Venu, Stock taking, tagging, labelling and finally couriering is not my kinda job.
Just one point: I am not opposed to Universalism in a relativist sense by highlighting some traditional as well as localisms I would only like to imagine or think of varied and multiple Universalism. Academic/ Metropolitan-Traveling Theorists, my point is we are not living in 19th century Europe. Perhaps just immediate to the publishing of Darwin's Origin of Species!!!! On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 12:11 PM, venukm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dear DP and others, > Labeling is convenient and problematic at the same time. > I'm not afraid of being labeled as a postmodernist,though I didn't > think myself of that sort. > I would've been more happy ,if you gave me a label as a supporter of > Modernism; > Post-modernism , Buddhism and Ambedkarism and Marxism and other > isms apart. > Please, allow me to call the Neo-Gandhians Pre-Modernist rather than" > Post.", if you don't mind.. > I mean labeling is basically meant more for the convenience of people > who do it, and it is irrespective of how the 'victims' themselves like > to accept... > I know your problem of not having a stock label, to call certain > lines of responses, and it is understandable..... > Same way, I may not be having one either, to call you other than the > stock label at my disposal.. > So long as our relationship remains in discursive terms, I believe it > is all right. > Regards, > Venu. > > > > On 5 Oct, 11:14, "damodar prasad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is implied in both Jenny's reading or in a subtle way KMVenu's new > mail > > is that there is normative procedure , which is pre-given applicable to > all > > context and which fundamentally locates on a universalistic ethic as in > > universalistic US's rational human rights concept and hence > unchallengable. > > > > KM Venu has a name for it, which helps his easy to muster support from > all > > quarters - from the traditional Left to active thinkers of the Identity > > politics. And the name is "postmodernism". Wow!! wow!! > > > > These assumptions displays on its over determining moments how > > fundamentalist it is. > > > > On modes of protest, an unlikely theoretically engagement as indeed posed > by > > Nizar kinda buji, is immediately forestalled to make way for what is > being > > a very normal assessment. And amusingly, this assessment , which > implicates > > all other assessments and approaches as hierarchal in turn is ruthlessly > > dictatorial and intolerant and conformist to the extent that it wants to > > cancel out all "separatist" discourses as untoward instances because it > has > > interrogated the integrity of a "sedimented conviction", "precipitated > idea" > > and in some cases "monolithic formations like groups perhaps located in > > dispersed way where a little dissent is even discouraged". > > > > My best wishes for integrated the wholeness of thinking. But no need to > > appear as a dissenting inquiry or knowledge. > > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dear Jenny, > > > > > You ignore certain critical traditions and go on talking about > Sathyagraha > > > and Panchayathi Raj, which is a talk that started some sixty years > ago.. > > > > > Dear Jenny, > > > This is the place where you are totally guided by prejudices. > > > Just when you see words like satyagraha and panchayati Raj, you > > > simply judge that nothing new is said.( and if somebody were to use > > > gender/caste sort > > > of jargons and go on establishing conservative positins on gandhi, you > will > > > be happy. > > > that shows you share certain values with certain other peple and you > form > > > an academic community. ya, I am one who refuse to be part of such > community > > > norms.) > > > > > You are trying to stipulate the terms of discussion. Sorry, I won't > comply. > > > You simply don't have any respect to others like you. You believe you > are > > > the only champions of all poilitcal radicalism in this country. > > > > > Otherwise why this sort of branding? > > > > > Who are you to brand and judge evrything based on your > > > assumptions and prejudices? > > > > > the attempt was to engage with the texts oof gandhi in a critical way. > > > > > Your attempt was not o engage with report/text but the individuals. > > > > > I do respond to Luisa's response as that took the text seriously. > > > > > Ranju, > > > Nizar kinda bujis and Dileeps of the world...:) > > > Ya..that is the trap you want everybody to fall na? > > > Why are you so afraid to engage with any text? > > > I don't think the report I have posted is beyong criticism. i rrefuse > to > > > take up personal attacks. > > > > > and please don't speak on behalf of all dlaits.. At least K K baburaj > was > > > present and he was happy to enage with the text.. > > > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 7:17 AM, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >> dilip, > > >> chengara struggle is gandhian? This is the worst statement one can > ever > > >> make and I request NIzar Ahmed to apologise for humiliating the > struggle of > > >> chengara. > > >> this s like saying: just bz all the struggles waged by Dalits under > the > > >> leadership of AYou ignore certain critical traditions and go on > talking > > >> about Sathyagraha > > >> and Panchayathi Raj, which is a talk that started some sixty years > > >> ago..mbedkar were peaceful and non-violent, it s gandhian. how > horrible the > > >> logic !! > > >> People of chengara have rejected GAndhi and EMS . Why should NIzar > kinda > > >> bujis want to impose it on them? > > > > >> and abt ur take on "modern", i agree. but would like to point out that > > >> modern could be as traditional as tradition. these days postmodern > gandhi s > > >> also availble on sale. > > >> when talking from dalit perspective i would defenitly attach a > 'positive' > > >> and 'emancipatory' value to 'modernity' knowing clearly that it need > to be > > >> problematically