Walking with Comrades

[Arvindc]

It's time we revist the aims set for a democratic India at it's bearth and understand what we wanted to achive by a "democratic governance" and what we have actually achived.

Link:http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/PUB...1.shtml?Mode=1

Rework the agenda left hand drive -by SITARAM YECHURY

Socialism has often been used to mask the growth of capitalism in India. But instead of removing socialism from the Constitution, let's make the directive principles of State policy mandatory

A recent decision of the Supreme Court has attracted considerable attention in pubic discourse. The apex court refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the need for political parties to declare allegiance to `socialism' -enshrined in the Preamble of our Constitution -to obtain recognition from the Election Commission. Noted jurist and my former Rajya Sabha colleague Fali Nariman had a point when he argued that since market forces, under neo-liberal economic reforms, have been the determining factor for over two decades, it was a dichotomy to force political parties to owe allegiance to `socialism'. The court, however, rejected this on the grounds that no political party has challenged this requirement so far. Such hypocrisy has been decried, if not denounced, by some columnists who entertain the so-called `eternality of capitalism' and the `end of ideology' predilections.

Strange as this may sound, this ruling reflects the supreme hypocrisy of our ruling classes as reflected in Solicitor General's defence (reflecting the UPA 2 government's view) of the existing Constitutional requirement. `Socialism' was inserted in the Preamble by Indira Gandhi during Emergency in the mid-70s.

The rise of authoritarianism and the large-scale curtailment of democratic rights and liberties under the Emergency was sought to be cloaked under exhortations of `socialism'. Very chillingly reminiscent then of the way Adolf Hitler used `national socialism' to consolidate the Nazi fascist machine.

The issue of mentioning `socialism' in our Constitution was a matter of debate in the Constituent Assembly itself. Moving the resolution to draw up a Constitution for India's governance, Jawaharlal Nehru, while asserting that he stood for socialism and hoped that India will stand for socialism, didn't use the word as `it may be agreeable to many and may not be agreeable to some'. He, however, went on to stress that the content of the resolution that proposed to guarantee social, economic and political equality to all sufficiently reflected a socialist character.

On a later occasion, B.R. Ambedkar rejected an amendment moved by Professor K.T. Shah inserting the word `socialism' in the first clause of the Constitution. Ambedkar advanced two reasons on the lines similar to that of Nehru's. He strengthened the content argument by pointing out Part IV of the Constitution, which deals with the directive principles of State policy, by saying, “If these directive principles to which I have drawn attention are not socialistic in their direction and in their content, I fail to understand what more socialism can be.“ However, directive principles were never made mandatory.

Socialism, as a political slogan, had a big relevance given the powerful mass movement that resulted in our country's freedom and the accompanied hopes for a better future. While the façade was maintained for sometime, the hypocrisy lay in the fact that, all along, independent India pursued a trajectory of capitalist development, which is the antithesis of socialism. The public sector, erroneously and sometimes deliberately described as `socialism', was nothing else but the marshalling of people's resources through the State to create the required economic infrastructure for the growth of private capitalism. Leaders of Indian monopoly capital collectively proposed the establishment of the public sector in the famous Bombay Plan that they drew up in 1944. The defence of the public sector today, as the means to resist imperialist globalisation's assault on our economic sovereignty, in no way detracts from this class need for the creation of the public sector in the first place.
This trajectory resulted in the assets of the top 22 monopoly houses shooting up from Rs 312.63 crore in 1957 to Rs 1,58,004.72 crore in 1997, a 500-fold increase.
Private capital, thus enabled, mounted pressure for the privatisation of the public sector in order to further enlarge their profits. The subsequent years of neo-liberal reforms have today produced 52 USD billionaires whose combined assets equal a fourth of our country's GDP. On the other hand, 77 per cent of our people are living on less than Rs 20 a day.

This is accompanied by an unbridled loot of public resources and the country's mineral wealth under what can be described as `crony capitalism' at its worst. The telecom scam, the Indian Premier League scam and the illegal mining scam appear to rule the roost. Further, this is also distorting our parliamentary democracy where money power is influencing the voting pattern of the people.

