Satyagraha (literally) means clinging to the truth one has found On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 10:19 AM, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> pls elaborate nisar's take on satyagraha? > what is satyagraha? and how it s relevant in applying it n chengara > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Dileep Raj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> HI, >> I am pasting Jenny's mail on Chengara struggle at the bottom of this >> thread. >> To make the terrain clear, let me clarify why I want Gandhi (the >> historical person) to be forgotten in this new thread. >> >> If the attempt in the other thread by some friends was to convince all >> that Gandhi >> as an actor is historically not recommendable and Ambedkar is more >> acceptable, i personally have nothing against it. >> >> but in order to reject certain principles ( even if those are invented by >> Gandhi) we need more reasons . >> Is there somethinng inherently doubtful about them/Then that should be >> visible to everybody. thus I insisted on providing reasons. >> If somebody tell why it is unacceptable, there is scope for debate. >> Otherwise , the exclusivist attitude will >> demand the other to accept ones terms .which means the end of >> communication.Are there terms in between all of us? can we temporarily give >> up our own terms? >> >> Jenny, I am still sticking to the role of reporter in this mail. I find >> some scope for debate betwween your take and Nizar's position. >> So, let me first explore it before articulating my own position. >> >> The reasons given by Nizar to qualify Chengara struggle as satyagraha were >> the following. >> 1.They have violated the law. >> 2.They are fiercely holding on to what they have found as truth. >> 3.They have consciously opted self injury instead of injury on others. >> 4.this existential dimention, that they are ready to hold on to truth unto >> death , is different from other struggles. >> 5.This is satyagraha. >> 6.The point you raise, that, it is not a choice but forced situation, >> doesn't nullify such a proposition. >> 7.Satyagraha, even in gandhi's imagination, was the tool of >> oppressed/powerlwess. It is not the first step, >> but final step, when all attempts at negotiating failed. >> 8.It is not necessary that activists in Chengara should opt this form. >> They could become violent or join other political parties. >> >> >> >> Jenny: >> >> A few lines about the difference between non-violent resistance and >> Gandhian Satyagraha and why Chengara does not fit the bill >> >> - Non-violent resistance, tries to attain a political goal without >> averting to violence and yet at the same time putting pressure on >> governments and other authorities through various means like picketing, >> campaigning, consiousness raising, etc.. >> In this the need is to forcefully gain, procure, reach, a certain goal >> which is considered to be socially just and which is politically empowering >> to subjugated groups. >> >> - Gandhian Sathyagraha in Gandhi's own words "is a kind of truth-force or >> love-force or soul-force." >> Here the "pursuit of truth did not admit of violence being inflicted on >> one's opponent" and he would instead be weaned from error by patience and >> sympathy. >> Here, patience means self-suffering. And the doctrine came to mean >> vindication of truth, not by infliction of suffering on the opponent, but on >> oneself. >> >> In Chengara, nothing of this sort is/was happening. The suffering that is >> happening in Chengara is not a choice. It is not to convert the opponent. >> The threat of suicide is not used to hurt oneself, but because as people in >> Chengara have already said, they cannot return to their even worse lives. >> >> See the whole point is this.... >> >> An upper caste person like Gandhi, is giving up so much of a great life - >> including his clothes, his meat eating habits, sex, etc etc - to fight the >> British. He is choosing TRUTH over material comforts and this TRUTH clothes >> him and satisfies him and that becomes his moral weapon. >> >> An agitating person in Chengara (and in many other spheres too) is not >> anywhere like this. They are not giving up something - going to suffer >> something - so as to gain something better - NO. They are always already >> placed within suffering due to social injustice and they >> are looking for a political way out. Without patience and with anger. >> >> This cliched urge to look at all this in the Gandhian mode, tells us >> nothing about the political passions surrouding this new struggle, which >> needs new ways of understanding, and which also needs to be seen in the way >> it wants to be seen...as a continuation of the Ayyankali and Ambedkarite >> politics.. >> -- >> Dileep R I thuravoor >> >> >> > > > > -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
