Its a nice article written by Mr. Shenoy who is a well known anti-socialist or more specifically anti-CPI(M). This is certainly a valid stand but it would be good if one keeps this prelude in mind.
The newly born CPI was confused during 40's between International Socialists vs. Nationalists which is probably understandable. If one says that during the birth of INC, S. N. Banerjee et al. decided to work together with British (in fact historians say that it was precisely created to suppress the anti-British feeling among the mass), so whatever nationalist stand they take today is meaningless, will that be acceptable Mr. Shenoy?
On the point of supporting Indira Gandhi's government, the communist party actually got split! So, it not just a light-hearted commedy, Mr. Shenoy. It had a much deeper implication than you think.
V. P. Singh's government got the support of lefts but its stability didn't suffer from them. And so was the case of Devegowda and Manmohan Govt.
Left parties had clear principles from the beginning. Have you ever seen them changing camps like changing clothes? Was there any accusation ever that one left MP could be purchased? One may not like their ideology but their action was always firm on some principles of their own. Probably they are the only group of politicians who can refuse the seat of PM or ministership over political principle and ideology.
So, please say the full truth and give proper respect even if you hate their political l
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by arun singh on Jul 08, 2008 01:03 PM Permalink
Very well said, Sugata Roy. You have connected all the missing links, very conveniently and deliberately forgotten by Mr. Shenoy.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sameer K on Jul 08, 2008 01:10 PM Permalink
Sugata Ray,
I agree with you commies never changed the camps like changing clothes. Because there first interest was always with Russia and China rather than India and they changed this stand. At the time of birth first they supported nationalist and when they saw that Russia joined with England after Hitlers attack, they simply changed the stand, Lefist made comedy themselves. Now also I can bet if same Nuclear deal proposed by China no wonder we will see one more comedy.
It is very true leftist never changed their stand from antinationalism and remember they are still stick with their Dead leftist philosophy and what else we can expect who cannot come out of their outdated philosophy.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sugata Ray on Jul 08, 2008 01:27 PM Permalink
Probably it is useless to reply to you Mr. Sameer because most of us are familiar with this tone and logic (or absence of logic) in rediff comments section. But, can't you see that your arguements do not hold well? Indian Govt. was very close to Russia during cold war and that Govt. was not headed or even supported by communists. Congress started its journey by alining with British Raj, commuist movement was nowhere there then. Savarkar wrote from cellular jail to British to pardon him and he was not a communist. So, the political scenario in India was always like this. Then what logic tells that INC or BJP are the nationalist party (they have indeed taken India to great heights, isn't it, where even today 84 crore people live with less than Rs. 20 a day and so on?) while lefts are confirmed anti-Nationalist? Either come with information, logic or keep on blabbering the same words which has no logical base and doesn't deserve any discussion.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sameer K on Jul 08, 2008 01:50 PM Permalink
Indian Govt was close to Russia.. yes, but to safegaurd the national interest and we really thankful to Russia for their support, In this world no country have permanent friends or enemy it changes with time to time depending upon national interest. But this is very fact that commies always use to take care the interests of China and not the India.
Whatever Savarkar did, he did for this country and not for China. You already tried to malign the image of Vir Savarkar and even all those nationalist who served India, its not new lie for us. better you should not talk about the nationalist credentials of others, first look at yourself.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Srini on Jul 08, 2008 02:27 PM Permalink
Ray seems to be greatly disturbed at the accusations. But isn't it a fact that when China sneezes left here catches cold. During the 1962 war, we had an enemy in CPI-M with in our country and even today left holds the opinion that India was at mistake. Left espouse great ideals but see what has happened in Nandigram. Left shies away from BJP but has no qualms in playing religious politics themselves, Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rashidi, aligning with Muslim League to rule in Kerala and the recent comment by Left that Nuclear deal is against Muslim interests and the talk of displeasing Iran. What principles are they talking about, they seem to be constantly working against the national interests. Today the problem of illegal Bangladeshis in India is the gift of left front government in West Bengal.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by B Kumar on Jul 08, 2008 01:31 PM Permalink
Firm principles by left ?? Nothing can be far from truth. They oppose industrialists and support farmers/labours every where except their own back yard where they fire on protesting poor and small farmers. How can you forget Nandigram & Singoor ! They denounce the violence against MF Hussain but offer no support and safety for Taslima ! As far as talk of even one MP being purchased, dear entire party has been outrightly motgaged to China ! All their policies and actions are directly helping China and hurting India. All the leftists have been consistent is in - harming Indian interests and supporting China / Russia / Maoists. I remember Jyoti Basu calling his decision of rejecting PM seat as 'historical blunder'. That says a lot about politicians who you claim can refuse the seat over political principle and ideology. I would call it cunning. They want to enjoy power without accountability and want to do backseat driving.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sugata Ray on Jul 08, 2008 02:44 PM Permalink
