I like to add this... ambedkar used satyagraha as a mass mobilisation strategy.All these struggles of mass satyagraha -( mahad satyagraha of kolaba--burnt down Manusmrithi-temple entry struggle of kalaram temple of nasik in 1930s etc)in which ambedkar faced direct atrocities from caste hindus-police nexus.it is not like a single man satyagraha like gandhi.Ambedkar wrote about these experiences. suffering,more suffering and relentless struggle .-that is the path of dalit struggle.This was a type of MORAL EXEMPLAR IN DALIT STRUGGLES."WE ARE HUMANBEINS LIKE ALL OTHERS".This His core slogan in those struggles.Ambedkar set this aggenda for dalit struggles. I prefer an article here. Ambedkar and emancipation of the sceheduled castes by S.G.sardeasai written in 1986.This was an article of a communist idealogue giving a full praise to ambedkar.Today.,indian left of parliamentary left follows this line.
--- On Mon, 6/10/08, Gouri Patwardhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Gouri Patwardhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: Chengara: Is It Satyagraha? ( Forget Gandhi while speaking about Satyagraha!!!) To: [email protected] Date: Monday, 6 October, 2008, 10:41 PM As far as I know the agitation for the access to the water tank in Mahad that Dr. Ambedkar led was called Mahad chowdar Tale (Chowdar tank) Satyagraha. I don't know if Dr. Ambedkar called it Satyagraha. Has he written explicitly about Satyagraha? Gouri On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:25 PM, jenny rowena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Aryan, I found Nizar's arguments not to have any relevance to > understanding the present. that is the political > reason for my posting here.. > > waiting to read ur piece.. > > jenny > > \\On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:25 PM, aryakrishnan ramakrishnan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Dear Jenny,Luisa,Ranju, >> >> My interest in engaging in this kind of exercise is related to >> understanding the present. which is more political than historical. >> History do help in major ways but sometimes the novelty, >> innovations, and surprises won't be captured due to overhistoricising. >> >> One has to be theoretically inventive, creative and commited in order to >> theorise the present. >> >> Thus I found Nizar's proposition interesting. Arguing with it will also >> be productive, as this debate increasingly show. >> >> I will share my reading of Chengara struggle in anorganised manner soon. >> triggering rich theoretical work in itself is an indication of the >> creativity of the movement. >> It isn't at all an attempt to negate agency to Dalit activists in Chengara >> and ascribe it to Gandhi ! I personally take the social reality as >> indeterminate, calling for >> various theoretical frameworks. >> >> >> Luisa, >> To be frank, Nizar himeself (in an interview published in a Malayalam >> journal) called Bin Laden >> "violent Gandhi". considering their position on civilisation. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:09 PM, jenny rowena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> > Friends, >> > >> > 1. Given the new turn in the discussions to read Gandhi as a text, both >> > by >> > Ahmed in an another thread >> > and by Devika here... what i am writing here is also an attempt to read >> > Gandhi's philosophy.. >> > Actually i have done it earlier too in talking about the concept of >> > Sathyagraha... >> > However Ahmed i know that some readings always gets better visibility >> > than >> > others.. >> > >> > 2. Dileep, most of the points that you have written about Sathyagraha >> > can be >> > shared by any >> > non-violent and even violent resistance as Luisa pointed out.. >> > The core to what distinguishes Gandhian Sathyagraha from other forms of >> > non-violent resistance >> > is the fact that here there is an insistence on suffering, self-injury, >> > truth and other ideals >> > like patience, sympathy, weaning, love... etc.. >> > -- let me quote again from Gandhi's own text... >> > >> > Its root meaning is holding onto truth, hence truth-force. I have also >> > called it love-force or soul-force. In the application of satyagraha, I >> > discovered in the earliest stages that pursuit of truth did not admit of >> > violence being inflicted on one's opponent but that he must be weaned >> > from >> > error by patience and sympathy. For what appears to be truth to the one >> > may >> > appear to be error to the other. And patience means self-suffering. So >> > the >> > doctrine came to mean vindication of truth, not by infliction of >> > suffering >> > on the opponent, but on oneself... >> > >> > In an earlier mail to Dileep, I had already talked about this to which >> > Dileep wrote: >> > >> > ??