Since Iliahah's award came up for discussion here, I remember a "we the people" on the run up to Durban, where Ilaiah and Nandy were on the panel on the question whether caste was race - of course, rightfully Ilaiah stole the show with his dramatics against the *greatness* of Nandy's rhetoric. have a curious question.... where is India and who are the *greats?* In mere curiosity
On 30/06/2008, damodar prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since we commented on Habermas, why should we leave Ashish Nandy. > > To begin with a personal remark, some years ago, when I read Ashish Nandy > for the first time, intimate enemy, it was a mind-opener. I didnt have any > doubt that he is the *greatest* thinker India has produced. Subsequent to > this, I dd read his other works on gandhi assasination, tagore, nationalism, > popular cinema, jagdish bose, ramanujan, indira gandhi, utopia and tyranny, > time warps. Along with these, we did also read many new writers. By that > time I felt he is *greater* writer than say Nirad C Cahuduri ( very > opposite positions) etc. But the life was moving, we found new writers and > scholars like deepesh, parthachaterjee, mss pandian, dk nagraj, uma > chakraborthy, Chandar bhan prasad. > > (I have a "villaku" in FEC for naming scholars-pls. alow me here- ;-), > > Then I found him as one of the *great *thinkers. ( But I admire his > foresight on Narendra Modi. > > There is a diminshing value with regard to Asish Nandy. > > As Dileep mentoned in some other mail about frame work. I think he has a > framework, which he applies everywhere- be that Sati or T20 game. > > Even in this interview, I see an extreme clairty- which is an excessive > transparency. No confusions, hence it lacks 'probing'. > > Writers and Thinkers need to leave amibigous spaces in their writings so > that his contemporaries and generations coming next can read delve deep into > their work. > > But let me also state that, the interview and answers are fine. Politically > enagaging . > > But the interviewee is mimcking a thinker by name Ashish Nandy. > > Damodar Prasad > > > On 6/30/08, C.K. Vishwanath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 5, Issue 26, Dated July 05, 2008 >> CURRENT AFFAIRS >> interview >> >> 'The middle class wants development backed by authoritarianism' >> >> Amid rows of books in the Delhi office of political psychologist Ashis >> Nandy is a painting that's striking in its sordidness: the head of a dead >> politician enveloped in a floppy garland, surrounded by numerous tags >> displaying his numerous identities. Ever the political dissenter, Nandy is >> back in news after the Ahmedabad- based National Council for Civil Liberties >> filed a case against him for his article, Blame the Middle Class, published >> in The Times of India in January, analysing Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra >> Modi's victory in the Assembly elections. The charge against Nandy is >> "promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, >> place of birth and language". Some 178 academics and intellectuals have >> signed a statement to protest the case against Nandy ( >> http://www.sacw.net/FreeExpAndFundos/ defendNandy16June08.html). In an >> interview with TUSHA MITTAL, Nandy explains how modernity is devastating >> India. >> >> How has your understanding of India changed over the years? >> >> Like every other Bengali from Calcutta, I had a political edge to >> everything I did, but little empathy for the world outside the cities. >> Theoretically, I might have been committed to the people of India, but in >> practice they were an abstract category. Things began to change dramatically >> when I came to the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. We studied >> politics empirically, and I realised its pervasive presence in Indian social >> life, how much of a pace-setting agency it really is. A second major change >> came with the Emergency. Neither my political studies nor my understanding >> of Indian politics had prepared me for it. It was a shock. Then, I began to >> look for new ways of looking at Indian politics. My discovery of Gandhi >> happened at that time. I had always disliked Gandhi: his allegiances had >> looked primordial; his style a deviation from our idea of cosmopolitanism; >> his politics anti-modern. But I rediscovered Gandhi. I became more sceptical >> of >> the Indian state, which was modelled on the colonial state that had ruled >> us. I saw that the categories that dominated Indian politics had no openness >> to the experiences of a majority of Indians. Often, as with terms like >> 'secular', they could not even be translated into vernacular languages. >> >> Would you say the secular project in India has failed, that we have failed >> to merge ground realities with our idea of liberal secularism? >> >> Absolutely! Secularism is a tool to achieve certain goals of tolerance and >> amity. It has not been able to touch the heart of most Indians, who have >> found it flawed, an abstraction used for political purposes only. I think we >> would gain much more if we entered it through the various cultural and >> religious traditions of India to confront the forces fomenting communal >> conflict. They are actually anti-Hindu and anti-Islam. They will destroy >> these faiths in the arrogant belief that they can defend them. We don't >> defend faiths; faith defends us. In fact, the