Labelling Gandhi as "more violent" than Hitler would also *ipso facto *mean than Hitler is less violent, and thereby more benign, than Gandhi!!
That's the true extent of this stinking obscenity. I also imagine that "social science" is no esoteric branch of Astrophysics or something of that sort so that only a blessed few are entitled to interpret and dish out whatever nauseating hocus pocus they want to. Sukla 2010/1/15 Daniel Mazgaonkar <[email protected]> > I really fail to understand what you all are saying and arguing, calling > non-violence violence, and violence, non-violence. > > Shall we ever call what is going on in Chhattisgarh, non-violence of the > state? > > Daniel. > > 2010/1/15 Chrysanthemum Grower <[email protected]> > >> I’m not sure it is particularly helpful to term a comparison of Gandhi >> with Hitler ‘shit’ or ‘dumb’. >> >> >> >> I think Zizek is absolutely right about Gandhi. It is quite sensible to >> compare Gandhi with Hilter from the point of view of social science AND >> politics: both were leaders who had the capacity to mobilize large number of >> their countrymen – the question is, the effects of what they did, with all >> that power they wielded, and what they could have done. >> >> >> >> What Zizek says here is not particularly original; others with more >> ‘knowledge’ of Indian history have made the same point. Gandhi’s violence is >> the violence that nonviolence makes possible and helps in reproducing. I >> imagine one can recognize that without necessarily pouring scorn on Gandhi >> as a human being. But for that one has to stop putting him on a pedestal and >> worshipping him and treating him like a God and making an ‘ism’ >> (Gandhianism) out of his thoughts. It ought to be pretty obvious that >> violence in one domain is not possible without forms of complicity, through >> explicit nonviolence, in other domains. That is the link between a >> nonviolent salesman in Dadar and the soldier-rapist in dantewada. The >> violence of pacifism would annihilate this link, and failing that, term it >> ‘shit’. >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Sukla Sen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: Kavita Krishnan <[email protected]> >>> Date: 2010/1/15 >>> Subject: Re: [GreenYouth] Re: Was Gandhi more violent than Hitler ? >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: foil-l <[email protected]>, Free Binayak Sen < >>> [email protected]> >>> >>> >>> Comparing Gandhi with Hitler is quite dumb - from the point of view of >>> social science/politics, what have you. Zizek ought to know that being >>> provocative isn't always the way to communicate something. It is possible to >>> criticise the 'himsa' inherent in/unchallenged by/only partially challenged >>> by Gandhi's 'ahimsa' - gender, caste, class and so on. But it is important >>> to remember some things: Gandhi was unequivocally supportive of the >>> Palestinian nation; he was willing to come out on to the streets against >>> communal violence; he resisted anti-Pak jingoism. Those are important >>> legacies for us: legacies that 'Gandhigiri' proponents in popular media tend >>> to suppress and bury. >>> >>> 2010/1/15 Sukla Sen <[email protected]> >>> >>> That's just "shit". >>>> I just can't dig up anything more appropriate. >>>> >>>> Hitler, in any case, is unparallel in modern human history. He put, >>>> racist (purity of Aryan blood etc.) and even otherwise, hatred and violence >>>> on a pedestal and then executed on a mind-boggling scale. >>>> >>>> And Gandhi, one can very well have one's own assessment - from angel to >>>> crook, but bracketing with - nay "more violent" than, Hitler!!!. >>>> Just to recall, he was "martyred", because he went on an indefinite fast >>>> to force the GoI release the funds due to Pakistan, the enemy state, held >>>> up >>>> on account of the Kashmir war. That was the final trigger. >>>> Even if one forgets the legendary foot marches by this indomitable >>>> spirit through blood spewing riot torn districts - Noakhali and (in) Bihar >>>> - >>>> without any "protection" whatever. And his interventions in Calcutta and >>>> Delhi. >>>> >>>> A mind-boggling obscenity! >>>> >>>> Sukla >>>> >>>> 2010/1/15 sreenivas v.p <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I agree with Mr. Venugopal . There is no point in comparing Gandi with >>>>> Hitler because Gandi never perpetuated the philosophy of hatred and also >>>>> he did not support violence directly . >>>>> >>>>> But it is a fact that Gandi's false ideas and his political stand has >>>>> resulted in killing of thousands of Indians . I believe that Gandi was >>>>> preaching what he got from hindu text books and he was very adamant in >>>>> executing and imposing these stupid philosophies on others . >>>>> >>>>> It is Gandi who should be blamed for dragging the freedom struggle for >>>>> so long and he never took any solid action against the british >>>>> imperialism . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So it can be said that Gandi believed in peace and nonviolence but he >>>>> indirectly created more violence and killings than hitler >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --- On *Thu, 14/1/10, venukm <[email protected]>* wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: venukm <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: Was Gandhi more violent than Hitler ? >>>>> To: "Green Youth Movement" <[email protected]> >>>>> Date: Thursday, 14 January, 2010, 11:10 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In spite of whatever Zizek has said, he hasn't given the rationale of >>>>> his ranking Gandhi higher in violence. It looks that a comparison >>>>> between Hitler and Gandhi is ok, both having justified the states' >>>>> ways of coercing the poorest people to serve the elite without >>>>> grumbling.. but giving away the first place to Gandhi by him,is just >>>>> to give the effect of sensationalizing. One can see that the source of >>>>> savarna violence is Hindu scriptures and beliefs in a divinely >>>>> ordained system of division of labour and labourers., whereas that of >>>>> Hitler& fascism is entirely based on hate and ethnic cleansing of the >>>>> 'other'. British India was a territory inhabited by the largest Muslim >>>>> population and Gandhi became a martyr just for having intervened in >>>>> the process of ethnic cleansing of Muslims by Hindus. >>>>> Fascists on the other hand, were also motivated by the desire to bring >>>>> the entire world under control, for which they even made use of the >>>>> advancement of the science in the form of newer techniques to kill. >>>>> Gandhi never preached hate and violence for its own sake!Zizek >>>>> obviously misses lot of details about India, Gandhi and Buddha! >>>>> He is only a beginner of all these and of the Ambedkarite modernism. >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 14, 7:46 pm, Ranjit Ranjit >>>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc84.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > Was Gandhi more violent than Hitler? Shobhan >>>>> > Saxena<http://author.toiblogs.com/Main-Street>, >>>>> > 12 January 2010, 06:14 PM IST >>>>> http://author.toiblogs.com/Main-Street/entry/was-gandhi-more-violent- >>>>> ... >>>>> > >>>>> > Let me make it clear at the very beginning that I have no doubt that >>>>> Hitler >>>>> > was more violent than Gandhi. Actually, I would not even compare >>>>> Gandhi with >>>>> > Hitler. I am not an admirer of Gandhi, but I wouldn’t call him a >>>>> violent >>>>> > person. Now, if you are wondering why on earth I am asking this >>>>> question -- >>>>> > Was Gandhi more violent than Hitler? Here’s my answer: Last week, I >>>>> met >>>>> > Slavoj Zizek who is an unusual philosopher from Slovenia. Zizek mixes >>>>> > unfashionably intransigent left-wing politics with his taste for >>>>> Hollywood >>>>> > classics. The 59-year-old academic has written more than 30 books on >>>>> > subjects as diverse as Alfred Hitchcock, Lenin and 9/11 attacks, and >>>>> also >>>>> > presented the TV series The Pervert's Guide to Cinema. He has also >>>>> run for >>>>> > Slovenia’s president. During the interview, excerpts of which were >>>>> carried >>>>> > in this week’s Sunday Times (All That Matters page), Zizek told me >>>>> that he >>>>> > considered Gandhi to be an extremely violent person. When I asked >>>>> Zizek to >>>>> > elaborate his point, he gave a long, provocative and interesting >>>>> > explanation. It’s not easy to disagree with him. Zizek, who was >>>>> invited to >>>>> > India by Navayana to release his latest book, First As Tragedy, Then >>>>> As >>>>> > Farce, and give a series of lectures across the country, also slammed >>>>> the >>>>> > Dalai Lama and Buddhism and China. On the advice of some friends, who >>>>> found >>>>> > the interview interesting and wanted to know more about Zizek, I am >>>>> posting >>>>> > the detailed interview here. Read it and decide for yourself if you >>>>> agree >>>>> > with Zizek or not. >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: You call yourself a Leninist but the media in the West has called >>>>> you an >>>>> > "intellectual rock star", "Elvis of cultural theory" and the "Marx >>>>> Brother". >>>>> > How do you react to such journalistic labeling?