<?xml 
version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL formatting" type="text/xsl" href="https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/spip.php?page=backend.xslt" ?>
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
>

<channel xml:lang="en">
	<title>Mainstream Weekly</title>
	<link>https://mainstreamweekly.net/</link>
	<description>Mainstream Weekly ISSN (Mainstream Online) : 2582-7316
Author Submission Guidelines
Mainstream's Privacy Policy
Donate to Support Mainstream Weekly</description>
	<language>en</language>
	<generator>SPIP - www.spip.net</generator>
	<atom:link href="https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/spip.php?id_auteur=506&amp;page=backend" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

	



<item xml:lang="en">
		<title>Between Livelihood and Development: Protest against the Vizhinjam Port Project in Kerala | John S Moolakkattu &amp; Jos Chathukulam</title>
		<link>https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article12939.html</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article12939.html</guid>
		<dc:date>2022-12-16T00:40:46Z</dc:date>
		<dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:creator>John S. Moolakkattu, Jos Chathukulam</dc:creator>



		<description>
&lt;p&gt;Abstract &lt;br class='autobr' /&gt;
This paper analyses the agitation of fishers in the Vizhinjam port area in Kerala to understand the context, issues, and nature of the protest and how it can be seen as a part of the livelihood protection movement by the fishers based on a critique of the neoliberal model of big development. It also discusses the leadership role of the Latin Catholic church and the metaphors and symbolisms used to legitimate and garner support for the agitation. The paper ends by proposing the (&#8230;)&lt;/p&gt;


-
&lt;a href="https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/rubrique121.html" rel="directory"&gt;2022&lt;/a&gt;


		</description>



		

	</item>
<item xml:lang="en">
		<title>India-China Row Over Arunachal Pradesh: A New Irritant or Mere Posturing?</title>
		<link>https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article1760.html</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article1760.html</guid>
		<dc:date>2009-11-17T13:00:44Z</dc:date>
		<dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:creator>John S. Moolakkattu</dc:creator>



		<description>
&lt;p&gt;China had always been a paradox for India, and a potential threat the country had downplayed as long as Pakistan was seen as the main adversary. After the 1962 war, India had exercised moderation while dealing with China as it did not want encirclement by two hostile countries. China had been obsessed with the presence of the Dalai Lama in India, particularly after it became sensitive to global public opinion in the wake of its economic reforms. The country also seemed to be uneasy at the (&#8230;)&lt;/p&gt;


-
&lt;a href="https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/rubrique96.html" rel="directory"&gt;November 2009&lt;/a&gt;


		</description>



		

	</item>



</channel>

</rss>