Yes, I completely agree with you on this point. In industrialization policy, lefts are not able to clarify their stand and that's disastrous. Although I disagree slightly over the point that the situations outside left ruled states and inside are absolutely identical. For example, take the compensation values, undoubtedly they are far larger than other states. Nandigram, Singur are undoubtedly shameful and every sane person would protest killing of any poor individual, be it left or anti-left. But we should take a neutral stand. If I say that the killing of 13 advasis in Kalinganagar, or the Honda factory incident in Gurgaon or the long string of supprression in narmada valley in the name of development are equally brutal and shameful, will all of us agree? Certainly those incidents can't give credibility to the Nandigram incident and the ruling Government must be cornered over this. This Government showed equal brutality like others in the country. The point was that irrespective of Jyoti Basu's (most influential left leader at that time), the ideology won which is certainly a rarity in India's political history. Again I mostly agree with your points about Taslima and freedom of art. However, a little detailed look would reveal that the stand of the two parties in these two cases were little different. The point is lefts do change their stand but those are always at the ideological level and never for just winning a minster post or money or any such things.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Charly Brown on Jul 08, 2008 04:25 PM Permalink
Mr.Ray, what will be the Left's stand on Arunachal Pradesh.... Now China has an eye on Sikkim too...
What would have been the stance of the Left parties, if a similar nuclear deal has come from China.... definitely they would jumped up and down to have the deal signed... let's not talk too much of Marxist parties ideology... they are opportunists...
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Anubhav Lal on Jul 08, 2008 10:29 PM Permalink
Who said left's stand is not clear. They are very clear that they will do whatever harms India
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sameer K on Jul 08, 2008 04:02 PM Permalink
Nandigram and Singoor nothing but the true face of communism. History recorded in Russia aroud 6 Million people massacred by communist rule under Stalin, China killed over 1 million and even more population. There are more figures from other communist ruled contries.
In democracy at least you can express yourself but in communism you will be blasted by tanks just like in Tianmen Square.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Sugata Ray on Jul 08, 2008 04:56 PM Permalink
In last 50 years, USA invaded 59 sovereign states. No. of killing? Do I need to mention? Just consider Hiroshima. Nobody has more bloody record than USA. Add Israel, Ethiopia and such allies, the number will be countless...
What is the point in counting deadbodies? Are we trying to establish that deaths by communists means more than deaths by capitalists or vice versa? That would be childish. A death is a death and even if we just consider the modern world, the language of power was always the same, be it left or right. This discussion was not a discussion of communism vs. capitalism, it was entirely about the Indian lefts in electoral politics. So, why do we confuse?
Just for an info. May be it will be useful to read Prof. Amartya Sen's work where he showed how suppression or economic isolation actually kills far more than what a war does. And in this regard, the so called civilized western world is far ahead considering their treatements towards other third world latin american, asian or african countries. So, there may not be much to say in favour of 'democracy' also.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by manish singh on Jul 08, 2008 02:19 PM Permalink
i personally think that the new standpoint of Mr MSY will not bring any defeat to him. This is because, his politics dwells largely on the caste issue, which mostly stands in favour of the cause he is upholding, as on this day. this he has served many a purpose in one blow. the ideological grounds for supporting/opposing the N deal appears to served. the caste's opinion is upheld. the 'national interest' is served(i can see even Mr Shenoy is in favour of the deal); and last the chief rival, Ms Mayawati's, opposition is opposed to let some politics boil, (to eventually provied some gains or loss, whatever). Muslims, i envisage, are also as much divided in themselves, as this whole nation is, by way of the Kalam-endorsement, and that the higher educated muslims to would stand in favour as most other indians. Arguably, even the BJP is not so actively in opposition as it is being made to appear. We know eventually they will proceed with the deal, if the congress fails. So Mayawati's resistance is no meaningful when she is with the BJP. MSY, in the least, gives an illusion of gaining some ideology by lending his support. otherwise, the previous loss was because of losing ideology in the eyes of his people.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by sunil singh on Jul 08, 2008 01:16 PM Permalink
Nation needs nationalist and people who take concrete decision. Left parties can take the stand which suits them to keep in business. Not to participate in Government but to support is like being a Father but not owning the responsibility of child.
RE:How half truths can be dangerous!
by Nanchil on Jul 08, 2008 02:42 PM Permalink
Yediyurappa, BJP cm of karnataka, is the great nationalist. He struggled not to give drinking water to Tamil Nadu. For him karnataka is a nation not India. So he is the great nationalist and his party too.
