| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-Feb-01 11:34 AM
I just love the delicious irony thrown up by
educated, aware and networked Nepalis using English
and living in places like Auburn, Alabama and Washington DC
attacking or making fun of the so-called 'elites'
in Kathmandu!! Hey, a few more such of explosive
attacks, and, Jesus F. Christ, we can actually start
seeing smoke curling up in Kathmandu!!
I happen to like/cherish and champion elitism,
preferably individual elitism, and before I lay out
my reasons for liking such elitism, let me
clearly define what I mean by the term.
My entire argument springs from how I define
the term.
To start, I do not, N-O-T, buy this knee-jerk
sweeping definition of 'elitism' that one hears from
and reads in the writings of those Nepalis, usually,
but not necessarily, with what I call, unchallenged
socialist tendencies. For them, anything 'elite' is
bad; and, anything that smacks of 'elitism' is to be
ridiculed. [Their arguments remind me of my
Marxist friends' forever-frozen-in-time fixations
about "samanta-baad" and "upa.neebesh.baad" and all
that "baad" garbage that's so common in Nepali
leftist discussions.]
And so, in the company of these people, you are made
to feel guilty for being a part of the so-called 'elite', as
if it's something you should be ashamed of. Even
though you had NOTHING to do with how you chose your
parents, and how you were brought up as a child, you
are still made to feel guilty for having had some
access to 'privilege'. And on and on these people go.
Theirs is all really stupid, socialist garbage.
Let me explain what I mean:
In a World Cup soccer match, putting aside immediate
patriotic concerns, people, by and large, root for an
ELITE team to win. Top universities anywhere, especially
in the US, go out of their way to recruit ELITE students
from applicant pools of 1000s and 1000s. Likewise,
top companies anywhere try very hard to retain and
promote their ELITE employees. And software firms
try to lure ELITE programmers with stock options
and so on.
Shakespeare was an ELITE dramatist as Picasso was
an ELITE painter. Devkota remains an ELITE essayist,
as Lain Singh Bangdel remains an ELITE artist
in Nepal.
In all these examples, I use the word elite in
a SPECIFIC context: meaning, 'elite = excellent',
and excellence defined SUBJECTIVELY in a prevailing
cultural context. It's in a cultural context that
Shakespear's work or Bangdel's art is valued as
a rare piece of work. Excellence is thus further
defined as something "not everyone can do". And so,
based on those conditions, an equation would go
something like:
an elite piece of work would be equal to
a work of excellence, which would be further equal to
a work not everyone can do!!
Hence:
an elite piece of work is, by definition, something
not everyone can do!!
And, now, anyone who can do such work, ANY such work,
is a part of the elite in that particular field (whether
pottery or cookery or nuclear physics or basketball),
and is practicing elitism.
That's my definition of elite and elitism.
Well, it's been a long day. I think I'll go to sleep
now.
In my next posting, in a day or two, I'll explain,
with examples, how I disagree with the labeling and
indeed the very notion of "social elitism in Nepal"
that others here are actually talking about.
Discussions and dissents are vital to keep democracy
alive.
oohi
ashu
|
| Hemlal |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 12:55 AM
Its very interesting way to attack other people whom are or and have different opinion than yours. In reality, as human being or other spices, it tends to be very threatened by others who have different ideology or interest than yours. I feel your attack to ‘elitism’ is more personal rather than an intellectual. If you really feel you are one of the intellectuals or academia please use your concern or assumption directed toward well being of us Nepali rather than using it as a means of political jargons. Hemlal
|
| seelu |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 09:36 AM
I am making mental comparison between this discussion board and another discussion I view for south asian woman only. Are not CAPITOL LETTERS thought to be dominating? Ashu-ji, if one is a man of good will, is it truly a dialogue that the idea of others are "stupid garbage." If discussion at MArtin Chautari works in such a manner i think I would be discouraged from participating. You are human rights activist, I think, so please be man of good will to others.
