RGV's open letter to Pawan Kalyan on ISM

Before talking about ISM, I must confess that I have long been obsessed with the idea of you starting a political party. I have always admired your honesty and integrity, and yes, I was also mesmerised with your speech at the launch of Jana Sena party.

When I heard that a book called ISM was going to be launched, I was truly ecstatic. Being a voracious reader since childhood, I finished reading Immanuel Kant, Arthur Schopenhauer, Descartes, Wilhelm Hegel, Friedrich Nietzsche, Baruch Spinoza and Ayn Rand back in my engineering college days and moved on to various modern day philosophers, who thought forward in terms of applied philosophy, to aid the world in restructuring rapidly changing societies.

A far superior advancement in those thought processes of all those earlier philosophers is what I actually expected from your ISM. And why I expected that was because of my adulation of your near perfect instinctive intellect,which I have been observing in you ever since I have known you. But when I finally got to read ISM, I was appalled at the elementary school understandings of the great social philosophies articulated by Raju Ravi Tej.

Please note that I am primarily addressing Raju Ravi Tej because he has the primary credit as the author of ISM.I have chosen to express my views on ISM on a public platform only because I have always communicated my views about you through such platforms.

From your gestures, your lines, your expressions and even your pauses at the Jana Sena launch, I can tell you that you have more instinctive wisdom than what is there in the whole of that entire-most-non-explanatory book I have ever read in my life called ISM. I am sorry Pawan, but you truly don't need the over used crutches of here dead and there gone philosophies and that too so falsely represented by Mr Raju Ravi Tej.

I truly believe that maybe because of your busy schedule, you neither read Arthur Schopenhauer's 'The World As Will And Idea' nor Immanuel Kant's 'The Critique Of Reason' and just depended upon Raju Ravi Tej's extremely superficial misreading of it. The basic fact of the matter is that your instinctive originality has been corrupted by his school boy interpretations of Schopenhauer's Metaphysics, Kant's Epistemology, Marx's Dialectic Materialism. To make matters worse, your original thought process has been diverted into a very wrong direction by his complete non understanding of existential nihilism.

Please understand that the best of yesteryear philosophies have already been absorbed into the evolution of modern societies and what is needed now is 100% pure Pawanism and not an adulterated version of it and that too so haphazardly done by mis-representing and mis-interpreting pseudo philosophical understandings of second handers. Philosophy, in its simplest form, is a pursuit of truth, but truth by itself cannot be absolute in an ever changing society. Ayn Rand said, "The pursuit of truth in general is not important but the pursuit of a particular truth is important which helps you in reaching your intended goal."

Ninety percent of ISM doesn't have a single goal oriented direction pointer in comparison to your arrow like vision, which was so clear in the inaugural speech. But the same was absent in the second speech. I suspect it was because your first speech was more you and the Vizag speech was more him (Raju Ravi Tej). Also, the very thought of moulding a relevant ISM for today's requirements to be based on outdated philosophies of bygone eras is like wantonly carrying an unnecessary and fatal burden.Bruce Lee,who, incidentally, apart from being a fighter was also a philosopher, once said, "Knowledge should be used like the steps of a ladder to climb up. You should leave the step behind once you climb up. But if u keep collecting all the steps you have climbed upon, their combined weight will one day not let you climb further. You should never carry what should carry you."

Pawan, I mentioned Bruce Lee because I feel you share his focused intensity and dynamic integrity. Bruce Lee's style is unique because he refused to be influenced by others. I really wish that you understand that only what you feel yourself, and how you express it yourself will be your own unique philosophy. As a well wisher, I implore upon you to get away from diversive, destructive and corruptive influences. Lastly, I want to tell you that yes, I am thoroughly disappointed with ISM but I still have tremendous faith in Pawanism.