{"title":"A Great, Restless Stream","authors":"T. Crowley","doi":"10.1215/1089201x-10375409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article explores the thought of philosopher, historian, and activist Sharad Patil, particularly the way he constructs theoretical arguments by drawing on, expanding, and critiquing the insights of his predecessors in radical anti-caste thought, Jotirao Phule and B. R. Ambedkar. Patil advances a particular reading of Phule-Ambedkarism to sharpen his critique of orthodox Marxism and develop a philosophy that could undergird revolutionary egalitarian change in India. The article focuses on two key theoretical insights elaborated by Patil and his reading of Phule-Ambedkarism: one historical, centering on the methodological and ideological importance of rewriting longue durée history; the other political-economic, centering on the way that circuits of exploitation and rule get reproduced. The article attempts to read Patil according to his own methodological and analytic criteria. Patil had little interest in purity of theory or in defending the boundaries of the one true Marxism or Phule-Ambedkarism. Even while critiquing Phule and Ambedkar, Patil insistently asked (as this article too asks): what did their philosophies of history, of knowledge, and of political economy enable them to understand about the past, present, and future of egalitarian struggle in India and beyond?","PeriodicalId":51756,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Studies of South Asia Africa and the Middle East","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Studies of South Asia Africa and the Middle East","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/1089201x-10375409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article explores the thought of philosopher, historian, and activist Sharad Patil, particularly the way he constructs theoretical arguments by drawing on, expanding, and critiquing the insights of his predecessors in radical anti-caste thought, Jotirao Phule and B. R. Ambedkar. Patil advances a particular reading of Phule-Ambedkarism to sharpen his critique of orthodox Marxism and develop a philosophy that could undergird revolutionary egalitarian change in India. The article focuses on two key theoretical insights elaborated by Patil and his reading of Phule-Ambedkarism: one historical, centering on the methodological and ideological importance of rewriting longue durée history; the other political-economic, centering on the way that circuits of exploitation and rule get reproduced. The article attempts to read Patil according to his own methodological and analytic criteria. Patil had little interest in purity of theory or in defending the boundaries of the one true Marxism or Phule-Ambedkarism. Even while critiquing Phule and Ambedkar, Patil insistently asked (as this article too asks): what did their philosophies of history, of knowledge, and of political economy enable them to understand about the past, present, and future of egalitarian struggle in India and beyond?
本文探讨了哲学家、历史学家和活动家Sharad Patil的思想,特别是他如何通过借鉴、扩展和批评其激进反种姓思想的前辈Jotirao Phule和B. R. Ambedkar的见解来构建理论论点。Patil对Phule-Ambedkarism进行了一种特殊的解读,以尖锐地批评正统马克思主义,并发展出一种可以为印度革命性的平等主义变革奠定基础的哲学。本文主要关注帕蒂尔阐述的两个关键理论见解以及他对普勒-安贝德卡莱尔主义的解读:一个是历史的,集中于重写长期的杜氏历史在方法论和意识形态上的重要性;另一种是政治经济,以剥削和统治循环的再生产方式为中心。本文试图根据帕蒂尔自己的方法论和分析标准来解读他。帕蒂尔对理论的纯洁性不感兴趣,也不想捍卫真正的马克思主义或普勒-安贝德卡主义的界限。即使在批评普勒和安贝德卡的同时,帕蒂尔也坚持问道(正如本文所问的那样):他们的历史哲学、知识哲学和政治经济学哲学使他们能够理解印度及其他地区平等主义斗争的过去、现在和未来?