>6.The point you raise, that, it is not a choice but forced situation, >> > doesn't nullify such a proposition. >> > >> > Let me elaborate my point further... >> > >> > The whole Gandhian idea of winning over, patience, love, suffering etc.. >> > imagines a struggle, where >> > the resisting party is already placed in some kind of a negotiating >> > position.. >> > Where she can still be patient, suffer, wean, wait it out, talk about >> > love, >> > etc etc.. >> > In other words, where she is able to somewhere make a connection with >> > the opponent from his present situation and wean him into give in.. >> > >> > This is Sathyagraha for you.. For an excellent illustration see Lage >> > Raho >> > Munna Bhai.. >> > >> > What i am saying is this... >> > this kind of an approach might not be available to Dalit Bahujan and >> > other >> > politically oppressed people >> > whose political position has given them less than human-lives and >> > intense >> > SUFFERING for >> > centuries after centuries, >> > >> > PATIENCE AND SUFFERING AND LOVE as IDEALS, JUST MIGHT NOT APPEAL TO THEM >> > >> > Because patience and love are not essentialized and naturally given >> > ideals >> > and they need a cultural context to be made into a reality and to >> > survive.. >> > >> > So one can conclude that sathyagraha is a very savarna middle-class >> > ideal, >> > with its use and uselessness... >> > >> > And most Gandhian ideals are like this... >> > Gandhian philosophy is also like this... >> > >> > You really cannot stop reading Gandhi's own identity into his political >> > and >> > philosophical formulations.. >> > You meet it there in his text as well as in his action.. >> > And then you realize that he cannot be easily transplanted into >> > subaltern >> > locations and positions.. >> > neither to understand subaltern struggles or politics.. And this is >> > where >> > Ambedkar's analysis >> > begins to become important.. >> > >> > Some more points on what Devika said: >> > >> >>>I don't think saying that the activists at Chengara are using the >> >>> techniques of satyagraha automatically reduces them to >Gandhi's >> >>> politics or >> >>> denies their innovativeness. >> > >> >>>Satyagraha has always been an idea capacious enough to allow multiple >> >>> uses >> >>> and interpretations. >> >>>I have a feeling the activists at Chengara could be seen as innovating >> >>> on >> >>> it in a strikingly anti-Gandhian spirit and to ?>diametrically >> >>> opposite >> >>> ends. >> > >> > If Chengara struggle has "innovatively moved" out of Gandhian Sathyagra >> > and >> > is also "anti Gandhian", then why is Nizar Ahmed and others compelled to >> > see >> > "Gandhian" ideals in it? >> > >> > I really really cannot understand.......except by thinking of dogmatism >> > - >> > this is not a personal comment, but i really cannot understand thisd >> > phenomena otherwise... . >> > >> > To end, let me just say that... the Chengara struggle is a Dalit >> > struggle, >> > with ideas, ideals and philosophy mainly drawn from Ambedkar and >> > Ayyankali.. >> > And this is what the struggling people in Chengara are telling us.. And >> > this >> > is the philiosophy that India/Kerala culture has no access to. Saturated >> > as >> > we have been with Gandhi and Gandhians for so long.. >> > >> > We want the ideals and ideas of Ambedkar, Ayyankali and other Dalit >> > Bahujan >> > thinkers, who take CASTE as one of the most important >> > analytical category for any kind of analysis. >> > >> > We reject the Savarna ideals of Gandhi's philosophy and persona and >> > recognize him and his writings as the spokesperson/philosophy of the >> > HIndu >> > caste system, which is one of the most oppressive power structures in >> > India >> > today... >> > >> > If we are to think about Gandhi please don't assimilate Dalit struggles >> > into >> > Gandhism. In stead tell us how Gandhi is relevant for Dalit Bahujan >> > Minority >> > Gender and Sexual politics.. and which of his philosophy and which text >> > we >> > must read for this..... >> > >> > >> > jenny >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:39 PM, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Before branding Chengara struggle as Gandhian, do these intellectuals >> >> ever >> >> felt for a second to think about how Dalits waged their freedom >> >> movement >> >> agansit brahminism? DO they refer back to find out the nature of >> >> struggle >> >> that Ambedkar led? genealogy of Dalit Struggles can't be find in Gandhi >> >> and >> >> Gandhism. there is a history of such struggles. Chengara could be >> >> traced >> >> back to that history. >> >> for me, NIsar's reading is yet another attempt to mask that history of >> >> struggles by Dalits. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> > > > > > Get perfect Email ID for your Resume. Grab now http://in.promos.yahoo.com/address --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
