Banner Advertiser

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

[ALOCHONA] Coke goes to the Indians



Coke goes to the Indians



http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/12/08/121177



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Islam and Modern Age



SUFI ISLAM VERSUS WAHABI ISLAM

 

Asghar Ali Engineer

 

(Islam and Modern Age, December 2011)

 

Recently a huge congregation of Sunni (Sufi) Muslims in Moradabad denounced Wahabi Islam and the Spokesperson of the All India Ulama Mashaikh Board Syed Mohammad Ashraf and leader of the Sufi Islam said we do not accept leadership of Wahabi Islam (hamen inki na qayadat na imamat qabool hai). Syed Babar Ashraf said, "80% of Indian Muslims followed the Sunni Sufi tradition while Wahabis wielded control over just 13-14% of the community "But, he said, "a large section of the Urdu press has boycotted us. They are controlled by hardliners. Though there has been a serious difference between the two, it was for the first time that public denunciation came surprising many and not so surprising some.

 

For outsiders all Muslims are one in India. In fact they consider Muslims a monolithic bloc. However, it is far from true. Indian Muslims are highly diverse, as diverse as India culturally, linguistically, regionally as well as theologically. Indian Islam, it must be noted has been thoroughly Indianised in terms of culture, local customs and traditions. This is reflected in various ways including celebration of festivals, marriage, birth and death rituals etc.

 

Some purists of course opposed this Indianisation and worked for de-indianising Islam through medieval ages also. Mujaddid alf-e-Sani during Jahangir's time was one among them. He was opposed to Chishti school of Sufi Islam (which has been predominant in India) and which believes in what is known as Wahdat al-Wujud (Unity of Being). This School demolished all walls of separation between religions.

 

Mujaddid alf-e-Sani proposed the doctrine of what he called Wahdat-e-Shuhud (Unity of Witnessing). However, this school never becomes popular in India or even outside India. It remained confined to a few religious elite. Some separatists in 20th century used Mujaddid as their icon of pure Islam and also for consolidating their separatist movement under Islamic garb. In fact it is too much to read political separatism in Mujaddid's religious doctrines.

 

We are mentioning Mujaddid alf-e-Sani here only to show there always have been some tension between pure Islam and Indian Islam which Chishtiya Sufis preached. It is interesting to note that Hasan Nizami Sajjada Nashin (Keeper) of the Dargah Hazrat Nizamuddin in Delhi, wrote a wonderful book Fatimi Dawat-e-Islam in which he has documented in detail how Sufis adopted various Indian rituals, customs and traditions to popularize Islam in India and how successfully they Indianized Islam.

 

Thus it will be seen that Sufi Islam reflects regional variations of cultures from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Sufi Islam has always been pluralistic and inclusive and its emphasis has always been on spiritual aspects of religion (tariqat) than Shariat (legal path) though Shariat is not neglected. It is closer to what we can call bhakti marg among Hindus. Sufi Islam lays more emphasis on devotion.

 

Sufis, though they were great scholars of Persian and Arabic – two languages in India in which Islamic literature was produced- they preferred to write in local languages. Baba Farid Ganj Shakar, a great Sufi saint from Punjab wrote in Punjabi and is considered as the first Punjabi poet and Guru Nanak has quoted his verses in Adi Granth Sahib and hence Baba Farid is highly respected by Sikhs. Punjab University, Chandigarh, has also created a Chair in his name i.e. Baba Farid Chair and also publishes a journal.

 

Sufi Islam being pluralistic in approach was tremendously popular among people of different religions, specially among Hindus. One can see large number of Hindus at Sheikh Moinuddin Chishti's Dargah, Ajimer or Hazrat Nizamuddin's Dargah at Delhi and so on. Thousands of Hindu women come and take vow for offering chador (sheet of cloth) if their problem is solved.

 

It is interesting to note that Dara Shikoh, the elder son of Shah Jahan who was appointed heir apparent by him (Shah Jahan) was a Sufi belonging to Qadariyah School (which did not have much following in India) was great scholar of Hinduism and he learnt Sanskrit in order to understand Hinduism through original sources. He translated Upanishads into Persian and maintained that he found the concept of tawhid after Qur'an only in Upanishads.

 

He also wrote a seminal work Majma'ul Bahrayn which is a comparative study of Hinduism and Islam and in which he shows how similar are these two religions. In fact it should be a compulsory study for students to promote national unity and integration. However, it has been totally neglected and hardly anyone knows even its name. Instead books promoting serious misunderstandings, even downright animosity, are taught in schools and colleges.

