Lit.Org - a community for readers and writers Advanced Search
 




Average Rating
0.00

(0 votes)

You must login to vote

A great Twentieth Century Philosopher, Bertrand Russell, said this: "Religion may in most of its forms be defined as the belief that the gods are on the side of the government."

It would be difficult to argue that this is absolutely true, in today's world. It is, in fact, only partially true.

It might be completely true were there no migration of peoples toting their religions to continents where other peoples and their religions abide.

But there are, and will continue to be, such migrations.

When such migrations are destined for Canada, the Canadian government endorses a welcoming dynamic that the media refer to as "reasonable accomodation". Of late, reasonable accomodation has included allowing young girls to wear the hijab to school, allowing young boys to wear the kirpan to school, providing prayer rooms for Muslim students and Muslim workers, depending on where said Muslims spend their weekdays. It has also included voting in elections wearing a burqa, even though the wearing of a burqa makes it impossible to identify the wearer.

Such examples of reasonable accomodation are not, per se, good or bad. They have no intrinsinc value, other than "you are welcome here; make yourselves comfortable", and they could be construed as demonstrations of tolerance and democracy. Do not get me wrong here: I am not saying that immigrants should be acculturated rather than accomodated. I am taking no sides at all.

However, such practices turn Bertrand Russell's affirmation on its side, in that now, governements are on the side of all incoming gods.

Why? Possibly because the words "religion" and "belief", which are core to Mr. Russell's thought, mean very little anymore to Canadians.

The French discovered Canada in 1534 and settled Quebec in 1608, where they founded the oldest city in North America. Quebec thus has a 400 year history of Catholicism, grown weaker and weaker in the past 50 years especially. I can't speak for Protestantism, introduced somewhat later on, to other Canadian Provinces settled by the British, as I have never lived elsewhere, so I don't know if religious practice has weakened there too.

I do know that in my lifetime, I have not seen Judaism weaken around me. Judaism is a religion I have seen as self-affirming and strong, if anything.

Not so the religion of the founders here: crucifixes have been taken off the walls of schools, hospitals, courtrooms, police stations, City Hall, and any public edifices they were formerly seen in. Morning prayers have been removed from schools and hospitals. Morning Mass is attended only by the very old. On Sundays, Catholic churches have many more empty pews than full ones. Religious orders (priests, nuns, monks, brothers) are enrolling very few, if none at all...

So, if religion means so little, why would groups form in streets and demonstrate and decry the reasonable accomodations made for those who are arriving? Why would a town like Herouxville, Quebec (around 90 km from where I live) have its citizens decide to "cast out" them that are different by saying things like "if you wear a rag on your head, we don't want you here". Why would their mayor say things like "we're only saying what others don't dare say". Why?

Well, I don't know. But I would venture to opine that when you're a majority, you don't want to become a minority. Thing is, you can't fall asleep for 50 years, then suddenly wake up screaming, and panicking, over some perceived threat.

It happened while you weren't looking: the government now favours incoming gods over indwelling gods because you have not been worshipping your indwelling gods.

Plain and simple.

Live with it.

------
Of all known institutions, I attend only two: church, in my heart, and school, in yours. Both are subject to demolition. - Lucie Adams, 2007
It is only for poetry to know how many stanzas fit into one caress. - Lucie Adams, 2008


Related Items

Comments

The following comments are for "Of gods and politicians"
by windchime

Lucie
Lucie.

Just a clarification : did "The French discover(ed) Canada in 1534 '.

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 6, 2007 )

Witness For The Prosecution...
Lucie, this is really well written, because you've managed to state your case, point & view, exceptionally well...and, you did it without going off on a tangent, which is my problem in trying to write about things like this. I believe when you say that you are not taking sides, but you do conclude with a rather harsh judgement, which to me says you are not completely uninvolved emotionally.

I do find your perspective on all of this fascinating, very unique take on this issue. Here in the US there is similar anger by the general public over the issue of "religious accommodation" going a bit too far when it comes to the Muslims, religious accommodations that certainly go far beyond anything that has ever proceeded it, a whole new precedence in fact! There are people her in the US who are quite vocal about their disdain for this type bend over backwards accommodation, and those who are against the increased costs/burden to the American taxpayer these type of accomodations bring.