* >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > A: With resigned melancholy. I think they try to say that this guy >>>>> may be >>>>> > interesting and provocative but he is not serious. They call me a >>>>> > provocative guy. To the western media, I am like a fly that annoys >>>>> you and >>>>> > provokes you but should not be taken seriously. It’s a defence >>>>> mecahnism. >>>>> > Though, of late, they have been dubbing me as someone more >>>>> threatening... >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: In an article in the New Republic recently, Adam Kirsch called >>>>> you the >>>>> > most "dangerous philosopher in the west..." * >>>>> > >>>>> > A: Yes, in the last two years, the tone in the US and Europe has >>>>> changed. >>>>> > Now they say we are dealing with somebody very dangerous. This change >>>>> of >>>>> > tone is quite amazing. First there were Marx Brothers jokes and now >>>>> they say >>>>> > I am dangerous because I am Leninist. But I don’t care. I am resigned >>>>> to it. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: You have also been accused of glorifying political violence. Do >>>>> you >>>>> > support violence as a means of political change?* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: Here I must be frank. For me, the 20th century communism is the >>>>> biggest >>>>> > ethical-political catastrophe in the history of humanity, greater >>>>> > catastrophe than fascism. In fascism, you had bad people who said we >>>>> will do >>>>> > bad things and they took power and they did bad things. That’s why in >>>>> > fascism you don’t have dissidents. But in the first years of the >>>>> October >>>>> > Revolution, in spite of the so-called Red Terror, there was sexual >>>>> > liberation, literary explosion and then it turned into the nightmare. >>>>> I >>>>> > don’t accept the right-wing critique that says it was evil from the >>>>> very >>>>> > beginning. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: What’s your point?* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: My point is what people perceive as violence is the direct >>>>> subjective >>>>> > violence. It’s crucial to see violence which has to be done >>>>> repeatedly to >>>>> > keep the things the way they are. I am not just talking about >>>>> structural >>>>> > violence, symbolic violence, violence in language, etc. In that sense >>>>> Gandhi >>>>> > was more violent than Hitler. Hitler killed millions of people. It >>>>> was more >>>>> > reactive killing. Hitler was active all the time not to change things >>>>> but to >>>>> > prevent change. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: A lot of people will find it ridiculous to even imagine that >>>>> Gandhi was >>>>> > more violent than Hitler? Are you serious when you say that...* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: Yes he was, although Gandhi didn’t support killing. With his >>>>> actions -- >>>>> > boycott and all that -- he helped the British imperialists to stay in >>>>> India >>>>> > longer. This is something Hitler never wanted. Gandhi didn’t do >>>>> anything to >>>>> > stop the functioning of the British empire or the way it functioned >>>>> here. >>>>> > You have to think why was India called the jewel of the empire? That >>>>> for me >>>>> > is a problem. Let us locate violence properly. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: I guess you have no respect for Gandhi who is a tall figure in >>>>> this >>>>> > country... * >>>>> > >>>>> > A: I respect him. I don’t respect him for his peaceful ways, >>>>> vegetarianism >>>>> > etc. I don’t care about that. But Gandhi somehow succeeded in >>>>> carrying on >>>>> > his principled attitude with pragmatic spirit. It’s very difficult to >>>>> > maintain this balance. But again I feel Ambedkar was much better than >>>>> > Gandhi. My favourite oneliner from Ambedkar is when he said that >>>>> "there is >>>>> > no caste without outcastes". Ambedkar saw that the Gandhian solution >>>>> for >>>>> > untouchables was wrong. This attitude doesn’t work. I am for >>>>> Ambedkar’s >>>>> > radical approach. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: You haven’t answered my question about your stand on political >>>>> > violence...* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: In an abstract sense I am opposed to violence. But nobody is >>>>> actually >>>>> > against violence. Look at the Buddhist text. They say you shouldn’t >>>>> kill, >>>>> > but then they have all the exceptions. During the 40s, a great Zen >>>>> > philosopher was writing articles not only justifying Japanese >>>>> invasion of >>>>> > China but also giving advice on how Buddhist enlightenment allows you >>>>> to >>>>> > kill without guilt. It says you are in a void, you are an observer, >>>>> your >>>>> > hand moves in the air and the other’s body gets stuck on your knife >>>>> knife, >>>>> > so it’s not your fault. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: It’s hard to accept that Buddhism supports violence. Buddhism is >>>>> growing >>>>> > very fast in the west and very few people will agree with you...* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: Buddhism is the predominant ideology in the west now. It plays a >>>>> very >>>>> > conformist function. It makes you feel good in global capitalism. I >>>>> read an >>>>> > analysis why all the top managers in the US like to practice Zen and >>>>> all. >>>>> > Because things are so confusing now with one speculation you can lose >>>>> > billions of dollars in a minute. The only thing that can explain this >>>>> is >>>>> > Buddhism which says that everything is an appearance and be aware of >>>>> the >>>>> > inner reality and all that. You are dealing with just fake >>>>> appearance. The >>>>> > tradition European thinking doesn’t help in explaining the world in a >>>>> flux. >>>>> > This new age Buddhism gives authenticity to global capitalism. That’s >>>>> why >>>>> > Dalai Lama is popular in Hollywood. I hope he is aware of what kind >>>>> of game >>>>> > he is playing there, maybe he is not aware. He is providing them a >>>>> cheap >>>>> > spiritual path so that you can basically go on with your life -- >>>>> seducing, >>>>> > sex orgies, drugs, earn money -- but it gives you a feeling that I am >>>>> aware >>>>> > I am not really that. It helps you to normalize and neutralize the >>>>> > schizophrenia we live in. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: In your new book you have addressed the issue of the recent >>>>> financial >>>>> > crisis. Do you see it as an opportunity for the Left to revive >>>>> itself?* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: I don’t believe my leftist friends who say this is wonderful >>>>> opportunity >>>>> > for the Left as the people will see that capitalism has failed. >>>>> That’s the >>>>> > tragedy of the Left. Let’s be very clear, all this ideas of >>>>> environment >>>>> > movement, civil society movement etc cetera is not going to work. >>>>> This is >>>>> > all logic of the movement. But there is no alternative proposal. The >>>>> > majority of the Left today -- and this is ironic -- have become >>>>> Fukuyamist. >>>>> > They make fun of Francis Fukuyama for his "end of history" argument >>>>> but >>>>> > basically they accept his argument. They believe the liberal >>>>> capitalism is >>>>> > not the best of the system but it’s not too bad and what all we can >>>>> do is to >>>>> > make it better. Today majority of the Left wants global capitalism >>>>> with a >>>>> > human face -- more tolerant, more healthcare, more education, etc. >>>>> The big >>>>> > issue if this is enough. I don’t think this is enough. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: You are a philosopher but you are also a follower of Hollywood >>>>> classics. >>>>> > Don’t you see Hollywood as part of the global capiltalism...* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: Hollywood is an ambiguity. But it’s worth analysis. The Hollywood >>>>> > products are the best indicators of where we are moving in our >>>>> collective >>>>> > ideology. If you look at reality, it’s confusing, but in Hollywood >>>>> you get >>>>> > the distilled version of reality, like the distilled alcohol. At the >>>>> same >>>>> > time, on the margins of Hollywood you have wonderful filmamkers like >>>>> Robert >>>>> > altman, Woody Allen. I am opposed to this simple third-world attitude >>>>> > towards Hollywood. If you ignore Hollywood you end up ignoring the >>>>> worst of >>>>> > Hollywood. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: What about Bollywood? Can you ignore it?* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: For us in the West, Bollywood is chaotic and too colourful but I >>>>> like >>>>> > this experience. The first reaction to this linear western story in >>>>> chaotic. >>>>> > You have to look for a different type of narrative. It’s like the >>>>> medieval >>>>> > painting when you don’t have to make a distinction between the >>>>> foreground >>>>> > and background. It’s totally different disposition of space. This is >>>>> how I >>>>> > watch Bollywood not for the story but how they present it. I like >>>>> even the >>>>> > fake Bollywood like Slumdog Millionaire. First, I resisted the movie, >>>>> but >>>>> > what I started to like was how much the brutakity of life exists. >>>>> This is >>>>> > something unimgibale in the west. It’s a happy story but nonetheless >>>>> the >>>>> > reality remains. It’s a fairytale but it doesn’t allow all the >>>>> reality to >>>>> > disappear. In the west, a feel good story could not be combined with >>>>> this >>>>> > brutal intrusion of social reality. >>>>> > >>>>> > ** >>>>> > >>>>> > *Q: You can’t be here just to watch Bollywood?* >>>>> > >>>>> > A: No, I am here to know more about India. I must frankly admit that >>>>> till >>>>> > now I ignored India. But for sometime, a storm was gathering inside >>>>> me and >>>>> > now it exploded and now I am here. I am reading books on India. I >>>>> started >>>>> > with the laws of Manu. I am here to study how the modern and >>>>> tradition >>>>> > co-exist together amid contradictions of globalization. I have more >>>>> hopes >>>>> > from India than China because in China something very dangerous is >>>>> > happening. It all started in Singapore -- capitalism with Asian >>>>> values, >>>>> > which is actually authoritarian capitalism. Till now, there was one >>>>> good >>>>> > thing to say about capitalism -- democracy. I am afraid what’s now >>>>> emerging >>>>> > in the Far East (we all know that Deng Xiaoping went to Singapore and >>>>> said >>>>> > this is the model for all of China). It’s the new capitalism. It’s >>>>> more >>>>> > dynamic than the western capitalism. And I don’t believe my liberal >>>>> friends >>>>> > who believe that in another 10 years in china there will be another >>>>> > Tiananmen. >>>>> > >>>>> > -- >>>>> > Ranjit >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send an email to >>>>> [email protected]<http://in.mc84.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> . >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to greenyouth+ >>>>> [email protected]<http://in.mc84.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Peace Is Doable >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. >>>> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]<greenyouth%[email protected]> >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Green Youth Movement" group. >>> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<greenyouth%[email protected]> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Peace Is Doable >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Free Binayak Sen" group. >>> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] >>> . >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<free-binayaksen%[email protected]> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/free-binayaksen?hl=en-GB. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Chrysanthemum growers, >> You are the slaves >> Of Chrysanthemums >> —Buson >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Free Binayak Sen" group. >> To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<free-binayaksen%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/free-binayaksen?hl=en-GB. >> >> > > > -- > Take my will, and make it Thine; It shall be no longer mine. Take my > heart, it is Thine own; It shall be Thy Royal Throne. Take my love, My > Lord I pour, at Thy feet its treasure-store. Take myself, and I will be, > ever, only all for Thee. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Free Binayak Sen" group. > To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<free-binayaksen%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/free-binayaksen?hl=en-GB. > > -- Peace Is Doable--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an 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.