 

It is Sufi Islam which not only brought Hindus and Muslims together but also created our rich heritage of composite culture. It is highly necessary that our youngsters know more and more of this rich heritage.

 

The Wahabi Islam, on the other hand, came into existence, in 18th century in Najd, a part of what is called today Saudi Arabi. It was Muhammad Abdul Wahhab who was its founder. Abdul Wahhab was totally against Sufi version of Islam and he thought it is corruption of Islamic teachings.

 

Sufi Islam believes in visiting graves of Sufi saints and reciting Fatihah (prayer invoking name of Sufi saint and taking vows in the name of Sufi saints. Abdul Wahhab denounced all this and thought Islam cannot permit this and this is against the teachings of Islam as it believes in unity of God (tawhid) and is shirk (associating partners with God). Thus Sufi Islam is totally anti-Islam and must be rejected.

 

The Wahabi Islam is opposed to even invoking name of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and opposes visiting Prophet's grave and praying there. Here we are not trying to judge who is right and who is wrong. I am only trying to portray what is what.

 

May be Wahhabis are right from their own perspective but it would be equally wrong to denounce Sufi Islam as corruption of Islamic teachings. No ideology in the world, be it religious or political, can remain 'pure' as some ideologues would like to desire. Even Marxism drastically changed when imported to China.

 

It is also interesting to note that those who desire to use any ideology for power insist on 'purity', even extremism and those who desire to make it pro-people take it closer to people's culture and thus 'compromise' its original purity.

 

While Wahhabis desired to capture power which they subsequently did, Sufis kept their distance from power. Sufi Islam is inclusive and pro-people and hence does not want to aspire for power. In fact power becomes problematic as it is always exploitative and anti-people.

 

Even democratic power structure tends to become exclusivistic for certain groups and communities and does not remain pro-people as it ought to be. Sufi Islam, though Muslim dynasties were ruling over India, maintained its distance from rulers and ruling dynasties. It remained closer to common people rather than ruling classes.

 

Thus among Muslims, all those who desired power were not much enthusiastic about Sufi Islam. Even poet Iqbal initially denounced Sufism as its teachings seriously interfere with the philosophy of what he called 'khudi' i.e. elevation of self. Iqbal at that stage thought Sufism leads to inkisar (humility) as against khudi so necessary for a power wielding personality.

 

However, Iqbal did realize later inner richness of Sufi approach and came to greatly appreciate poetry of Hafiz, Sa'adi and Rumi and he calls Rumi as 'Pir' i.e. spiritual teacher and quotes him repeatedly in his poems. Indian soil was very fertile for Sufi Islam and specially Chishtiyah Sufism which was founded by Muhiyuddin Ibn Arabi on the philosophy of Unity of Being i.e. Being is one and we all are its manifestation.

 

India had developed this approach in its own way and Muhiyuddin Ibn Arabi in Spain in his own way. When these Wahdat-ul-Wujudi Sufis came to India the two met and flourished. That is why Wahdat al-Shuhud of Mujaddid alf-e-Sani found no takers in India and now it is only history whereas Wahdat al-Wujudi Islam is still flourishing.

 

Wahhabi Islam, as pointed out above, is essentially a political Islam and it found some takers in 19th century when the Mughal rule declined and Muslims suffered both politically as well as economically. Its history in India is much chequred one. It began as a revolt against the British as well as against the feudal lords who exploited the peasants. In Bengal the peasantry was mainly Muslim and Dadu Miyan and Titu Miyan, both described as Wahhabis led to revolt. However, in U.P. it acquired mainly anti-British tone.

 

In India the Wahabis are generally known as Deobandis as they had established the famous seminary Darul Uloom Deoband in 19th century and from day one they had been opposing the British rule and played prominent role throughout freedom movement. They supported the Indian National Congress and its ideology of secular democracy and opposed Jinnah's two nation theory. Thus one finds this contradiction among Deobandis – politically they have been progressive but religiously and theologically rather conservative.

 

The Deobandis though technically not the followers of Abdul Wahhab of Najd, are closer to Shah Waliyullah Dehlavi who tried to work out synthesis of Wahdat al-Wujud and Mujaddid alf-e-Sani wahda al-Shuhud to reconcile the two opposing ideologies. However, it did not succeed much. Shah Waliyullah, an eminent theologian did not reject Sufism but did not accept philosophy of Wahdat al-Wujud without reservation either.

 

But Deobandis of late have adopted hostile attitude towards Sufi Islam and both try to revile each other As Saudis are quite intolerant of Sufi Islam, Deobandis who are going closer to Saudis ideologically, are also becoming more and more intolerant of Sufi Islam. Saudis are pouring money in the Islamic world to popularize Salafi Islam which is most intolerant and exclusivistic and wants to go back in history and practice Islam as practiced by the earliest Muslims.