Generally though, most Americans are non-involved and seem apathetic over this issue and remaining silent.

I think though, that I feel as you do, not that there is really a comparison like what you have described with the French Catholics, but more of a Gee, look what happens when you're sleeping and not giving a damn. By the time you do wake up and smell the coffee, well, too late. Your opinion no longer means a shit. Too bad, and I told you so!

Too little, too late..."a day late and a dollar short" as they say.

I've got to admit though that I am one of those apathetic Americans on this subject. I see no harm in accommodating someone religiously, and in the Muslim faith there is a need for a little more accommodation than most, but so what? As long as it doesn't cross the line between Church and state issues.

But in the case of wearing a burqa for a drivers license pic, as one woman tried to do here in the US, it went to court and she lost the case. That's where I draw the line. I mean give me a break already, wearing a burqa for a driver's license pic? There are laws in the US that do not allow people to wear masks in public, and some of these NO MASK WEARING laws came about as a result of the Klu Klux Klan. Can you imagine if it were legal for someone to wear a Klu Klux Klan sheet over their head while working as a government worker at a US voting/poll center or city policewomen and men being allowed to do the same? A little ridiculous, intimidating, and insane risk to security and public interest, right? Duh, maybe, you think?

Anyway, thanks for posting this, Lucie. Good job.

( Posted by: TheRealKarmaTseringLhamo [Member] On: October 6, 2007 )

Lucie
Lucie

First of all ,thank you for sharing that quote from Russell. He certainly did possess that unique ability to cut through Gordian Knots -to get to the very heart of the matter.At his incisive best he could make many a lesser intellect squirm . The point he makes about "Religion ..(being the) belief that the gods are on the side of the government' is right on target - more so now.

That said , I am not sure what you mean by saying that the French 'discovered' Canada - nor what you mean by alluding to 'the religion of the Founders'.

The French could most definitely not have 'discovered' Canada -considering that a native population was already around .That too ,long before the French 'discovery 'of the place.

And re. the matter of religion - wouldn't it be best if we let sleeping dogs lie and moved on. Haven't enough wars been fought , blood split and grief caused - all in the name of religion . (The Abrahamic Religions viz. Christianity, Judaism and Islam between them ,visiting more tragedy on humankind than all the others put together.)

However the disquiet you voice is something that cannot be wished away . And the sooner the powers-that-be faced up to it squarely the better. Sweeping it under the carpet , taking the line of least resistance , pandering to minorities etc. could well turn out to be very dangerous . For the ensuing backlash may well give the Holocaust quite a run for its money -in terms of sheer malevolence ,savagery and viciousness.

In an ideal world ,immigrants ( particularly those of the 'wrong ' race and skin colour ) would never have been there in the first place.

But then neither would 'Empire' -nor its modern reincarnation viz.Gobalization.


( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

RJKT
It was on purpose that I stayed away from the issue of colonization, but I guess it's okay to go there now that you allude to it. That Jacques Cartier "discovered" Canada is in all the history books, because he did. That aboriginal peoples had lived on the continent for 10,000 years prior to that speaks to "colonization" and it's many other opinion pieces that would be required to tackle that. Fact remains that the aboriginal people here did not "discover" Cartier and his fleet when that fleet landed here. It was, really, the other way around. The aboriginal peoples did not write down any records of the arrival of the colonists settling. It was the colonists who did that. Like I said, colonization is a whole other argument on its own.

The "founding" people are just that, founding people. The French, led by Samuel de Champlain founded Quebec City in 1608. That too is in all the history books. Before 1608, the aboriginal people living on the land that became Quebec City, did not found Quebec City, or build its fortifications, or call it Quebec City. The "arriving" "colonists" did that. And those arriving colonists were Roman Catholic. The aboriginal people they "colonized", were not.

Also, like I said, I'm not for or against acculturation, any more than I'm for or against accomodation. That's tantamount to letting sleeping dogs lie, as you call it, I think.

But, most importantly, I don't particularly want to mix the apples and oranges that immigration and colonization are...

All peoples have their history. If your people have been around and still live in the same geographical area as they did 10,000 years ago, then good! But that's not the case everywhere and for everyone...

That you disagree with my point which turns Russell's quote on its side (rather than gods being on the side of the government, the government is on the side of incoming gods, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE) is fine. I'm not omniscient. I just have this as an opinion.

