After independence FIRST TIME this decade India started appearing on the world stage. The same stage where RUSSIA and CHINA where appearing from day 1. Mr. Communist does not like that ? Do they want to still go in the shell listening to speeched of Mr. Marx? Who is survent .. communist to the ideologies or India to US ? Few more years and if COMMUNIST have there way we will be worst than RUSSIA ! broken into pieces..
RIGHT OR WRONG PM GO ! PM GO !
Whatever happens we will rub shoulders with BIG ones..We will figure out then what is right or wrong ..India is the conutry with its own ideology..Do not worry about communist and capitalist worry about INDIANIST..
Kerala and Bengal are the only places where they are and those 2 states were the worst states in development after so many years. Only in the last few years after Budda's initiatives does Bengal performing better. The Left doesnt have any real points to oppose the deal - they havent made any thing clear yet. Thier only problem is that we are getting into a good relationship with USA. They all the time resort to "Non-aligned" principles of India. "No-aligned" does not mean that you have to be enemies with everyone. In today's world, you need to have good relationship with everyone - including with our time-tested friend Russia, the new friend USA, with our neighbour China among others. This is not cold-war era - it is long gone.
RE:Its a pity that the Left had to have so many MP seats !!!
by Niharika Sharma on Sep 01, 2007 08:11 PM Permalink
Kerala is ahead of rest of the nation in almost all social index. If we are nt blind we will admit it.
Females are still killed at birth all over the country. kerala has higher female population.
We keep rest of the nation uneducated, so that they never question, debate the upperclass. Kerala didnt do that.
its another state, where communal harmony is better then any state ruled by cong, bjp.
u dont hear caste issue in kerala as much as u hear in up, bihar or rest of the nation.
RE:Its a pity that the Left had to have so many MP seats !!!
by Vinodh on Sep 01, 2007 11:41 PM Permalink
Hi Sharma, Kerala has higher female population because majority of their men are working in other states/countries - because they cant rely on thier state if they want to come up in life.
Most of thier money is Gulf money. And whatever improvements we see in Kerala is because of that only.
RE:Its a pity that the Left had to have so many MP seats !!!
by shiva on Sep 01, 2007 08:30 PM Permalink
Mr Sharma,
All the wealth that Kerala has created were due to the enterprising people who went to work and died in inhuman working conditions abroad. Most left with only the shirts on their back and huge mountain of loans.
Families were split and men married and left to work overseas returning every few years. Women left to work as nurses. While the leftists were living in their dream land protecting the unionised govt "servants" while the poorest of the poor suffered.
The progress of Kerala recently is due to the enterprising people returning to start bisiness, despite the leftists standing in the way of progress.
RE:Its a pity that the Left had to have so many MP seats !!!
by Niharika Sharma on Sep 01, 2007 08:08 PM Permalink
Bengal may nt be as discriminately properous as Gujrat or Maharstra are bt villages of bengal are in the best possible shapes. ppl , it means all kind of ppl can survive and live peacefully. Bengal is still one of the low cost place in india. For upper middleclas people, bengal was dying nt for all. Thinking abt bigger population never crime,its yr human nature where u want all to prosper along with u. Well u will never get it unless u become less selfish. IN BENGAL:
Caste politics: non issue.sc/st/obc doesnt rule. reservation is nt issue coz commies look for poor be it brahmin, upperclass or st/sc/obc.
Communal politics: when did u last hear abt communal riots in bengal?compare this with other parts of india.
farmer suicide: did u hear any farmer dying in bengal like nagpur, like andra pradesh ?
Elections r fair: bengal is one of most democratic state in true sense. it regularly goes for election in all layers upto panchayat levels. after last year strong monitoring only a true loser like mamta can accuse abt scientific rigging.
Place for all: Bengal is in fact the least dictatorial. Anybody can come and say anything and ppl will hear and debate with u. they are cultured, wellread and talk vibrantly. non commie ruled states are nt that tolerant in nature. just look at the postings can say that.
RE:Its a pity that the Left had to have so many MP seats !!!
by shiva on Sep 01, 2007 07:57 PM Permalink
They are trying to stay relevant, forget India. What solutions do they have? The only one can be close down all industries, unionise the whole productive set up and live in eternal darkness.
Deng Xia Peng linked wages to productivity and the heavens opened. USA points out about workers welfare, minimum wages etc., and China responds they want to create wealth first before being egalitarian. Some news from China:
1. An electronic factory employs 15000. Nobody wears specs. The boss says they want people with perfect eyesight, if they develop problems later, out they go. It is not his problem where they go, as there are jobs which do not require good eyesight.
2. At the bell, all rush out to have a quick lunch. If late, they get only leftovers.
3. Before the food stalls were commie run. They look the other way at patrons. Take it or leave it. Now, people talk about competition and high service quality everywhere and toursim is a big earner and soon will be biggest destination. 4. Chinese cities have beaten others in music, entertainment, professionalsim etc.
4. There is no water or electrical shortage in the cities. The roads and airports are better than US.
5. They want to make Beijing Olymics the best ever. They have mobilised all and sundry and get the best from the world in terms of technology.
Bardhan & co., go and spend some time in China. The only problem is you will be chased away, if you open your mouth about your theories.
Bardhan should look ahead. The gates of heaven was alteast partially opened by the slow opening of the economy. We need to look not further than WB & Kerala to see hell before. Businessmen were chased away and poverty was excruciating. It is one thing to oppose and call for bandhs. What do they achieve? Miseries to the lowest strata of society. The enterprsing will just leave the shores to where they are welcomed. People like Mittal left and found the gates of heaven in places like Indonesia battling language, culture etc. At least, they could use their initiative than be treated with contempt for working harder than others. People from Kerala left for inhuman working conditions returning every few years to marry and have children, while these leftist could do nothing to look after them. It was misery all around and they flourished in that atmosphere.
How safe is it to dependent on the Middle east for seventy percent of our energy? Hydro potential cannot be exploited due to other hurdles. China despite getting nuclear fuels and machinery from abroad put up an engineering marvel, Three Gorges dam across Yantze river to produce 18000mw of energy. The protesters were put away in style. For them every drop counts as they want progress. Vietnam war veterans are hugging US businessmen to put up all types of business, even telling them, don't worry you are safe, we have no muslims!
The only way Bardhan can solve the energy problem is to bar progress!
Left people (Idiots).. India is not going to heaven. India will stay on Earth and progress with or withyou. Also look at Bengal and Kolkata, it was state of intellectuals and now because of there stupid policies, it is now where near Maharashtra, ujarat, TN, AP. For SEZ also, these stupid people are the one and which created all the fuss. All other state SEZs were and are going smoothly. These people don't want SEZ and it will remove poverty, there vote bank. Throw these people out to CHina.
we have comrades dictating us about imperialistic forces, while china has has most of the trade with usa. WB completely is an antithesis of mr. burden. quite stupid of communists trying to paint a great socialistic future :p
The Russian Revolution of 1917 was not the revolution of the most advanced capitalist societies predicted by Karl Marx. As Hobsbawm puts it, "Capitalism had proved far easier to overthrow where it was weak or barely existed than in its heartlands." (ibid. p.82) Even within Russia, Hobsbawm doubts the ostensibly "progressive" effects of the revolution: "What remained [after revolution and civil war] was a Russia even more firmly anchored in the past... [W]hat actually governed the country was an undergrowth of smaller and larger bureaucracy, on average even less educated and qualified than before." (ibid. p.379)
It is a central thesis of Hobsbawm's book that, from the start, State Communism betrayed the socialist and internationalist vision it claimed to uphold. In particular, State Communism always dispensed with the democratic element of the socialist vision: "Lenin... concluded from the start that the liberal horse was not a runner in the Russian revolutionary race." (ibid. p.58) This anti-liberalism ran deep. In 1933, with Benito Mussolini firmly in control of Italy, "Moscow insisted that the Italian communist leader P. Togliatti withdraw the suggestion that, perhaps, social-democracy was not the primary danger, at least in Italy." (ibid. p.104)
RE:The failure of communism - wikipedia.org
by imran patel on Sep 01, 2007 07:27 PM Permalink
contd...