people often called religious >> fanatics usually did not care about religion. They were modernists who >> wanted a European- style nation state in India. They considered Gandhi >> primitive because he brought into politics ideas such as fasting and >> nonviolence. Gandhi was the counter-modernist who said that modernism was an >> intrusion in Indian culture and could only devastate India culturally, >> economically and >> socially, [that] it is intrinsically hostile to India's environment, local >> knowledge systems and diversity. Ethnic and religious conflict is a >> pathological expression of modernity, not of tradition. The way >> modernisation is conceptualised leads to genocides; an enormous degree of >> violence; the demolition of civilisations. >> >> Can you give an example? >> >> I did a major study on sati, the first in contemporary times. I showed >> that sati epidemics primarily occurred when a community was under attack. >> For example, sati in late 18th and early 19th century was a direct product >> of the colonial political economy, the kind of collapse of traditional norms >> then taking place in India, the monetisation of the economy and human >> relationships. Half the cases of >> Photo: Shailendra Pandey >> >> Sati took place in Calcutta and its slums not in villages. >> >> In your article, 'Gujarat: Blame the Middle Class', you talked about how >> development has de-civilised society, leaving only a shrinking space for the >> life of the mind. >> >> This is a product of democratic processes. The people entering the middle >> class do not have middle-class values. They only have middle-class incomes. >> They have neither the traditional nor the modern concept of cosmopolitanism. >> They have just risen in the social hierarchy. They have only middleclass >> consumption. >> >> What are these middle class values? >> >> Some degree of tolerance and the ability to live with minority views which >> are different from yours; some acceptance that you do not protect >> divinities, that divinities can protect themselves. >> >> You have used the term 'cultural desert' for Gujarat. >> >> Gujarat has produced an intellectual culture where some of the finest >> minds, thinkers, writers, artists don't feel comfortable at all. Perhaps it >> is not America but Singapore that is their utopia, at least in the short >> run. They want Singapore-style development. Even though they won't admit it, >> they are looking forward not only to Singapore-style malls but also to >> Singapore-style authoritarian prime ministers. Large numbers of the middle >> class are now perfectly willing to sacrifice large sections of the society >> for the sake of development. In most countries, spectacular development has >> been associated with spectacular authoritarianism. Not only Singapore, China >> is a very good example. The enormous diversity of India has always troubled >> modern Indians. They think some degree of homogenisation imposed from above >> is the perfect remedy for India's ills. They think they are the strict >> school teachers who can teach the rest of India how to behave when >> the government takes away land for SEZs, when it builds mega dams. They >> want to shut their eyes to what development really means. They are its >> beneficiaries and feel it must be protected at all costs. >> >> What is your idea of a post-secular world? >> >> Everybody predicted the demise of religion in the 19th century. Yet, at >> the beginning of the 21st century, we find religion stronger than ever. It >> has re-emerged from its isolation and marginalisation in a big way, taking >> advantage of the democratic process. Unless we learn the language of >> religion and enter the people's mind through that path, we have no way of >> truly influencing their choices. That's why one of the most creative persons >> of our time, Gandhi, said that people who say religion and politics have >> nothing to do with each other understand neither religion nor politics. >> Other creative persons who may or may not call themselves Gandhian follow >> that method. The Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther >> King — they have all used religion very creatively. In India, people like >> Baba Amte and Sunder Lal Bahuguna never attacked religion; Swami Agnivesh >> has never put away his saffron robes. When you talk of saffronisation, it >> offends most Hindus. Saffron is not the colour of extremism. It is the >> colour of renunciation — sanyasis wear saffron. Extremists have hijacked it >> because we allowed them to; they have hijacked it even when they don't >> believe in it themselves. [VD] Savarkar was an atheist. He didn't believe in >> Hinduism but produced the bible of Hindutva. Hindutva is a political >> ideology while Hinduism is a form of faith. Ideologies enter when faiths >> become weak and do not have a meaning for people. Hindutva is a way of using >> Hindu sentiments politically to push towards the development of a Hindu >> nation state. The concept of a nation state is not Hindu. It is a >> 19th-century European concept, but Europe is moving away from it while we >> continue to cling to it. As Rabindranath Tagore once said, India trying to >> build a nation is like Switzerland trying to build a navy. >> >> What prompts people who were once part of the Left to turn to the BJP? >> >> Psychologically, the Leftist and the Hindutva ideologies are not far from >> each