JANUARY 2016
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
KURDS P3 PONGAL P3 ANALYSIS P8 THE PERSECUTION OF TAMILS, P4
Say not, 'Tis hard', in weak, desponding hour, For strenuous effort gives prevailing power. - Kural 611
TIBET IN LIMBO, P6 STAND BY ME, P11
A VIEW
அAைம உைடtெத12 அசாவாைம ேவ9:m ெபAைம µயGH தAm. - 5றll 611
A Letter from a student
Dear Students,
Please don’t lose your hopes and don’t stop your engagement. Please seniors, be active during the last months of your M.A. and in your life as I’ve seen and known you during my few months there. Please first years, learn from them and continue what they’re doing, please do more than them and influence the future students. Please don’t stop inspiring people as you’ve done with me.
« You know which is the first lesson that I’ve learned there ? Time to do, to change, to make things happen is now.»
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!1
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
You know which is the first lesson that I’ve learned there? Time to do, to change, to make things happen is now. And also that if nothing is happening you should be the one, standing up long before the others, who finds his own way to start. Complaining about a problem doesn’t help the change to happen, it only increases dissatisfaction and mistreats hearts.
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
Tamil Tirunaal Pongal by students
I love change. I feel alive when I feel that change is coming. I love to help bringing change in people’s life and I love when people bring change in my life. Unfortunately I know so many young people who are scared of it, who feel threatened by it, who see change only as a loss of something else. For me change is not a loss, it’s an enrichment. It is learning from other systems and experiences, it’s drawing on a paper which is not blank, which is instead full of pictures: change means taking a pencil and correct the wrong lines, add a different colour, draw new details. Such small corrections, that the difference can only be noticed after a while, looking at the paper from a certain distance. I think that for a long time I forgot how to use the pencil or the colours. I thought it would have been better to study the picture carefully before trying to modify it. But in this period with you I certainly understood that we can never avoid to produce change, whether we want it or not. The simple fact of being there did it: I come from a different reality and when two different perceptions of life come together something will change for sure on each side. Third lesson: bring positive change. Don’t forget that people you’ll get in touch with will be anyway influenced by your presence, try your best to make this influence to be a good one. Remember that you’re the representative of your culture, that people will learn from you much more than what you intentionally decide to share with them. Let me tell you all a huge thank you for everything you taught to me, for what you shared and what you made me understood. Exchange is the reciprocal act of giving and receiving, it’s the best way of learning. I want to leave you this powerful quotation, together with my best wishes for this new year and for your lives. “Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” (Robert F. Kennedy) Your friend in Exchange, Antinisca
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!2
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
HDP preparing to take demand for selfgovernance of Kurds to UN Today Zaman The pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) is preparing to take its demand for selfgovernance for Kurds in southeastern Turkey to the United Nations for discussion, according to a report by the Taraf daily. According to the report, the HDP will justify its argument based on three articles of the “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,” a UN resolution that Turkey signed in 2001 and ratified on April 3, 2002. The first article of the resolution begins: “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” The Democratic Society Congress (DTK), an umbrella group of Kurdish non-governmental organizations, said in a declaration in December 2015 that the settlement of Turkey's longstanding Kurdish issue can only be achieved by granting autonomy to Turkey's predominantly Kurdish Southeast. DTK Co-chair Hatip Dicle also said in December 2015 that Kurds have the right to selfgovernance and that the DTK supports the demands of Kurds living in Turkey. “Self-governance is a right and is guaranteed by international conventions. It is a legitimate demand. The DTK and other institutions affiliated with it support the struggle [for self-governance for Turkey's Kurds]. The war the government is trying to provoke is both unlawful and unethical,” Dicle said in a press conference held jointly by the DTK and three pro-Kurdish parties in the southeastern province of Diyarbakır on Dec. 20, 2015. Taraf also reported on Wednesday that the Turkish Foreign Ministry will defend the government's actions before the UN with the first articles of Turkish Constitution. Article 1 of the Constitution says: “The State of Turkey is a republic.” Article 2 says: “The Republic of Turkey is a democratic, secular and social state governed by the rule of law, within the notions of public peace, national solidarity and justice, respecting human rights, loyal to the nationalism of [Mustafa Kemal] Atatürk and based on the fundamental tenets set forth in the preamble.” Lastly, its third article reads: “The State of Turkey, with its territory and nation, is an indivisible entity. Its language is Turkish. Its flag, the form of which is prescribed by the relevant law, is composed of a white crescent and star on a red background. Its national anthem is the ‘Independence March.' Its capital is Ankara.” Commenting on the report by Taraf in a press conference in Parliament on Wednesday, main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) Trabzon deputy Haluk Pekşen said that the a possible application by the HDP to the UN would be “funny.” “Who will go to the UN? Will the [terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party] PKK go to the UN? The possibility of the PKK, which is recognized as a terrorist organization by the UN, [submitting a complain to the UN] is simply funny, nothing else. What could be funnier than that? What is their intention?” Pekşen asked.