in regard to, Hom Raj-ji, your arguments have greater subtlety than Ashu-ji is admitting. I thnk Ashu-ji did not read carefully. Posting of reading culture was very good, I support you that we must have literate culture. Yet perhaps clever insults about "Nuppies" are not helpful to expand dialogue. Yes I see your point, but isn't it more likely to inflame than enlighten? :-)
|
| Gokul |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 12:48 PM
I don't see any substance in Seelu and Hemlal's arguments. They are just trying to spend their time in straining themselves about what the originator of this discussion meant and did not mean and instead of giving counter examples and showing the fallacy (if there is any) in Ashu's arguments, they are just turning sour and saying whether he should use capital/small, italic, bold fonts. This discussion is NOT about Word processing. It is about making healthy arguments and productive discussions. It is about stimulating creative ideas. It is about analyzing our prejudices and if we are strong and honest enough, it is about accepting our contradictions and hypocrisy and taking a step to rectify this perversion, which is insidiously creeping into our cultural and political institution and has become ultimately and intimately a national phenomenon.
So coming to the discussion of "Elitism", let us be clear what we meant by "Elite" and whether it is really bad to become elite. And more importantly, are we, the elites(?), calling others elite because it is the surest sign of becoming ourselves elite? Afterall, elite is about becoming Superior and are we not definitely superior when we say we are not superior? What a clever way of becoming superior! O we the proletariat - advocates of dialectic materialism - relishing the American materialism. Seelu - You See?
|
| seelu |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 01:19 PM
My concern was in regard to how one conducts discussion. How is this sour to say one must be polite and respectful? "Elite" or not are we not taught that in our homes. I simply say "treat others as you wish to be treated." How is this a statement worthy of attack? Please enlighten me on this point.
your didi. :-)
|
| kiran |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 03:37 PM
Ashuji,
I really enjoyed reading your posting.Very simple english and logical.You really are a gifted writer.
Keep on posting.
kiran
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 09:01 PM
My sincere thanks to all of you who have responded.
I appreciate your words of praise as well as your
words of criticisms.
I am aware that we in Nepal and in various
Nepali communities elsewhere are NOT used to
people expressing strong opinions publicly and
forcefully.
And that's all right.
For better or worse, we also know that, to borrow
Hom Raj's idea from another posting, one of the
legacies of having grown up in Nepal is that we are
rarely taught to ask questions, challenge
assumptions and forecfully argue a point of view.
From experience I know that learning to do that
takes a lot of time, and, that is why, Nepal-related
Web sites like this help us all to ask questions, challenge
assumptions, argue a point of view, and see what
others are thinking on issues so that our collective
understanding of Nepal becomes deeper.
That is why, I am sure that after the initial
shock of seeing words like "garbage" and "stupid"
wears off, we would be on our way to having
substantive discussions. I, for one, am
willing to be patient.
For the record, I do not find my Marxist/Socialist
friends stupid, it's just that some of their ideas
are indeed stupid and unsupported by evidence.
Feeling comfortable enough to trust them personally,
I have -- in many private convsersations -- pointed
out the contradictions in many of their thoughts
without, I am happy to say, losing their friendship.
So, my calling an idea stupid does not mean the person
behind the idea is also stupid. I am sure we are
all mature enough (over 18?) to keep this difference
in mind.
Please keep ideas/info and disagreements flowing.
But if you insist on attacking me, rather than my
ideas, that's fine too. After all, when I advocate
freedom of speech, I really mean absolute freedom
of speech.
oohi
ashu
|
| dd |
Posted
on 28-Feb-01 11:35 PM
Okay, okay, I insist on attacking ashu! I admit it, happy now?
If every little syllable of disagreement comes across as "attacking" you, so be it!
Now don't you come with a kitchen knife next time I'm at Martin Chautari! My "attacks" are solely "intellectual"!! ;)
dd
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 01-Mar-01 08:37 AM
Thanks dd,
All injuries sustained, but will not
file charges ;-)
oohi
ashu
|
