Dear Gouri, Have not so far come across any writing on Satyagraha by Ambedkar.
After Gandhi's adoption of this term, most non-violent struggles were routinely called Sathyagraha. Though Gandhian theory on Sathyagraha actually went beyond just non-violent resistance, and attributed new values to it...This has already been discussed here from many perspectives. See above and other threads.. jenny On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Gouri Patwardhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As far as I know the agitation for the access to the water tank in > Mahad that Dr. Ambedkar led was called Mahad chowdar Tale (Chowdar > tank) Satyagraha. I don't know if Dr. Ambedkar called it Satyagraha. > Has he written explicitly about Satyagraha? > Gouri > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:25 PM, jenny rowena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Aryan, I found Nizar's arguments not to have any relevance to > > understanding the present. that is the political > > reason for my posting here.. > > > > waiting to read ur piece.. > > > > jenny > > > > \\On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:25 PM, aryakrishnan ramakrishnan > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Dear Jenny,Luisa,Ranju, > >> > >> My interest in engaging in this kind of exercise is related to > >> understanding the present. which is more political than historical. > >> History do help in major ways but sometimes the novelty, > >> innovations, and surprises won't be captured due to overhistoricising. > >> > >> One has to be theoretically inventive, creative and commited in order to > >> theorise the present. > >> > >> Thus I found Nizar's proposition interesting. Arguing with it will also > >> be productive, as this debate increasingly show. > >> > >> I will share my reading of Chengara struggle in anorganised manner soon. > >> triggering rich theoretical work in itself is an indication of the > >> creativity of the movement. > >> It isn't at all an attempt to negate agency to Dalit activists in > Chengara > >> and ascribe it to Gandhi ! I personally take the social reality as > >> indeterminate, calling for > >> various theoretical frameworks. > >> > >> > >> Luisa, > >> To be frank, Nizar himeself (in an interview published in a Malayalam > >> journal) called Bin Laden > >> "violent Gandhi". considering their position on civilisation. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:09 PM, jenny rowena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Friends, > >> > > >> > 1. Given the new turn in the discussions to read Gandhi as a text, > both > >> > by > >> > Ahmed in an another thread > >> > and by Devika here... what i am writing here is also an attempt to > read > >> > Gandhi's philosophy.. > >> > Actually i have done it earlier too in talking about the concept of > >> > Sathyagraha... > >> > However Ahmed i know that some readings always gets better visibility > >> > than > >> > others.. > >> > > >> > 2. Dileep, most of the points that you have written about Sathyagraha > >> > can be > >> > shared by any > >> > non-violent and even violent resistance as Luisa pointed out.. > >> > The core to what distinguishes Gandhian Sathyagraha from other forms > of > >> > non-violent resistance > >> > is the fact that here there is an insistence on suffering, > self-injury, > >> > truth and other ideals > >> > like patience, sympathy, weaning, love... etc.. > >> > -- let me quote again from Gandhi's own text... > >> > > >> > Its root meaning is holding onto truth, hence truth-force. I have also > >> > called it love-force or soul-force. In the application of satyagraha, > I > >> > discovered in the earliest stages that pursuit of truth did not admit > of > >> > violence being inflicted on one's opponent but that he must be weaned > >> > from > >> > error by patience and sympathy. For what appears to be truth to the > one > >> > may > >> > appear to be error to the other. And patience means self-suffering. So > >> > the > >> > doctrine came to mean vindication of truth, not by infliction of > >> > suffering > >> > on the opponent, but on oneself... > >> > > >> > In an earlier mail to Dileep, I had already talked about this to which > >> > Dileep wrote: > >> > > >> > ??