Johny, Please do not place Marx and Savarkar in the same platform. On a political and philosophical search against State and capital, Marx placed the dream of abolition of nation. But Savarkar was different. He was clearly placing universe as an extension of his Akhand Bharat concept.
And interestingly, in this debate bbetween you and Anand Nair, the political issue of soft Hindutva among the left has gone for a toss. On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Anand Nair <[email protected]> wrote: > Johny, > > It is quite possible that Marx and Krishna both believed that their > prescriptions are "good". So did, Hitler and Jack the Ripper! THIS cannot > be what equates (or differentiates) ideologies or theories or > "suggestions"! > > The difference is that Marx argued his case on the basis of an analysis of > what he regarded as the material conditions of our existence; and a > detailed study of how the mode of production shapes social relations. > > Quite in contrast, Krishna (Christ, Mohammed etc) arrived at "what is > good" based on notions of their own divinity. (What about Buddha? I am not > sure. May be he falls somewhere in between the two extremes). > > I would think THAT is a clear differentiator. > > "An Idea called ‘Love’ ... is beyond any kind of falsification" > > "Love" is a description of a mental state, and NOT an explanation of > phenomena nor a theory. What is there to be falsified? Actually, the > observed phenomenon of "love" has an elegant explanation in the Darwinian > Theory. Why and how various kinds of "love" evolved in biological nature -- > how this behavioural propensity gave an edge to our ancestors to survive > and procreate. As also other behavioural traits that coexist with love > (along with empathy, altruism etc) across biology -- traits such as hate, > anger, violence, cruelty... > > You went on (with trademark vagueness!):- > > "..one says it from a clear understanding of the ultimate un-divideablity > of the existence and idea" > > Which *one*? What is an "idea" -- other than part of the repertoire of > "survival strategies" evolved by material structures (biological creatures) > possible only under rare conditions? We can form ideas only because the > ability to form ideas (and thus predict the future) helped our ancestors to > survive and reproduce.... > > All of available evidence points OVERWHELMINGLY to the hypothesis that > matter can exist (and existed for most of the time since the Big Bang) in > the absence of any entity capable of formulating "ideas" of any kind. > > Science is the most effective non-dualistic knowledge system ever -- aham > dravyasmi! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "FEC-Fourth Estate Critique" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fourth-estate-critique. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
