From: sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy)
Subject: Re: Relevance of Satyagraha
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:24:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.192859.27943@ultb.isc.rit.edu> akn8257@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.012121.4358@cs.odu.edu>, raj@aelle.cs.odu.edu (M. P. Krishna Raj) writes:
>>
>>Satyagraha is an  universal truth as long as opponent understands that.
>>
>>Satyagraha won't work against everybody.
>>
>>Think about someone else occupied india.
>>
>>If gandhi was doing satyagraha that regime would have announced
>>that some mad prisoner in the jail had eaten him. Also would have
>>destroyed his family. Homeguards will do that job.
>>
>>At the end no one will dare to do satya graha.
>>
>>raj
>
>IMO, Satyagraha will work at all times and with all people, but the 
>time it takes and the price we ought to pay may vary. Impatience is 
>something that would never go with Satyagraha. Its main objective 
>itself is making its opponent understand it. (Remember Jalian Walahbakh)
>The British weren't the most understanding people even though looking
>back at history after all these years may seem so. If you have doubts 
>go to England and see how they treat Asians even in the 90's.
>
>- Arun. 

	Let me write my opinions on this and previous posting of yours. 

(1). Constitution: 

	Constitution is not something that was dropped from heaven. After all
	it was also written by a group of human beings few decades back.
	And it is not something that is immortal or stay same all the times. It 
	underwent so many amendments, mostly to fit to the interests of the
	ruling class and our honourable elected representatives are empowered 
	to do that. You know what their credentials are. 

	It may be unconstitutional to burn a page of the constitution,
	and those who indulge in such activities may be barred from running
	for elected office. But I like to know, whether it is unconstitutional
	too to burn human beings and those who do this or support are
	barred from running in elections. (I think it may not be so, because
	we would not have the present ruling and opposition parties sitting
	in the parliment). The net constitutional experts may enlighten me
	on this.

	Was there a constitution before Independence and if yes, why
	did our forefathers choose to disobey that 'Sacred one'?.  
 
(2). Thanithamil Nadu:

	I honestly do not know who this intellectual Thamizharuvi Manian
	is. But as I know, DK asked Dravidanadu, not Thanithamilnadu, before 
	Independence and DMK dropped that idea in order to run for power. 

	In Karnataka and Andra, November 1, is celebrated with more fanfare
	than August 15. (Nov 1 - Rajyotsava day). There is even a separate
	flag in Karnataka, though unofficial and one could see this flag
	flying everywhere during November. I do not know how a Tamil Nadu
	map looks like, but a Karnataka map is a common sight in many
	places in Bangalore.

	Every national group expresses its separate identity someway
	(Satyagrahis note: sometime violently too, as happens in Banglore
	during Rajyotsava celebrations) and most of the times, this identity
	overrides the pan-Indian identity. 
	
	Tamils were bit overenthusiastic and, started and dropped too early.
	In the present situation, TN will be the last state to ask a separate
	nation, because the pre-independence  guilt has not been completely
	wiped out yet. Our nationalists don't miss any oportunity to remind 
	this (but wouldn't mind to have electoral alliances and support of
	their MPS whenever needed) and the guilty feeling Tamils would say 
	loudly "No No. We don't want"  
	
	That is precisely the reason why the fever of patriotism is 
	running very high among some nettors. They wouldn't accept even if
	separate Tamil Nadu is offered and would like to call it only 'India',
	even if they are forced. 
 
	Hypothetical situation: Suppose a Gorbachev sits at the helm of
	power in New Delhi and inspires a Soviet Union type collapse,
	how many the hard line "Unity Lovers" of the net would fight back to
	reunite?(just a opinion poll). (In my opinion, if it happens, for good
	or bad, it would need another colonial power to reunite us, definitely
	not ourselves). It is usual that those who live comfortably support
	the status quo and no other logic works there. (Just an example:
	When Morarji Desai proposed the merger of Pondichery, it was 
	vehemently opposed. They want to keep their separate identity. The only 
	difference of the identities is TN and Pondi had different masters
	before Independence).  

Aside: The critics of DK/DMK have a strange, but interesting way of criticising
	them. If they ask separate nation, the critics would cry, "hey look
	they are asking a separate nation". If they give up, "hey look
	they have given up and want to run in the elections". The hypocrisy
	of both these parties and their critics are same. It is a kind of
	cat_and_mouse game (BTW, what is the secret of excluding ADMK, which
	is (supposedly) an of offshoot of DK/DMK from this kind of criticisms?
	Just a prefix AI in the name or something else?). 

	V.R. Kumar brought a news to the net that Ramadoss is asking a separate
	nation and Panruti is supporting. I bet my life, if Panruti supports
	the concept of separate nation. Rather he would join Congress (I), 
	which he almost did after MGR died.

(3) Sataygraha:

	Why do we have a fourth largest army in the world (may be third now,
	thanks to the collapse of Soviet Union)?. Just to sing Bhajans:
	"Raghupathi Rahgava Rajaram". 

	My honest and humble query to die-hard Satyagrahis Arun et. el.
	
	Which political party do you support in India now?.
	(my intention is not to know your political stand, because I know
	your idealogy is 'Ahimsa-At-Any-Cost'). Just curious to find a 
	'Non-violent' party such that I can also join you to support that. 
	If there is none and if you are planning to start one: 
	Count on my support. 
 	

M. Sundaramoorthy
sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu

P.S: I am sure you would not flame me. Ahimsa is your idealogy.