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!3
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
Sri Lanka will not act 'in haste' on special court says president The Hindu - The Sri Lankan government would not act “in haste” on the issue of setting up a special court on allegations of violations of human rights in the last stages of the civil war, President Maithripala Sirisena said on Sunday. Answering questions on the status of implementation of a resolution adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council in October on accountability, Mr. Sirisena, in an exclusive interview with The Hindu at his residence, replied in Sinhala that what should be done first was to “evaluate” what had happened [during the war]. Only after ascertaining the situation would “subsequent steps” become necessary. Calling for a gradual approach in the implementation, he alluded to the resolution and maintained that “we have not been ordered to do anything.” The government would do “whatever is necessary.” The implementation should be a “collective exercise,” he said, referring to the establishment of a body headed by former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga on reconciliation and another institution to go into complaints regarding alleged disappearances.
The Persecution of Tamils Continues Under Sirisena’s Watch The Diplomat: Taylor Dibbert. Follow him @taylordibbert One year into President Maithripala Sirisena’s tenure, the abduction, torture and rape of ethnic Tamils continues. The International Truth and Justice Project-Sri Lanka (ITJP) officially releases a new report on January 7. ITJP has documented cases of abduction, torture and sexual violence against ethnic Tamils. Short enough to be read in one sitting, the report encompasses 20 cases which occurred in 2015. With its latest report, ITJP has reaffirmed how deep-rooted some of Sri Lanka’s problems are. The abduction and torture of Tamils is a systematic issue and one where state security personnel த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!4
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
commit crimes with impunity. On many occasions, the families of victims are compelled to pay ransoms to ensure the release of a loved one. Families may also pay human smugglers so that victims are able to leave the country. So, in addition to the obvious physical, emotional, and psychological damage being done, these acts of violence consistently result in increased debt and more poverty. State security personnel also harass the families of torture victims. This oppressive system is ingrained into the culture of Sri Lanka’s security apparatus.
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
A student attempted suicide !
Broadly speaking, President Maithripala Sirisena’s tenure thus far has been less authoritarian than Mahinda Rajapaksa’s final years in power. Nevertheless, let’s not take too much comfort in people proclaiming that things are more democratic 12 months into Sirisena’s reign. As Sri Lanka watchers assess the new government’s progress one year after Rajapaksa’s unexpected ouster, it’s important to be candid about ongoing torture and sexual violence. The disturbing incidents documented in this report call into question the depth and breadth of purported democratic gains since Sirisena’s ascension in January 2015. Here’s an illuminating paragraph from the report: The cases reveal not only that torture and repression continue in Sri Lanka but that they remain widespread and systematic. They are the work of a well-organised machine which continues to thrive within the Sri Lankan police and military fuelled by extortion. It is responsible for terrorising and oppressing Tamils. This is therefore not a question of a few rotten apples in the system, as the new government so often suggests, but rather the result of structures that have long been corrupted. This appalling abasement of human dignity greatly undermines any transitional justice plans and reiterates the need for significant international involvement in the country’s transitional justice process. Such coordinated repression also violates the most fundamental tenets of a fully functioning democracy. If the Sirisena administration is truly committed to building a more inclusive state and healing the wounds of war, then the work must begin now.
