I dont how to define "greatness". As I read once agin read the mail I wrote
afer reading your response, I am aware certain subtle but definite issues
about  the question you raise.

If there are mopre responses, I believe we need to wait for that. Reponse
may perhaps precisley raise issues concerned with Indian stream of
postcolonial thought.

On 6/30/08, Bobby Kunhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Not you, in general, where does greatness lie? Whose knowledge? episteme?
> where? who defines?
>
> On 30/06/2008, damodar prasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to