Violence in Indian historical process

[George Thompson]

In reply to all those who did not like my response to Subrahmanya:

Please re-read the recent post, well-argued and fair, of V. V. Raman, in
order to understand the kind of person that I am.  I am not interested in
your crusades against your enemies.  Your battles are not my battles.  If you
think, as the seriously deluded Subrahmanya thinks, that I am interested in
subverting your revisions of history, then you are seriously deluded too.
The point is that while I am indeed interested in Indian antiquity [i.e.,
Indology as defined by this list] I am not at all interested in your
closed-minded, religious, nationalist, and often racist, versions of it.

To insist, as I have done, that this is a scholarly list, is to insist that
its members be open-minded, critical not only of one's enemies but especially
of oneself, and to insist also that all members be disciplined enough to
submit well-informed and well-reasoned posts.  Furthermore, it is to insist
that all members be prepared to yield to the well-informed and well-reasoned
arguments.of one's interlocutors.  Subrahmanya has never shown any
inclination to do any of that.  He is all bluster, no substance.

I am willing and prepared to argue, vigorously, with any of you about the
scholarly matters that matter to me.  But I am not willing to waste my
efforts on your petty and ultimately vicious religious wars.

As the Vedic poet, in the heat of a brahmodya, said:

e'tat tvA'tra pratimanvAno' asmi
na' mAya'yA bhavasy u'ttaro ma't

Best wishes to you all,

George Thompson