[Reader-list] MUBAI ATTACK: Violence, publicity, and sovereignty

[Swadhin Sen]

Dear Rakesh

Fascism, again - if u have already read my personal post to u- could be defined from different perspectives. But if we acknowledge an essentially universalized ideal, fascism can be termed as utter disrespect to tolerance to other views and violent actions towards 'the others'. And violence is not only corporeal. Violence or the act of violence could be manifested covertly or overtly by many other expressions (i.e. speech, gesture, writings, etc.).

I wonder whether she/he would have used the same words toward an Indian. Please, note that the blogger himself is an Indian. But she/he didn't attack the blogger who is very respected among the intellectual world.

I have strong doubts about the liberal notion of tolerance and free-speech. I am very fond of Talal Asad, a professor of Anthropology, and as an Asadist I may respect your liberal position; but I am also politically and intellectually critical about the position. Because, the historicity of the concept of liberalism suggest that the concept and practice of a liberal can essentially be ambivalent, self-contradictory and ahistorical.

With thanks

Swadhin

Swadhin Sen Archaeologist - Assistant Professor   Dept.of Archaeology            Tel:       +88 02 779 10 45-51 Ext. 1326 Jahangirnagar University      Mobile:  +88 0172 019 61 76   Savar,Dhaka. Bangladesh    Fax:      +88 02 779 10 52    swadhin_sen at yahoo.com; swadhinsen at hotmail.com www.juniv.edu



--- On Sat, 1/10/09, Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] MUBAI ATTACK: Violence, publicity, and sovereignty
> To: swadhin_sen at yahoo.com
> Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 10:25 AM
> Dear Sir
> 
> I know it is vulgar, but how is it fascist is beyond my
> comprehension. About
> indo-centric, it may not be necessarily so. It may be that
> the writer may
> believe in same views as yours, but has heard it enough and
> now wants
> something to be done. Or may be she thinks the way you
> think can't solve the
> problem.
> 
> I realize you are angry on getting this, and would
> certainly not like
> somebody abusing me if I were you. I think however that
> judgements on one's
> comments should best be left to others. And as for silence,
> it is only now
> that I received this mail. And I would say let them be
> entitled to their
> views, so let them have it. But yes, paining someone with
> such things is
> certainly nonsense.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rakesh