[Reader-list] BOYCOTT SECTARIAN AGENDAS

[Pheeta Ram]

Don't worry Anupam, its me who brought in Gayatri Mantra and stuff. Murali
mistook.
Now dear Murali, if i say that Gayatri Mantri is a Hindu mantra - though
certainly not a
personal property of Hindus - how did you counter that? It might be an
extremely effective
breathing exercise, as all of Hindu sacred Mantras are claimed to be, but
would a Hindu
like to disown it as a Hindu matra? How does it figure and get performed in
public space?
Its "meaning" certainly need not exclude this performative aspect of the
mantra.

Now if our government schools make little children chant this mantra every
morning of their
formative years why don't they also let some beautiful aayeten from Kuran be
included in the
morning prayer, if we go by Anupam's cliched proposal though certainly not a
wrong one.
What problem would you have by that?Why does your rant against
"pseudo-secularism" refuse to acknowledge this aspect. Anupam's stance is
enough to counter all your counter-claims and i don't need to pitch in
because this has been
the case all along. One goes to the extremeties of intolerance like a
disgruntled lad of five another takes
a now much worn-out yet excessively lauded progressive stance of a mature
elder. We have been
hearing such arguments for a long time now but have they really provided a
solution, certainly not. A person
who throws a pig in a mosque today used to do the same during the partition
riots. Sadly, many things are much the same
despite our metros and innumerable malls.

The patent argument of "sarva dharma souhard" gives us hope for atleast a
tolerant future, though i hate this "tolerance" stuff, it smacks of Nazism
or things like that. "Though you fanatically believe that your neighbour is
bad or fit enough to be eliminated yet for the time being tolerate him/her
till the things get better in your favour": This is what i hear when they
bring in the argument of
"tolerance."

What i am proposing is to go a step ahead of the current progressive
argument that Anupam seems to be rooting for. His argument
has atleast one merit that it keeps in check the extremist-fanatic battle
cry that we have been hearing too often these days.
Dear Anupam, when you suggest that certain elements of religocity are free
of 'politics' or 'ideology' you put forward a too naive yet not an unheard
of claim. If i visit a temple/mosque everyday, don't fight with my
neighbour, and live a happy and contented life, whether that be in village
or a city like Delhi that doesn't absolve me of the complicity in a belief
system that by its very "a priori" nature exclude the other. The communal
polarisation that we have witnessed during/after Gujarat riots is a fitting
instance. People who had nothing to do with the riots and were leading a
peaceful life with their neighbours who professed other religion/s turned
hostile the moment the stench of burning bodies filled the air. All their
"souhard" went down the drain.

In a communal frenzy of the riot, when people are faced with the prospect of
extinction supposedly apolitical element of religiosity converts to a
fanatic hatred for the other. And its because the germs are there in the
first place, the need is to stoke the fire.

I don't know perhaps my argument needs to be elaborated more in
philosophical terms rather than weighed like mangoes on a weighing scale.
All i ask is : is the thought of taking lessons from our histories and
marching on to build  a future that could secure the future of our coming
generations which are responsible not to their "ist dev" but to each other
in the world society such an "indecent" and far-fetched idea. The proposed
future certainly need not be built upon the rubble of the past but
upon certain foudations that are still there but need to be delved upon. So
many centuries of living cultures and civilisation would have atleast
something to build such an ideal society. And if we are not able to find
such things as useful for a future human society we need not despair for we
know that the responsibility of sustaining and bettering our world is in our
hands and we can ignore it only at our own peril.

Religions are living traditions and can certainly not be banished ( and not
"banned") in one go. History, culture and society are not
softwares where CUT and PASTE are quick options. Whatever we need to learn
from all our religions and religious texts we need to do, our
progressive brothers have already ploughed enough field, but we certainly
need not get attached to the deadwood of the past. Its a task rather a
long...long revolution which hundreds of coming generation might find a
difficult proposition yet its worth aspiring for. At the philosophical
level, the problem is with the perennial springs of our belief systems and
the problem is patent.

