Quote Most importantly, no words here on the two fundamental fallacies.
One, Lalgarh, or Nandigram, is from the most backward hinterland of India. No typical Indian village. Hence even its best experience - say from November 2008 to mid-June 2009 - has a very limited applicability. Two, how the public embrace of the Lalgarh resistance by the Maoists proved to be its kiss of death! *A seven month long massive resistance crumbled in less than seven days! * Quote It is worth recalling here a highly fanciful report carried by the Hindustan Times, the dateline being as recent as June 10 - that is still less than a month back (and yet lies in another era) - incorporating an interview with a top-notch Maoist leader operating in that area: Quote [Q:] How long can they [the Maoists] defend the area from the might of the state? [A:] “I know an action (sic) is perhaps impending,” said Koteswar Rao, or Kishnaji, the second in command of the Indian Maoists, in an exclusive interview to the Hindustan Times. “But let them try once.. It will be the last time they will eye this territory.” (Emphasis added.) Unquote [Source: < http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print.aspx?Id=3e7456f2-6c9e-4...<http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print.aspx?Id=3e7456f2-6c9e-44c1-9b35-3af9ec746d7e> >] This was just before the campaign of violence launched by the Maoists sidelining the PCAPA. It started effectively on June 14. The operation of the Joint Forces commenced on June 18. The Lalgarh Police Station, the Ground Zero, reoccupied on June 20. Unquote *A seven month long massive resistance crumbled in less than seven days! * *Who's afraid of the Maoists? At least not the Indian state. It only uses it as a convenient alibi - a manufactured spectre - to crush democratic resistance. * That eminently suits both. That's how Saroj Giri and Buddhadeb both are on the same side to brand Chhatradhar Mahato as a "Maoist". "The Unity of the opposites"! *Not even a pretence of attempt to address the two fundamental fallacies underlined. The deafening silence is only too eloquent. * Unquote Excerpted from the last communication - the concluding part. The response below by "sandy bajeli" ostensibly responds to that! The deafening silence is only too eloquent. Sukla On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 6:00 PM, sandy bajeli <redris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "I don't think so. The State uses any excuse/opportunity to aggrandize >> its repressive power (a point Sukla has been emphasizing) -- it does >> not *necessarily* mean that, even in the state's own internal >> estimation, the threat to it is necessarily particularly great. >> >> In a sense, the State *needs* the CPI(Maoist) to justify its >> repression/aggression -- much in the same way that Israel *needs* >> Hamas to justify its aggression. Likewise, the Maoists *need* the >> State's repression to (at least psychologically) self-justify their >> own draconian tactics. The State and the Maoists each act as the >> other's enabler in this circular relationship." >> > > > While it is true that the anti-people state does need the bogey of Naxalism > to "justify its repression/aggression" but can we deduce an inference, in > a quite mechanical, cyclical fashion, that the Maoists too "*need* the > state's repression to (at least psychologically) to self-justify their own > draconian tactics", and thus vulgarly distorting the very concept of “the > law of unity of opposite”. It appears that Naxals themselves invites the > severe repression on them by espousing violence and even seems to glorify and > indulge in the idea of being a victim of the state repression. It is also > required as a moral (what about political?) justification > for their violent activities among its cadres and mentally prepares them for > their continuous wars. Foisting such an over simplistic one-to-one casual > relationship between the state and the Maoists could lead to an absurd > conclusion that Maoists activities ultimately ends up serving the interests > of the predatory state not to destroy it. This above stated contention is > not only non-dialectical and a historical (if not down right reactionary) > but also more crucially hides its own (anti-Maoists) ideological agenda > that see both the state and the Maoists as undemocratic and violent and thus > clearly mirroring each other. It is typical reflection of the Gandhian > formulation that seeks to equate both the oppressors and the oppressed along > the same plane and finally ends up criminalizing the oppressed for choosing > armed means in their life and death struggle for emancipation. It also > believes in the falsity of the armed struggle leading to liberation, which > anyways has reached to an dead end. > > In this fantastic, fanciful formulation of Sayan that “the State and the > Maoists, each act as the other's enabler in this circular relationship" I > find the resonance of what Saroj Giri has once argued, “an unmistakeable > element of middle-class self-indulgence” that "dissident left" revels in > by vigorously defending an empty neutral spaces while at the same time > observing a kind of political neutrality and equidistant “when large > masses of the people are mobilized in a collective revolutionary project way > beyond these spaces”. The Maoists are the victims of state repression not > because they have asked for it but because of its political belief and it > exists as a political force because of certain subjective and objective > conditions. It has succeeded in making its made its bases in the remote > parts of the country where the most oppressed peasantry and adivasis resides > and has integrated itself with them in order to identify with them. In that > it has taken them decades of work to win and earn the support and love of > the masses. > > The state doesn’t simply unleash its repression on the revolutionary and > democratic struggles just because these movements at a certain juncture of > history have turned violent. Even without the bogey of Naxalism it would > have maintained its basic repressive character. This is the logic of the > system plain and simple that it will act violently whenever and wherever the > interest of the propertied classes will be challenged and harmed whether by > a peaceful or violent struggle. Even the militant struggle of the Adivasis > in Lagarh started as a peaceful agitation against the marauders in Khaki. > But the state betrayed its true character and let the situation persist > leading to further confrontation and later it exploded into full-grown > Second Santhal rebellion. The Naxalites holds no illusion about the > character of the Indian state which is not like a benign Buddha that chants > the mantra of peace and non-violence. It hides the hideous face of the > brutal and violent state. The state also knows all too well that there is a > movement that has the potential to mobilize and organize the emerging vast > constituency of the disaffected under its fold. They have a perspective and > a pro-people agenda. And they have an all India presence and are > concentrated in mineral rich parts of India that is being readied by the > state for the TNC’s sharks for their primitive accumulation. They are the > biggest obstacles in their schemes of things. A perceptive journalist from > tehelka, Ajit Sahi observed that, “unless the Maoists are killed off and > millions of tribal people removed from their forests, hills and fields, > corporate India won’t be able to claim the bounties of their lands?”. Thats > the reason why state is sharpening its knives today in a most grotesque > manner. > > But "it does not *necessarily* mean that, even in the state's own internal > estimation, > the threat to it is necessarily particularly great". > > What does the spiraling budget of the internal security signify? Why is > that thousands of crores is being spend to combat the Naxal menace? Why the > most specialized, hi-tech task forces are being created and > new strategies for containment and the encirclement of the red rebels bases > are being devised. It is the state that believes in the universal truth > that the power does flows from the barrel of the gun and that it lies at the > very core of the existence of the modern bourgeoisie state not just for > preserving its territorial integrity but also for maintaining and > controlling the recalcitrant and rebellious populace. It has never ever > desisted from its use and utilizes it freely as and when the time demands. > The state towards their psychological and ideological warfare has upped its > ante by dubbing the Naxalites as terrorist and imposing a central ban on > them. The neo-liberal assault on the people necessitates a qualitatively > higher level of repressive machinery which the state is prepared and fully > geared up to unleash on the people who will one day defy its "rule of > law". As the present unsustainable system generates more crises it pushes > more and more, the vast majority of the masses towards the brink. There is > one Lagarh tomorrow there could be many. This is the perhaps the greatest > fear for the state. Faced with the prospects of the desperate masses joining > and merging with the shadowy Maoists the state has already sets in motion > its war machine. Considering the fact how the state is even criminalizing > all the democratic spaces that hitherto existed before, albeit in a limited > fashion and baring its fascists fangs it is clear that it is taking the > Naxals threat seriously.Both the state and the "dissident left", however, > share a common concern about this rising totalitarian threat from Maoists > in their own ways and want to see it receding to the background and finally > into a political oblivion. For them it has nothing to offer and clearly it > is not an alternative. > > The dissident left, for their obvious ideological reasons, refusing to > accept the fact that the Maoists are the biggest threat to the predatory > state after the era of valiant nationality struggles in India have almost > reached to a point of stagnation and saturation. It is the only > credible, decidedly anti-state revolutionary force which is slowly and > steadily channelising the anger of the masses againt the criminal > system towards the great cause of establishing a new democratic state. But > it is also ridden with many of the old dogmas and have not shown > the critical spirit to creative apply Maoism, it is the Marxism > and Leninism, of our times, in the concrete context of Indian situation. > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
