today i attended one lecture by an eminent professor from JNU .i t was on ECO CITY and Global warming... in a question answer session he was also talking abt Gandhi. He avoided reference to Gandhi fearing that SOME people may not like it. at least he has that SENSE.
Gandhi is like HIV. Protected sex and precautions while blood trnsfusion etc may help you keep away from infectd by HIV. but the Gandhi virus seems to be more dangerous esplly if the carriers are of the ilk nandy-nisar. etc. On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:09 PM, venukm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Welcome to hear; but I wish I could beleve it! > Thanks. > > On 6 Oct, 09:23, "damodar prasad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On point that struck me ( I did not take any notes for that matter) in > > Nizar mash talk is this: > > > > *"Sardar Patel was Gandhi's reality and Nehru was his dream. No one likes > > reality, every one is in love with one's dreams. Nehru was closer to > gandhi" > > . > > * > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:59 AM, jenny rowena <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > > > WHAT I MEANT - i would like to clarify - was this - > > > you were giving ambedkar, sreenarayana guru, etc as names to be > discussed > > > later > > > - as if in answer to what i said about not bringing caste into the > > > discussion - > > > > > so my reply meant this : just by deciding to look at these subaltern > > > figures, > > > you are not going bringing *the issue of caste *into the discussion - > > > > > if you discuss these people like you did (or reported you did) Gandhi, > > > then such a discussion will also *not include the issue of caste > > > > > *basically what i am trying to say here is to bring the caste > structure, > > > and other issues of identity into any discussion that is happening > today.. > > > that if you don't do this any discussion is incomplete.. > > > > > i am not dictating or saying i know the truth.. > > > > > jenny > > > > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> "And please read anyone you want in your next meetings.. Names don't > mean > > >> anything Dileep, > > >> it is the issues that matter. You can read Ambedkar and still manage > to > > >> talk about nothing - > > >> and even end up misreading him... " > > > > >> To my limited intelligence, saying this implies, > > >> that you have direct access to the correct reading of > everything.Gandhi, > > >> Ambedkar...everything under the sun. > > > > >> What else does these words mean? > > > > >> Despite Ranju is threatening, I will write on how I see Chengara. In > fact > > >> it is nothing that new, i have already wrote on it. But will try to > connect > > >> it with your observations. > > >> ( Ranju, I became an activist in CPIM"s fortress Kannur. Though no > longer > > >> an activist, > > >> I could sense fundamentalisms of all sort. Sorry, I am not one who > will so > > >> easily get silenced.I have been closely watching how you have been > engaging > > >> with "Venuettan" in > > >> this forum, soem 'respected" academics in certain other forums and how > you > > >> reserve your "go to hell" attitude for certain names no matter whtever > be > > >> the subject. So, please dont try to feign innocenece and strategically > act > > >> as if you are not strategical. I am prepared to face it) > > >> ) > > > > >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 12:24 AM, jenny rowena < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > >>> dileep, now i really can't follow what you are saying here - > > > > >>> why are people's names and motives being brought in again and again > > >>> into a discussion that is about gandhi, ambedkar, caste system, > > >>> the modes of how it was reported to > > >>> have been read at a recent seminar, differences with that mode, etc > > >>> etc.. this is really *silly > > >>> * * > > >>> * *When you say whatever issue/name we ( i.E : some people in Kerala > > >>> where Jenny, "Venuettan", Ranju ( Ranjith ?) etal are absent) take > up, the > > >>> discussion will be futile, I become a humbled person.* > > >>> *I will wait for your proclamation of "official line" on each and > every > > >>> issue/name.* > > >>> *once I become a follower ( and humbly submit before the Truth > revealed > > >>> by you, and will even attack everybody who are not willing to do so.* > > > > >>> and what kind of nonsense is the above? > > >>> did i say any of the things you are accusing me of? > > >>> should a difference of opinion, a questioning of a given ideological > > >>> position immediately lead > > >>> to this kind of attack? > > >>> do you know that you are making me out to be some monster??? > > > > >>> anyway go on...you do it very well... > > >>> btw, if there is any issue you want to come back to...... still > here.. > > > > >>> jenny > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >>>> of you critically/intelllectually engaged with any of the arguments > > >>>> raised by nizar on > > >>>> *I think i have argued exactly why Chengara struggle cannot be > called > > >>>> Gandhian, and you said you take the argument and will respond.. Now > what > > >>>> happened ????