As for philosophers, let's take Confucius, for example, who said "Hold fast to tradition, but constantly put it on trial, to verify that it stays valid and has not been falsified by selfish interest."

I would argue that this statement, dated circa 500 BC, is more universally applicable, and timeless than the quote from Russell I opined on...

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Lena
Thank you for recognizing and acknowledging that I did not go off on a tangent. As I stated just now to RJKT, it would certainly have been easy to throw colonization into this mix...

Having your picture taken for a driver's license wearing a burqa is the same as voting wearing a burqa. You can vote 500 times, and you can give away 499 drivers' licenses, because your face, being your identity, is covered from the camera, and from the poll attendants. That's a no-brainer. I also think that after obtaining a driver's license wearing a burqa, the issue of peripheral vision while driving the vehicle would need some consideration....But that's just my opinion.

You're right about my final two lines in this piece: they're terse and could be construed as taking sides, I suppose.

Way back, when I sent my son to Catholic school, and my friend Faiga sent her son to Yeshiva, schools were denominational. In the case of "what was already here", School Boards were denominational too. We had the Catholic School Board and the Protestant School Board. Now, everything's gone non-denominational, and so, in the same building that once had a crucifix in the auditorium, the auditorium, or part of it, now becomes a Muslim prayer room. I'm not saying I'm against what it has become, I'm just saying it's too late to "go back to before"...

Thanks again for taking time to discuss this with me here.

As for apathy, it has consequences. So does activism. Nothing is without consequences...

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Keep it simple, I suppose
Lucie,
very good insight and great topic for discussion. Here in the USA similar occurrences of removing anything that bears religious sybolism from schools, court houses, state seals....it all comes down to political correctness.

This week in the USA we celebrate Columbus day; a federal holiday that honors the explorer whose suposedly discovered America. Well, if you read history there is still a lot of debate about that. But we give credit to Christopher Columbus, and celebrate his discovery.

Meanwhile, the Native Americans in Denver are protesting that the annual Colubus day parade terrorizes their children. Yesterday the Native Americans protested, got arrested, poured (fake) blood all over the streets, all because the Italian Americans are celebrating with a parade that honors a discovery.

According to the Native Americans, Columbus invaded their homeland, introduced disease, stole riches, enslaved the people, killed many......

Yeah, that is all true; and it is just as you say Lucie, because the Native Americans sat back and let it happen, with open arms, and by time they figured out it was time to fight back it was too late.

BW

( Posted by: BWOz [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Brian
Yes, everybody blames everybody else for everything they don't like...It's human nature, except when religion and politics get into the fray, and then, it can become somewhat ugly.

I like very much the point you make that proves history repeats itself: Native Peoples "let it happen", and so, now, do the "majorities" that populate this North America of "ours"...

Still, colonization is another matter for another opinion piece/article/essay. It deserves its own space, and I'm not sure I should be the one to tackle it.

Yes, colonization can and does include a process of invasion. And it happened, and it can't un-happen. It is a reality. In my own country of origin, Poland, the country itself was near-erased from the map of Eastern Europe more than once due to invasions. Even James Michener picked up on that historical fact in his novel, "Poland".

North Americans are by no means the first and only people at odds with the perceived injustices perpetrated on them throughout history. Further, we are in our infancies, as countries go, and our perceived iniquities are still in their phase of innocence.

Columbus Day is a holiday to commemorate Christopher Columbus who discovered America. That is a fact. One can like it or not. Freedom of choice, freedom of expression through fake blood, whatever.

Once again, America did not discover Christopher Columbus in the middle of the Atlantic while his three ships were still sailing...So yes, he "discovered" America. That European colonists also showed "invasive" behaviours, this is secondary to discovery.

Christopher Columbus came because he was able to. Period. Same as we undergo MRI's because we are able to. Progress gives us "abilitites". And the choices we make thanks to those abilities have consequences. It all comes down to what we want to do with the consequences: accept them, protest them, attempt to minimize their impact, attempt to rewrite history, etc.

It's up to us.

BTW, I take it as a great compliment that you see me as insightful. Thank you for that!

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Separate fairness from favor
I had a really long comment for here... but I figured it had gotten to the point of being its own post. Keep an eye out.

Thanks for the inspiration, Lucie.