other. They offer the same kind of closure, the feeling of having >> reached an absolute truth by which to live. People who have faith don't >> usually have strong ideologies. But many Indians also have blind faith in >> ideologies because they feel if they don't have the support of an ideology, >> the meaning of life will collapse. >> >> What about young Indians?Are they clinging to ideology as a means of >> security? >> >> Like our politicians, the young are increasingly getting de-ideologised. >> They don't understand Hindutva but they have picked up its slogans as >> ideology. They cling to it with the passion of a lover because without that >> clinging, they feel they will not be able to call themselves Hindu, because >> otherwise they are going out and downing beef hamburgers. Alternatively, >> they are moving towards a new, generic version of Hinduism obtained from >> gurus. This flooding of the market with gurus has also come from this need. >> You could be a Malayali working in Himachal Pradesh. You have no access to >> your own village gods and goddesses, to the Malayali version of Hinduism >> with which you have lived — it doesn't even make sense to you anymore. Then >> you take a generic version of the faith [from the gurus]. Somehow it gives >> you solace, a feeling that you are part of the Hindu community. >> >> So are we losing Hinduism's diversity? >> >> Hinduism is becoming a faith in the way that Christianity in many parts of >> the West is a faith. That wasn't our concept of religion. Today, there are >> many in India willing to fight for the cause of India to the last Indian. >> Exactly as in Islam: they are many willing to fight for Islam until the last >> Muslim. They despise Muslims for not participating in the struggle and don't >> care how many of them die. Because they have very little compassion for >> Muslims, their compassion is reserved for the vague idea of Islam. >> Similarly, in India you will find a lot of people who have a vague idea of >> what India is — they have a statist, mechanical concept of India and of >> Hinduism, and they are willing to sacrifice a million people to achieve that >> end. But the Indian state is the Indian culture and that extends from South >> Vietnam all the way to the borders of Persia. >> >> What about Islam in India? How has it changed over the years? >> >> We are seeing an Arabisation of Islam in India. At one time, Indian >> Muslims were proud that their Islam represented the best of the world's >> traditions. But they are increasingly losing that confidence, as a direct >> product of 19th-century European scholars who claimed that West Asian Islam >> was the real Islam while other strands were influenced by local religions. >> These scholars endorsed fundamentalist Islam as the real Islam. The hijab, >> for example, was introduced in Indonesia by Western-educated women because >> they felt the Islam of their parents was not good enough. The same thing is >> happening in India. Muslims are virtually in uniform with skull caps and >> kurta-pyjama. >> >> What are some of the biggest challenges India is to face? >> >> How do we stop the fact that our economic and social vision is very close >> to writing off the bottom 10 percent of our society. We would be happy if >> they were all dead. How do we find people who will use the language of >> religion to re-enter the public imagination, someone who will re-enter as a >> person, articulating principles in direct continuation with his or her >> religion, without practising the dominant slogans of the pack. There are >> many, even our finance minister, who seem to believe that "development" and >> industrialisation are the way out of poverty, as that is the only model of >> social change they have learnt. America consumes 30 percent of the world's >> resources with only six percent of its population. But we are not six >> percent of the world's population. To become America we will have to kill >> off everybody else in the world and consume all the world's resources and >> even then we will not have the American standard of living. According to a >> prediction, the Ganga will die out in 28 years. Something like that will >> probably awaken the consciousness of the people. >> >> Why is the space for dissent shrinking? >> >> Their own conviction in their being right is so small. Because they are >> themselves not convinced that what they are doing is right, they look at all >> dissent as an attack, not only on their ideas but on them directly. You are >> planting the idea in their mind, making them think that they could be wrong >> — that is their fear. >> >> You've called history an overrated discipline. Why? >> >> Every community of India has its own history, not only in terms of jati >> puranas but their own mythic history: memories handed down for generations. >> There are many ways of constructing the past, history is only one of them. >> But with this passion for history that came to India in the 19th century, >> everything has been "historised". That, I think, has diminished us. Today, >> history is a major part of the knowledge industry, but that no longer >> enhances us. This search for truth about the past closes many pasts. >> From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 5, Issue 26, Dated July >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- Bobby Kunhu --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
