"Group Yudham"? Zardar and Habermas are totems? Fun apart, I would argue that the existence of groups like Greenyouth by itself nullifies Habermas' notion of ideal speach situation. There is an implicit elitism in looking for spaces where 'comfort' and 'safety is assured. Most probably it will be done by denying membership to differences.
greenyouth is relatively unpredictable because here differences are negotiated differently including verbal violence. democracy grows through negotiations between differences. thus Habermas's notion is not of much importance in third world situations. even then engaging Habermas could not be posed in an either or manner. Why don't we focus on the isssues and situations that are faced with than looking for ONE framework whether it is provided by Habermas or Zardar? and... how public are the "public spaces" created by so called Habermasian leftists in Kerala? What are the differences they are afraid of? On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:14 PM, damodar prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Habermas and Ziauddin Zardar > > > > Whereas Habermas is a distinguished hardcore philosopher, Ziauddin Zardar, > should I describe him, as a futurist? > > > > Habermas belongs to the tradition of European philosophy; Zardar belongs to > the thinking emerging in the postcolonial context. > > > > Habermas belongs to the great Frankfurt school tradition of critical theory > and is located in Germany; Zardar is located at England and writes > passionately about Bollywood cinema. > > > > Zardar is devout practitioner of Islamic religion; I know nothing about > Habermas except the remark in MG Radhakrishnan's mail that he is friend of > Pope. > > > > As I understand, ( may be there is -donno) there is nothing in common > between their thinking and writings. > > > > But both concern themselves to the problem of secularism in a world > increasingly determined by multi-religious or inter-religious exchanges, > sometimes pleasant, some times violent. > > > > Habermas is perhaps popular to Malayalam writing since 80s, I guess because > of his engagement with Marxism. Public sphere, his antithetical position on > students left movement, his idea of the 'In complete project of modernity' > and his dialogues with Focault are popular in Keralam. > > > > But Zardar, I think is not much popular. > > > > Habermas engagement with secularism is contextualized in European modernity > and in a particular context where state-promoted multiculturalism and the > created fear of "terrorism" has made the 'civilized' states xenophobic and > resulting in 'irresistible' rise of new Artru Uis. > > > > I've found (with my minimal knowledge) there is a deep sense of tragedy > underlying Habermas' writings. That has become his style. Though a bit > 'flexible", same syntactic intricacies, conceptual complexities and semantic > density can be seen in his description of "post secularism". > > > > A sense of mourning pervades his description. This can be best described in > Rushdie's words "last sigh for a lost world in Moor's Last Sigh. He opens up > to a new world but there is 'nostalgia' for the lost world. So I don't > wonder a large gap, a widening chasm between the thinkers who live in the > lost world of Nehruvian Nationalist Secularism and Habermas who wakes up to > engage the emrgent context. The world of Nehruvian Statist secularism > is bygone and cannot be recaptured. (and pls. don't!!) > > > > But then Zardar is refreshingly new. He engages religion and new emerging > ideas of secularism as a value. He engages with a non-European world where > multi-religion is a historical condition and perhaps ravaged by Colonialism > and later neo-colonialism. Wriiting is full of enjoyment and a sort of > pleasantness spreads through his works. > > > > Habermas is least self-reflexive. (The maximum he can be, as he states is > that he is a "sociological observer") There is no "Habermas's" in his > writing, where as Zardar is self-reflexive. One can engage with Habermas in > a "disciplined and dispassionate (and cozy way) " keeping his 'self' in a > comfortable closet (looks like a scene Bunuel's from "Phantom of Liberty). > But to engage with Zardar, one has to be self-reflexive (if at all he/she is > sincere). All the solidity of discipline and dispassion liquefies. > > > This is my tentative reading, slightly undisciplined and passionate. (pls. > do visit: http://www.ziauddinsardar.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dileep R I thuravoor --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