>6.The point you raise, that, it is not a choice but forced > situation, > >> > doesn't nullify such a proposition. > >> > > >> > Let me elaborate my point further... > >> > > >> > The whole Gandhian idea of winning over, patience, love, suffering > etc.. > >> > imagines a struggle, where > >> > the resisting party is already placed in some kind of a negotiating > >> > position.. > >> > Where she can still be patient, suffer, wean, wait it out, talk about > >> > love, > >> > etc etc.. > >> > In other words, where she is able to somewhere make a connection with > >> > the opponent from his present situation and wean him into give in.. > >> > > >> > This is Sathyagraha for you.. For an excellent illustration see Lage > >> > Raho > >> > Munna Bhai.. > >> > > >> > What i am saying is this... > >> > this kind of an approach might not be available to Dalit Bahujan and > >> > other > >> > politically oppressed people > >> > whose political position has given them less than human-lives and > >> > intense > >> > SUFFERING for > >> > centuries after centuries, > >> > > >> > PATIENCE AND SUFFERING AND LOVE as IDEALS, JUST MIGHT NOT APPEAL TO > THEM > >> > > >> > Because patience and love are not essentialized and naturally given > >> > ideals > >> > and they need a cultural context to be made into a reality and to > >> > survive.. > >> > > >> > So one can conclude that sathyagraha is a very savarna middle-class > >> > ideal, > >> > with its use and uselessness... > >> > > >> > And most Gandhian ideals are like this... > >> > Gandhian philosophy is also like this... > >> > > >> > You really cannot stop reading Gandhi's own identity into his > political > >> > and > >> > philosophical formulations.. > >> > You meet it there in his text as well as in his action.. > >> > And then you realize that he cannot be easily transplanted into > >> > subaltern > >> > locations and positions.. > >> > neither to understand subaltern struggles or politics.. And this is > >> > where > >> > Ambedkar's analysis > >> > begins to become important.. > >> > > >> > Some more points on what Devika said: > >> > > >> >>>I don't think saying that the activists at Chengara are using the > >> >>> techniques of satyagraha automatically reduces them to >Gandhi's > >> >>> politics or > >> >>> denies their innovativeness. > >> > > >> >>>Satyagraha has always been an idea capacious enough to allow multiple > >> >>> uses > >> >>> and interpretations. > >> >>>I have a feeling the activists at Chengara could be seen as > innovating > >> >>> on > >> >>> it in a strikingly anti-Gandhian spirit and to ?>diametrically > >> >>> opposite > >> >>> ends. > >> > > >> > If Chengara struggle has "innovatively moved" out of Gandhian > Sathyagra > >> > and > >> > is also "anti Gandhian", then why is Nizar Ahmed and others compelled > to > >> > see > >> > "Gandhian" ideals in it? > >> > > >> > I really really cannot understand.......except by thinking of > dogmatism > >> > - > >> > this is not a personal comment, but i really cannot understand thisd > >> > phenomena otherwise... . > >> > > >> > To end, let me just say that... the Chengara struggle is a Dalit > >> > struggle, > >> > with ideas, ideals and philosophy mainly drawn from Ambedkar and > >> > Ayyankali.. > >> > And this is what the struggling people in Chengara are telling us.. > And > >> > this > >> > is the philiosophy that India/Kerala culture has no access to. > Saturated > >> > as > >> > we have been with Gandhi and Gandhians for so long.. > >> > > >> > We want the ideals and ideas of Ambedkar, Ayyankali and other Dalit > >> > Bahujan > >> > thinkers, who take CASTE as one of the most important > >> > analytical category for any kind of analysis. > >> > > >> > We reject the Savarna ideals of Gandhi's philosophy and persona and > >> > recognize him and his writings as the spokesperson/philosophy of the > >> > HIndu > >> > caste system, which is one of the most oppressive power structures in > >> > India > >> > today... > >> > > >> > If we are to think about Gandhi please don't assimilate Dalit > struggles > >> > into > >> > Gandhism. In stead tell us how Gandhi is relevant for Dalit Bahujan > >> > Minority > >> > Gender and Sexual politics.. and which of his philosophy and which > text > >> > we > >> > must read for this..... > >> > > >> > > >> > jenny > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:39 PM, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Before branding Chengara struggle as Gandhian, do these intellectuals > >> >> ever > >> >> felt for a second to think about how Dalits waged their freedom > >> >> movement > >> >> agansit brahminism? DO they refer back to find out the nature of > >> >> struggle > >> >> that Ambedkar led? genealogy of Dalit Struggles can't be find in > Gandhi > >> >> and > >> >> Gandhism. there is a history of such struggles. Chengara could be > >> >> traced > >> >> back to that history. > >> >> for me, NIsar's reading is yet another attempt to mask that history > of > >> >> struggles by Dalits. > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
