[Reader-list] reader-list Digest, Vol 64, Issue 148
rajendra bhat
raja_starkglass at yahoo.com
Fri Nov 14 13:39:39 IST 2008
Dear All,
This digest was both interesting and in some parts disgusting as well, interesting because of the thoughts expressed by list moderator, who did not like the idea of being class monitor, interesting because of the humane response by many like shuddha, taraprakash, aashima who seem to have measured mature responses to the situations in the list.
Disgusting was the response by Tapas, who links fascism to some while certifying others not fascist. Again, it is imperative that fascism is a method of extinguishing dissent and that too by violent means. Tapas should remeber the fate of the sikdar girl, raped and murdered by cadrs and the two leaders now being jailed for the crime, so left can not take a moral highground of not being fascist.Tapas in his enthusiasm for defence of the ideology of left seems to overlook the fact that non violence and sobre response without incitementcan make the discussions healthy and exchange of thoughts worthwhile. Not that we as humans not get get excited, in the heat of the moment outbursts are present, but to make mistakes is human, to forgive is much more humane, as I will not call divine as all of us are at times devilish and more times humane.
Hate for an ideology by some can transcend such boundaries as to call the subscribers of such ideology by broad brush of being fascist is ludicrous to say the least. Let us not forget that the ills of the society have been more pronounced after freedom with discriminatory governance, some castes labelling themselves as backward castes , who are normally ruling class have ruled the citizens with out any fear for the rule of laws and have got away with it.
Tapas refers to khandamal incidence and violence and I must say do we have the moral honesty to analyse the facts without prejudice.? The bishops who exhort the followers to stone the police and publice, the new life trust which paid money to the followers of faith to foment trouble and foolish bravado of bhajrangdal leader, who was not even at the site of violence to claim that "he did it" is sheer media circus. Killers of elderly "swami" and killers of followers of faith are equally guilty of violence and fact is this was done for electoral gains by the party in power at centre, as detailed investigations will reveal in due course . Inference may be wrong but reasonable as all the political parties including left parties do use religion, faith and caste to garner votes, vreate vote banks with favours and fears to voters.
A system of governance in which elected take oath to govern without fear or favour, is more violeted in practice and we need such leaders who see all citizens without the colour blindness and this is possible, change we can, when we strive to change orselves instead of blaming others.
Lastly, as rights are important and freedom is to be preserved it is necessary to honour the duties as well by all as otherwise in the process of absolute rights of individuals rights of others rights in the society are subjective if duty does not honour the others' rights saying duties are advisory, rights are mandatory. This is where sanathana dharma is unique as dharma means duties defined of an individual to his parents, spouse, children, siblings and to society and others in society. That is the reason hindu way of life recognises the duty and right flows only when duty is followed.
Of the population of 75 crores, when over 35 crore are seeing this truth, to call such citizens as fascist is ostrich like approach to the issue of democratic life, just and equitable.
----- Original Message ----
From: "reader-list-request at sarai.net" <reader-list-request at sarai.net>
To: reader-list at sarai.net
Sent: Thursday, 13 November, 2008 9:03:45 PM
Subject: reader-list Digest, Vol 64, Issue 148
Send reader-list mailing list submissions to
reader-list at sarai.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
reader-list-request at sarai.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
reader-list-owner at sarai.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of reader-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: About the list (Shuddhabrata Sengupta)
2.. Re: About the list (Tapas Ray)
3. request to Aditya and Pawan (taraprakash)
4. BANGLADESH: Shibir’s militancy, do-or-die challenge for all
(Naeem Mohaiemen)
5. Re: About Accusations on this List (Tapas Ray)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:26:16 +0530
From: Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] About the list
To: sarai list <reader-list at sarai.net>
Message-ID: <FFB6A718-613E-409D-B66C-76E836C455E2 at sarai.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Dear Monica,
I am writing this with the hope that this sorry chapter about false
allegations on the list is now lurching towards conclusion. But
before we achieve the closure we all need, a few clarifications and
recapitulations are in order, for the sake of the record.
It is my belief that your response as list administrator is a
philosophical one, and upholds what I think are the best traditions
of the Reader List of standing for the freedom of speech even of
those with whom one agrees least of all. I agree to withdraw my
demand that Aditya Raj Kaul and Pawan Durani be asked to leave the list.