 

Of late due to Saudi influence Salafi Islam is spreading fast among Muslims and this leads to extremism. During anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan America also promoted Salafi Islam as at that time Islamic extremism was thought to be American ally. Today America is paying price for that. America never hesitates to exploit religious fanaticism, if it helps its purpose even temporarily. Thus America is no less responsible for spreading Salafi Islam.

 

Again because of Saudi influence the Government also gives more importance to Deobandis than to representatives of Sufi Islam though they are in great majority. Recently when our peace yatra from Ayodhya to Nizamuddin Awliya ended at the Mausoleum of Hazrat Nizamuddin the Sajjadanashin bitterly complained that we are not included in any governmental delegations though were most inclusive and people of all communities Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis and Christians visit this place. He pleaded with us to use our influence with the government to include them in official delegations.

 

It was in this background and frustration that Syed Babar Ashraf .spoke at a rally at Moradabad. It is unfortunate that Muslims while swearing by unity (ittihad) are indulging in sectarian fights. In this respect one must admire the efforts of Shah Waliyullah, a man of social vision, tried to reconcile the two schools of thought but his ideas have been marginalized and intolerance is growing.

 

India is a land of diversity and tolerance and Sufi Islam prospered here because of this nature of Indian soil. Some Muslims may not accept Sufi Islam for ideological reasons and there is nothing wrong about it but they should show respect for those who are devout Sufis and believe in praying at Sufi Dargahs. Sufi Islam is after all more spiritual in nature and Sufis, though do not renounce the world as renunciation has no place in Islam but they do believe in controlling desires and keep their distance from power. That is why it is more inclusive and pluralistic in nature.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Institute of Islamic Studies,

Mumbai.

E-mail: csss@mtnl.net.in

                    



__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism



Responding to some of Dr. Jiten Roy's Comments:
 
J. Roy: I like what President Regan has said - government is not the solution, government is the problem.
 
Response from S. Bain: On the face value of "government is not the solution, government is the problem", Ronald Regan should have moved to the jungle where the animals can do whatever they want and are capable of, as opposed to staying in the civilized world, where the government does regulate, where people can not just do what they want and are capable of, without caring about other people and the environment. With his 'government is the problem' political philosophy, Regan has done a lot of harm to the USA through his deregulation efforts. Deregulation helped the dishonest rich, not the regular working people. And I do include the middle class, the lower-middle class, and the working poor within that "regular working people" of this country.
 
J. Roy: We have given trillions of our hard-earned tax dollars to the government, what they have done with it - they have given it to their cronies, sponsors, and people are still suffering. You know what happened with Solyndra and others green initiatives.
 
Response from S. Bain: I am not for helping the rich cronies, neither is Robert Reich, on whose article we are having this discussion. Dr. Reich was advocating for a rich and decent America, where no working person should be poor and made to feel like a beggar.
 
J. Roy: I have followed Barak Obama from the very beginning since his candidacy for the Presidency. He is more like a Marxist. American is like a giant ship, it is hard to divert her course. That's what happened with Obama. He tried to stir it to the left as much as he could, but due to sudden political shift in the Congress within a short time, he could not do so. That's why I trust in the American people and the system.
 
Response from S. Bain: One really has to have a lot of irrational fixation to call Barak Obama a Marxist. To me, he is as much of a capitalist as any other leader of this country. He is no more liberal than what Lyndon B. Johnson or Franklin D. Roosevelt was. Dr. Roy should give some real examples where Obama was like a Marxist.
 
Thanks to Dr. Roy and others for the discussion,
 
Sukhamaya Bain

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2011 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

I mostly agree with everything, except on one or two points. The good news is - Americans have started to pay attention to the politics recently - and this has made some impact on the political establishment already.
 
I like what President Regan has said - government is not the solution, government is the problem. We have given trillions of our hard-earned tax dollars to the government, what they have done with it – they have given it to their cronies, sponsors, and people are still suffering. You know what happened with Solyndra and others green initiatives. These money will never come back. We just lost hem.
 
I know many people think financial institutions (Banks, Wall Street firms, etc.) are the culprits, but that is not correct; these institutions either have paid then back fully or about to do so. The money given to the financial institutions will come back to the government treasury; we will probably make money on these investments.
 