( Posted by: andyhavens [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Lucie
Lucie

Thank you for that very detailed reply. It was greatly appreciated - in particular the information on Champlain .

My comments w.r.to yours as follows:

1. This may well be splitting hairs : but shouldn't one be really saying that Champlain "discovered' the place for the French . Else one could well end up making statements like : " Vasco da Gama 'discovered' India ' , "Marco Polo 'discovered' China' , "The Dutch / Portuguese 'discovered' Southern Africa' etc..

2.My comment about 'letting sleeping dogs lie ' was made solely in the context of Religion -which has - time and again - been shown to be a very very rabid dog .

3.Far from turning Russell's point on its head ,events ,both in the past -and down to the present day - have only reinforced it. Strange as it may seem ,it can even be extended to take in your point that now " governements are on the side of all incoming gods'.

4. Appeasement of minorities and their 'incoming gods' is far more dangerous than playing with fire. As I've said ,the ensuing backlash could well make the Holocaust seem lily-white and saintlike in comparison.

5. If only "Empire' (and its post -war American incarnation) hadn't happened ..For then the North Americans could have kept North America to themselves , the Europeans , the whole of Europe to themselves - and so on.

And the immigrants would have remained where they should all along have been - at home.Rather than swarming all over your land , snatching the bread out of people's mouths , thumping the table demanding authorities bend over backwards to accord sacrosanct status to their cultural mores and religious sensitivities , screaming bloody murder at every perceived ( or imaginary ) slight etc.

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 7, 2007 )

Andy
I see you have a post on the front page and have not been to read it yet, but will, shortly, after I respond to a couple more comments here.
Thanks for picking up on this.

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 8, 2007 )

Francisco
Thank you for seeing impartiality on my part in the choices I made when writing this piece.

Besides the choice I made of not going into the topic of colonization, I also made the choice of not going into the topic of emigration, which includes, as you say so well yourself, the whole aspect of "go back". As the child of immigrants, and not a Native American myself, I'm in no position to risk saying anything to anyone that would prompt them to send me "back". My paternal grandfather arrived here from Poland in 1905. May father was born in Canada. My mother arrived here after nine years of various "displacements" which began in Poland in 1940. Which makes my brother and I "barely" Canadian by some standards.

Christopher Columbus discovered a new place to take a shit in 1492. But he also saw that the toilet he'd found was habitable, exploitable and resource-full. And then, the taking advantage of that got underway, in the form of what history books call colonization.

BTW, shrines in homes do exist. When my son delivered furniture, he told us one day that he'd been to take something through the garage because that was the only feasible entry for the large pieces, and on the garage's back wall, there was a huge mural representing Osama Bin Laden. My son said it gave him the creeps.

I love how you rant! Of course, it's easy to get "transported" (pun regrettable) by and into this topic. Thanks for taking part.

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 8, 2007 )

RJKT
A "discovery" by definition, is something found which had not been previously known to exist. So they all "discovered" whatever it was they discovered because it had not been previously know to exist FOR THEM. But like I said, I'm not discussing colonization in this piece, which, by Francisco's standards, is an essay, I guess.

Because Bertrand Russell isn't here to discuss this, I prefer to take his thought to the letter and not extend it. I prefer to argue its timelessness and universality as compared to the timnelessness and universality of Confucius' thought, for example. I have a tendency not to want to distort what great thinkers have said. So, in my mind, gods being on the side of governments is in no way akin to governments being on the side of incoming gods. The two are not extensions of one another. That is my opinion. Yours is valid too, but I disagree. No harm in that.

Whatever backlash comes from us mild-mannered Canadians being who we are, may or may not come in my lifetime. I do no bellyache over this.

As to your number five point, see Francisco's comment, and my response to it, with this addition: European immigrants to Canada like my paternal grandfather and my mother will all tell you the same thing: those born here accuse them of stealing the bread out of their mouths but all who say this were either too lazy or too chicken to accept the jobs immigrants had accepted. This animosity still smolders. "We did the jobs nobody wanted to do" is in the history books too. Take just the example of the Chinese building the railroad.

(Plus, the Polish are Catholics, so no contentious religious issues were ever at stake.)

Today's immigrants come from countries where they had domestic service in their homes, so yes, entitlement to much will be on their agendas. Today's immigrants don't come here to escape material inadequacy. They come to escape political inadequacy.