However, the least that Pawan Durani and Aditya Raj Kaul can do, if
they are to be truly deserving, in my view of the measured and
considerate tone of the list administrator's response is to
reciprocate by -
- Offering an unconditional and unambiguous apology to all list
members for seeking to mislead list members and making allegations
without proof about people who write or say things that Kaul and
Durani are in disagreement with being in the pay of 'terrorists' and
'foreign powers'.
I think that a variety of different conflicting opinions and points
of view is healthy. But a welcoming attitude to difference should not
be taken to mean a licence to harm the reputations and persons of
others. Most importantly, I believe it means never to say anything
directly accusing another person of doing something if you do not
have proof for it.
From this time onwards, I suggest that we evolve a code of conduct
that states
1) that no person, whosoever they may be should make any allegations
on the personal conduct of another list member or any other third
person, without offering proof for the same. Should this proof be
found wanting, they should apologize.
2) that people voluntarily agree to refrain from making sexist and
homophobic remarks or use racist language of any kind.
Even the most strong arguments can be made without attacking each
other on the basis of the name that people carry or the bodies they
have and the desires that they own up to. I do not see this in any
way as a restriction on anyone's freedom to express their thoughts,
feelings, desires, interests, ideas or questions. I propose that
unless a person actively dissents at this stage, we take it that
these principles are agreeable to all.
regards
Shuddha
On 13-Nov-08, at 1:17 PM, Monica Narula wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I think its rather cute the way dear everyone is asking for an
> intervention from the admin - now increasingly feeling like a class
> monitor!
>
> The coming years are going to be a difficult ones. There is going to
> be a massive drop in employment opportunities, liquidity will fall,
> infrastructure will remain half-built etc. There will also be an
> increasing shrillness of speech. This, I am guessing, will lead to an
> aggressive acceleration in both inclusive and exclusive
> authoritarianism.. So the future trajectory of the language game and
> the rhetorical quotient on the reader-list will be something that I
> am a little ambivalent about.
>
> I request list members to be aware that making charges without
> substantial ground is more to do with incitement than to do with
> discussion. It is odd that when the world is trying to come to term
> with global seismic shocks that seem to come at all of us from all
> directions, archaic accusations about the "foreign" seem to find some
> votaries.
>
> Let us think a little harder. The world is not legible. In an
> increasingly blurring reality, understanding the grounds of
> accusations and rhetorical posturing will be necessary. Let us think
> how to deal with language, and what it says, in what can feel like a
> crumbling world, rather than merely becoming the dust that arises
> from this process.
>
> best
> Monica
> List Admin
>
> Monica Narula
> Sarai-CSDS
> 29 Rajpur Road
> Delhi 110 054
> www.sarai.net
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:26:14 -0500
From: Tapas Ray <tapasrayx at gmail..com>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] About the list
To: Reader-list <reader-list at sarai.net>
Message-ID: <491C4716.1010401 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Monica,
It is, of course, your prerogative to decide whether the likes of Pawan
and Aditya should be expelled or not. But I would like to repeat -
because I would request you to consider - a couple of things I have said
recently and had said two or three years ago (maybe earlier) when this
whole thing started with Vedavati (as far as I remember) throwing in the
cow slaughter issue out of nowhere, refused to stop repeating the same
"arguments" ad nauseum, and was soon joined by a few others in that
enterprise.
After this had gone on for what then seemed like an eternity and now in
hindsight seems like a few minutes, I had said that the expulsion of
these people should be considered, because it was clear they had no
interest in rational critical debate and were determined to disrupt such
debates with their discourse of hate. As this list (in my understanding)
had been set up precisely as a space for such debates, they had no
business to be here. I was told that reasoned argumentation was the only
possible response to whatever they had been doing, and coercive measures
like expulsion were not acceptable.
I had pointed out that the Nazis had used democracy to disrupt democracy
and communist parties had been taking part in elections and getting
elected in multiparty systems with the long-term goal of replacing that
very system with dictatorship. In other words, there ought to be a limit
up to which such forces can be allowed to operate freely. If not, that
freedom - for others - will become a casualty.
The situation escalated over the years. It is worse on this list today,
but that should be the least of our concerns (or not). It is worse
globally and internally (in India) in terms of the economy as you have
noted, and is likely to deteriorate politically, again as you have
noted. I agree with you - if we go back to the Great Depression and the
rise of fascists and Nazis, we will see why. And it's there that we come
back to the question of our list.
Let us pause for a moment here to think why Vedavati, Pawan, Aditya,
Chanchal, etc., have joined this list in the first place. Does their
discourse show any interest in history or reason or theories or
concepts? No. Do they expect those of us who engage them, to change our
minds? No. Then why are they here, and why do they continue to flood the
list with their inanities and their hate and their spit? What do they
want to achieve? My answer is, to coerce us into submission, force some
of us to unsubscribe in disgust, and effectively take over the list. Why
do they spend so much time and energy on this? My answer is, they see
some value in it - they know that this list has earned respect as a
liberal/progressive forum hosting some high-quality discussions (along
with their venom) and they want to snuff it out for that very reason.
The question remains, why? The simple answer - in my opinion - is that
these members are (as we have stated recently) part of the fascist creep
we have seen in India, which is becoming a thrust with every passing
day. If we did not see that in Babri, not even in Gujarat, or in the
recent anti-Christian riots, not to speak of smaller riots and pogroms
during these years, we should perhaps see it in the revelation that some
army officers have been involved in terrorist activities. Some of us
will probably object to my characterization. For their benefit I am
quoting from the definition of "fascism" in the Collins Dictionary of
Sociology.
"... anti-intellectualism is a constituent element ofthe ideology ...
The following are some of the main constituents in fascist writings and
actions: extreme racist nationalism linked with territorial expansion;
virulent anti-communism combined with intolerance of most other
political ideologies and independent working-class organizations; the
open use and glorification of physical violence and terror against these
groups; a reliance on a mass party organized around a powerful
leadership, and once in power engaged in most areas of civil life and
depending on continual mass mobilization to sustain support for the
leadership; the glorification of militarism, the cult of the presumed
masculine virtues, with women defined mainly as mothers and supporters
of men; predominant support from the middle classes who are the main,
though not exclusive, mass support."
The question for us is, can we fight these forces with reason alone? My
answer is an emphatic no, on this list or outside it.
Tapas
Monica Narula wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I think its rather cute the way dear everyone is asking for an
> intervention from the admin - now increasingly feeling like a class
> monitor!
>
> The coming years are going to be a difficult ones. There is going to
> be a massive drop in employment opportunities, liquidity will fall,
> infrastructure will remain half-built etc. There will also be an
> increasing shrillness of speech. This, I am guessing, will lead to an
> aggressive acceleration in both inclusive and exclusive
> authoritarianism. So the future trajectory of the language game and
> the rhetorical quotient on the reader-list will be something that I
> am a little ambivalent about.
>
> I request list members to be aware that making charges without
> substantial ground is more to do with incitement than to do with
> discussion. It is odd that when the world is trying to come to term
> with global seismic shocks that seem to come at all of us from all
> directions, archaic accusations about the "foreign" seem to find some
> votaries.
>
> Let us think a little harder. The world is not legible. In an
> increasingly blurring reality, understanding the grounds of
> accusations and rhetorical posturing will be necessary. Let us think
> how to deal with language, and what it says, in what can feel like a
> crumbling world, rather than merely becoming the dust that arises
> from this process.
>
> best
> Monica
> List Admin
>
> Monica Narula
> Sarai-CSDS
> 29 Rajpur Road
> Delhi 110 054
> www.sarai.net
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:27:22 -0500
From: "taraprakash" <taraprakash at gmail.com>
Subject: [Reader-list] request to Aditya and Pawan
To: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Message-ID: <C0CE0A6DCEE5467B8B9A1069C74F69DC at tara>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8";
reply-type=original
Hi all. Monika's mail responding to several requests to take off these two
members for making allegations about a respected member without being able
to substantiate them, is quite understandable. The member/s have been banned
in the past and they have rejoined with a changed name. It is not easy, if
not impossible, to ensure a permanent ban on people on a community hosted in
the cyber space. Moreover, as some members in their postings have suggested,
that even if Aditya's and Pawan's mails were not always palatable, they have
helped us to know some new intelectual nooks and corners to peep in to.
Aditya and Pawan, you have sensitize a lot of readers on the list about some
issues which were on the backburner of the intellectual discourse on the
list. Some members on the list recognize your importance, but you too should
recognize the worth of the readers. The best way to win an argument, or to
draw a serious attention to yor perspective, is to engage and not to offend
your readers. You might have noticed from a sizable number of mails on this
topic, you have offended a lot of members with a claim that you could not
substantiate. In the heat of debate, we tend to make claims which have no
basis. In order to maintain your credibility in future, you do retract and
apologize for making a false claim. You will do a great service to this
community if you apologize to Shuddha for the baseless allegations you made.
An unconditional apology is not going to hurt you. Not apologizing will lead
to the loss of any kind of credibility in your mails.
I hope you will take this mail in good faith.
Regards
TaraPrakash
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>
To: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] About the list
> Dear Monica,
>
> I am writing this with the hope that this sorry chapter about false
> allegations on the list is now lurching towards conclusion. But
> before we achieve the closure we all need, a few clarifications and
> recapitulations are in order, for the sake of the record.
>
> It is my belief that your response as list administrator is a
> philosophical one, and upholds what I think are the best traditions
> of the Reader List of standing for the freedom of speech even of
> those with whom one agrees least of all. I agree to withdraw my
> demand that Aditya Raj Kaul and Pawan Durani be asked to leave the list.
>
> However, the least that Pawan Durani and Aditya Raj Kaul can do, if
> they are to be truly deserving, in my view of the measured and
> considerate tone of the list administrator's response is to
> reciprocate by -
>
> - Offering an unconditional and unambiguous apology to all list
> members for seeking to mislead list members and making allegations
> without proof about people who write or say things that Kaul and
> Durani are in disagreement with being in the pay of 'terrorists' and
> 'foreign powers'.
>
> I think that a variety of different conflicting opinions and points
> of view is healthy. But a welcoming attitude to difference should not
> be taken to mean a licence to harm the reputations and persons of
> others. Most importantly, I believe it means never to say anything
> directly accusing another person of doing something if you do not
> have proof for it.
>
> From this time onwards, I suggest that we evolve a code of conduct
> that states
>
> 1) that no person, whosoever they may be should make any allegations
> on the personal conduct of another list member or any other third
> person, without offering proof for the same. Should this proof be
> found wanting, they should apologize.
>
> 2) that people voluntarily agree to refrain from making sexist and
> homophobic remarks or use racist language of any kind.
>
> Even the most strong arguments can be made without attacking each
> other on the basis of the name that people carry or the bodies they
> have and the desires that they own up to. I do not see this in any
> way as a restriction on anyone's freedom to express their thoughts,
> feelings, desires, interests, ideas or questions.. I propose that
> unless a person actively dissents at this stage, we take it that
> these principles are agreeable to all.
>
> regards
>
> Shuddha
>
>
>
> On 13-Nov-08, at 1:17 PM, Monica Narula wrote:
>
>> Dear All
>>
>> I think its rather cute the way dear everyone is asking for an
>> intervention from the admin - now increasingly feeling like a class
>> monitor!
>>
>> The coming years are going to be a difficult ones. There is going to
>> be a massive drop in employment opportunities, liquidity will fall,
>> infrastructure will remain half-built etc. There will also be an
>> increasing shrillness of speech. This, I am guessing, will lead to an
>> aggressive acceleration in both inclusive and exclusive
>> authoritarianism. So the future trajectory of the language game and
>> the rhetorical quotient on the reader-list will be something that I
>> am a little ambivalent about.
>>
>> I request list members to be aware that making charges without
>> substantial ground is more to do with incitement than to do with
>> discussion. It is odd that when the world is trying to come to term
>> with global seismic shocks that seem to come at all of us from all
>> directions, archaic accusations about the "foreign" seem to find some
>> votaries.
>>
>> Let us think a little harder. The world is not legible. In an
>> increasingly blurring reality, understanding the grounds of
>> accusations and rhetorical posturing will be necessary. Let us think
>> how to deal with language, and what it says, in what can feel like a
>> crumbling world, rather than merely becoming the dust that arises
>> from this process.