Free systems (political, social, economic, education, etc.) need to take care of our problems. This country has abundant opportunities and resources for everybody in this country. Those who do not want to avail them, nobody can help them. I know a recent immigrant young man from Bangladesh, who works in a restaurant as a waiter/delivery boy. He bought a one bedroom co-op house at Bronx, which he shares with a renter. I have visited his house recently. In contrast, I see many people here, who are second/third generations in this country, but have no place to live, and need government help to feed their families. Who can help them?
 
Anyway, I have followed Barak Obama from the very beginning since his candidacy for the Presidency. He is more like a Marxist. American is like a giant ship, it is hard to divert her course. That's what happened with Obama. He tried to stir it to the left as much as he could, but due to sudden political shift in the Congress within a short time, he could not do so.  That's why I trust in the American people and the system.
 
Thanks.
 
Jien Roy

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2011 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 
While Dr. Roy and I disagree on the political awareness of the American people, I can see some of his points, although with some different interpretations.
 
I can understand the apprehension that the earlier generation Americans may have against the recent immigrants from failed and backward countries. When I say that the average American is very poor in politics, I mean they are poor in foreign as well as domestic political affairs.
 
The way I see it, in a developed country, if a couple honestly works 40+40 hours a week, they should have a guarantee of the basic needs of life, such as food, clothing, a reasonable place to live, basic healthcare, and education for their minor children. That should happen no matter what kind of work they do; even flipping hamburger in a fast food restaurant is essential work for the system. That should happen without the couple needing help from any kind of charity, and feeling like beggars. I am sure the USA is capable of doing that without stopping the exponential capitalistic rewards for great innovators such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. I am sure the USA has the overall financial strength to do that without lowering the living standards of the middle class. The problem is, the big money players in politics are good in manipulating the politically unaware population, which is mostly middle class, to fulfill their greed through getting their cronies elected to power.
 
In spite of what I wrote above, I agree with Dr. Roy that the USA is still a far better nation than most of the others in the world. For people like Dr. Roy and me, the USA is probably the best.
 
Indeed there were many visionary leaders in the USA. However, many of them were as liberal as, or more so than, Barak Obama. If Obama were a socialist, I wonder what we should call FDR or LBJ!! I would not call even Robert Reich a socialist; he is a decent capitalist, similar to many of the past great visionary leaders of this country.
 
While I criticize the excessive corporate and executive greed, I am also optimistic about the USA. To me, following are some of the reasons why the USA is most powerful, and will continue to be so for a long time:
 
1)      The country's ability to attract and keep foreign talents through respecting and rewarding people based upon their talent and upon the contents of their character. This would allow the country to maintain its scientific and technological lead.
2)      The population of this country is generally honest, decent, caring, and devoid of the nonsensical prejudices that prevail in many parts of the world.
3)      The country has a great political system (which would have worked better if the population as a whole were more politically educated).
4)      The country has an advanced judicial and law enforcement system.
5)      The country is rich in many natural resources.
6)      The country would not be overburdened by population any time soon.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2011 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 
Dr. Bain: When it comes to politics, American people are probably the most idiotic in the developed world.
 
JR: I respectfully disagree with the above statement. Yes, it is true - American people do not care much about the outside world as people from other countries do. And, yes, Americans are not as political as recent immigrants, like me, from other countries. Why would previous generation of Americans listen to our opinion? Many of these immigrants came from failed countries anyway. In fact they don't. That's a good news.
 
When I analyze, I see the following. Apart from foreign affairs, previous generation of Americans have done pretty well in the domestic front. They have made pretty good decisions when it comes to internal politics. The proof is everywhere, if we care to look around sincerely with open mind, not biased by religious and political biases/interests.
 
While most of the developed European world was almost devoured by communism, Americans fended this beautiful land from it, and built their country a superpower in the world. It became so because of their right social policies and structures. I always get amazed by the subway system in the New York City - that was built more than 100 years ago, when it was totally unnecessary. You can easily imagine - what type of visionary leaders is needed to make that decision. I love and appreciate everything these people have achieved; I am grateful to them for allowing me to share their wealth and opportunity, which no other country in the world will do. I cannot call them 'politically most idiotic in the developed world.' I just can't prove it.
 
It is true - the political system is not perfect, but it is better than anywhere else. I can't find any other polical system that will be better than this. The system is so fair that a socialist (Obama) can also raise billion dollars for the election.
 
Many people say – better days of America are behind; I don't think so. I believe American people will make correct decision in 2012 to elect social conservatives, as they always do.  Usually, they balance power towards center-right. American academicians are hell-bent to indoctrinate young generations to social liberalism. The good news is - they have been doing so forever with little success; once Americans grow up - they revert to social conservatism. My worry now with many more social liberals in the recent immigrant communities in the country.
 
