From: sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy)
Subject: Re: Relevance of Satyagraha
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 17 Nov 92 19:45:25 GMT

	For Arun's convenience I keep his previous posting unedited,
	no matter many line are really needed now or not. 
	
In article <1992Nov17.183154.27447@ultb.isc.rit.edu> akn8257@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>In article <2B083617.7750@news.service.uci.edu>, sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>
>>	You have the right to vote whoever you want. Your analogy fits
>>	more to those who wrote and who have power to amend.
>>
>>	The issue under debate is opposition to Hindi as the official
>>	langauge of India. You know how it got into the constitution.
>>	The constitution assembly voted equally for and against making
>>	Hindi official language. The chairman, President Rajendra
>>	Prasad, who had to break the tie, voted for, breaking  
>>	norm of voting for 'status quo'.
>>
>>	Now you decide, who is the real cat in the issue.
>
>        Again I am not supporting any party here. It seems you conveniently
>        deleted the part where I wrote about it. If Congress people burned
>	the constitution and lied about it in the court I would have said the
>        same thing.

	I said 'agreed' in my previous reply when you pointed out the
	hypocrisy of DMK.
	
	My point above didn't say that you supported Congress. I just
	provided some background information to complement. 
>
>	First they boasted that they are going to burn the constitution to
>	show their 'thamizhpatru' and they did burn something. In the court 
>	they said they burned only a white paper. So they have lied somewhere
>	either to the people or in the court under oath. Either one of them
>	is unconscionable and unforgiveable. Get it?
>
>	The reason I wrote this is if you think these people are going to
>	bring prosperity to Tamilnadu, forget it.
>
>
>>	OK. CRL doesn't carry this book. If I get chance I will read.
>>	You ask everyone to read this book,  without prejudice. But
>>	I wonder, given the party affiliation of Thamizharuvi Manian,
>>	the author himself was unbiased. Did he write any book on
>>	the history of Congress party?.
>
>        That is why I wrote the following:
>
>>>      In his book "Thi.Mu.Ka-
>>>	Sila sandhehangal...." he just talks about facts about the history
>>>	of DMK and its various stands on every issue and the contradictions.
>>>	He never tried to judge anybody in this book -just facts- with 
>>>	references to their own Newspapers like Murasoli and the books
>>>	written by people like Mu. Ka, Annadurai and Nanjil Manoharan. 
>
>        Please read it, you will know what I mean.
>
>>	To come to the correct judgement, one needs to hear from the 
>>	other side too. I recommend to read the book:
>>	Dravida iyakka varalaaRu by Murasoli Maran. (I haven't read it
>>	myself, but read a good review by S.V.Rajadurai, who is not
>>	affiliated to any of these parties and has written few critical
>>	articles on Dravidain movements himself).
>
>
>        I will try to get the book and read it.
>
>>>>	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". 
>
>>>	Nehru thought so, until China taught us otherwise. The best way
>>>	to avoid a war to be prepared. Wearing a helmet does not mean you
>>>	intend to make an accident.
>>
>>	OK. As long as we use it as helmet. But was it always used to protect
>>	Indian head?. Was itn't used as a sword by his daughter and grand
>>	son in foriegn soil?.
>>	
>>	Didn't this helmet indulge in similar crimes you listed that
>>	the 'terrorist' organisations are doing?.
>
>
>        Please read the question to which I responded. It is why we have 
>        a large army. Well, I wrote my opinion about IPKF operations.
>
>>	You are going back on your earlier words. You are just repeating
>>	what Krishnaraj initially told, which you chose to refute.
>>
>> Let me jsut quote your and Krishanraj's words:
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>	>Satyagraha is an  universal truth as long as opponent understands that.
>>	>Satyagraha won't work against everybody.
>>	>
>>	>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.
>>	
>> 	- Arun.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>	This double standard is typical of 'non-violence' preaching Indian
>>	patriots.
>>
>        My first words mean Satyagraha will work against even the worst
>                                                 ^^^^^^^
>	possible enemy. But it takes a lot to follow, so not everybody
>        can do it. Okay? 
>
>>>	
>>>	I did not write this to mean I support Indian Government in every
>>>        incident. What Srilanks has is its own problem and it should settle 
>>>        it the way it wants to. The only thing we should have done is to
>>
>>	Then why do want to remind every other day they are terrorists?.
>>	Why don't you keep quite if it is irrelevant issue to you?.
>
>	Because I have a right of free speech. It was my opinion, remember?
>	I think you have got rather a strong dose of Eelam policies.
>       

	Yes. I got a dose from right sources. If you are interested
	read this book:

	'indhumaha samudhramum ilankai inap pirachinaiyum' by
	Udayan and Vijayan, published by Rosa Luxemberg Study Circle,
	Madras.
 
>>
>>>	
>>	I don't know when you took this stand. But most of the Indians,
>>	realised the terrorist problem only when it came to Rajiv. Not
>>	when he and his mother harboured, trained, armed and financed these
>>	terrorists. And not when he lent Indian helmet to Sri Lanka.
>>	Do you have any anology on hand for this double standard of India?.
>
>        Again, it was none of our business, what they did was extremely
>	wrong and I strongly condemn it.
>
>>>
>>>	
>>>>M. Sundaramoorthy
>>>>sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>>>>
>>>
>>>        Thanks for your time.
>>>
>>>        " Onrupattaal undu vaazhve, Nammil 
>>>          ottrumai neengin anaivarukkum thaazhve!"
>>>
>>>        ( United we stand, Divided we fall. )
>>
>>	Bharathiyar has been smart not to mention the basis for this unity:
>>	Is is based on geopolitics or religion or language?. I know from
>>	from you postings your reason is geopolitics. Others, who argue
>>	on the basis of other reasons are as (in)correct as you are.
>>
>>		
>>	" naadugaL 
>>	  piridhalum, iNaidhalum
>>	  kuRaindhapatcham
>>	  manidha iruppai
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>	  nilaippaduththuvadhaRkaagavE "
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>	This is not happening in Srilanka.

	Why?. Did you try to know the root cause?. The book I mentioned above
	would help you.
>
>
>>	                Va. I. Sa. Jayapalan.
>>
>>	We have examples in recent history. 
>
>	Really?

	Yes. German Unity and Soviet Union disintegration, mostly without
	bloodshed. 

>
>>M. Sundaramoorthy
>>sundar@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu 
>
>	Sorry, for my sarcastic tone, but it is not fun to repeat the 
>	same thing over and over again.
>
>	- Arun.

	You have right of free speech and so also sarcasm. You don't have to
	feel sorry.

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

P.S. This is my last response in this thread.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil