Bengali nationality. If we move away form what we are, we can as well be part of Pakistan again.
4. Now that Bangladeshi has been established for 30 years, there are many Bangladeshis in UK, US, and other countries. Following the logic of differentiating Bengalis of Bangladesh and West Bengal, we will have to differentiate between the Bangladeshis of UK and Bangladesh. Now we must change our nationality again. May be, the current citizens of Bangladesh should be called Bangladeshan.
5. The countries that are nation states have not changed their nationality to reflect inclusion. Germans did not change their name to Gemanians to give non-German citizens equal rights. People of Ireland are not Irelandi; they are Irish, though the Northern Ireland is part of UK.
4. Unlike countries like India or Pakistan, Bangladesh is a nation state. Our nationality is Bengali and citizenship is Peoples Republic of Bangladesh. There is nothing controversial about this.
The world Bangladeshi is grammatically wrong and meaningless. Communalism, bigotry, and submission to Pakistan were the motive behind this word. Not to mention, it the brainchild of a Pakistani collaborator and was introduced by a military dictator. This word disconnects us form our past. It is unfortunate that this word is widely accepted and well established. No significant effort has been given by the Bengalis to get back their identity. Even Sheikh Hasina referred to us as Bangladeshis during her visit to US as PM of Bangladesh.
The idea of putting the ethnic group next to nationality of Bangladeshi will only prove that we have accepted Bangladeshi as our nationality.
I know it's just a word. But it defines who I am. It carries thousands of years of my past and I refuse to give that up.
2. One of the arguments I hear is that we need to include non-Bengalis that live in our geographical boundary and therefore, we should call us Bangladeshis. Bangladesh itself is derived from Bengali. I do not understand how Bangladeshi is anymore inclusive then Bengali. I am pretty sure the non-Bengalis of Bangladesh did not feel any more included by changing the name. The people of Chittagong Hill Tracks would have felt included if we did not rape, murder, and burn them for twenty years. They would have felt included if we did not take away their land and give it to Bengalis. They would have felt included if we kept our promises.
3. Another argument is that we need to differentiate from the Bengalis of West Bengal. This notion itself is communal. There are Bengalis all over the word. Why only differentiate with the Bengalis of West Bengal? Further more, why should we give up our right to the Bengali nationality? We are the only independent Bengali nation, and we have every right to claim Bengali nationality. If we move away form what we are, we can as well be part of Pakistan again.
4. Now that Bangladeshi has been established for 30 years, there are many Bangladeshis in UK, US, and other countries. Following the logic of differentiating Bengalis of Bangladesh and West Bengal, we will have to differentiate between the Bangladeshis of UK and Bangladesh. Now we must change our nationality again. May be, the current citizens of Bangladesh should be called Bangladeshan.
5. The countries that are nation states have not changed their nationality to reflect inclusion. Germans did not change their name to Gemanians to give non-German citizens equal rights. People of Ireland are not Irelandi; they are Irish, though the Northern Ireland is part of UK.
4. Unlike countries like India or Pakistan, Bangladesh is a nation state. Our nationality is Bengali and citizenship is Peoples Republic of Bangladesh. There is nothing controversial about this.
The world Bangladeshi is grammatically wrong and meaningless. Communalism, bigotry, and submission to Pakistan were the motive behind this word. Not to mention, it the brainchild of a Pakistani collaborator and was introduced by a military dictator. This word disconnects us form our past. It is unfortunate that this word is widely accepted and well established. No significant effort has been given by the Bengalis to get back their identity. Even Sheikh Hasina referred to us as Bangladeshis during her visit to US as PM of Bangladesh.
The idea of putting the ethnic group next to nationality of Bangladeshi will only prove that we have accepted Bangladeshi as our nationality.
I know it's just a word. But it defines who I am. It carries thousands of years of my past and I refuse to give that up.
No comments:
Post a Comment