Jiten Roy
 

From: Arif Tuhin <etothepowerpi@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 3, 2011 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 
The other day i saw republican debate i was pretty disgusted by their ideas. They will never change and will try to feed the same crap about how anything related to wealth distribution is socialism and hence evil. Another frenzy was about who was better christian. I think Thomas Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he heard this argument. And that female candidate, i forgot her names already told in a Q/A that she will push for teaching intelligent design in school text books. I guess in coming days as liberals are not taking the country anywhere I'm afraid a far right orgy is in place.
 
With Best Regards
Ariful Hossain Tuhin
email: etothepowerpi@hotmail.com , etothepowerpi@gmail.com, etothepowerpi@yahoo.com
skype: freeburn1986
phone: 8801673301175
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/etothepowerpi
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2011 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 
When it comes to politics, American people are probably the most idiotic in the developed world. I remember the then Vice-President Dick Cheney was once asked about what he thought about the fact that a majority of the American people thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. His answer was that he was not surprised. Of course, he was not surprised, because he was smart enough to know that the average Americans were only-the-sports-page-reader idiots, and that they had no real idea why the USA had to go for a war in Iraq.
 
Talking about the American people taking the initial step of electing some clowns in 2010, I think in this country the elections are controlled by big money doing big propaganda, not by the consciousness of the American people. Even Obama was a billion dollar fund-raiser.
 
I think people like Dr. Roy should make informative counter-arguments against Dr. Reich's comments, as opposed to just calling him an ultra-liberal democrat.
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2011 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 
 
After getting tired of ceaseless empty promises and rhetoric from Obama and other democratic liberals during 2008 - 2010, American people took the initial step at the end of 2010 – by electing conservative Republicans in the Congress. That's step one. Now, step 2 is coming at the end of 2012. In the mean time, the national debt has surpassed unthinkable 15T, without the prospect of economic recovery.  If liberal policies could revive the economy and create jobs, it would have happened by now. Robert Reich is an ultra-liberal democrat; what else can he say, except bunch of liberal blathering, when he has nothing to show?
To understand the consequence of liberalism, please look at the EC, especially Greece and Italy.
Jiten Roy
 
 
From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2011 2:36 PM
Subject: [mukto-mona] The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

 

What kind of society, exactly, do modern Republicans want? I've been listening to Republican candidates in an effort to discern an overall philosophy, a broadly-shared vision, an ideal picture of America. They say they want a smaller government but that can't be it."

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)


The Rebirth of Social Darwinism

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
01 December 11
 
hat kind of society, exactly, do modern Republicans want? I've been listening to Republican candidates in an effort to discern an overall philosophy, a broadly-shared vision, an ideal picture of America.


They say they want a smaller government but that can't be it. Most seek a larger national defense and more muscular homeland security. Almost all want to widen the government's powers of search and surveillance inside the United States - eradicating possible terrorists, expunging undocumented immigrants, "securing" the nation's borders. They want stiffer criminal sentences, including broader application of the death penalty. Many also want government to intrude on the most intimate aspects of private life.

They call themselves conservatives but that's not it, either. They don't want to conserve what we now have. They'd rather take the country backwards - before the 1960s and 1970s, and the Environmental Protection Act, Medicare, and Medicaid; before the New Deal, and its provision for Social Security, unemployment insurance, the forty-hour workweek, and official recognition of trade unions; even before the Progressive Era, and the first national income tax, antitrust laws, and Federal Reserve.

They're not conservatives. They're regressives. And the America they seek is the one we had in the Gilded Age of the late nineteenth century.

It was an era when the nation was mesmerized by the doctrine of free enterprise, but few Americans actually enjoyed much freedom. Robber barons like the financier Jay Gould, the railroad magnate Cornelius Vanderbilt, and the oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller, controlled much of American industry; the gap between rich and poor had turned into a chasm; urban slums festered; women couldn't vote and black Americans were subject to Jim Crow; and the lackeys of rich literally deposited sacks of money on desks of pliant legislators.
Most tellingly, it was a time when the ideas of William Graham Sumner, a professor of political and social science at Yale, dominated American social thought. Sumner brought Charles Darwin to America and twisted him into a theory to fit the times.
Few Americans living today have read any of Sumner's writings but they had an electrifying effect on America during the last three decades of the 19th century.

To Sumner and his followers, life was a competitive struggle in which only the fittest could survive - and through this struggle societies became stronger over time. A correlate of this principle was that government should do little or nothing to help those in need because that would interfere with natural selection.