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
A student attempted suicide due to him and his classmates being suspended despite court orders and for more than 140 days. The 6 students have been revoked by the u n i v e r s i t y. T h e y a r e expected to return to class and allowed to write exams. the student accused the university of pushing students to extreme acts and told the need for a student union. !5
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
Tibet in Limbo: An Exile’s Account of Citizenship in a World of Nation-States The Diplomat - Tenzin Pelkyi is a writer, activist, and law student. She sits on the board of the Asian American Organizing Project and is also the founder/editor of the Tibetan Feminist Collective. Follow her @TenzinPelkyi
The international community needs to address the plight of Tibetan refugees. Recently, an Al Jazeera article offered a profile of statelessness which featured tales of refugees from around the world. From Tibet to Kazhakstan, Syria to the Dominican Republican, the intimate glimpses of life for the millions of dislocated individuals in countries across the globe highlighted the common obstacles faced by those forced to flee their ancestral lands. Tibet is a prime example of this 21st century phenomenon of statelessness in a world of nationstates. In fact, many parallels have been drawn between the troubled Himalayan region and stateless peoples from the Palestinians to the Kurds.
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!6
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
In 2015, a number of important events took place in the secretive underbelly of Tibetan exile politics – a world unto itself for those of us who have to navigate it either as members of the in group (Tibetan exiles) or out group (non-Tibetan activists, scholars, journalists), including the Tibetan exile elections, inception of the Tibetan feminist movement, the rising numbers of selfimmolation protests in Tibet, and a major rebranding of the official Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) policy of “genuine autonomy” for Tibet (i.e. “The Middle Way”). As such, I think it’s important to properly contextualize the article and clarify a few key points in regard to the issue of Tibetan refugees. Having personally been born after the cut-off point for Indian citizenship granted to Tibetan refugees after the 2010 ruling, I, like many others, take issue with the arbitrary window period for citizenship. Although it’s certainly better than no such law at all, there is still a restriction on citizenship for future Tibetan refugees and an entire generation excluded from this opportunity. Tibetans like myself, who were naturalized in the U.S. after relocating through the special visa provision for Tibetan refugees included in the Immigration Act of 1990, are privileged in holding American citizenship. But there are far more in the settlements in India who are not so fortunate. Beyond the issue of a cut-off point for citizenship, the very idea of Indian citizenship was hotly debated in the Tibetan exile community. Those advocating for Tibetan independence, which the exile administration opposes, have argued that granting exiles Indian citizenship when the administration is headquartered in India would negate the very existence of such an entity. An official name change of the CTA was posed in 2012 and met with vocal opposition for restricting its jurisdiction to “the Tibetan exile people,” encompassing only the exile population of roughly 128,000 rather than the entire population of Tibet (over 6 million). Indian citizenship thus has tremendous implications for any prospects for Tibetan statehood. With the rise of disputes between Tibetan exiles in the Indian settlements and locals, legal protections for Tibetan refugees are becoming an increasing concern. Tibetan exiles are required to carry and renew a registration certificate and an identity card to travel overseas. A lack of citizenship means Tibetans are unable to own land and travel freely. Harsh penalties, including incidents of arrest, for the mere failure to renew these documents have further heightened fears over the tenuous nature of exile in the settlements. Restrictions on employment opportunities in India have also contributed to growing debate over Indian citizenship. As we head into the new year, the plight of Tibetan refugees must be more fully addressed by the international community, lest we have yet another global humanitarian crisis on our hands.