The election expenses of candidates of major bourgeois parties, in the recent elections, make a mockery of the limits set by the Election Commission.
Democracy is increasingly being defined not by people's popular choices but by the capacity of political parties to spend exorbitant amounts of money to coerce the voters. Leave alone socialism, even democracy is fast losing its real meaning.

The reason why none of the political parties that embrace neo-liberal reforms, like the Congress and its allies now or the BJP and its allies earlier, have objected to the need to show allegiance to socialism, as the Supreme Court questioned, is not far to seek.
The loot of our resources and the distortion of our democracy require the socialist mask (read: aam aadmi) to hide behind.

The point is not to rip the mask apart. The point is to change the reality behind this mask. Instead of seeking to remove `socialism' from the Constitution, we need to work towards realising its spirit and content of providing -in the real sense -liberty, equality and fraternity to all. We can begin by making the directive principles of State policy mandatory.
Sitaram Yechury is CPI(M) Politburo member and Rajya Sabha MP The views expressed by the author are personal

[Arvindc]

Don’t Mine Us Out of Existence - Amnesty Report

http://sanhati.com/wp-content/upload...-existence.pdf

THE COMPANIES INVOLVED
Vedanta Resources Plc (Vedanta Resources)
Vedanta Resources is a metals and mining group, headquartered in London, United Kingdom. The company was first listed on the London Stock Exchange in December 2003. The group has its principal operations in India and has mines and production centres in Australia and Zambia.

Sterlite Industries India Limited (Sterlite India)
Sterlite India is headquartered in Mumbai. Sterlite India has been a public listed company in India since 1988, and its equity shares are listed and traded on the National Stock Exchange and the Bombay Stock Exchange; these are also listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange in the form of American Depository Shares (ADSs). Vedanta Resources owns 59.9 per cent of Sterlite India and has management control of the company.

Vedanta Aluminium Limited (Vedanta Aluminium)
Vedanta Aluminium is headquartered in Lanjigarh, Orissa. Vedanta Resources owns 70.5 per cent of the share capital of Vedanta Aluminium and Sterlite India owns the remaining 29.5 per cent share capital.

Orissa Mining Corporation
Wholly owned by the State of Orissa, this company mines chrome, iron and manganese, and has joint ventures with major mining companies to mine iron ore and bauxite.

South-west Orissa Bauxite Mining Corporation
A new joint venture formed in early 2009, of which Sterlite India would hold 74 per cent shares and Orissa Mining Corporation 26 per cent, to mine bauxite in Niyamgiri for the next 25 years.


WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY? STATES AND CORPORATE ACTORS
States are the primary duty bearers under international law for ensuring the respect, protection and promotion of human rights. Far too often, however, governments are unwilling or unable to discharge their legal obligation to protect against human rights abuses. When a government fails to protect people’s human rights against harm by non-state actors, such as companies, this amounts to a violation under international law. However, the fact of government failure to protect human rights does not absolve the non-state actor from responsibility for their operations and the impact of those operations on human rights.

The emerging consensus on corporate responsibility for human rights is that companies should – at minimum – respect all human rights.

[Arvindc]

Arundhati Roy is Rakhi Sawant of pseudo intellectuals. Granted that she is a good story teller (one tirck pony or shall I say only ONE fictional book story writer, her 2nd was compilation of essays on social issues), she knows how to use her celebrity status to raise issues. In her essays, she fails to undertake comprehensive analysis, fails to see things from all angles, thus quickly earning the reputation of biased, limited-angle analyst leading people/readers to loose faith in her and eventually lose interest in her writings.

She fails to provide comprehensive analysis from the view point of various stakeholders
She tends to take hardliner approach as opposed to pragmatic approach
She is a serial protester/activist, not a solutioner.
She is biased, she raises voices against forces but never says a word against violence by protesters against forces and innocent people.
She presents problems from limited view point but offers no solution,

May be its time, like Rakhi Savant, Arundhati too gets her own Reality TV show...

This thread is not about Ms Roy or Ms Sawant. You can start a new thread if you want a debate on the issue. I will surely be participating.

[vdhillon]

This thread is not about Ms Roy or Ms Sawant. You can start a new thread if you want a debate on the issue. I will surely be participating.

