Reference -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/12938
I agree that use of such ethnicity or ideology defining terms in
academic matters is ridiculous. And that is what I am precisely
trying to say.
I am not trying to allege that XYZ is a German Nationalist or
something else. Such an allegation would sound ridiculous to you
because it is indeed ridiculous. But then, is it not ridiculous to
call S S Mishra a Hindu Nationalist? My argument was therefore meant
to show the absurdity of your remark, incidental though it may be.
When such 'incidental' remarks appear so frequently in certain
quarters, it tends to raise a red flag for us.
Concerning the term 'Indian Marxists', please note that this is how
they define themselves publicly, and this is how the media
characterizes them in India. In fact, currently there is a huge
controversy going on in India right at the level of the apex Federal
court on the brainwashing of generations of Indian children with
history books written by Indian marxists.
As for the term 'Nationalist' that you now mention with respect to
India, I feel it pertinent to explain something about Indian politics
here to the list members.
Nationalism is NOT A DIRTY word in India, but Hindu Nationalism is.
Mishra (who died a few months ago, if I am correct) would not mind
the former but he would be offended very much by the latter.
In our country, Natioanalism merely means loving and serving one's
country, and this is not seen as a corollary to hatred for other
countries or even an apathy for them. As an India, I would say - "If
I profess my love and respect for my mother, it does not mean that I
hate your mother. All mothers are worthy of respect." That is how we
define nationalism in India, except when relating to others for whom
Nationalism is a dirty word.
I end this discussion here and sincerely request people not to use
all these 'isms' to define or characterize people especially when
they deny affiliation with these 'isms' themselves.
Vishal