सत्याग्रही भूख हड़ताल की हिंसकता?
.... Politics inspired by dharma has always had a place for the righteous use of force. All wars in modern history have carried with them some justification in the name of the good, the right, or the just. The recourse to armed resistance against an oppressive regime is still widely regarded as a legitimate political method. The national movement in India saw much spirited debate on this question and the Bhagavad Gītā was widely cited as a canonical text justifying the righteous use of force against injustice. Even the Gandhian movement which expressly abjured the use of violence had a place for the exercise of force. The intention behind the non-violent satyagrahi breaking the unjust laws of the state was to bring the violence of the state on his or her body; indeed the intention was to invite the agents of the state to use force against the satyagrahi. When the state refused to employ force, the last weapon of the satyagrahi was the fast unto death, which was a way of doing violence to one's own body and holding the state responsible for it. The relation between violence and the politics of dharma is, I think, deep and inseparable.
  [Chapter 4 'The Rule of Subjects', p.71-72 イタリック原文]

前近代から植民地期および独立後の近現代にかけてのインド在地の政治諸概念の推移、とりわけ「ダルマ」と「ニーティ」をめぐる大枠の議論の流れとはやや外れた試論的な部分(著者自身も上記引用部の直前に「deserves more extended treatment than is possible in the space of this chapter」と断り書きを入れてる)にすぎないのですが、個人的には本書の中でとくに興味深く印象に残りました。とりわけ後半のくだり、最近アンナー・ハザーレーで再度注目の高まっているサッティヤーグラヒー的政治主張手段であるハンガーストライキについての部分が。


by ek-japani | 2011-11-26 14:34 | 書籍

<< まだる いんでぃや わいでぃすこらべりでぃ? >>