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!7
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
Analysis “Pierre Bourdieu – Challenging Symbolic Violence and the Naturalisation of Power Relations” Author: Katie Smith - E-International Relations. For Bourdieu, ‘The only way to bring about organizational change that does not entail merely replacing one modality of domination with another is to address specifically and to undo the mechanisms of dehistoricisation and universalisation – “always and everywhere has it been this way” – whereby arbitrary workings of power are enabled to continue.’ Change is at the heart of Bourdieu’s philosophy and he espouses radical views and strong criticisms of society. With this in mind, this paper will ask if, and how, Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence can help us to change the world for the better? The quote above summarizes Bourdieu’s approach to social change. He proposes that it is necessary reconceptualise society in order to make visible power relations and injustices which are hidden through processes of ‘dehistoricisation and universalisation’. We must escape what Bourdieu terms the symbolic violence within our own minds which prevents us from thinking critically. I will argue that this is a necessary step towards creating a more just society. In this idea, Bourdieu is in agreement with many other great modern philosophers who offer a variety of means to undo symbolic violence. Although there are philosophical differences between these theorists, a number of different approaches can helpfully be brought together to achieve the same ends of emancipation. I will then examine briefly the ways in which this approach is applied to neo-liberalism which, I will argue, is the most generalized form of symbolic violence functioning in Western societies today. I will conclude that undoing symbolic violence is the key to creating a better world and that Bourdieu, in combination with other theorists, can lead us towards this goal. Change That Bourdieu is a passionate advocate for change is clear in his writings. Unlike some, he is not afraid to use strong language or offer damning criticism and his normative views are clearly on display. At the core of Bourdieu’s politics is the emotive notion of symbolic violence. This is a similar concept to the Marxist idea of ‘false consciousness’, whereby people internalize the discourses of the dominant, meaning that “the most intolerable conditions of existence can so often be perceived as acceptable and even natural” A brief overview of history gives us considerable reason to take this claim seriously. In Victorian Britain, even the Queen opposed extending voting rights to women because of their unsuitability for politics. Similarly ‘social Darwinism’ and the ‘divine right’ of monarchs have both in the past been widely accepted despite the huge inequalities and injustices we see in them today. Past examples such as this should alert us to the probability that many norms and practices which are unquestioningly accepted now may be deemed barbaric in the future. Bourdieu’s call for more த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!8
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
critical intellectuals who ‘[question] the things that are self-evident’ and challenge the ‘acceptance of commonplaces’ reflects this need to question contemporary society and is part of his moral attack on the perpetuation of hidden injustices.
In Bourdieu’s philosophy, symbolic violence is lodged in an individual’s ‘durable principles of judgement and practice’ – the habitus. In effect, individuals absorb the structures and hierarchies of the social settings in which they exist (fields) into their ‘mental structures’ (habitus). This acceptance of the social order, even by people disadvantaged by it, is what Bourdieu calls the ‘paradox of doxa’ – it is a conflict hidden under the surface of the common sense notions which rule our social reality. In the current dominant framework of neo-liberalism, individualism, and self-responsibility, symbolic violence often leads people to (unjustly) blame themselves for their own suffering whilst the role of society remains hidden. The implication of all this is, ‘that what is required is a radical transformation of the social – including organisational – conditions of production of the habitus that is actively complicit in its own domination’. In other words, we must free our minds as a first step towards freeing ourselves from the injustices of the status quo. Approaches to ‘freeing the mind’ Symbolic violence is an idea (although not a term) which is common to a number of theoretical approaches and which has its roots in the classical Marxist idea of false consciousness. Indeed, it is a concept which is present, to a greater or lesser extent, in most post-positivist thinking. Bourdieu’s approach is most similar to that of Critical Theory and elements of Postmodernism and Poststructuralism also resonate. Although the philosophical basis for these approaches differ they share a goal of undoing the naturalisation of social power relations, and as such can be viewed as mutually supportive. Bourdieu sees the naturalisation of power relations, and the resulting symbolic violence, as made up of two processes – ‘dehistoricisation and universalisation’. Thus a social relation, such as the gender system, has come about as a result of specific historical and contextual factors. The denial, or forgetting, of this specificity places gender to a large extent beyond question, even by those who suffer as a result of it. It appears to be true that, naturalised inequalities are not seen as problems to be solved, but as inevitable facts of life. Bourdieu’s aim of undoing these processes by which we come to accept power relations as natural can best be achieved by a historical and contextual analysis of the roots of this power. This is directly comparable to Nietzsche’s (postmodern) genealogy and search for ‘origins’ – ‘a form of history which historicizes those things which are thought to be beyond history, including those things or thoughts which have been buried, covered, or excluded from view in the writing and making of history’. Foucault describes genealogy as “a history of the present” in that it seeks to explain and evaluate the present ‘particularly with a view to discrediting unjustified claims of authority’. Critical (international) Theory also takes this type of approach; it ‘asks how that configuration [of power relations] came about, what costs it brings with it, and what alternative possibilities are immanent in history’. Critical Theorists search for internal contradictions in the present, within the framework of the power relation being challenged – a method known as ‘immanent critique’. This aims to open up space for democratic challenges to the status quo by highlighting its logical inconsistencies and weaknesses. த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!9
