Fwd: Peace Mumbai Re: James Laine ke kitaab ke virudh Andolan vahi kar sakte hain jinhone kitaab padhi nahin!!!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: Peace Mumbai Re: James Laine ke kitaab ke virudh Andolan vahi kar sakte hain jinhone kitaab padhi nahin!!!


Suklaji, 

You really do not know much about Shivajii's anti-caste struggle & that is very clear from your utterly ignorant retort. A typically arrogant, insolent liberal Brahmanic response to the ongoing caste struggle being waged all across Maharashtra.

That is basically what can be expected of you, on issues such as these. 

I guess my point has now been made & very clearly at that.

It was Mahatma Phule who resurrected the memory of SHIVAJI as the symbol of the BAHUJAN masses, whilst Tilak later tried to appropriate him as a Brahmanic totem & that is the stream that carries on with the RSS-BJP-SS-MNS-Bhandarkar institute . . . 

The latest is that Justice Kolse Patil & Justice PB Sawant are going to lead a 1 lakh strong mass rally for the removal of Konddeo's statue from Lal Mahal. They are now being joined by a vast number of Dalit, OBC leaders, organizations & political parties.

An overwhelming number of Dalit, OBC, Adivasi intellectuals & writers are now coming out in support of this agitation.

Baba Purandare (Raj Thackeray's guru) & Ninad Bedekar have failed miserably in their attempt to malign & co-opt the memory & legacy of Shivaji Maharaj. 

Both Purandare & Bedekar, who are heroes of the RSS-SS version of history are the core members of the Bhandarkar institute. 

They are also currently under suspicion for their links to the Malegaon terror attack . . . quite an impressive  resume' - I must say. 

And as you very well know now, all the 14 members that Laine thanked, belonged to a particular caste of Maharashtrians. 

A mere coincidence - I would think not !!

I'd now like Kunda, Avinash, Rohini, Sanjay bhai & Anand bhai to educate Sukla's ill informed, staid & puerile understanding on this issue & enlighten him on the social ferment that emanated from the era of SHIVAJI's struggle.

It was a turning point in Indian history & then the legacy was kept alive & burning, due to the sacrifices & contributions of JIJAU Mata, Sambhaji Maharaj, Shahu Maharaj, Mahatma Phule, Savitri bai Phule & then leading down to Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar & to Kanshi Ram amongst hundreds of others who carry on . . . . . .

The BAHUJAN masses are not fools as you insinuate, they love their liberators for a reason  - & will fight when & where required.

regards

feroze

On 28 August 2010 13:07, Sukla Sen <sukla.sen@gmail.com> wrote:

Shivaji was, by all accounts, the apex of Maratha power, despite some mutual tensions, had a symbiotic relationship with Peshwas and upheld a highly hierarchical and oppressive social order.

Shivaji, by no stretch, was a radical social reformer set upon to do away with that order. At best he tried to find better accommodation for himself and his kinspeople within the given order, maybe with slight readjustments.

Given that backdrop, the whole controversy regarding Konddeo is an utterly silly one.

Sukla

On 27 August 2010 13:55, Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All, 

For the latest news on the Dadai Konddeo / James Laine controversy - over which our emails circles are totally silent.

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/PUBLICATIONS/HT/HM/2010/08/27/ArticleHtmls/Pune-mayor-backtracks;-Konddeo-statue-to-stay-for-27082010011002.shtml?Mode=1

Search Results

1. Dadoji Konddeo's statue will be shifted from Lal Mahal

2. Uddhav blasts Pune Mayor for assuring to remove Konddeo's statue

3. Shiv Sena protests shifting of Shivaji`s mentor`s statue

   
   
4. 
   

Now the BJP-Shiv Sena-RSS & their front organizations (with the help of Ajit Pawar, nephew of Sharad Pawar) have all come out to support Dadaji Konddeo - whilst the Phule-Shahu-Ambedkarite movement is challenging the religio-cultural hegemony of the Brahminists on their interpretation & imposition of history & SHIVAJI & his legacy are the contested battlefield in the terrain of the rising BAHUJAN consciousness.

Thus as previously stated, the entire controversy over the James Laine book, is one essentially, i reiterate - essentially one that of caste struggle.

regards

Feroze

On 20 July 2010 11:34, Feroze Mithiborwala <feroze.moses777@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sanjay bhai, That is perfectly fine.

Books are banned in Democracies if they cross the line set by the norms, parameters set under the Freedom of Expression, the nrms which are again different for different nations & societies. That is again determined by the political system & social mores.

There are other far more important issues at stake out here as well.

The Right to Critique I will defend, but the Right to Insult, I will not. Arguably, the defining line is very thin indeed, agreed.

I believe that Laine has crossed that line, by the supposed 'Joke', which has been a Brahmanical verbal concoction, that never found its way into print, until the Purandare's & Bedekar's could get Laine to do their dirty little job for them.

The offensive lines on Page No. 93 in the Laine book is all that we are opposed. The rest of the book is ok, though from what I've gathered, pretty much second-rate.

On this issue, one angle is the Freedom of Expression & rightly so, but the other angle is the entire issue of Caste Struggle.

Today the likes of Baba Purandare & Ninad Bedekar stand exposed for their Brahmanical interpretation of the legacy of Shivaji Maharaj & the offensive lines on page no 93 are being traced back to them.

The major sections of Shahu-Phule-Ambedkari movement have a very different understanding on the issue & I think you should discuss the matter with them as well.

The Dalit-OBC-Maratha & Muslim organizations & political parties are now coalescing on this issue.

Leading Non-Brahmin scholars & ideologues like Retd Justice Kolse Patil, Shrimant Kokate, Bhalchandra Nemade, Purshottam Khedekar, Pravin Gaikwad amongst a host of others - all have a very different interpretation from the way you tend to view the issue.

For me both interpretation are valid as they both come from different progressive streams & schools of thought.

Regards

Feroze

On 20 July 2010 10:49, Sanjay Singhvi <xsanjayx@gmail.com> wrote:

On 19 July 2010 22:10, anand patwardhan <anandpat@gmail.com> wrote:

"...in a democracy it is unhealthy to ask for books to be banned. yesterday they asked for books by ambedkar to be banned. tomorrow it may something else. luckily at least this time the supreme court agreed with us and lifted the ban."

I have to totally agree with Anand on this. I have not yet read the book but hope to read it soon.
Sanjay.

--
Feroze Mithiborwala

--
Feroze Mithiborwala

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peace Mumbai" group.
To post to this group, send email to peace-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to peace-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/peace-mumbai?hl=en.

--
Peace Is Doable

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peace Mumbai" group.
To post to this group, send email to peace-mumbai@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to peace-mumbai+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/peace-mumbai?hl=en.

--
Feroze Mithiborwala

--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/