Thursday, August 23, 2012

HERE IS SIX QUESTIONS TO EVERY COMMUNIST OF INDIA.........



1. With the demise of the Soviet Union, and China clearly and consciously taking the capitalist road (plus one-party rule, just like Hitler did), what hope is left for Marxism? Cuba, North Korea and the Indian state of Tripura?

2. Whenever Communists are told of the success of Capitalist economies they always produce
 spurious arguments, like you cannot compare Singapore with India, and so on. But the best comparison to illustrate the failure of Communism is between North and South Korea, even better than between erstwhile West and East Germany. East Germany had to erect a wall so that their Germans would not escape their Workers' Paradise to enter 'decadent, capitalist' West Germany. North and South Korea have almost the same area, same population, same ethnic stock, same language, same culture, except that South Korea is a capitalist democracy, while north is a 'hereditary Communist state'. South Korea is in the first world; North Korea suffers from famine and a chronically malnourished population, and is branded as a 'rogue state'.

3. Maoists abuse nationalism, Indian Army, police, state, everyone, but are strangely reticent about the sort of social order they want to bring about if they are successful (some hope!). What they want to bring about is Mao's and Pol Pot's type of rule. Both of these were nothing less than demons. Estimates on the number killed during his disastrous experiment called 'Great Leap Forward' (1958-1960) vary from 18 million to 45 million of his countrymen, and those during the 'Cultural revolution' (1966-68) may run to tens of millions. Pol Pot, communist dictator of Cambodia envisaged a state where there would be only peasants and soldiers, and everyone else was to be killed. He killed off an estimated 21% of his population. IS THIS THE SORT OF SOCIAL ORDER THE MAOISTS WANT TO BRING ABOUT? 

4. Lenin died from General Paralysis of the Insane (GPI), a complication of Syphilis, a sexually transmitted disease, which one normally gets from whoring around. Is this type human relationship the communists are envisioning? That is, to bring equality and brotherhood by indiscriminate sexual intercourse with countless men and women and die peacefully of STDs (sexually transmitted diseases)?

5. Mao Zedong was an incurable womanizer and used to frolic with teenage girl when he was a decrepit old man. Is this sort of character the communists want to build for the progress of humankind?

6) Communists always claim that the emancipation of women is their noble goal. Mao even described the condition of women in society as one of ‘daily rape’, defended women’s emancipation and argued that it could only take place after a complete overhaul of Chinese society. But we see that the Soviet red army raped thousands of German and Austrian women after the fall of Berlin in 1945 and perhaps two million women over its occupied territories, thousands of women were systematically raped by Mao’s red guards throughout the great leap forward and the Pol Pot’s zealots in Cambodia and elsewhere in the communist world. The Committee for Human Rights in North Korea estimates that up to 200,000 North Koreans are imprisoned in concentration camps of the country now and many thousands of women are being subjected to daily rape. So is this type of freedom communists want to bring about for women?





By A Former ABVP JNU Activist..............
Debabrata Mandal

Saturday, August 11, 2012

TWIST IN THE TALE - Secular politics is harming the Bodo minority in Assam...By Swapan Dasgupta



It is an undeniable fact that in the hierarchy of what passes off as ‘national’ news, North-eastern India occupies the lowest rung. While periodic lip-service is paid to the need to rectify matters and bring this much-neglected part of India into the ‘mainstream’ discourse, the bewildering complexity of the region and its relative inaccessibility has ensured that the North-east remains an afterthought, a sort of Fourth World in the Third World.

So it was with last week’s violent clashes in Kokrajhar and Dhubri districts of Assam that left more than 50 people being killed and an estimated four lakh people being uprooted from their homes. A ‘humanitarian crisis’—the newest coinage of mediaspeak—of this magnitude should have led to a furore in the chat shows, with sundry human rights bodies joining the race for competitive indignation. After all, a far lesser crisis in the Kandhamal district of Orissa in 2009 had attracted far greater attention, not to speak of the Gujarat riots of 2002 which continue to dominate media space.

To argue, as has often been done, that the editorial classes are naturally callous and prefer to focus on a relatively small protest in Delhi’s Jantar Mantar is only part of the story. The reality is that the media loves simple categories—as, for example, Hindu ‘fanatics’ versus helpless Christians in Kandhamal and the ‘mass murderer’ Narendra Modi versus beleaguered Muslims in Gujarat. The situation in the northern bank of the Brahmaputra, unfortunately, was too complex to present as a clash between ‘good’ and ‘evil’. Was it, as many insisted, a ‘communal’ clash involving Hindu Bodos and Muslim settlers who had arrived from what is now Bangladesh? Alternatively, was it an ethnic clash involving the indigenous Bodos and Bengal-speaking immigrants? The underlying presumption was that while a ‘communal’ clash was unacceptable, an ‘ethnic’ conflict was nominally less damning.