So, i would reiterate, we have two options: either take the current state of
strife and religious hostility as a "normal" state of being -
for there have never been communities that we conjure up for ourselves in
future - and keep on fighting for communal harmony as a normal affair and
take the path to be the destination OR begin fighting for a "religion-less"
( religion in  the sense of usage in currency) human/e society that has
learnt enough lessons from its history and culture and which is "hell
bent upon" to save the world for future generations to come. When i
can believe in a pilot that he won't crash me somewhere downthere why am i
not ready to struggle to formulate a neo system of belief in the goodness of
my fellow human being. Why am i not ready to "believe" in such an ideal when
every moment of my existence is based on unacknowledge and invisible and
certainly unpalatable belief in the other person.

I would like to be corrected if i am wrong. If i am not ready to learn and
am not ready to take responsibility of my history and society and culture of
which i am a rightful, though unwilling, heir and am not ready to fight for
a future that could accommodate every human being without prejudices, i
certainly need not exist. Right bro's?



On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:24 PM, anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Murali,
>
> I never spoke about Gayatri Mantri or anything about it. Where does this
> come from sir? I think you must be mistaken.
>
> -Anupam
>
>
> On 8/1/09, Murali V <murali.chalam at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > That is because U had stated that Gayatri Mantra is of religious nature
> > which I had countered.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:19 PM, anupam chakravartty <c.anupam at gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Murali,
> >>
> >> My issue here why are we discussng burqa clad women going to school on
> >> this
> >> reader's list sir. what difference did it make to your belief system or
> >> how
> >> did it threaten your existence? Also if chanting Gayatri mantra helps
> you
> >> to
> >> breathe better how or why does this reader's list has to bear the
> effects?
> >>
> >> -anupam
> >>
> >> On 8/1/09, Murali V <murali.chalam at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Dear Anupam,
> >> >
> >> > Dear Anupam,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The issue of uniformity has still not been addressed. A burkha clad
> girl
> >> in
> >> > a school cannot be questioned and if done, the media and the entire
> >> > pseudo-seculars go all out to  call it hindu fanaticism.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Atma or the soul, life after death and re-birth are concepts which is
> >> their
> >> > in most faiths. Moreover the Gaytri mantra is also a breathing
> exercise
> >> as
> >> > the stanzas repeated in its correct form has set timings to control
> >> breath.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > V Murali
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Pheeta Ram <pheeta.ram at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Dear Murali,
> >> >> Institutions run by religious sects would be like that only otherwise
> >> why
> >> >> would they set
> >> >> up schools in the name of their religions in the first place. Every
> >> >> religion has an agenda.
> >> >> More the followers more the currency. But what i am pointing towards
> is
> >> >> the fact that
> >> >> even a school run by a government, and just imagine how many schools
> >> are
> >> >> there all over
> >> >> India, indulges in practices, and "uniformly" so, which are nothing
> >> short
> >> >> of proselytisation.
> >> >> When my son is asked to chant a Hindu Gayatri Mantra, or prayers that
> >> talk
> >> >> of "Atma" and
> >> >> "Parmatma" isn't it silent conversion to Hindu faith by a government
> >> that
> >> >> needs to be neutral
> >> >> in terms of religion.
> >> >>
> >> >> When you level charges, let me tell you, "opposite is true too." So
> >> don't
> >> >> exert yourself so hard.
> >> >> Moreover, if i am discriminated against my religion that doesn't give
> >> me
> >> >> the right to read "fatwas"
> >> >> against people who "just" extend the boundaries of citizenship to our
> >> >> relief. I won't ask my little son
> >> >> to go and kill his classmates just because he is being asked to chant
> a
> >> >> "mantra" that he has come
> >> >> to believe he doesn't need to or is unjustified ( given my
> >> brainwashing)
> >> >> in the first place. He has the right
> >> >> to be nurtured in a world where he is not preordained into the
> >> watertight
> >> >> compartment of some religion.