Sir, thanks for enlightening with knee jerk one-liner. If you care to read the 'Walking with Comrades' OP by Brigadier, the post mentions he got to walk in the shoes of naxals due to the long article by Arundhati. His OP is open ended, granted that subsequent to that thread has evolved in a specific direction, now almost dead. Last post, prior to my post, was way back in July (5months). Thread takes a life of its own and evolve and may change directions depending on the subsequent posts by others. This is the specific angel I have taken based on OP, though may be diff from a common theme earlier posters may have crated which has come to an end.

So with due respect to your right to freedom of expression, I hereby discard your observation that my post is not relevant. Thanks again.

[Arvindc]

Sir, thanks for enlightening with knee jerk one-liner. ....
....
So with due respect to your right to freedom of expression, I hereby discard your observation that my post is not relevant. Thanks again.

Didn't thought my suggestion would have such a response!! Was my tone harsh?? Wondering!!

[singhvp]

This thread is not about Ms Roy or Ms Sawant. You can start a new thread if you want a debate on the issue. I will surely be participating.

Arvind, this thread cannot be discussed while keeping Arundhati out of the preview. By now, it is established that she is a professional contrarian who leaves no opportunity to be in news by making an outcry of everything that government does. Be it Indian Army’s war against Pak sponsored terror in Kashmir or CRPF’s action against China- backed insurgency in the mineral rich tribal belt. The way she has tried to romanticize the violent and anarchic methods of Naxalites to establish Mao Brand Socialism by overthrowing the State at gun point, is merely a disguised attempt on her part to steal the agenda from liberal left and social democratic forces of India who believe in bringing out a change through Parliamentary process. Arundhati herself knows it very well that the dream cherished by a handful of Naxalites with outmoded weaponry, inadequate resources and skeletal cadres unmatched to the mighty Indian armed forces can never be realized. If Arundhati is a firm believer and a person of conviction, why doesn’t she also hold the gun and rise in armed rebellion walking with comrades in jungles. Moreover, Naxalites are killing only poor constables who belong to the poorer sections of society or working class, in the parlance of Marxists, which is against the philosophy of communism. Have you ever heard of Naxalites targeting any top gun? Did they ever target any top politician or policy maker, any blood-sucking capitalist or top Generals or high ranking Bureaucrats ………No….Never……What kind of communism is this, which is killing people of its own flock?

[vdhillon]

Didn't thought my suggestion would have such a response!! Was my tone harsh?? Wondering!!

Mate, introspection is a virtue, inni't

[vdhillon]

What? where did my OP go? Badly moderated site. Get sane. No wonder no on wants to revisit this site. Huge deterrence to 'inherent republican spirit' of Jats. May be it is a personal fief of someone who pays for it. Well keep putting, us the visitors, off and you can then have this site a limited audience of a very few - reflected in lack of regular traffic and lack of active members despite significant registered membership.

[Arvindc]

Arvind, this thread cannot be discussed while keeping Arundhati out of the preview.
...

Well, this thread was started for discussing Arundhati's article on Naxalites. So it's fine to discuss Ms Roy with this context. Discussing Ms Roy's other things here would be a digression from the main topic.

[Arvindc]

Shocking! An acquitted 'Maoist' speaks out
http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-sho...t/20120117.htm


Branded a Maoist by the Maharashtra police, Arun Ferreira was released on bail on January 5.
At his first press conference after his release, he spoke about his ordeal and how the State has been muffling the voice of dissent. Prasanna D Zore reports.
The sarcasm in 40-year-old Arun Ferreira's voice is not completely misplaced.
It comes naturally to somebody who has been branded a Maoist/Naxalite and tortured in jail -- slapped, kicked and made to stretch.
It comes naturally to somebody who has been fighting the system and pleading his innocence.
It comes naturally to somebody who breathes fresh air after having spent more than 50 months in jail and was then acquitted by various courts in ten out of 11 cases.
It comes naturally to somebody who is pouring his heart out about his ordeal in prison, his release from prison after the court's order in September 2011 and immediate 'abduction by the police' in Nagpur, and somebody who has seen the system work against the innocents.
Arun Ferreira, a native of Bandra, the upmarket northwest Mumbai suburb, was first arrested from Nagpur on May 8, 2007 under the Unlawful Activities and Prevention Act for his alleged links with the Maoists.
At his first press conference after his release on bail on January 5, he answered questions that were asked to him by friends and family ever since his release.
Over to Arun...