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
In stressing the possibilities for change, Critical Theory shares with Bourdieu a focus on justice and emancipation which is lacking in much postmodern thought. Whilst postmodernism sees change only as ‘the endlessly repeated play of dominations’, Bourdieu and Critical Theorists allow for the idea that some power relations are more problematic than others. They feel justified in advocating change on behalf of those dominated by a system. Poststructural thought offers a slightly different strategy for denaturalisation, which has a more linguistic basis. It derives from the idea that all concepts and logics/arguments rely on dominant (common sense) assumptions which allow them to appear stable. Through the processes of deconstruction and double reading, internal contradictions can be made obvious within these concepts and logics and their ‘truth’ can be challenged. These various approaches, despite their differences, can all contribute towards Bourdieu’s project of challenging the naturalisation of power relations. The Postmodern and Critical theories emphasise more the ‘dehistoricisation’ element of naturalisation, and Poststructuralism’s approach can be seen perhaps as a challenge to ‘universalisation’. Accepting Bourdieu’s claim that denaturalisation is a prerequisite for meaningful change, all of these perspectives can contribute to a better future. This can be demonstrated with regards to the denaturalisation of neo-liberalism – a high priority for Bourdieu. Challenging Neo-Liberalism Bourdieu describes neo-liberalism as a ‘mental colonisation’ which operates globally. The sheer scale and pervasiveness of neo-liberalism and the many damaging effects it has, make it a pressing target for criticism – a project which Bourdieu has contributed much to. For Bourdieu, neo-liberalism is deeply complicit in numerous types of symbolic violence. Not only does it ‘betray’ and abandon of all types of social workers, but the ideals of individualisation and self-help serve to hide the role of neo-liberalism in the creation of suffering and ‘[make] it possible to ‘blame the victim’ who is entirely responsible for his or her own misfortune’. Thus, both social workers and those receiving help are denied much of the support they need and exposed to a logic which claims that their worsening situation (meaning tougher working conditions for social professionals) is their own fault. Drawing on Bourdieu’s critique, Fairclough stresses the need to challenge neo-liberalism particularly over the idea that it is ‘inevitable’. ‘Governments of different political complexions take it as a mere fact of life (a ‘fact’ produced by intergovernmental agreements) that all must bow to the logic of the global economy’. This ‘inevitability’ of neo-liberalism, despite powerful grassroots opposition, is evidence of its naturalisation in the eyes of many. This last example, in particular, gives a clear indication of the practical manner in which a denaturalising approach to the status quo can challenge policy. It could also play a significant role in undoing the structural violence experienced by those who are told they must fulfill the requirements of ‘individual responsibility’ and yet find that they cannot. Were these arguments to become well-known, they could reduce self-doubt and suffering by legitimising the difficulties of welfare recipients and those who support them, as well as providing a platform for dissent. Conclusion I have argued that Bourdieu’s approach to social change through denaturalising the status quo is both powerful and useful. Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence stored in the habitus is a helpful way in which to understand people’s acceptance of their own domination. His method for
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!1 0
JANUARY 2016
எŋகll வா'(m எŋகll வளµm மŋகாத த.ெழ12 சŋேக µழŋ5 !
வll6வr ஆ9: 2047
challenging this – ‘to undo the mechanisms of dehistoricisation and universalisation. whereby arbitrary workings of power are allowed to continue’, is broadly accepted by many post-positivist theorists.
The theoretical resonance of Bourdieu’s perspective on symbolic violence means that a variety of Critical, Postmodern, and Poststructuralist tools can be used to challenge the naturalisation of power relations. I have briefly demonstrated a few of the possibilities as applied to neo-liberalism. Bourdieu’s challenge to the status quo, and to neo-liberalism in particular, should be taken very seriously if we are to move beyond our most pressing hidden injustices into a more equal future.
Song Stand by me
No matter who your are No matter where you go in life When the night has come And the land is dark And the moon is the only light we see No I won't be afraid No I won't be afraid Just as long as the people come and stand by me And darling, darling stand by me Oh, now, now, stand by me Stand by me, stand by me If the sky that we look upon Should tumble and fall And the mountain should crumble to the sea I won't cry, I won't cry No I won't shed a tear Just as long as you stand, stand by me And darling, darling stand by me Oh, stand by me Stand by me, stand by me, stand by me Whenever you're in trouble won't you stand by me Oh, now, now, stand by me Oh, stand by me, stand by me, stand by me Darling, darling stand by me Stand by me Oh stand by me, stand by me, stand by me
த.' எŋகll உ<r =c?
!1 1