As for support for international revolution, "The communist revolutions actually made (Yugoslavia, Albania, later China) were made against Stalin's advice. The Soviet view was that, both internationally and within each country, post-war politics should continue within the framework of the all-embracing anti-fascist alliance... There is no doubt that Stalin meant all this seriously, and tried to prove it by dissolving the Comintern in 1943, and the Communist Party of the USA in 1944. (ibid. p.168) "[T]he Chinese Communist regime, though it criticized the USSR for betraying revolutionary movements after the break between the two countries, has no comparable record of practical support for Third World liberation movements." (ibid. p. 72)
On the other hand, he is no friend of the Maoist doctrine of perpetual revolution: "Mao was fundamentally convinced of the importance of struggle, conflict and high tension as something that was not only essential to life but prevented the relapse into the weaknesses of the old Chinese society, whose very insistence on unchanging permanence and harmony had been its weakness." (ibid. p.469) Hobsbawm draws a straight line from this belief to the disastrous Great Leap Forward and the subsequent Chinese famine of 1959-1961.
Communism, Hobsbawm argues, ultimately fell because, eventually, "...hardly anyone believed in the system or felt any loyalty to it, not even those who governed it." (ibid., p.488)
RE:The failure of communism - wikipedia.org
by Prem Mohan on Sep 01, 2007 07:32 PM Permalink
1. Lenin could overthrow the Czars because the Russian state had been weakened by the Great War.
2. Mao overthrew the Nationalist Government in China which has been weakened by the second world war and the struggle against the japanese.
3. In 150 years since Mao, we have no evidence that Communism can succeed. On the other hand, we have many examples of its failure.
4. Do Prakash karat and Sitaram Yechury really believe that they can succeed where Mao and Stalin failed?
THe communists are not INTRESTED IN THE DEVELPEMENT OF iNDIA THEY ARE JUST DOING WHAT HAS BEEN DICTATED BY THEIR MASTERS. EVEN THE BJP WHICH IS WELL AWRE HOW THE DEAL WILL HELP AND WUD HV DONE THE SAME HAD THEY BEEN IN POWER IS JUST PLAYING THE OPPERTUNISTIC POLITICS THE COMMUNISTS ARE BEING FORCED TO DENY THE INDIA THE BENEFITS BUT WHY BJP IS DENYING THE BENEFITS TO INDIA, THEY CALL THEMSELVES THE NATIONLISTS. HOPE VAJPAI WUD PREVAIL UPON THEM AND GUIDE THEM ON THIS ISSUE.
We will be interested about his/their heaven. He/they must thank that we are really tolarent about his/their thought. Try to remember the days of war with China. Whom they favoured to open the gate of heaven for us? Please don't forget the traitors.
Communism is a form of socialism. It puts control of all property into the hands of the government directly. The results have been impressive: over 100 million people killed in the last century.
Communism is the bloodiest form of government ever conceived. It enslaves the entire population, and rules through fear. Because it destroys property rights, it makes the production of wealth almost impossible. Since the use of one's mind is no longer a method of creating wealth, communism has only one method of production: Through hard physical labor. But without the use of reason, even this is severely limited in its scope.
Since the population gets an equal share of the wealth produced, there is virtually no incentive to produce, since one's effort is of negligible benefit. To compensate for this, the government must intimidate and force the people into working hard. Since self-interest is eliminated as a motivation for production, it is replaced by its cruder sort of self-interest in the form of fear of death. The government slaughters citizens to keep the rest in line.
This is encouraged because the government policies are failures. Communism is supposed to produce limitless wealth, making all of its citizens happy and rich. But with the ability to produce impaired, the success never happens. To distract the population from its failure, the government must blame it on others. And anyone guilty enough of harming everyone in society should be killed of course. Communism lives on scapegoats.
Communism is a brutal system of government. It does not just fail to protect individual rights, it establishes a system of violence force. The results have been exactly what one would predict: starvation, poverty, and the slaughter of millions.