'In jail if you have money you will get a good place to sleep'
Arun Ferreira, an alumnus of Mumbai's prestigious St Xavier's College, on what life in prison is like:
Prisons in India still have the old British-type system running even now.
I was first placed in a cell called 'Anda Barrack.' There is an Andabar cell in the Arthur Road jail as well as many other jails in India. It is supposed to be a high security cell and I could not meet anybody but my co-accused for one year.
So the government, which has supposedly banned solitary confinement 20 years ago, is continuing it, using another name.
Another example of the British-type jails is that they use an old prison manual of 1894 which has no practical use anywhere. Even the jailers tell us that if we go to use it you won't be able to live in jail and if you go to use it then we won't be able to live in jail.
The prison manual in jail out there doesn't work. So, ultimately it is the jailer who decides; it's his manmani (discretion).
As per this 1894 prison manual accused can get only one letter per month. That was practical 10 years ago; now you can get many more, but the jailer decides that.
While the prison manual says so and so what actually happens is the jailer's manmani. What I am trying to say is the prison 1894 prison manual is very archaic.
And if you dare to talk about the jailor's corruption, or corruption in jail he will come the next day and say 'Take care you are not supposed to write more than one letter in a month. You will get such dhamkis (warnings) as you call it (smiles wryly).
The other thing I'd like to tell about prisons with regards to the 2G accused is that 'Jail is a great equaliser.' I think that is a big fallacy.
The hierarchies that remain in society exist in jail also: Whether it is class, caste or money. I have seen it.
In jail if you have money you will get a good place to sleep.
If you don't have the money you will have to sleep in the barrack next to the toilet. Otherwise, you will have to sleep next to the water tank which will make you wet throughout the cold season.
In my experience in jails too money calls the shots.

'The trial is going on, witnesses are being examined but the accused is kept in jail'
Undertrial prisoners arrested as 'Naxals' face two problems. One, since January 2010 till now they have not been produced before the Gadchiroli Sessions court at all.
You will not find this practice anywhere in the state, but in Gadchiroli it is happening. Why? Because the police is required for the Naxal Virodhi Abhiyaan (a campaign against the Naxalites in Gadchiroli, the district where the Maharashtra government is in almost daily confrontation against the leftwing rebels).
So the situation is from January 2010 till now no court production (of the accused) has taken place. So the trial is going on, witnesses are being examined, but the accused is kept in jail. He is not allowed to go to court (for want of enough policemen as escort).
If the same situation were to happen in Mumbai there would have been a big hungama (ruckus) by now. But this is in some corner of Gadchiroli and nobody takes (bothers to) care of (look into) it.
This is the sort of free (and fair) trial that many of the Adivasis (mostly arrested as Naxalite supporters) have to face there (in Gadchiroli).
The second problem I'd like to focus on is the question of re-arrest.
This problem is not something that has started from my case. From the time since I have been in jail in May 2007 this has been a recurring event.
There is this case that happened in 2007 about this man Mallesh. He was re-arrested in exactly the same way that I was re-arrested in September 2011.
In September 2007, Mallesh came out of the gates, was abducted, taken for six months in Nagpur jail.
He got released in April 2008, but he was again picked up at the gate and in similar fashion sent back, this time, to Bhandara jail.
Later he was released from Bhandara jail, but yet again he was picked up and sent to Balaghat jail.
This is the rule of law (in this country).
The point I am making is not whether he is a Naxal or a terrorist or whatever, but if the courts have ordered somebody to be acquitted or released on bail then it is the rule of law that says that he should be released. But the police are not following this procedure. This is in Mallesh's case.
Ever since that whenever the issue of re-arrest took place we in jail went on a hunger strike for 27 days. I don't know if you remember this, but the honourable home minister had asked the police to hold an inquiry about the issues that we brought forth during our hunger strike.
The police department did an inquiry. But it was about the cases framed against us. The outcome of this inquiry was that the police suggested that all those who participated in the hunger strike should be distributed in various jails. This is how they solved the problem.

