I mean, about the discussion on the fuzzyness and meaning constructions about myths and making of belief etc..... its important but, that deep thinkings would only prevent us from activism sometimes. If I want to support tibaten freedom fight, acting with them , I have to stop thinking about the conceptual errors for the time being. And if I want to support mentally only, then I can think.... I think this is a problem with activism, that is mental and physical !
On 11/25/08, Maya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > cant save myself from saying that its really good that ranju write these > ideas here. I think almost the same way sometimes while we go so rigid in > mind about matter of facts , while discussing about something...May be the > 'myth and meaning' by Claude Levi-strauss is so relevant for these type of > discussions.. A structuralist who celebrates his 100th birthday this 28th! > > > On 11/17/08, ranju radha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> civilians all over the world belive or are made to belive that we live >> here peacefully because there is military at the boarder. chinese people may >> be feeling the same way. >> >> but given the context of hindu colonisation taking a violent turn and >> moving into the genocidal terror mode, one can't always belive such myths. >> >> Are we not living peacefully bz the newspaper-walla puts the newspaper at >> our door steps on time and therby, initiating us to the world around us, >> make us belive in peace and lead us to demand a peaceful world ? Yes we are. >> It is not only the jawans in kargil but also the newspaper boys in the >> streets, t make us 'belive' that we live in peace. >> but are we not paying a price for that? Living peacefully in a country of >> violence demands alot more slavish/blind belief. Belief that make us believe >> that we cant live without belief. We end up victims of that belief. but >> sometimes, or most of the time we tend to believe in it. nationalisms are >> created out of such beliefs. patriotism is the symptm. >> boundaries are fuzzy; history can delete it with just a stroke >> We as a trapped rat in the boundaries of nation clamour for more strong >> boundaries >> but boundary again is a myth created and re-created in our minds. the >> beliefs make us create such strong boundaries in our mind. can we break it? >> let us try once. >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 1:04 AM, bobinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >Your Holiness, even during the period when China was yet to become an >>> economic powerhouse, you could not persuade Buddhist majority countries like >>> Thailand or Sri Lanka to boycott China. >>> >>> >>> >>> During my recent visit to north east states I happen to talk to lot of >>> Indian Buddhists. Not a huge number, hence they may not represent the >>> Buddhist community but still I was surprised to find that none of them >>> supported Dalai lama. >>> >>> Another experience is witnessing the chineese demonstration in ottawa, >>> Canada immediately after Dalai Lama's visit to Ottawa. ( >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/freemind/2412774172/) I was told by the >>> chineese crowd that during a recent tibetan demonstration chineese embassy >>> was attacked and flags were burned. I was told the similar facts about the >>> visit and violence caused by the same by a Canadian photographer also. >>> >>> >>> I am not making conclusions. Simply mentioning few facts. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:48 PM, sreenivas v.p < >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> i support Dalai lama and the tibetan people for their freedom >>>> struggle. expanding territory is one of the agenda of chinese communist >>>> party and they are following it religiously which resulted attacking >>>> nieghboring countries including russia and india. >>>> >>>> some communists were laughing saying that indian soldiers ran away >>>> fearing chinese bomb tack during 1962 war . these people should not forget >>>> that we live here peacefully for the fact that our soldiers are struggling >>>> for life in the border. >>>> >>>> >>>> sreenivas >>>> bangalore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --- On *Sun, 16/11/08, Bobby Kunhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Bobby Kunhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Subject: [GreenYouth] An Open Letter to the Dalai Lama >>>> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" < >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Greenyouth" < >>>> [email