Listen to today's Republican debates and you hear a continuous regurgitation of Sumner. "Civilization has a simple choice," Sumner wrote in the 1880s. It's either "liberty, inequality, survival of the fittest," or "not-liberty, equality, survival of the unfittest. The former carries society forward and favors all its best members; the latter carries society downwards and favors all its worst members."
Sound familiar?

Newt Gingrich not only echoes Sumner's thoughts but mimics Sumner's reputed arrogance. Gingrich says we must reward "entrepreneurs" (by which he means anyone who has made a pile of money) and warns us not to "coddle" people in need. He opposes extending unemployment insurance because, he says, "I'm opposed to giving people money for doing nothing."

Sumner, likewise, warned against handouts to people he termed "negligent, shiftless, inefficient, silly, and imprudent."
Mitt Romney doesn't want the government to do much of anything about unemployment. And he's dead set against raising taxes on millionaires, relying on the standard Republican rationale millionaires create jobs.

Here's Sumner, more than a century ago: "Millionaires are the product of natural selection, acting on the whole body of men to pick out those who can meet the requirement of certain work to be done… It is because they are thus selected that wealth aggregates under their hands - both their own and that intrusted to them … They may fairly be regarded as the naturally selected agents of society." Although they live in luxury, "the bargain is a good one for society."

Other Republican hopefuls also fit Sumner's mold. Ron Paul, who favors repeal of Obama's healthcare plan, was asked at a Republican debate in September what medical response he'd recommend if a young man who had decided not to buy health insurance were to go into a coma. Paul's response: "That's what freedom is all about: taking your own risks." The Republican crowd cheered.
In other words, if the young man died for lack of health insurance, he was responsible. Survival of the fittest.

Social Darwinism offered a moral justification for the wild inequities and social cruelties of the late nineteenth century. It allowed John D. Rockefeller, for example, to claim the fortune he accumulated through his giant Standard Oil Trust was "merely a survival of the fittest." It was, he insisted "the working out of a law of nature and of God."

Social Darwinism also undermined all efforts at the time to build a nation of broadly-based prosperity and rescue our democracy from the tight grip of a very few at the top. It was used by the privileged and powerful to convince everyone else that government shouldn't do much of anything.

Not until the twentieth century did America reject Social Darwinism. We created the large middle class that became the core of our economy and democracy. We built safety nets to catch Americans who fell downward through no fault of their own. We designed regulations to protect against the inevitable excesses of free-market greed. We taxed the rich and invested in public goods - public schools, public universities, public transportation, public parks, public health - that made us all better off.

In short, we rejected the notion that each of us is on his or her own in a competitive contest for survival.

But make no mistake: If one of the current crop of Republican hopefuls becomes president, and if regressive Republicans take over the House or Senate, or both, Social Darwinism is back.
















__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Pls sign the petition to stop Tipaimukh Dam



জাতীয় স্বার্থ রক্ষায় বলিষ্ঠ ভূমিকা রাখুন।

Petition to
United Nation: TIPAIMUKH DAM MUST BE STOPPED
To sign the petition please clicks the link below.
 
 
দয়া করে নিজে সাইন করুন,পরিবারে সবাই, আত্মীয় স্বজন, বন্ধু বান্ধব,পাড়া প্রতিবেশী সহ বিশ্বের যে কোন স্থানে বসবাস রত সবাইকে সাইন করতে বলুন।
Please forward this massage to all your friend, family member, co-worker and everybody you know around the world.

Desh-Bondhu,
'Desher Kotha Bolay'


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] খালেদা জিয়া হতাশ !!!!!



 
 