I disagree with not welcoming immigrants, RJKT. It is, once again, all about the consequences of how we welcome them.

Thanks for your viewpoints. They are all well-founded.

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 8, 2007 )

Lucie
Lucie.

Thanks as always for your thoughtful reply. I guess we could discourse over semantics of it ( the word 'discovery') till the cows come home. So perhaps its best left at that.

I quite understand what you mean . In those times anyone (other than a white Anglo Saxon ) was looked down upon and willy-nilly became the object of racial slurs and abuse. And people from East Europe i.e. the Slavs , were fair game.

The sheer hypocrisy of it all never ceases to amaze : berating the Nazis for their notions of Germanic superiority -while espousing very similar mind-sets themselves .

Fortunately for you, all that is firmly in the past.Most white westerners no longer draw such fine distinctions - having 'circled the wagons' around themselves.

The racial bogeyman is now the brown Asian :who earlier ,was merely an oddity -living thousands of miles away in some Asian boondock .

All that changed once they began to swarm onto the shores of our 'fair' land in ever increasing numbers. To compound matters, many turned out to be extremely well qualified - and ended up taking many of the jobs that the average westerner could only dream about.Or ending up as eminently successful entrepreneurs.

That turned out to be like rubbing salt into open wounds - and way too much to bear.

So if these guys know what's best for them they'd lie low, keeping themselves to themselves . And positively refrain from flaunting it.

However ,should they continue ( as they're doing now ) to display their in-your-face attitudes - they'd just be asking for it.

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 8, 2007 )

RJKT
I wasn't planning on having to discuss racism on this post, which was originally focused on religion and politics.

I wasn't planning on it, but I guess I should have expected it.

I try to live from an all men equal kind of mindset, and see people as people before I see them as bogeymen. Whoever obtains financial success in this life through hard work is to be congratulated no matter who they are, and no matter when they got to this continent. This takes nothing away from anyone. Everybody has opportunity. One person's "missed opportunity" should not be berated while another's "opportunity taken" is condemned. At least IMO. You believe they should keep themselves to themselves. I don't. Both beliefs are okay.

But back to the incoming gods this was originally about: those gods are worshipped as those people practice their religions. As opposed to our indwelling gods, who are not worshipped through religious practices having ceased.

And it's really about what the consequences of THAT may be.

Thank you for engaging in discussion on this post.



( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 8, 2007 )

Thank you
Lucie.

Thank you for that thoughtful comment. If only there were more like you , the world might well have been a more peaceable place.

The sad fact is that , however we might wish it were otherwise , racism keeps cropping up .More so in Western multicultural societies. Defying all attempts to wish it away.

One is often left wondering what blond, blue-eyed , white westerners and black Africans ,brown Asiatics and 'yellow' Mongoloids could possibly have in common. Or even how such disparate-looking races could have been descended from a common set of ancestors.

The chasm that separates them seems unbrigdeable .To take a small but telling example :most Westerners are perceived ( increasingly so in our unipolar world ) by the 'others' as being so full of themselves -with an inherent sense of their superiority over all others.

Now how does one go about countering perceptions like that -which only vitiate the atmosphere , harden attitudes on either side and render a genuine reaching out (and a meeting of minds) well-nigh impossible.

Once again let me thank you for both the quotes from Russell and Confucius. True pearls of wisdom - and manna for the minds seeking to open out to the infinite possibilities that lie beyond our all-too-tawdry insularity and cliquishness .

Few could have voiced it more eloquently than Tagore ( virtually unknown in the West):

"Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow
domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the
dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought
and action--
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.'

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 9, 2007 )

Tagore
Unknown to me, anyway! Will research.

"Where the mind is led forward by thee": yes! and would that every mind be open to being led forward...

Thank you for this quote, RJKT, obviously from an enlightened thinker.

And may every blessing be yours!

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 9, 2007 )

...
Does anybody know the average annual snowfall in Fargo, North Dakota???

( Posted by: kilgoretrout [Member] On: October 9, 2007 )

Terence
40.9 inches.

Would you like to say something about what I posted?

