hi dileep, see i ve my own reservations regarding the kind of efforts such alliances bring. (hope it may be different in the reffered case).. frankly, i dont belive in such "civil" society initiatives any more. but dont discourage any such attempt. My politics is different. Perhaps, I dont want to make our moderator worry more by talking abt it here. After all, Kerla the space where all this happens has an inherent tendency to brand, moderate and block the politcs, I position myself.
regarding polemics: Anivar was talking abt RSS using it. Arundhati and Medha Patkar also use it quite well. any one involved in public action has to resort to some kind of polemics ( for good or bad) and i belief that effective use of polemics is importnt one d master it, even to counter one.... people hesitate to admit it, but use only polemics (their so calld sophistcation itself is a polemic) i ve used ur own logic of moralism to argue here which u r countering by calling it polemics so in effect it points towards u dear keep thinking On 28/09/2007, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > if people like dilip raj think that killings of Dalits in Khailranji and > tsunduru (AP) was POSITIVE just bz it invited lots of debate, I must say > that such ALLIANCE-INFECTED PEOPLE are the curse of any movement in > india.(kerla being the worst) > Ranjith! > You are again trivializing my standpoint . [ in 'polemics' is it the rule > than exception?] > Well, I accept the curse. Let me be not the blessing of any movement. > > The question is, how do you go about resisting those atrocities?[ not > whether that will > trigger discussions] Will you try to bring as many people coming against > it together and do the maximum possible or sit on making judgments on each > and every person? > This is a practical problem faced by any such movement [ Kerala being not > an exception] > > I personally see the present campaign in Chithralekha issue following the > same dynamics. I > appreciate the action committee which brought even Ajitha under its > umbrella. Who is > ALLIANCE - INFLECTED PEOPLE in that instance? Do you mmeant this > experience while cursing Kerala as the worst case? Will it be purged of evil > forces if 'people like me' are > kept at a distance? > > > > On 9/28/07, Ranjit Ranjit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > dear arunima, > > In the same token (as u belive MOdi is an outright criminal. i dont > > question it) one who has enough knowledge and Proof (like Geedha) can > > comment on sugata as well. It should be remember here that i never > > questioned her right to visit Athirappally. Given the context of green > > politics in KErala, i raised de question of a possiblity (in several > > question marks) of its hijack by this green mafia (who pretend to raise the > > issues). we have seen witnesed it in many occasions. as a i use to follow > > these issues, it s become evident that the kind of PR game greenyouth start > > to play may also lead to the same fate of many of these movements. > > > > MOreover, the moderator has the responsibility to mention it clearly wht > > are the criteria used for moderation. Perosnal whims and fancies cant be the > > scale. On the same token used to moderate me, murali, salim, dilleep raj, > > who used "hate" in theri emails should have been 'moderated'. Instead of > > addressing my objection, the moderator resort to un-democratic green politcs > > (what more one expect from these people?) > > > > and regarding MOdi and Sugata: A criminal is a criminal, even if s/he be > > CM or Poet? > > sugata is not just accused of being "romantic", > > as someone argued in this list, free investigations will put criminals > > of all sorts in prison. > > though, in personal discussion or in these kinds of lists people "taken > > for grantedly' blaim MOdi ( i also do it) is there proof to prove his > > involvment in any crime? Allegations against his govt. dont make MOdi a > > criminal, if we apply same sugata-dilip logic.(thoguh i dont subscribe to > > this arguemnt) > > > > so, if people like dilip raj think that killings of Dalits in Khailranji > > and tsunduru (AP) was POSITIVE just bz it invited lots of debate, I must say > > that such ALLIANCE-INFECTED PEOPLE are the curse of any movement in > > india.(kerla being the worst) > > > > Thnks > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28/09/2007, Arunima G <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Ranjit, > > > > > > I wish to respond to the issue you have raised (and much of the > > > ongoing debate) in three, different, ways: > > > > > > 1) I don't think there has been any discussion here about open space > > > norms and what kinds of issues are significant to this. If at least this > > > debate can initiate that, I would be happy. > > > > > > 2 a) Regarding Modi: I think he is an outright criminal and that there > > > is ample evidence from Gujarat in the past many years (and certainly post > > > the carnage) to associate him directly with what happened there, as indeed > > > the continuing ways in which the atmosphere is vitiated, and the bizarre > > > extent of communalising of every day life in that state. To my mind, it > > > is for him to prove that he is not a criminal than for any of the > > > victims (or any of us who believe him to be a criminal) to prove > > > otherwise. > > > > > > 2 b) I also think there is a simple difference between Sugathakumari > > > and Narendra Modi - that is the extent of power and control possible in > > > the > > > hands of a poet/'personality' as opposed to a politician. Therefore, even > > > though cult figures can be culpable my own guess is that the extent of > > > damage might be far less (but then I speak without any knowledge of some > > > of > > > the issues raised by you and Geedha, particularly the rape case in > > > Abhaya). > > > Dileep Raj argues quite convincingly to the contrary, so it might really > > > be > > > worthwhile to know the basis for such an allegation, which is quite strong > > > and damning, to say the least. > > > > > > 2 c) Having said this, I agree with you that double standards in > > > discussions can be quite fruitless. Often, many of us voice our opinions > > > without providing "proof". Besides, as can be seen in the discussions over > > > the past few days (unless I am totally missing something and these are all > > > internal battles amongst people who know each other), unless people agree > > > with each other no amount of "proof" seems to convince the other. So > > > either > > > 'proof' needs to be defined or maybe proof ought to be discarded as the > > > grounds for locating one's beliefs! However, the alacrity with which the > > > moderator chooses to muzzle a difference of opinion is a little worrying. > > > > > > 3)On a different note: regarding the tone of "romanticization" > > > regarding "the people" and "their struggles" - and despite Dileep's > > > strenuous arguments to the contrary there is a strong whiff of that in all > > > these exchanges - I just wished to share an anecdote from 1993 when some > > > of > > > us, as part of the Sampradayikta Virodhi Andolan organised a national > > > convention post Babri masjid demolition in Delhi. One of the groups that > > > participated was the NBA, and at least some of the people who came from > > > there were very distressed as large numbers of the kar sewaks at the > > > Babri demolition and the subsequent violence in Ayodhya/Faizabad were > > > people > > > from the Narmada valley, and those whose lives were threatened by the dam, > > > and displacement, and were actively involved in the NBA. So which "people" > > > and "people's struggle" must one support then? Those killed by the dam and > > > displacement/poverty or those killed by those who were uprooted by the > > > dam? > > > > > > All I want to say is that while it assuages our bourgeois guilt by > > > homogenizing and valorising the subaltern, it is important to both > > > understand that there are many fractures within "people' and "their > > > struggles", as much as take seriously one's own - be they in the form of > > > the > > > right to the freedom of speech and expression or claiming the space to > > > articulate one's political ideas/opinions. > > > > > > Arunima > > > > > > On 9/27/07, Ranjit Ranjit <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > PROTEST!! > > > > > > > > if moderation is the rule in greenyouth it d be applicable to > > > > evryone... i accept it, but.... > > > > these self proclaimd activists can call anyone a "criminal" without > > > > any proof; > > > > and they r not moderated..... > > > > if this is the kind of trnsparncy and democracy practised how can > > > > these people lead people's movements? > > > > this whole fracas has exposed greenyouth and its self -proclaimed > > > > "activists" > > > > pity for such activisms!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Ranjit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Ranjit > > > > > > > > > -- > Dileep R I thuravoor -- Ranjit --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
