--- On Wed, 20/5/09, Suresh Ramasubramanian <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [silk] Why have Indian exit polls been so off lately?
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Wednesday, 20 May, 2009, 9:11 AM
> I put it to you that IG didn’t
> particularly intend this as a laundry list of megalomaniac
> people who made chariots and elephants run on time.
> 
> And that you are missing and/or skating around his point
> again.
> 
>     srs
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of ss
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 May 2009 9:05 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [silk] Why have Indian exit polls been so off
> lately?
> 
> On Tuesday 19 May 2009 2:40:16 pm Bonobashi wrote:
> > *   My objection to Modi was nowhere
> connected to Hindutvabadi; it was
> > connected to our usual, may I say facile, ability to
> gloss over breaches of
> > the rule of law,
> >
> > *   It is the same objection that I
> have to an historical figure, Husain
> > Shahed Suhrawardy, for exactly the same reasons,
> except that Modi happens
> > to be Hindu, and Suhrawardy was Muslim.
> >
> > *   It is the same objection that I
> have to Tytler, Sajjan Kumar and the
> > unlamented swine H. K. L. Bhagat.
> >
> > *   It is the same objection that I
> have to the Muslim crowds that
> > demonstrated to numbers in Calcutta, seeking the
> expulsion of the hapless
> > Taslima Nasreen. Being a hopeless and pedestrian
> writer doesn't warrant
> > such brutal measures, nor such a flagrant breach of
> the rule of law.
> >
> > So which part of Hindutva, or which Hindutvabadi was I
> guilty of hauling up
> > before my kangaroo court?
> 
> IG I cannot but agree with your view of the names you have
> posted above.
> 
> But please take another look at the names you have posted.
> Your list of people 
> who have benefited from the " facile ability to gloss over
> breaches of  the 
> rule of law," does not extend to names earlier than the
> 20th century.
> 
> Now what if you were to extend that list back by say 5000
> years.
> 
> On the face of it this may sound like a ridiculous
> exercise. After all, 
> credible records of the actions tyrants and genocidal
> maniacs though all 
> those centuries do not exist. But records do exist of a few
> of them. And many 
> of them still benefit from the "facile ability to gloss
> over breaches of
> the rule of law" and retain reputations they do not deserve
> centuries after 
> their death
> 
> I put it to you that "pseudosecularism" is the ability to
> recognise tyranny 
> and genocide after a cutoff date (such as circa 1900) and
> the facile ability 
> to gloss over the tyranny of a long list of tyrants before
> that date.
> 
> Would you be guilty of that perhaps?
> 
> shiv


Well, yes, SRS, if you choose that particular sequence of words, but I prefer 
to coopt a mind like Shiv's. His kind of mind cannot resist the bait of naked 
logic; just leave him to it.

Before you go further, if you want a quick peek into my thinking, go read 
Mudrarakshasa.

Remembering always that you are addressing a crude, brutalising Sudra, not a 
subtle, sophistry-imbued Brahmin.


      Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with Yahoo! India 
Travel http://in.travel.yahoo.com/

Reply via email to