> >> >>
> >> >> Things are not so simple and straightforward as you would have them
> to
> >> be.
> >> >> In a public discussion forum
> >> >> everybody needs to be patient and not panic just because some
> >> "fan-atic"
> >> >> has fanned an imaginary jingoitst
> >> >> or communal frenzy.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Murali V <murali.chalam at gmail.com
> >> >wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Dear Anupam,
> >> >>> I have never nor will I ever talk of destruction of any kind. My
> only
> >> >>> concern is that when we talk of secularism, it has to be followed
> with
> >> >>> absolute clarity and without any bias. It is only pseudo-secularism
> >> which
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> the norm.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> A school run by christian isnstitutions does not allow hindu boys to
> >> come
> >> >>> with Sandal paste on their foreheadin and  with a black towel worn
> >> around
> >> >>> the waist during the fasting period before going to Sabarimala, does
> >> not
> >> >>> allow girls to wear the traditional bindi on their forehead while a
> >> >>> school
> >> >>> run by a hindu institution cannot object to the girl coming to
> school
> >> in
> >> >>> a
> >> >>> Burkha.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The word "uniform" is not applicable to some.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Crores of Tax payers money is spent every year on the Mecca trip,
> >> while
> >> >>> Hindus will have to pay tax to go to the holy shrines atop the
> >> himalayas.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Regards,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Murali V
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> tion
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM, anupam chakravartty <
> >> c.anupam at gmail.com
> >> >>> >wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Dear Murli,
> >> >>> > I am really sorry to say the stories you have been posting about
> >> >>> > Murshidabad
> >> >>> > are far from true. It is the perspective of someone who has a
> >> sectarian
> >> >>> > understanding of the problem. You generalised the gang rivalry in
> >> the
> >> >>> > region
> >> >>> > to the slaying of the hindus. The problem here lies in the fact in
> >> the
> >> >>> > process of strenghtening your sectarian identity you tend to
> >> accomodate
> >> >>> a
> >> >>> > lot of devaints who could have otherwise found some gainful
> >> employment.
> >> >>> > Here
> >> >>> > there were two agrarian gangs fighting for resources like
> terrorism,
> >> >>> > manipulation and worst of all, lure of power with the help of fear
> >> and
> >> >>> > threats.
> >> >>> > I refuse to be manipulated. It is a personal protest demanding a
> >> fair
> >> >>> play.
> >> >>> > From very close quarters, I have seen the sectarian identity
> >> >>> functioning
> >> >>> > seditiously, poisoning minds which could have done better than
> what
> >> >>> they
> >> >>> > are
> >> >>> > doing. I dont want my brethren to be blinded by the propaganda of
> >> fear
> >> >>> from
> >> >>> > the state's side or from gun runners. Insecurity drives people
> >> crazy. A
> >> >>> > nation full of people, with their aspirations cannot be cheated to
> >> >>> perform
> >> >>> > such a heinous crime killing or plundering or looting. They
> >> inherently
> >> >>> want
> >> >>> > fair play although when manipulated, they needed to be told that
> >> there
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> > no
> >> >>> > point in worrying about who you are -- it is about what you are
> >> doing.
> >> >>> > Sir, nation building is not an easy task. Do you think in a
> >> homogenous
> >> >>> > society (as you speak for the Hindu community) you can stop the
> >> >>> individual
> >> >>> > aspirations? Lets say as a reaction you chased out devaints of all
> >> >>> kinds,
> >> >>> > and only your kinds exist, would you be able to control
> subversion?
> >> You
> >> >>> > cannot afford to be unfair here.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I wont tell you about the multi-sectarian society and benefits
> that
> >> it
> >> >>> > brings. Because you know what it means and since as a reaction,
> you
> >> >>> have
> >> >>> > also consciously chosen to deviate from such a possibility of
> multi
> >> >>> racial
> >> >>> > or sectarian society. But whether should i respect this deviance
> at
> >> the
> >> >>> > cost
> >> >>> > of accomodating all the wrong doings is something that needs a
> >> >>> > philosophical
> >> >>> > understanding. A historical and a subjective (i know this word is
> >> >>> likely
> >> >>> > displease several readers here) understanding always accomodates
> >> >>> conflicts
> >> >>> > as the prime reason for all creations sectarian or otherwise (from
> >> >>> small
> >> >>> > panchyats, to the demand for new railway stations to demand for a
> >> >>> seperate
> >> >>> > state hood). These reactions are provokative and instead of
> painful
> >> >>> task of
> >> >>> > solving these issues in light of rational solutions, it proposes
> an
> >> >>> easier
> >> >>> > victory over such ailments -- by destruction. It is from here, I
> >> said:
> >> >>> "I
> >> >>> > would rather prefer a keyboard or a pen than a sword. Here's an
> >> >>> assurance
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > you, the more you keep on discussing your sectarian agendas here I
> >> will
> >> >>> > keep
> >> >>> > on presenting more issues which will be contrary to your claims."
> >> You
> >> >>> are
> >> >>> > most welcome to critique in the same rational, peaceful way not as
> >> >>> someone
> >> >>> > shouting "kill them all" in a discussion forums as this. Killing
> me
> >> is
> >> >>> not
> >> >>> > enough Sir.
> >> >>> > - with warm regards
> >> >>> > Anupam
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Murali V <
> murali.chalam at gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > > And I shall also try to counter every one of your claims.
> >> >>> > > Regards,
> >> >>> > > V Murali
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 6:16 PM, anupam chakravartty <
> >> >>> c.anupam at gmail.com
> >> >>> > >wrote:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > >> Dear Rajen
> >> >>> > >> You can go on and be sectarian. The moderator in this reader's
> >> list
> >> >>> > doesnt
> >> >>> > >> seem to have a problem. And i respect your democratic rights
> sir
> >> >>> that
> >> >>> > the
> >> >>> > >> constitution guarantees you. I am just calling for a boycott of
> >> such
> >> >>> > >> agendas.
> >> >>> > >> I would rather prefer a keyboard or a pen than a sword. Here's
> an
> >> >>> > >> assurance
> >> >>> > >> to you, the more you keep on discussing your sectarian agendas
> >> here
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> > will
> >> >>> > >> keep on presenting more issues which will be contrary to your
> >> >>> claims.
> >> >>> > Take
> >> >>> > >> my word for that.
> >> >>> > >> Best wishes
> >> >>> > >> Anupam
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Rajendra Bhat Uppinangadi <
> >> >>> > >> rajen786uppinangady at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> > >>
> >> >>> > >> > sword is having both sides sharp.Your thoughts apply to all
> of
> >> us,
> >> >>> as
> >> >>> > we
> >> >>> > >> > post.
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> > Regards,
> >> >>> > >> > Rajen.
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 6:05 PM, anupam chakravartty <
> >> >>> > >> c.anupam at gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> Dear Rajen
> >> >>> > >> >> why are u pointing people, naming them? has anybody named
> you
> >> >>> rajen.
> >> >>> > i
> >> >>> > >> >> guess
> >> >>> > >> >> they (as in Taha and Javed) speak of it because you keep on
> >> >>> > questioning
> >> >>> > >> >> them
> >> >>> > >> >> pinpointing them all the time, makign generic statements
> >> against
> >> >>> a
> >> >>> > >> >> community
> >> >>> > >> >> is something that you guys keep doing. i will never forget
> >> what
> >> >>> you
> >> >>> > >> said
> >> >>> > >> >> to
> >> >>> > >> >> meera rizvi (your surname suggest). first clean up your act
> >> then
> >> >>> > point
> >> >>> > >> out
> >> >>> > >> >> others
> >> >>> > >> >> -anupam
> >> >>> > >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Rajendra Bhat Uppinangadi <
> >> >>> > >> >> rajen786uppinangady at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> > >> >>
> >> >>> > >> >> > Dear Anupam jee,
> >> >>> > >> >> >     who owns the hindu religion, it i universal way of
> life,
> >> so
> >> >>> > also
> >> >>> > >> the
> >> >>> > >> >> > islam, but why a taha, a javed speak for it, do they own
> >> >>> islam.?If
> >> >>> > >> any
> >> >>> > >> >> of us
> >> >>> > >> >> > talk of ills our seculars have ready question that we do
> not
> >> >>> speak
> >> >>> > >> for
> >> >>> > >> >> > hindu, but they join to defend a husain for his right to
> >> >>> express
> >> >>> > art
> >> >>> > >> in
> >> >>> > >> >> > deities in his style, but no right to art for his own
> >> faith.?
> >> >>> Art
> >> >>> > is
> >> >>> > >> >> > heartless when it is just art, but only commerce.
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> > Regards,
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> > Rajen.