looked at. for a Dalit the scope that modernity > > >> offered would never be possible with 'tradition'. Gandhian modernsim > was > > >> rooted in the tradtion of caste heirarchy and savarna values. DAlits > > >> could never become citizens in that imagination. the possibility (at > least a > > >> minutest) is outside that. That is why Ambedkar asked Dalits to "Come > out of > > >> Gandhian villages and go to cities. it s a spiritual and political > call. it > > >> chaged the Dalit world. the project is not finished yet. and to remind > u > > >> that city is not an end in itself. > > >> Gandhi would never be the path for Dalits. it can;\'t be, even if > NIzars > > >> and dilips try to impose it on them. > > >> DALITS HAVE OUTRIGhTLY REJECTED GANDHI. > > >> regards > > > > >> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 2:36 AM, jenny rowena < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > >>> Sorry i sent off that half-written piece, without knowing.. > > > > >>> Dileep , > > > > >>> You ignore certain critical traditions and go on talking about > > >>> Sathyagraha > > >>> and Panchayathi Raj, which is a talk that started some sixty years > ago.. > > >>> and when some others bring attention to some alternate ways of > thinking > > >>> about the same subject, you turn the tables on them and project your > > >>> own problems into them? > > > > >>> Can you please follow your own advice about critical debate, and > tell > > >>> me what > > >>> makes you think i am intolerant. I was just drawing attention to the > fact > > >>> that Venugopal's > > >>> post with so much informatin on gandhi was being ignored, and then > > >>> connecting it to the > > >>> fact that caste was not brought into the discussion, also .. > > > > >>> And i was not asking the seminar to "mention" Chengara. I was > referring > > >>> to the point > > >>> that in talking about Gandhi, you cannot forget the issue of caste, > which > > >>> had come alive > > >>> after the Chengara issue.. > > > > >>> Who is Ajay Skaria? I saw similarities in the seminar on Gandhi that > > >>> happened in Hyderabad, > > >>> with people like Ajay Skaria.. and in the report you gave.. that is > why i > > >>> mentioned him. > > > > >>> and you are the one who seems to be angry.. > > > > >>> jenny > > > > >>> 2. Jenny, > > >>>> on post Chengara scenario, there ofcourse were serius deliberations > in > > >>>> the session. > > >>>> ( why are you so intolerent of a debate where about thirty people > met -- > > >>>> everybody except two or three were nonacademicians-- and had a live > > >>>> discussion on certain important political issues ? who is Ajay > Skaria? Why > > >>>> do you transfer such anger to this sphere?) > > > > >>>> Nizar observed that Chengara struggle is Gandhian in nature due to > the > > >>>> readiness to self injury but the present day state and civil society > is more > > >>>> brutal than the British. It doesn't mind even if the > > >>>> struggling people die. Thus here government is resorting to > Gandhian > > >>>> method , waiting patiently for the people to change ther mind > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 2:25 AM, jenny rowena < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > >>>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >>>>> ( I really don't understand why people exhort to refrain from > > >>>>> engaging in critical debates and be satisfied with chanting certain > > >>>>> manthras.While somebody claim that everything is said and done on > > >>>>> certain topics, > > >>>>> and everybody should content with uncritical repetition of > > >>>>> certain 'critical' traditions... and show intolerence toward all > > >>>>> differences, > > >>>>> and even worse, brand everybody referring to certain names as > > >>>>> reactionaries... I simply feel like ignoring it.) > > > > >>>> You ignore certain critical traditions and go on talking about > > >>>> Sathyagraha > > >>>> and Panchayathi Raj, which is a talk that started some sixty years > ago.. > > >>>> and when some others bring attention to some alternate ways of > thinking > > >>>> about the same subject, you turn the tables on them and project your > > >>>> own problems into them? > > > > >>>> 1.*Really? and modern?? > > >>>> what kind of discussions take place there in GAndhi's (savarna) raj? > > >>>> * > > > > >>>>> Ranju, > > >>>>> This is as rediculous as retorting "Really?Modern?" to somebody who > say > > > > >>>>> Hindu fundamentalism is modern not, traditional!! > > > > >>>>> the point was, panchayat is a state, umpire, arbitrar, whihc works > on > > >>>>> hierarchy. > > >>>>> Gandhi does not deny decision making within it . Its not that > Gandhi > > >>>>> stick to statelessness. > > >>>>> Its only that his state is small. > > > > >>>>> The moment one come across "modern" or "discussion' why should some > > >>>>> (positive) values be ascribed to it? > > > > >>>>> 2. Jenny, > > >>>>> on post Chengara scenario, there ofcourse were serius deliberations > in > > >>>>> the session. > > >>>>> ( why are you so intolerent of a debate where about thirty people > > >>>>> met -- everybody except two or three were nonacademicians-- and had > a live > > >>>>> discussion on certain important political issues ? who is Ajay > Skaria? Why > > >>>>> do you transfer such anger to this sphere?) > > > > >>>>> Nizar observed that Chengara struggle is Gandhian in nature due to > the > > >>>>> readiness to self injury but the present day state and civil > society is more > > >>>>> brutal than the British. It doesn't mind even if the > > >>>>> struggling people die. Thus here government is resorting to > Gandhian > > >>>>> method , waiting patiently for the people to change ther mind !! > > > > >>>>> Can you please follow your own advice about critical debate, and > tell > > >>>>> me what makes you think i am intolerant. > > > > >>>> When there is a report on a seminar with no reference to the > issue > > >>>> of Caste, and there is a cliched debate > > > > >>>>> ** > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