* > > > > >>>> ** > > >>>> Dear Jenny , > > >>>> for your ready reference let me give the portion you quoted in full > . > > > > >>>> I never said using certain jargon should be avoided. I only said, > > >>>> demanding everybody to speak the same language is fascist. I also > maintain > > >>>> that people could think critically using > > >>>> terms like satyagraha, panchayatiraj etc. as well.You were referring > to > > >>>> the vocabulary alone. though I went through each and every post by > you in > > >>>> this thread, I didn't find a single instanec where nay of you > > >>>> critically/intelllectually engaged with any of the arguments raised > by nizar > > >>>> on Gandhi. > > > > >>>> When you say whatever issue/name we ( i.E : some people in Kerala > where > > >>>> Jenny, "Venuettan", Ranju ( Ranjith ?) etal are absent) take up, the > > >>>> discussion will be futile, I become a humbled person. > > >>>> I will wait for your proclamation of "official line" on each and > every > > >>>> issue/name. > > >>>> once I become a follower ( and humbly submit before the Truth > revealed > > >>>> by you, and will even attack everybody who are not willing to do so. > > > > >>>> in case further training is needed, i will join CPIm for some time > and > > >>>> learn some secrets of ideological fundamentalism . > > > > >>>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:31 PM, jenny rowena < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >>>>>> Dear Jenny, > > > > >>>>>> *>>>>>Let me clarify my moderate claims.* > > >>>>>> *1.The report was of a seminar in which critical > assessment/readings > > >>>>>> of Gandhi were done in a dialogic manner. Of course all sorts of > issues came > > >>>>>> up in the discussion. Ambedkarite criticism included.It lasted > over three > > >>>>>> and a half hours and interactions were informal, alllowing equal > space for > > >>>>>> every participant. So inspiring was the ambience that we jointly > decided to > > >>>>>> hold seminars like "Reading Ambedkar", "Reading narayana Guru", > "Reading E M > > >>>>>> S", "Reading Sahodaran Ayyappan" etc.* > > > > >>>>> *I was responding to the report on the seminar which seemed to be > > >>>>> taking Gandhi at face value > > >>>>> or in other words, in his hegemonic avathar .. > > >>>>> For me Gandhi in his original form does not exist. > > >>>>> I cannot agree to a critique of Gandhi's ideas, without re-creating > > >>>>> Gandhi, using the > > >>>>> various ways in which he has been interrogated by Dalit Bahujan > > >>>>> scholars... > > >>>>> i can only analyze him now after doing this. this is the only > gandhi > > >>>>> available for some, NOW. > > >>>>> From the report or what you have written above, this does not seem > to > > >>>>> have happened. > > >>>>> And so i see a situation where we will have to sit and stare at the > > >>>>> same old Savarna Gandhi > > >>>>> and sit and discuss the merits and demerits of Sathyagraha.. > > >>>>> when we have no patience with such savarna concepts anymore and > want to > > >>>>> talk of new things... > > > > >>>>> And please read anyone you want in your next meetings.. Names don't > > >>>>> mean anything Dileep, > > >>>>> it is the issues that matter. You can read Ambedkar and still > manage to > > >>>>> talk about nothing - > > >>>>> and even end up misreading him... (e.g.The Chapter on Ambedkar by > > >>>>> Partha Chattterjee > > >>>>> in his book "The politics of the Governed" -) > > > > >>>>> * > > > > >>>>>> 2. It might be true that my report didn't bring the whole nunaces > of > > >>>>>> the debate in focus. ( sorry, being an organiser myself, it took > > >>>>>> almost three hours for me to prepare that report out of recorded > > >>>>>> tapes). But even from a re--reading of the given report, I can't > understand > > >>>>>> why that is taged as celebration of Gandhi in > > >>>>>> usual terms. You said discussions on satyagraha and panchayatiraj > were > > >>>>>> going on for sixty years and this is an extention. Could you site > one or two > > >>>>>> such examples from those sixty years? I am genuinely interested > in reading > > >>>>>> that. > > > > >>>>> * > > >>>>> I was referring to the way in which Gandhi has been associated with > and > > >>>>> has projected himself also in terms of > > >>>>> concepts like Sathyagraha, Panchayathiraj... The usual > commonsensical > > >>>>> mainstream hegemonic way of seeing > > >>>>> Gandhi.. Which is deeply connected to these concepts, without > allowing > > >>>>> us to enter into the existing knowledge > > >>>>> about Gandhi as the philosopher of the caste system in the modern > era.. > > > > >>>>> * > > >>>>> 3. You legetimises Venugopal's trivial way of vulgarising > opponent's > > >>>>> position by going to "history". OK, tell me where did poor Nizar ( > who is > > >>>>> not even a member of GY) behave > > > > >>>>>> badly to him? If you are referring to the fact that it was me > who > > >>>>>> reported..isn't that an evidence for persons becoming issues than > texts? > > > > >>>>> *I have not seen Venugopal using vulgarizing tactics in this forum. > > >>>>> But have seen him being ignored. > > >>>>> I have already talked about this issue... > > > > >>>>> * > > > > >>>>>> 4.Venugopal criticised the strategy of Chengara > > >>>>>> struggle(particularly threat to suicide) in this forum soem time > ago. Nobody > > >>>>>> demanded an apology ( nor do I beleve that it is the way one > should engage > > >>>>>> with other positions). > > > > >>>>> *I did not read it. And i really don't look at who is talking but > try > > >>>>> to stick to issues, in this forum i remember writing against both > Venugopal > > >>>>> (he has done that too) and Ranjith. And i remember Ranjith and > Venugopal > > >>>>> also debating similarly. > > >>>>> Why are you bringing this up? > > >>>>> * > > > > >>>>> 5.When Nizar says that it is the government who is following > > >>>>>> gandhian method at chengara and civil society in Kerala is more > cruel than > > >>>>>> British, somebody here want him to apologise!! I sincerely don't > understand > > >>>>>> why. But I could understand the pleasure gained out of such > polemics. > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