Then there were the invariable sub-plots that excite the TV channels. Was the Assam Government too slow to respond? Why did the Tarun Gogoi Government not take pre-emptive measures after the murder in Kokrajhar of , first, two Muslims on July 6 and the retaliatory violence that led to the killing of four Bodo activists on July 20? Was there any basis to Chief Minister Gogoi’s assertion at a press conference last week that the Army had refused to act until it got a sanction from Defence Minister A.K. Antony—a process that took two days? Is there any basis to the allegation by the Bodo Tribal Council chief Hagrama Mahilary that armed Bangladeshis from across the international border had incited the violence? The answers to most of these questions will remain unanswered, even after the official inquiry committee eventually submits its report. However, what is clear is that in trying to slot the violence into pre-determined compartments and exploring the vexed question of administrative culpability, the media and the political class are taking evasive action. There is an uncomfortable dimension to this ethnic-communal flare-up in Kokrajhar and Dhubri that decision-makers would rather not address, not least because they have no answers to offer.

That the origins of the violence lie in demographic upheaval Assam has been witnessing for the past 100 years is undeniable. Thanks to waves of immigration from the region that is now Bangladesh, the population of Assam increased from 3.29 million in 1901 to 14.6 million in 1971, a 343.7 per cent increase compared to the all-India increase of nearly 150 per cent in the same period. Public intellectuals in Assam have stressed that the increase of the Muslim population has been disproportionate. In an unusual intervention last week, Election Commissioner M.S. Brahma suggested that the details of the 2011 Census may reveal that 11 of the 27 districts of Assam now have a Muslim majority.

While the issue of ‘illegal immigration’ from Bangladesh has formed an important part of the public discourse of the Assamese-speaking Hindus of the Brahmaputra Valley, it has become a paramount issue for the Bodo-speaking minority living in the areas that constituted the undivided Goalpara district. The Bodo-speaking minority which accounts for only five per cent of the population perceives a dual threat to their existence: a cultural challenge from the Assamese-speaking majority and a physical challenge from Bangladeshi Muslims who constitute the majority in Dhubri and whose presence is increasingly being felt in the Bodo heartland of Kokrajhar district.

The emergence of militant Bodo sub-nationalism in the 1990s was an attempt to cope with these twin challenges and led to the formation of the semi-autonomous Bodo Territorial Council in 1993. However, much of the political gains from militant identity politics have been offset by the growing assertiveness of the Muslim community. The rise of the All India United Democratic Front led by Maulana Badruddin Ajmal, the All Assam Minority Students Union and the Asom Mia Parishad has triggered a frontal Bodo-Muslim confrontation. Tensions have further risen following the AIUDF demand that the BTC be abolished because Bodos no longer constitute a majority in large areas governed by it. In an astute move, Ajmal has taken care to develop links with major Muslim organisations throughout India to ensure that the concerns of his social base are easily translated into ‘national’ Muslim concerns.

Confronted with this seemingly intractable situation, both Delhi and Dispur have fallen back on homilies. Following his tour of the relief camps earlier this week, (then) Home Minister P. Chidambaram took recourse to pious platitudes: “There are people from a variety of communities living in Assam now. Ultimately, people of all communities would have to learn to live together in peace.” There was not a word about border fencing or possible modifications to the farcical Illegal Migrants Detection Tribunal Act. Dependant on Bodo support in Dispur but equally concerned with Muslim support at an all-India level, the Congress has very little space to manoeuvre. It can merely hope that any future conflict can be averted by more efficient administrative measures. Meanwhile, ground reports suggest an ongoing process of ethnic cleansing. Bodos in Dhubri are moving to Kokrajhar, and dispossessed Muslim of Kokrajhar are moving to Dhubri. Some may even find their way into West Bengal.

In the past, India’s liberal intelligentsia has been very vocal on the so-called ‘communal’ question, particularly the harassment of minorities. Yet, the usual suspects have been strangely quiet over this monumental upheaval that has shaken Assam. The reasons are obvious. The familiar stereotypes centred on brutish majoritarianism and vulnerable minorities don’t quite fit the bill in Dhubri and Kokrajhar. What we have instead is a very vulnerable indigenous tribal minority being squeezed from all sides, but particularly by the communal assertiveness of another minority that can leverage its national clout for local advantage.In 2004, when the religious demography of the 2001 Census showed some strange results for Assam, the intelligentsia buried its head in the sand and ensured that all meaningful discussions on the subject were guillotined. The same process is once again at work over recent events in Assam.

In 1947, the Muslim community was a frightened minority, unsure of its position in an India that never took too kindly to the painful Partition in two wings. In 2012, Indian secularism is deeply entrenched and has ensured both dignity and political empowerment to religious minorities, sometimes by way of exceptional consideration. A problem, however, is likely to arise if the empowerment of minorities becomes a byword for injustice to others. For the Bodo minority of Assam, the practice of secular politics is coming to imply the possible extinction of their very identity.