>>
>> best
>> Monica
>> List Admin
>>
>> Monica Narula
>> Sarai-CSDS
>> 29 Rajpur Road
>> Delhi 110 054
>> www.sarai.net
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 21:30:40 +0600
From: "Naeem Mohaiemen" <naeem.mohaiemen at gmail.com>
Subject: [Reader-list] BANGLADESH: Shibir’s militancy, do-or-die
challenge for all
To: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Message-ID:
<e9cfea7c0811130730g43c2798fl133299678fce0a58 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
The Battle Over Culture
Fundamentalist threats and secular response in Bangladesh
sacw.net | 12 November 2008
1. Shibir's militancy: it's a do-or-die challenge for all (New Age)
2. Shibir threatens RU cultural activists with death (Daily Star)
3. Smash Palace (Naeem Mohaiemen)
4. Cultural activists need to unite (New Age)
5. More protests against removal of sculptures
6. Protests go on against removal of sculptures
7. The sculpture row (A.B.M.S. Zahur)
8. Lalon and Terror (Rahnuma Ahmed)
9. Marchers for sculpture stopped
10. Demolition of Lalon sculpture a conspiracy 3-day protests begin
in Rajshahi; rally, human chain held in Nilphamari, Dinajpur
11. Bauls unite for culture (Iqbal Siddiquee)
12. The writing on the wall (Reaz Ahmad)
13. Notice has been given (New Age)
14. Anti-sculpture body warned against holding rally today (Daily Star)
15. Citizens to unite against sculpture removal (Daily Star)
16. All the king's men (Hana Shams Ahmed)
17. Reinstall baul sculptures (Daily Star)
18. Yet another walkover for bigots (New age)
19. Time to take a stand (Ashfaq Wares Khan)
20. Fury rages on against removal of sculpture (Daily Star)
21. Protests go on against removal of sculptures (Daily Star)
22. Baul Statue Protests Gather Momentum (Unheard Voices)
23. Put back Baul singers' statues near ZIA (Daily Star)
24. Govt shows where its sympathy lies, again (New Age)
25. Removal of sculptures sparks protests (Daily Star)
26. Sculptures near ZIA removed after protests (Daily Star)
27. Neo Talibans active in Bangladesh (Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury)
28. Controversies shroud Lalon and his songs (Ershad Kamol)
29. Bigots against baul monument (New Age, 16 October 2008)
http://www.sacw.net/article156.html
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:33:33 -0500
From: Tapas Ray <tapasrayx at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] About Accusations on this List
Cc: sarai list <reader-list at sarai.net>
Message-ID: <491C48CD.9000809 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Ashima,
You have offered a very interesting perspective, and I too have been
inclined to think that way at times. But, as I have explained in the
other message (addressed to Monica) I have posted a minute ago, the time
has probably come to set these considerations aside.
Just my two-bit.
Tapas
Ashima Sood wrote:
> Kirdar, Danish, Inder Salim, Ravikant, Sabitha and other fellow list members,
>
> As a committed reader of reader-list and someone who regularly has her
> email inbox flooded by Messrs Aditya Raj Kaul, Pawan Durani and
> company, I hear you. But may I request we not dignify the tantrums of
> this group with a ban?
>
> Recently, Mr Aditya Raj Kaul wrote (apologies to Shuddha for reproducing):
>
> "This is simply Dumbocracy rule here in SARAI. Shuddha being the
> originator. His mails are filled with trash, he has bad 'history' and
> 'Civics'."
>
> To me, all these gratuitous insults and juvenile coinages suggest this
> writer is a brat - very spoiled, very petulant and very cornered .
> From where I stand, it's clear that Shuddha, Shivam, Aarti, Prakash,
> (and many others I could not name without going on a couple of
> paragraphs) do a very fine (and patient) job of countering the
> half-baked facts and opinions spewed by Mr. Aditya Kaul and Mr Durani.
> Doesn't surprise me the only response left to these gentlemen is
> sputtering and spitting. With their elegantly argued missives on
> public record, seriously, are they defaming anyone more than
> themselves?
>
> My concern is that if we do banish them to their side of the fence -
> militarybharat.com or hindurashtra.com or kashmironlyforpandits.com -
> they will continue without challenge. On this list, they are called
> to account, and exposed for what they are. Over time, we can be sure
> they lose a fraction more of the fence-sitter vote.
>
> Despite the bother, I suggest those of us not directly in the line of
> fire make judicious use of the delete button. Even better, drown out
> the bad talk with good talk. Or maybe think of this as participant
> observation - we have enacted here a fascinating ethnography of thug
> thinking. I would love to see a meditation on the sputter and spit
> among the "stammer, mumble, sweat, scrawl, and tic" and other forms
> of arrested speech and gesture that Raqs examined on the e-flux
> journal (http://e-flux.com/journal/view/14) - only here it is the
> interrogator in the uncomfortable position of being interrogated.
>
> At stake here are two visions of public space. We know what Mr. Aditya
> Raj Kaul would do. He has defended the "protest" - read
> bully-enforced censorship - against SAR Geelani. Let's not give him
> the satisfaction of following in his path.
>
> Peace and deference to the moderator's decision,
>
> Ashima
>
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
reader-list mailing list
reader-list at sarai.net
https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
End of reader-list Digest, Vol 64, Issue 148
********************************************
Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
More information about the reader-list
mailing list