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:40 PM, anupam chakravartty <
> >> >>> > >> >> c.anupam at gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> Dear Rajen,
> >> >>> > >> >> >> My position has been same against all kinds of religious
> >> >>> > extremism.
> >> >>> > >> >> along
> >> >>> > >> >> >> with several other list members have been opposed to
> these
> >> >>> issues.
> >> >>> > >> if u
> >> >>> > >> >> >> can
> >> >>> > >> >> >> show me one instance which according to you contradicts
> my
> >> >>> earlier
> >> >>> > >> >> >> position,
> >> >>> > >> >> >> then i would like withdraw this boycott call from my
> side.
> >> I
> >> >>> wish
> >> >>> > to
> >> >>> > >> >> argue
> >> >>> > >> >> >> no more on this. i know you do not own hindu religion so
> my
> >> >>> advice
> >> >>> > >> is
> >> >>> > >> >> that
> >> >>> > >> >> >> u
> >> >>> > >> >> >> should assuming this self styled of this religion and
> >> >>> criticise
> >> >>> > >> others.
> >> >>> > >> >> i
> >> >>> > >> >> >> do
> >> >>> > >> >> >> not expect a change of heart from u but in case if that
> >> >>> happens it
> >> >>> > >> is
> >> >>> > >> >> also
> >> >>> > >> >> >> welcome.
> >> >>> > >> >> >> - best wishes
> >> >>> > >> >> >> anupam
> >> >>> > >> >> >>
> >> >>> > >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Rakesh Iyer <
> >> >>> > >> rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> >> >>> > >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> > >> >> >>
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > Dear all
> >> >>> > >> >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > I just read a story of the Panchatantra, and it seems
> to
> >> >>> > resonate
> >> >>> > >> >> with
> >> >>> > >> >> >> what
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > one of my friends told yesterday: 'People change, they
> >> do,
> >> >>> but
> >> >>> > >> don't
> >> >>> > >> >> >> force
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > them to change. They take it at their ego'
> >> >>> > >> >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > Here's hoping for that change one day from Murali ji,
> >> Rajen
> >> >>> ji,
> >> >>> > >> and
> >> >>> > >> >> >> others
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > of their like. And no more replies asking them to
> change
> >> or
> >> >>> > >> >> criticizing
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > them.
> >> >>> > >> >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > Regards
> >> >>> > >> >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> > Rakesh
> >> >>> > >> >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >> _________________________________________
> >> >>> > >> >> >> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the
> city.
> >> >>> > >> >> >> Critiques & Collaborations
> >> >>> > >> >> >> To subscribe: send an email to
> >> reader-list-request at sarai.netwith
> >> >>> > >> >> >> subscribe in the subject header.
> >> >>> > >> >> >> To unsubscribe:
> >> >>> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> >> >>> > >> >> >> List archive: &lt;
> >> >>> https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> >> >>> > >> >> >>
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> > --
> >> >>> > >> >> > Rajen.
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> >
> >> >>> > >> >> _________________________________________
> >> >>> > >> >> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> >> >>> > >> >> Critiques & Collaborations
> >> >>> > >> >> To subscribe: send an email to
> >> reader-list-request at sarai.netwith
> >> >>> > >> >> subscribe in the subject header.
> >> >>> > >> >> To unsubscribe:
> >> >>> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> >> >>> > >> >> List archive: &lt;
> >> https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> >> >>> > >> >>
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> > --
> >> >>> > >> > Rajen.
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> >
> >> >>> > >> _________________________________________
> >> >>> > >> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> >> >>> > >> Critiques & Collaborations
> >> >>> > >> To subscribe: send an email to
> reader-list-request at sarai.netwith
> >> >>> > >> subscribe in the subject header.
> >> >>> > >> To unsubscribe:
> >> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> >> >>> > >> List archive: &lt;
> 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: &lt;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: &lt;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: &lt;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: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>