protected]>, "canopeners" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> > >>>> Date: Sunday, 16 November, 2008, 7:25 AM >>>> >>>> http://winnowed.blogspot.com/2008/11/open-letter-to-dalai-lama.html >>>> Saturday, >>>> 15 November 2008 An Open Letter to the Dalai >>>> Lama<http://winnowed.blogspot.com/2008/11/open-letter-to-dalai-lama.html> >>>> Your Holiness, >>>> >>>> I hope this letter finds you in good health. You must be very busy right >>>> now, Your Holiness, preparing to attend the six day meet you have convened >>>> for members of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile in Dharamshala from 17 >>>> November 2008 to discuss the future course of action for Tibet. I assume >>>> you >>>> are not in the best of spirits, Your Holiness. You underwent a surgery for >>>> removal of a gall bladder stone last month. You have publicly >>>> stated<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7693052.stm>that you >>>> have lost hope of reaching a settlement with China through >>>> dialogue. Ever since March 1959 when you left Tibet and went to India, you >>>> have been trying to obtain a better deal for Tibet and its people. You have >>>> not only always stuck to the path of non-violence, but you have also >>>> insisted that your followers do the same. All of this is admirable until >>>> one >>>> realises that, as you recently admitted, you have not managed to wring a >>>> single compromise out of China. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, are you worried that history will judge you harshly for >>>> not having achieved anything much for the people of Tibet, despite >>>> struggling for almost 50 years? I don't have an answer to that, Your >>>> Holiness. Before we respond to that question, why don't we take a quick >>>> look >>>> at Tibet's history? >>>> >>>> The Tibetan language belongs to the Tibeto-Burman branch of the >>>> Sino-Tibetan language family. Tibetan is as much distinct from Mandarin as >>>> Burmese is. Tibet has always been an independent country. In the early 9th >>>> century, Buddhism reached Tibet after a Tibetan king invited Buddhist >>>> preachers and artisans from India. There have been occasions when Tibetan >>>> kings have defeated Chinese rulers in battle. From the 13th century >>>> onwards, >>>> Tibet was under the control of the Mongols who also controlled vast >>>> stretches of China. It was when the Mongols controlled Tibet that Buddhism >>>> spread to Mongolia. In the seventeenth century, the fifth Dalai Lama became >>>> the spiritual and temporal head of the whole of Tibet. Tibet has had wars >>>> with the kingdoms of Ladakh, Bhutan and Nepal, losing many battles and >>>> winning a few. >>>> >>>> Since the early eighteen century, the Manchu rulers of China have made >>>> claims on Tibet. However, China went into a period of decline after that >>>> and >>>> Tibet managed to assert its independence. In the early 20th century, the >>>> British led a few expeditions into Tibet in order to prevent any Russian >>>> influence in the region. The British forced the Tibetans to sign a trade >>>> treaty which opened Tibet's borders to British India. In 1907, Britain also >>>> entered into a treaty with Russia which recognised Chinese suzerainty over >>>> Tibet. >>>> >>>> After China was defeated by Japan in a series of battles in the early >>>> twentieth century, Chinese control over Tibet waned. Britain, Tibet and >>>> China held negotiations in Simla in 1913 and 1914 to resolve the boundaries >>>> between India, China and Tibet. The negotiations broke down and Henry >>>> McMahon, the then British Indian foreign secretary and the chief British >>>> negotiator, unilaterally demarcated the Indo-Tibetan border. Approximately >>>> 9,000 square kilometres of traditional Tibetan territory in southern Tibet >>>> (the Tawang region) was given to India (which now forms the Indian state of >>>> Arunachal Pradesh). McMahon also recognised Chinese suzerainty over Tibet >>>> and affirmed that Tibet was a part of China. China did not agree to this >>>> Simla convention and hence, this treaty became a bilateral agreement >>>> between >>>> India and Tibet. >>>> >>>> Immediately after the communist takeover of China, the communists took >>>> over parts of eastern Tibet and initiated a process of land reforms. >>>> Landlords were publicly humiliated and at times executed. However, the >>>> traditional Tibetan aristocracy was allowed to remain in place till public >>>> unrest in eastern Tibet led to a military crackdown, which in turn led to >>>> the Lhasa uprising. It was at that time, Your Holiness, that you fled to >>>> India. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, at the time of the communist takeover of Tibet, Tibet was >>>> a corrupt and undemocratic theocracy. Monks held all the powers and abused >>>> them. The peasants were oppressed and lived in extreme poverty. One of the >>>> reasons the Chinese were able to takeover Tibet so easily was because it >>>> was >>>> a backward, feudal and theocratic state. The blame for this should lie >>>> primarily on the Buddhist clergy which kept Tibet in the dark ages. Your >>>> Holiness and your predecessors were always at the helm of such a state of >>>> affairs. >>>> >>>> After Your Holiness came over to India, you set up a Government-in-Exile >>>> consisting of a legislative assembly (the Assembly of Tibetan People's >>>> Deputies), an executive (the Kashag), and a judiciary (the Tibetan Supreme >>>> Justice Commission). You have categorised the Government-in-Exile as a >>>> constitutional monarchy. Elections were held and exiled Tibetans voted. You >>>> have gone into semi-retirement and if rumours are correct, you would like >>>> to >>>> retire permanently. Considering the fact that prior to the Chinese >>>> take-over >>>> Tibet was a full-fledged theocracy, I feel that you have done an admirable >>>> job in injecting a decent dose of democracy into the Tibetan community. >>>> Since almost all Tibetans are Buddhists, not many Tibetans have objected to >>>> having you, the Dalai Lama, a living incarnation of the Lord Buddha, as the >>>> head of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile. This would mean there is a shade >>>> of >>>> theocracy in the Government-in-Exile, but I feel this was inevitable. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, your emphasis on non-violence and peaceful negotiations >>>> won you not only many admirers all over the world, but also the Nobel Peace >>>> Prize in 1989. Until you threw in the towel last week, you have always >>>> stated that you would be happy with greater autonomy under Chinese >>>> authority >>>> (on par with what Hong Kong has) and would not press for independence. >>>> However, it cannot be said Your Holiness, that all Tibetans have been happy >>>> with your approach. Organisations such as the Tibetan Independence >>>> Movement, >>>> the Students For a Free Tibet led by exiled Tibetans and supported by >>>> celebrities like Richard Gere have insisted that Tibet should be >>>> independent. They have rightly said that China has been diluting Tibetan >>>> culture by flooding Tibet with Han Chinese. Tibet's natural wealth, >>>> especially its forest wealth, has been eviscerated. Most importantly, they >>>> say that Tibet has historically been an independent state. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, it must not be forgotten that Chinese rule has brought >>>> some benefits for Tibet. There are a lot more roads and railways and >>>> industries, though it can be argued that all these developments further >>>> Chinese exploitation of Tibet and facilitate Han Chinese expansion into >>>> Tibet. We all know that sadly, in Tibet, the Han Chinese outnumber the >>>> Tibetans. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, even though you have won international acclaim and >>>> admiration, you have not been able to persuade a single country to take >>>> concrete measures for Tibet's independence. Measures such as imposing >>>> sanctions against China and not trading with China. Please don't laugh at >>>> me, Your Holiness. I do realise that the mere thought of not trading with >>>> China sounds silly. Who can afford to not trade with China? It is not only >>>> nation states who can't afford to antagonise China. A few months ago, the >>>> London Metropolitan University awarded Your Holiness a doctorate in >>>> recognition of your outstanding achievements in promoting global peace. The >>>> threat of a boycott by Chinese students forced this British university to >>>> express >>>> regret for any offence >>>> <http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/jul/09/highereducation.uk>caused >>>> to the Chinese government. >>>> >>>> Were things always like this Your Holiness? No, Your Holiness. It is >>>> only in the last ten years that China became so powerful. Twenty five years >>>> ago, China was an unknown country, tolerated because it was a counterweight >>>> to the Soviet Union. Your Holiness, for a couple of decade after you went >>>> over to India, there were many armed groups of Tibetans carrying out >>>> guerrilla operations against China. These were not on a very large scale >>>> and >>>> were funded by the CIA. However, they slowly died down due to various >>>> reasons. One of the reasons was that India slowly distanced itself from the >>>> USA and became friendly with the USSR, which meant that the CIA could no >>>> longer use India as a base for attacks on China. Your Holiness, I wonder if >>>> your insistence on non-violence as the only option has been mainly because >>>> you've known that neither the USA nor India would provide the quantum of >>>> commitment and support that would make it feasible for Tibetans to fight >>>> China. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, even during the period when China was yet to become an >>>> economic powerhouse, you could not persuade Buddhist majority countries >>>> like >>>> Thailand or Sri Lanka to boycott China. Even though Buddhists believe that >>>> you are a living incarnation of Lord Buddha, you have not been able to >>>> build >>>> up any following within the Buddhists among the Han Chinese. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, would things have been different if you have played a >>>> less key role right from the time you went over to India? I doubt it Your >>>> Holiness. Your personality and charisma gave the Tibetan cause the sort of >>>> publicity and respectability that no secular leader could have obtained. It >>>> is tempting to speculate on what could have been achieved if a secular >>>> person who believed in using all options had headed the Tibetan >>>> Government-in-Exile right from day one. At a time when China was fighting >>>> the USSR, could such a person have obtained independence for Tibet through >>>> armed action? I doubt it, Your Holiness, but we will never know. >>>> >>>> Your Holiness, I believe that the head of the Tibetan >>>> Government-in-Exile must not be the Dalai Lama. It must be headed by a >>>> secular individual. If you are to head this Government-in-Exile, it becomes >>>> a theocracy and there is no place in the modern world for a theocracy. >>>> However, the Tibetan movement still needs your help. You must not retire >>>> completely, though you have expressed your wish to do so. You must work >>>> with >>>> the Tibetan Government-in-Exile in order to keep the Tibetan cause in the >>>> limelight. History has been unkind to Tibet and its people. You have, in my >>>> opinion, performed a stellar role in fighting for their rights. I don't >>>> think history will judge you harshly. >>>> >>>> Where do we go from here, Your Holiness? I don't believe that there is a >>>> magic solution to the Tibetan issue. I wonder what advice you will give >>>> your >>>> fellow delegates at the forthcoming conference. >>>> >>>> There will be some hotheads who will want armed action against China. >>>> Around eight months ago, in March 2008 there were orchestrated riots in >>>> Tibet. Nothing much was achieved, but it did scare the Chinese government a >>>> lot, since it was so close to the Olympics. Next time your followers try >>>> something like that, the Chinese government might not be as restrained, >>>> since the Olympics are now over and the Chinese couldn't give two hoots >>>> about public opinion. >>>> >>>> I assume muscular lobbying is an option. The Tibetan cause has >>>> supporters and well-wishers all over the world. Your Holiness, things can >>>> change very quickly. If the current economic recession were to continue, >>>> China will not be able to provide employment for many of its restless >>>> millions. If economic unrest were to spread in China, which now has a vast >>>> rich-poor divide, the Tibetan Government-in-Exile might be able to bargain >>>> a >>>> certain degree of autonomy for itself. There might even be a fortuitous >>>> turn >>>> of events which enables Tibetans to get their country back. >>>> >>>> I wish Your Holiness and the people of Tibet all the best for the >>>> future. >>>> >>>> With warm and sincere regards >>>> >>>> Winnowed, A blogger from the World Wide Web >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Bobby Kunhu http://community.eldis.org/myshkin/Blog/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. >>>> >>>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_6/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> http://freebird.in >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Maya S. > School of Social Sciences > Mahatma Gandhi University > Kottayam-41 > Kerala, India -- Maya S. School of Social Sciences Mahatma Gandhi University Kottayam-41 Kerala, India --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