The Principal Judge, Gadchiroli, on the police modus operandi
While we in jail and the lawyers fighting for us have been commenting against these re-arrests there is something that the principal district judge of Gadchiroli -- and let me tell you that the principal district judge is the chief judicial authority in the district of Gadchiroli, somebody who supervises over the entire court functioning in a district -- has commented on the modus operandi of the police of re-arresting people.
This quote is from one of his judgments in the case of Ganpat Kulmethe (Vishwanath Ganpath Kulmethe). His petition at the time is pending in the (Nagpur bench of the Mumbai) high court. This is what the judge says:
It is noticed that it has become the modus operandi of the Police to involve any person branding him as a Naxalite. If any person is a resident of that locality and if there are certain incident, the persons from the area are implicated. The accused Vishwanath is the accused before me in a number of cases and it is noticed that that as and when he is acquitted in one case he is implicated in another case with intent to languish him in jail. That is the tragedy.'
'Be that as it may, when there is no evidence, even slightest against the accused to prove the charges, the accused has to be acquitted...
This was said by the principal district judge of Gadchiroli.

'The State has learnt the technique of how to make the person suffer and not show marks'
In May when I was picked up I think all of you must have seen my five-year old photo. That face and this face is a vast difference.
Actually, when I saw the photo in the newspapers I could not recognise myself. One side of mine was totally swollen. I was physically tortured, slapped, kicked, made to do stretching.
Petrol was inserted into the rectum of my co-accused.
What I feel is that the State has learnt the technique of how to make the person suffer and not show marks.
I remember when I was being tortured I heard two or three police officers talking. One cop told me that if you put your leg in that manner it would break. He knew that if my leg were bent slightly in a particular way it would break. I was thinking this is the guy who is torturing me and yet caring for me.
Actually he was not caring for me. He was thinking that if my leg breaks and I complain about it in the court, (smiles) he will... (face action).
They have learnt the technique of how my body should be positioned, how I should be tortured, which place I should be hit so the marks don't show and they will have their work done.

[Arvindc]

Isn't this "system's" abuse enough provocation for the people to stand against it?
Rape and murder in Maoist zone: many cops probed, few punished

[Arvindc]

Another one .. The war that doesn’t affect us - What a CRPF soldier deals with in Maoist areas and why we should look beyond our TV screens

But is any one interested?? - well in this crony capitalist world the only interest is where the money is; and the money lies in the wast mines of natural resources.

Some excerpts:

"Before such an event, or afterwards, we are just not interested in what is happening in Chhattisgarh or other Maoist-affected areas in central and eastern India — we are not interested because thinking about it becomes an incubus. We do not want that; we do not want to engage with it beyond the flashes of rage we display in front of our television screens. That is our only contribution to the crisis and then we withdraw."


"The Maoist problem, as many who have seen the situation on ground keep telling Delhi, is a socio-economic problem that stems from decades of marginalisation and exploitation of the adivasis in large swathes of land (in the undivided Bastar region in Chhattisgarh, for example, which is bigger than Kerala). Even after India attained her freedom, nothing changed for the people in this region."


"The Centre continued to use the presence of Maoist guerrillas in the region as an excuse for misgovernance."


"Also, in most cases, it is almost impossible for the CRPF troops to distinguish between an adivasi and a Maoist guerrilla. Sometimes, it leads to rights violations, with the CRPF soldier coming across as an impious villain."

"On his part, the CRPF soldier has no idea what he is dealing with. In other counterinsurgency situations — for example, in Kashmir — the situation is far simpler. The CRPF is just not prepared for deployment in the Maoist areas. There are several reasons for this. The CRPF soldier has absolutely no facility at his disposal. His living conditions are pathetic. In the camp, he does not have access to even basic amenities. Across Maoist-affected regions, the situation is the same. As a result, the morale of most of the CRPF soldiers is very low. Many of them want to get away from their situation as soon as possible. There is a chasm between the soldier and the officer. Even the officers want to get away. Many of them are preparing for careers elsewhere."


"So, who is benefitting from this war? Why cannot the adivasis be stakeholders in the wealth created by the extraction of mineral resources in this region? Why is the State unable to rescue a CRPF soldier injured in a Maoist ambush? If the Maoists are against mining, why are they not targeting mining companies in their areas of influence? These are the questions we must ask. And these must be asked outside our drawing rooms."


"The CRPF soldier hardly gets any support from his organisation, or from the State he is fighting this war for. He is just a sacrificial lamb in this war. And so are the poor adivasis."