On 6/30/08, Bobby Kunhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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* >
A good question indeed. If you are adressing it to me. I fail to find an answer. Truly > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
