Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 22:56:48 -0800 From: soumitra-AT-ix.netcom.com (Soumitra Bose ) Subject: Re: An answer (was Re: work, women's status, etc ) You wrote: > > > >On Sat, 16 Dec 1995, Soumitra Bose wrote: >> > >> > >> The word hegemony as a category itself is of course a gramscian >> construct . I was referring to that rather than the leninist construct >> of considering hegemony as a military construct only. Now the matter of >> knowledge when it is considered in the dichotomised sense of >> possessing/non-possessing breeds hegemony and is thus >> institutionalised. I wanted to point only this , not anything relating >> to the mode of discourse .... > >I agree with your point regarding the news item, and the possession of >knowledge and it's relationship to institutions. What I was trying to >point out was the continuity between the oppressed and the oppressors. >Ashis Nandy has argued this point very cogently. > > >> >Be that as it may let us for a change get out of the text-book exercise >> of trying to fit a growing phenomenon into one or the other model and >> then trying to understand it through deja-vu modes of analysis .What I >> meanst was clear if we try to keep aside the models . >> >Exactly. That is why I was unhappy with your reference to Foucault. > >Shashwati > Could you sent me what Ashis Nandy said , well interesting ,, now I have to learn politics from Ashis Nandy ... OK , why don't I give it a try...
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005