সরকারবিরোধী আন্দোলনের অংশ হিসেবে রোডমার্চ, সভা-সমাবেশ এমনকি হরতালের মতো জোরালো কর্মসূচি দিলেও বিএনপির আন্দোলন যেন দানা বাঁধছে না। সাময়িকভাবে গতি পেলেও পরক্ষণেই ঝিমিয়ে পড়ছে। সর্বশেষ ঢাকা বিভক্তির প্রতিবাদে গত রবিবার রাজধানীতে আহূত হরতালে নেতা-কর্মীদের ঢিলেঢালা তৎপরতায় আবারও স্পষ্ট হয়ে উঠেছে আন্দোলনের দৈন্যদশা। এ দিন বিএনপির পাশাপাশি জোটের শরিক ও সমমনা দলের নেতারাও মাঠে ছিলেন না। আন্দোলনের এমন গতি-প্রকৃতিতে ক্ষোভ ও হতাশা ব্যক্ত করেছেন বিএনপি চেয়ারপারসন খালেদা জিয়া।
একই সঙ্গে ভবিষ্যতে সবাইকে ঐক্যবদ্ধ থেকে আন্দোলন জোরদারের নির্দেশ দিয়েছেন তিনি। বিএনপির সংশ্লিষ্ট একাধিক সূত্র এমন তথ্য জানিয়েছে।
হরতালের পর বিএনপি চেয়ারপারসন খালেদা জিয়ার সঙ্গে গুলশানের বাসভবনে সাক্ষাৎ করতে যান দলের ভারপ্রাপ্ত মহাসচিব মির্জা ফখরুল ইসলাম আলমগীরসহ দলের বিভিন্ন পর্যায়ের সিনিয়র নেতারা। চেয়ারপারসন এ সময় ক্ষুব্ধ কণ্ঠে বলেন, এভাবে কর্মসূচি পালন হলে আন্দোলন জোরদার হবে কিভাবে। তিনি আগামী দিনগুলোতে সবাইকে ঐক্যবদ্ধ হয়ে আন্দোলন জোরদারের নির্দেশ দেন।
ঢাকা সিটি করপোরেশন বিভক্ত করার সিদ্ধান্তের প্রতিবাদে বিএনপির ডাকা ঢাকায় গত রবিবারের সকাল-সন্ধ্যা হরতালে চারদলীয় জোটের অন্য শরিক ও সমমনা দল এবং বিএনপি ঘরানার বিভিন্ন পেশাজীবী সংগঠনও হরতালের প্রতি সমর্থন দেয়। কিন্তু হরতালের মাঠে সমর্থনের প্রতিফলন দেখা যায়নি। বিএনপির ভারপ্রাপ্ত মহাসচিব মির্জা ফখরুল ইসলাম আলমগীর ও মহানগর বিএনপির আহ্বায়ক সাদেক হোসেন খোকাসহ হাতেগোনা কয়েকজন নেতা ছাড়া কাউকে মাঠে দেখা যায়নি। এমনকি, জোটের শরিক ও সমমনা দলের নেতারাও মাঠে ছিলেন না।
হরতালসহ বিভিন্ন আন্দোলন-কর্মসূচিতে নেতা-কর্মীশূন্যতা সম্পর্কে মির্জা ফখরুল ইসলাম আলমগীর কালের কণ্ঠকে বলেন, 'হরতালে দলের দায়িত্বশীল নেতা, শরিক ও সমমনা দলের নেতারা ইচ্ছে করে মাঠে ছিলেন না_এমন নয়। মোটামুটি সবাই ছিলেন। কিন্তু কাউকেই মাঠে নামতে দেয়নি সরকার। আর রবিবারের হরতাল শরিক ও সমমনা দলের ছিল না। তারা সমর্থন জানিয়েছিল মাত্র। তাদের মাঠে থাকার কথাও ছিল না।' হরতাল সফল না হওয়া ও সরকারবিরোধী আন্দোলন জোরদার না হওয়ায় দলের চেয়ারপারসন খালেদা জিয়া মনোক্ষুণ্ন ও হতাশ হয়েছেন_এমন প্রশ্নের উত্তরে তিনি বলেন, 'সবই অপপ্রচার।'
নেপথ্যে অন্তর্দ্বন্দ্ব?
বিএনপির নেতৃত্ব ও গুরুত্বপূর্ণ পদ নিয়ে দলীয় নেতাদের মধ্যে মতবিরোধ ও অন্তর্দ্বন্দ্ব চলছে অনেক দিন ধরেই। বিশেষ করে দলের স্থায়ী কমিটির সদস্য মির্জা আব্বাস ও ভাইস চেয়ারম্যান সাদেক হোসেন খোকার মধ্যে নেতৃত্ব নিয়ে বিরোধ দীর্ঘদিনের। সাদেক হোসেন খোকাকে ঢাকা মহানগর কমিটির আহ্বায়ক ও আবদুস সালামকে সদস্যসচিব করার পরও এই দুই নেতার বিরোধের অবসান হয়নি। এর পাশাপাশি ঢাকা জেলা কমিটি নিয়ে ব্যারিস্টার নাজমুল হুদার সঙ্গে ঢাকা জেলা সভাপতি আবদুল মান্নানের এবং স্থায়ী কমিটির সদস্য গয়েশ্বর চন্দ্র রায়ের সঙ্গে যুগ্ম মহাসচিব ও ঢাকা জেলা কমিটির সাধারণ সম্পাদক আমানউল্লাহ আমানের দ্বন্দ্ব চলছে। সম্প্রতি গয়েশ্বর চন্দ্র রায়কে কেরানীগঞ্জে আওয়ামী লীগের পক্ষ থেকে অবাঞ্ছিত ঘোষণা করা হয়েছে। কিন্তু আমানের সঙ্গে তাঁর দ্বন্দ্বের কারণে এ নিয়ে বিএনপির কোনো আন্দোলন কর্মসূচি নেই।
আন্দোলনে সবাই মাঠে নামছে না কেন_এমন প্রশ্নের উত্তরে বিএনপির স্থায়ী কমিটির সদস্য আ স ম হান্নান শাহ বলেন, 'আমার ব্যক্তিগত মত হলো, হয়তো কোথাও একটা গলদ আছে। এ নিয়ে চেয়ারপারসন হতাশ কি না_এমন প্রশ্নের জবাবে তিনি বলেন, 'উনি হতাশ নন, হয়তো কিছুটা মনোক্ষুণ্ন। তবে পর্যায়ক্রমে আন্দোলন জোরদার হবে।'
স্থায়ী কমিটির অপর এক সদস্য নাম প্রকাশ না করার শর্তে বলেন, ডিসিসি বিভক্তির প্রতিবাদে বিএনপির সবাই ঐক্যবদ্ধ নয়। সাদেক হোসেন খোকা মেয়রের দায়িত্বে থাকাকালে বিএনপি সমর্থিত ওয়ার্ড কমিশনাররা তাঁর নেতৃত্বে ঐক্যবদ্ধ হয়ে কাজ করেছেন। কিন্তু খোকা বর্তমানে মেয়র নেই। প্রথম দিকে ডিসিসি ভাগের বিরোধিতায় বিক্ষোভ মিছিল করলেও উত্তর ও দক্ষিণ সিটি করপোরেশনে প্রশাসক নিয়োগের পর তাঁদের অনেকেই কেটে পড়েছেন। যার কারণে হরতালের দিনে ওয়ার্ড কমিশনাররা অনেকেই মাঠে অনুপস্থিত ছিলেন। সম্ভবত এ জন্যই আন্দোলন জোরদার হচ্ছে না।
শরিক ও সমমনারা কথায় আছে, কাজে নেই জামায়াতে ইসলামীর নেতা-কর্মীদের গত হরতালে মাঠে খুঁজে পাওয়া যায়নি। ইসলামী ঐক্যজোটের চেয়ারম্যান মুফতি ফজলুল হক আমিনী মুখে বড় বড় কথা বললেও তাঁর দলের নেতা-কর্মীরা মাঠে নামেননি। বিজেপি চেয়ারম্যান ব্যারিস্টার আন্দালিব রহমান পার্থ ও মহাসচিব শামীম আল মামুন হরতালের পক্ষে বিবৃতি দিলেও হরতালের দিন মাঠে ছিলেন না। একইভাবে এলডিপি চেয়ারম্যান কর্নেল (অব.) অলি আহমদ, কল্যাণ পার্টির চেয়ারম্যান মেজর জেনারেল (অব.) ইবরাহিম, জাগপার শফিউল আলম প্রধান, এনপিপির শেখ শওকত হোসেন নীলু, বাংলাদেশ ন্যাপের জেবেল রহমান গণি বক্তৃতা-বিবৃতিতে থাকলেও সক্রিয় আন্দোলনে রাজপথে পা ফেলছেন না। অন্যান্য সমমনা দল লেবার পার্টি, বাংলাদেশ মুসলিম লীগ, ন্যাপ ভাসানী, বাংলাদেশ খেলাফত আন্দোলন, নেজামে ইসলাম পার্টি, ইসলামী ঐক্য আন্দোলন ও ইসলামিক পার্টির নেতাদের পক্ষে মাঠে সচেষ্ট থাকার বিবৃতিই সার। তাঁরা বরং হরতালের দিন ঘরে বসে টিভিতে 'ব্যর্থ' হরতালের চিত্র উপভোগ করেছেন।



খালেদা জিয়া হতাশ !!!!!
এই প্রতিবেদন সম্পর্কে আপনার মতামত দিতে এখানে ক্লিক করুন
Quantcast
প্রথম পাতা -এর আরো সংবাদ
অনলাইন জরিপআজকের প্রশ্নকমিশনের অনিচ্ছা সত্ত্বেও ৯০ দিনের মধ্যে ঢাকা সিটি করপোরেশন নির্বাচন করা উচিত হবে বলে মনে করেন কি?হ্যাঁনা
খালেদা জিয়া হতাশ !!!!!


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___