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 9, 2007 )

Tagore
Lucie

Hope this whets your interest in this man:

1.One of the earliest Nobel Laureates in Literature . In 1913.
2.Knighted by the Brits .However ,he renounced his Knighthood in 1919 after the Jalianwala Bagh Massacre.
3.Great friend of Gandhi . His hymn "Ekla Cholo ' ( Walk alone ) was reputedly Gandhi's favourite.
4.Several distinguished men served as his Private Secretaries. One of the earliest , a Major Leonard Elmhirst ,subsequently married the Whitney heiress. One of his later secretaries was the grandfather of the Economics Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen.
5.Very poignantly ,on his last day at home ,before he went off to die in the War , the poet Wilfred Owen , kept repeating to his mother the following lines from Tagore : "When I go from hence , let this be my parting word , that what I have seen is unsurpassable ' .

Sadly few in the West , today ,have ever heard of Tagore. (What chance would he stand against the greats like J.K.Rowling or J.D. Salinger .)

Which is why ,one was most surprised to see Martin Sheen reciting one of Tagore's poems to an elite , otherwise well-informed , New York audience . Virtually all of whom had never even heard of Tagore -much less read any work by him.

A personal note : in the 40s and 50s my late father became very good friends with Tagore's son .

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 10, 2007 )

RJKT/Tagore
Yes, I am very much interested in finding out more than what is online about Tagore. I hope to be, albeit busy preparing for a month-long trip, library-bound today or tomorrow, so I can spend some hours immersed in searching...

You've already introduced me to Tagore, RJKT. Now it's up to me to graciously become acquainted with his writings. And I will.

Thank you again for sharing your knowledge.

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 10, 2007 )

Windy...
40.9 inches..I thought for sure it was 51.8...Seriously though I did think about this and your viewpoint is very Neil Gaimanesque and that is something I can appreciate...do our old gods die in the face of our unbelief???? Do we in the West with our spiritually underbeaten hearts have a right to criticize what is obviously a very serious devotion to the seeking of God???? Is our Over Reliance on Reason and Intellect in the West the Natural progression of human society or just a modern aberration which will conclude in the destruction of said society..be it bombs or melting glaciers...??? Honestly I have not yet decided this in my mind...Some days I think we'd all be better on our knees in a mosque or praying to a head of lettuce and living in trees...other days I'm glad I can sit on the couch on sunday morning watching a porno and eating several twinkies in a row and laugh as the world collapses around me...I suspect I'm for the gods and the ritual and the search for meaning that science and reason will never be able to provide...I just wish we could seek God without killing anyone in the process...Too much to ask, huh?

( Posted by: kilgoretrout [Member] On: October 10, 2007 )

Terence
I googled the Fargo snowfall yesterday...

(BTW that movie, "Fargo", is still one of the best flicks I've ever seen!)

gods, gawd... You know, like it or not, most gods behind organized religions, sought or not, are male and patriarchal. When we were kids, we did the "my daddy can beat up your daddy" thing. We grew up. But, as soon as we want our governments to stand behind our gods, we yell "my god can beat up your god". And no, we haven't found a way to do that without killing...Mind you, Buddhist monks seek God without killing...

Praying to a head of lettuce, eh? If Tom Hanks can worship a soccer ball, anything goes!!!

I think "the right to criticize" is key to your response here. We have many rights in this society. That's why those we criticize have a right to criticize our criticisms.

And, once more, it's the consequences of these dynamics that make the ultimate difference.

Lucie

( Posted by: windchime [Member] On: October 10, 2007 )

You're welcome
Lucie

I really owe it to you . And the interchange we just had.

Thanks to it I re-read much more on Tagore than i'd otherwise have done.

Cheers

( Posted by: RJKT [Member] On: October 10, 2007 )





Add Your Comment

You Must be a member to post comments and ratings. If you are NOT already a member, signup now it only takes a few seconds!

All Fields are required

Commenting Guidelines:
  • All comments must be about the writing. Non-related comments will be deleted.
  • Flaming, derogatory or messages attacking other members well be deleted.
  • Adult/Sexual comments or messages will be deleted.
  • All subjects MUST be PG. No cursing in subjects.
  • All comments must follow the sites posting guidelines.
The purpose of commenting on Lit.Org is to help writers improve their writing. Please post constructive feedback to help the author improve their work.


Username:
Password:
Subject:
Comment:





Login:
Password: