I am placing below thoughts I expressed in a group discussion in response to a note circulated by John Samuel, Editor of Infochange. He is a person whose perspectives on Kerala, Indian and world affairs merit attention. Kindly see the Infochange website (www.infochangeindia.org) and his blog (www.bodhigram.blogspot).
There is a reference in this piece to certain comments made by N. P. Chekkutty, Editor, Thejas daily, Kozhikode during the discussion. He is also a person whose views, in my opinion, deserve special attention. See his blog (www.chespeak.blogspot.com
There is also a reference to a comment of Satchi -- the eminent poet N. Satchidanandan.
John Samuel has prepared the ground for a wide-ranging discussion on the developments in the Islamic world. Evidently a multilayered and multifaceted process is at work. It has social, economic, political and cultural dimensions. Muslim communities in various parts of the world are wrestling with various kinds of problems. Even a local or regional problem may be influenced for good or bad by what is happening elsewhere.
We must, therefore, examine the Islamic movements in our region in a wider context. Early Muslim reformers in Kerala and elsewhere in India were influenced by reform movements in the Arab world. There has been a change of direction in some countries to our west. To cite one example, in the last century, Kemal Pasha asked soldiers to stop women and remove the veil. Today in some countries women are stopped and made to cover their faces. The assertion of Islamic identity has social and political significance, which merits serious study.
To do justice to all the issues raised by John, it will be necessary to write a book. Maybe more than one! I shall, therefore, limit myself to just a few points here. If time and energy permit, I may take up some more later.
Before proceeding further, let me to assure Chekkutty that I did not equate RSS with Islamic groups, although I believe there are among them elements whose activities are as pernicious as those of the Sangh Parivar outfits. We must be able to deal with majority communalism and minority communalism on the same footing, because both pose danger to the democratic polity. My poser to Chekkutty was in the context of his statement that Islamic groups are able to provide a sense of security to CPI (M) defectors. I believe we must distinguish between majority/dominant community outfits, which use religion/caste for political mobilization, and minority/disadvantaged groups who come together to air their grievances and seek redress.
Incidentally, I do not subscribe to Satchi's view that today's Muslim League cannot be identified with Jinnah's party. Jawaharlal Nehru had advanced this view to justify the Congress' alliance with ML against the CPI. When Mohammed Ismail and B. V. Abdullah Koya were MPs they did not hide the fact that they were office-bearers of pre-Independence ML. (Please see Who's Who brought out by LS and RS secretariats in those days). Having said this, let me add that I do not consider the pre-partition League leaders a bunch of traitors. How can Allama Iqbal, who sang saare jahaanse accha Hindustan hamara be dubbed a traitor because he presided over the ML? I consider Pakistan an accident of history. A suitable opportunity presented itself, and Jinnah the politician seized it. But, then, many states are accidents of history and the world has learnt to live with them.
To come to the current Kerala scene, all the different strains that John identifies at the global scale -- reformism, renaissance, resistance and fundamentalism – are at work in the Muslim community. Access to resources is a factor that has contributed to the proliferation of Islamic organizations and institutions. External assistance to groups considered conservative or extremist has received much attention but my understanding is that those with progressive outlook are also getting funds.
I do not see any cause for worry in the appearance of the so-called Muslim press. I have pointed out in this group and elsewhere that all Malayalam papers have had sectarian origins. Yet they had always set their eyes on wider horizons. New technology has enabled newspapers to break out of their geographical confines. Yet only Manorama and Mathrubhumi have been able to break through the sectarian walls and reach out to all segments of society. All other newspapers still have narrow bases, the contours of which can be easily made out by a discerning observer. A party, a caste, a religion or a combination of little bits from all of them may constitute the base of an individual newspaper. Mangalam appears to be the exception that proves the rule.
John asks how do we rate a newspaper or journal -- from its content, editorial policy or its ownership or perceived identity? I don't think this is as complex an issue as the question suggests. The owner determines the editorial policy, and that in turn determines the content. Manorama and Mathrubhumi are commercially far more successful but professionally they stand far below some of the so-called Muslim newspapers. As far as I can see, the former's success is the result of carefully formulated and efficiently executed editorial and managerial strategies which bear an uncanny resemblance to the electoral strategies of political parties.
The Gulf Malayalee is (or at any rate was, before the advent of satellite television) an avid newspaper reader. This is understandable, considering that he was a first-time migrant with no exposure even to the rest of India. (During my visits to the region in 1980 to set up UNI presence, I had occasion to meet Malik, the Pakistani who was the largest distributor of Malayalam newspapers in Dubai. He told me: if you can send me more Malayalam papers I can sell more. Malayalam newspapers have a high selling price in the Gulf States. And Muslims constitute a large segment of the Gulf Malayalees. Against this background, Malayalam newspapers starting editions in the Gulf States is understandable. But non-commercial factors are also at work. For many years, Malayalam newspapers were unable to obtain permission to start editions there. Now they seem to adopt a more liberal approach at least in the case of the Muslim newspapers.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
New land scandal generates feeling of deja vu
EVEN BEFORE the reverberations of the Merchiston estate scandal have died down, another land scandal has surfaced. The deep involvement of political, bureaucratic and business interests in the deal gives rise to a feeling that we have seen it all before.
In the Merchiston deal, a Central government institution, the Indian Space Research Organisation, figured as the buyer and an estate owner, Sevi Mano Mathew, as the seller. In the new scandal, the roles are reversed. A Central Government undertaking, the HMT, is the seller and a business house with real estate interests is the buyer. In both the deals, State ministers and officials figure as accomplices.
The State government had given the Bangalore-based HMT 320 hectares of land at Kalamassery, near Kochi, to set up its unit. About 900 families were evicted at the time of acquisition of the land.
In 1995, the State government found that HMT was holding land in excess of its needs and issued an order for resuming 161 hectares. The company represented that it had expansion plans, for which it would require 40.4 hectares. Thereupon the government issued a fresh order, allowing the company to retain 40.4 hectares for its future needs. The remaining 121.4 hectares were allotted to Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (Kinfra), a State government undertaking, to develop an industrial park.
In October 2005, HMT placed advertisements in some national dailies offering for sale 28.3 hectares out of the 40.4 hectares it was allowed to retain. The property was conveyed to Blue Star Realtors, a real estate company, in October 2006 for a consideration of Rs.910 million.
Two contradictory opinions have surfaced on the legality of the transaction. According to one school of thought, the HMT did not have full rights over the land since the government order stipulated that the allotment was conditional. The government had the right to take back the land if it was not used for company's own expansion plans, which was the purpose for which the allotment was made. According to another school of thought, since no conditions were stipulated when land was allotted to the company originally and it had enjoyed full rights on the land from the beginning, there was nothing to prevent it from disposing of the land. The Revenue department, in an official note, is reported to have upheld this view.
Official circles had expressed contradictory opinions on the status of the Merchiston estate land too. While some held that the land in question was part of an area which had been declared ecologically fragile, others said it was not.
The authorities' inability to determine the nature and status of land, without leaving room for ambiguity, is a factor that makes it possible for real estate operators to push through suspicious deals.
Industry Minister Elamaram Karim (CPI-M) and Revenue Minister KP Rajendran (CPI) played a role in facilitating the sale of HMT land to the Blue Star Realtors, who claim to have acquired it to set up an information technology park named Cyber City.
After the sale deed was registered, the local HMT union attempted to put a spoke in the wheel.
In a representation to the Revenue Minister, it said the company was transferring the sale proceeds to Bangalore instead of using it to meet the needs of the Kalamassery unit, and urged him to intervene. The minister thereupon directed the department to keep in abeyance the process of effecting changes in the revenue records on the basis of the sale deed. The Industry Minister stepped in to get the stay removed.
The public got the first indication about the suspicious nature of the deal when Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who was to have laid the foundation stone of Cyber City project, stayed away from the function.
Achuthanandan said later the land deal was being looked into. He said the government would take steps to ensure that unused land in the possession of public undertakings did not end up in the hands of the real estate mafia.
The land deal has become a matter of contention between the two factions in the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Last week party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan sought to turn the needle of suspicion away from his faction by pointing out that HMT is a Central undertaking and it advertised the land for sale when the United Democratic Front was in power. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 28, 2008.
In the Merchiston deal, a Central government institution, the Indian Space Research Organisation, figured as the buyer and an estate owner, Sevi Mano Mathew, as the seller. In the new scandal, the roles are reversed. A Central Government undertaking, the HMT, is the seller and a business house with real estate interests is the buyer. In both the deals, State ministers and officials figure as accomplices.
The State government had given the Bangalore-based HMT 320 hectares of land at Kalamassery, near Kochi, to set up its unit. About 900 families were evicted at the time of acquisition of the land.
In 1995, the State government found that HMT was holding land in excess of its needs and issued an order for resuming 161 hectares. The company represented that it had expansion plans, for which it would require 40.4 hectares. Thereupon the government issued a fresh order, allowing the company to retain 40.4 hectares for its future needs. The remaining 121.4 hectares were allotted to Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (Kinfra), a State government undertaking, to develop an industrial park.
In October 2005, HMT placed advertisements in some national dailies offering for sale 28.3 hectares out of the 40.4 hectares it was allowed to retain. The property was conveyed to Blue Star Realtors, a real estate company, in October 2006 for a consideration of Rs.910 million.
Two contradictory opinions have surfaced on the legality of the transaction. According to one school of thought, the HMT did not have full rights over the land since the government order stipulated that the allotment was conditional. The government had the right to take back the land if it was not used for company's own expansion plans, which was the purpose for which the allotment was made. According to another school of thought, since no conditions were stipulated when land was allotted to the company originally and it had enjoyed full rights on the land from the beginning, there was nothing to prevent it from disposing of the land. The Revenue department, in an official note, is reported to have upheld this view.
Official circles had expressed contradictory opinions on the status of the Merchiston estate land too. While some held that the land in question was part of an area which had been declared ecologically fragile, others said it was not.
The authorities' inability to determine the nature and status of land, without leaving room for ambiguity, is a factor that makes it possible for real estate operators to push through suspicious deals.
Industry Minister Elamaram Karim (CPI-M) and Revenue Minister KP Rajendran (CPI) played a role in facilitating the sale of HMT land to the Blue Star Realtors, who claim to have acquired it to set up an information technology park named Cyber City.
After the sale deed was registered, the local HMT union attempted to put a spoke in the wheel.
In a representation to the Revenue Minister, it said the company was transferring the sale proceeds to Bangalore instead of using it to meet the needs of the Kalamassery unit, and urged him to intervene. The minister thereupon directed the department to keep in abeyance the process of effecting changes in the revenue records on the basis of the sale deed. The Industry Minister stepped in to get the stay removed.
The public got the first indication about the suspicious nature of the deal when Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who was to have laid the foundation stone of Cyber City project, stayed away from the function.
Achuthanandan said later the land deal was being looked into. He said the government would take steps to ensure that unused land in the possession of public undertakings did not end up in the hands of the real estate mafia.
The land deal has become a matter of contention between the two factions in the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Last week party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan sought to turn the needle of suspicion away from his faction by pointing out that HMT is a Central undertaking and it advertised the land for sale when the United Democratic Front was in power. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 28, 2008.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Online petition for Govindankutty's unconditional release
People's March editor P. Govindankutty ha been in custody for more than a month without being given bail. He was reported to be on fast. There was also a report about forcible feeding.
According to K A Shaji's report in Tehelka, while opposing his bail application in the Kerala High Court, the police said Govindankutty was providing ideological backing to Maoists of different streams for the last fiveyears and his release would help Naxalism grow in Kerala. Please see http://www.tehelka.com/story_main37.asp?filename=Ne020208code_red.asp
If this is true, the arrest is politically motivated and a wanton attack on freedom of speech and expression.
Those who subscribe to this view may sign an onpetition line demanding his unconditional release. http://www.petitiononline.com/govindan/petition.html
According to K A Shaji's report in Tehelka, while opposing his bail application in the Kerala High Court, the police said Govindankutty was providing ideological backing to Maoists of different streams for the last fiveyears and his release would help Naxalism grow in Kerala. Please see http://www.tehelka.com/story_main37.asp?filename=Ne020208code_red.asp
If this is true, the arrest is politically motivated and a wanton attack on freedom of speech and expression.
Those who subscribe to this view may sign an onpetition line demanding his unconditional release. http://www.petitiononline.com/govindan/petition.html
Friday, January 25, 2008
Ministry of Health invites applications for WHO Fellowships
The following is the text of a circular sent out by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, inviting applications for WHO Fellowships.
We have been training doctors and other health professionals under the WHO Fellowship programme. During the biennium 2006-2007, about 550 health professionals were awarded WHO Fellowship in prestigious institutions within the country and in foreign countries such as Thailand and Australia.
2. Building up on the experience of the last two biennium i.e. 2004-2005 and 2006-2007, we propose to send more number of health professionals, nurses, radiologist, laboratory technicians and para-medical staff under the aforesaid fellowships programme, to WHO Collaborating Centres in India for courses in various specialities as enclosed at Annexure - I.
3. There shall also be slots in foreign institutions indicated in the Annexure - II.
4. Kindly send nominations of interested officers especially those in the field of public health. It is our experience that the applicants are generally from big cities. We would like to afford equal opportunities to those who have been serving in rural areas or sub-divisional / district hospitals and have first hand experience of public health issues. Similarly adequate representation should be given to female officers and officers belonging to SC/ST category.
5. Efforts should be made to utilize the additional skills acquired by fellows undergoing WHO sponsored training in their day to day functions to improve the health services in the country.
6.The last date for submission of forms is 10.02.2008. Necessary direction may please be given to the concerned supervisory / controlling authorities so that the applications are forwarded in time. In case of selection, the applicants should be relieved as per the requirements of the course.
7. Copies of application form are available on our web site – www.mohfw.nic. in
We have been training doctors and other health professionals under the WHO Fellowship programme. During the biennium 2006-2007, about 550 health professionals were awarded WHO Fellowship in prestigious institutions within the country and in foreign countries such as Thailand and Australia.
2. Building up on the experience of the last two biennium i.e. 2004-2005 and 2006-2007, we propose to send more number of health professionals, nurses, radiologist, laboratory technicians and para-medical staff under the aforesaid fellowships programme, to WHO Collaborating Centres in India for courses in various specialities as enclosed at Annexure - I.
3. There shall also be slots in foreign institutions indicated in the Annexure - II.
4. Kindly send nominations of interested officers especially those in the field of public health. It is our experience that the applicants are generally from big cities. We would like to afford equal opportunities to those who have been serving in rural areas or sub-divisional / district hospitals and have first hand experience of public health issues. Similarly adequate representation should be given to female officers and officers belonging to SC/ST category.
5. Efforts should be made to utilize the additional skills acquired by fellows undergoing WHO sponsored training in their day to day functions to improve the health services in the country.
6.The last date for submission of forms is 10.02.2008. Necessary direction may please be given to the concerned supervisory / controlling authorities so that the applications are forwarded in time. In case of selection, the applicants should be relieved as per the requirements of the course.
7. Copies of application form are available on our web site – www.mohfw.nic. in
Thursday, January 24, 2008
The rationale and politics of small states
An English language newspaper recently carried an article demanding breaking up of Uttar Pradesh on the ground that it is able to command undue influence in national politics because of its size. In the normal course the State leadership’s reaction to such a demand will be negative. Especially so when the proclaimed intention is to reduce the State’s influence at the national level. But Chief Minister Mayawati did not oppose the suggestion. On the contrary, she said the State could be trifurcated.
Ordinarily the Chief Minister of a big State would not like to become the Chief Minister of a small State. After all, every ruler will want to maintain his or her empire in tact. Mayawati is not keen to retain UP in its present form probably because she is thinking not as the State’s Chief Minister but as a future Prime Minister of the country.
Free India began its career with the States that the British had created. Gandhi who reorganized the Congress units on linguistic basis and made it a powerful mass organization wanted the States also to be reorganized on the same basis. But the Central government was not ready for it. The martyrdom of Potti Sriramulu, who went on an indefinite fast to press the demand for a Telugu state, compelled it to change its stand.
Most of the provinces that the British created had no historical or cultural justification. Same was the case of the princely states that were carved out with their help. Jammu and Kashmir is a good example. Until the middle of the 19th century there was no state by that time. The region was part of the empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Punjab. The British, who defeated Ranjit Singh, demanded from him Rs.7.5 million by way of war reparations. He did not have the money. Gulab Singh, his commander in charge of the Jammu-Kashmir region, told the British, he was ready to pay the money if he was made the Maharaja. The British agreed. Gulab Singh became Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir.
When the British left, the state had a history of only 90 years. But if anyone suggests splitting it into Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh states, there would be opposition in the name of history and tradition.
Although the States Reorganization Commission, headed by Justice Fazl Ali, recommended extensive reorganization, the Centre refused to break up several States. Its attempts to evade the formation of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Punjab states on one pretext or another resulted in the creation of more martyrs. Eventually all those states had to be conceded. The Centre had argued that the separation of Gujarat would ruin Bombay, the nation’s financial capital, and that if Punjab was removed Haryana would not survive. Time has disproved these arguments.
Nehru was infuriated by the suggestion for division of Uttar Pradesh made by K. M. Panikkar, a member of the Fazl Ali Commission, in a dissenting note. The State had about 80 districts in those days. It was said that the Chief Minister could not even know all the district collectors. But Nehru, who believed in gigantism, could not think of dividing the State. While there were demands from all over for small linguistic states, the Chief Ministers of West Bengal and Bihar jointly proposed the integration of the two States to form a bigger, multilingual state. Nehru hailed it as a good suggestion. But it was not acceptable to the people of the States. Within a month the Chief Ministers withdrew the proposal.
Having had to live with big States we in Kerala have a feeling that ours is a small State. We often talk of “little Kerala”. Actually, it is not all that small. In the list of 28 States and seven Union Territories we rank as the 12th. If there are 11 States that are bigger than ours, there are 23 States and UTs that are smaller than ours. If all the units had roughly the same population, they will all more or less be of Kerala’s size. Looked at this way, Kerala is not small, but a state of ‘average’ size.
Quite recently small parts of UP, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh were separated to create the States of Uttaranchal, Jharkhand and Chhattisgrah. However UP (Population 166 million, Area 240,000 square kilometres), Bihar (Pop. 83 million, Area 90,000 sq.km) and MP (Pop. 60 million, Area 310,000 sq.km) are still large States. If UP were an independent country, it would be the world’s sixth most populous nation after China, India (minus UP), USA, Indonesia and Brazil. Russia and Pakistan will come below it.
There is not much substance in the argument that UP must be divided to reduce its influence in national politics. Although it remains the State with the largest contingent in the Lok Sabha, it has lost its prominence as a result of the fragmentation of the polity. So long as no single party is in a position to grab most of the State’s seats, its size need pose no problem nationally. But there are other factors which make small states desirable. In the light of the experience of Gujarat and Haryana, it is reasonable to assume that Vidarbha and Telengana may be able to develop faster if they are separated from Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. We have to acquire the capacity to take decisions on such issues on a rational basis.
Based on column “Nerkkazhcha” appearing in Kerala Kaumudi dated January 24, 2008
Ordinarily the Chief Minister of a big State would not like to become the Chief Minister of a small State. After all, every ruler will want to maintain his or her empire in tact. Mayawati is not keen to retain UP in its present form probably because she is thinking not as the State’s Chief Minister but as a future Prime Minister of the country.
Free India began its career with the States that the British had created. Gandhi who reorganized the Congress units on linguistic basis and made it a powerful mass organization wanted the States also to be reorganized on the same basis. But the Central government was not ready for it. The martyrdom of Potti Sriramulu, who went on an indefinite fast to press the demand for a Telugu state, compelled it to change its stand.
Most of the provinces that the British created had no historical or cultural justification. Same was the case of the princely states that were carved out with their help. Jammu and Kashmir is a good example. Until the middle of the 19th century there was no state by that time. The region was part of the empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Punjab. The British, who defeated Ranjit Singh, demanded from him Rs.7.5 million by way of war reparations. He did not have the money. Gulab Singh, his commander in charge of the Jammu-Kashmir region, told the British, he was ready to pay the money if he was made the Maharaja. The British agreed. Gulab Singh became Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir.
When the British left, the state had a history of only 90 years. But if anyone suggests splitting it into Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh states, there would be opposition in the name of history and tradition.
Although the States Reorganization Commission, headed by Justice Fazl Ali, recommended extensive reorganization, the Centre refused to break up several States. Its attempts to evade the formation of Maharashtra, Gujarat and Punjab states on one pretext or another resulted in the creation of more martyrs. Eventually all those states had to be conceded. The Centre had argued that the separation of Gujarat would ruin Bombay, the nation’s financial capital, and that if Punjab was removed Haryana would not survive. Time has disproved these arguments.
Nehru was infuriated by the suggestion for division of Uttar Pradesh made by K. M. Panikkar, a member of the Fazl Ali Commission, in a dissenting note. The State had about 80 districts in those days. It was said that the Chief Minister could not even know all the district collectors. But Nehru, who believed in gigantism, could not think of dividing the State. While there were demands from all over for small linguistic states, the Chief Ministers of West Bengal and Bihar jointly proposed the integration of the two States to form a bigger, multilingual state. Nehru hailed it as a good suggestion. But it was not acceptable to the people of the States. Within a month the Chief Ministers withdrew the proposal.
Having had to live with big States we in Kerala have a feeling that ours is a small State. We often talk of “little Kerala”. Actually, it is not all that small. In the list of 28 States and seven Union Territories we rank as the 12th. If there are 11 States that are bigger than ours, there are 23 States and UTs that are smaller than ours. If all the units had roughly the same population, they will all more or less be of Kerala’s size. Looked at this way, Kerala is not small, but a state of ‘average’ size.
Quite recently small parts of UP, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh were separated to create the States of Uttaranchal, Jharkhand and Chhattisgrah. However UP (Population 166 million, Area 240,000 square kilometres), Bihar (Pop. 83 million, Area 90,000 sq.km) and MP (Pop. 60 million, Area 310,000 sq.km) are still large States. If UP were an independent country, it would be the world’s sixth most populous nation after China, India (minus UP), USA, Indonesia and Brazil. Russia and Pakistan will come below it.
There is not much substance in the argument that UP must be divided to reduce its influence in national politics. Although it remains the State with the largest contingent in the Lok Sabha, it has lost its prominence as a result of the fragmentation of the polity. So long as no single party is in a position to grab most of the State’s seats, its size need pose no problem nationally. But there are other factors which make small states desirable. In the light of the experience of Gujarat and Haryana, it is reasonable to assume that Vidarbha and Telengana may be able to develop faster if they are separated from Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. We have to acquire the capacity to take decisions on such issues on a rational basis.
Based on column “Nerkkazhcha” appearing in Kerala Kaumudi dated January 24, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
When the Rapture happens...
Twenty-three percent of the 208 million adults in America identify themselves as either Pentecostal or Charismatic Christians [a.k.a. Rapture-ready], writes Robert Weitzel. He goes on to speculate on what can happen when the Rapture happens.
In the event of the Rapture up to 50 million workers will be leaving their jobs without clocking out. The number of positions vacated will be five times as many needed to wipe out the country’s unemployment, leaving the rest of us in a workers’ paradise. Affirmative action be damned! It’s “trickle up” economics at work here. Read on.
In the event of the Rapture up to 50 million workers will be leaving their jobs without clocking out. The number of positions vacated will be five times as many needed to wipe out the country’s unemployment, leaving the rest of us in a workers’ paradise. Affirmative action be damned! It’s “trickle up” economics at work here. Read on.
Monday, January 21, 2008
CPI -M silent as media discusses relevance of socialism
AS INDIA strives to find its place under the sun in the era of globalization, the media in Kerala is discussing the continued relevance of socialism. Strange as it may seem, leaders of the Communist Party of India-Marxist are not active in the debate.
The debate was touched off by CPI-M veteran Jyoti Basu's statement that the State governments led by the party are working within the capitalist system. Without mincing words, he said capitalism was the reality and socialism a distant goal.
Basu's statement came in the context of the difficulties encountered by his successor, West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, in pursuing plans to set up industrial complexes with the help of domestic and foreign capital. Both national and State media suggested that the statement represented a shift in the CPI-M stand. Party general secretary Prakash Karat clarified that what Basu said had been the party's position since 2000.
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the East European regimes had led to introspection by Communist parties the world over two decades ago.
At that time, the CPIM, under the guidance of EMS Namboodiripad, who was its chief ideologue, evaded the issue.
In 2000, two years after Namboodirpad's death, a party conclave at Thiruvananthapuram agreed upon changes in the party programme in the light of new realities. The party congress, held at Hyderabad in 2002, approved the changes. The shift in the party's position did not attract much attention as there was no effort to educate the rank and file on the changes.
The significance of the changes lay in that the party acknowledged that a socialist revolution was not imminent. It set the immediate goal as people's democracy, which was an intermediate stage in the march towards socialism.
The people's democracy concept is not a new one. The East European countries, which had come under Moscow's control at the end of World War II, were all designated as people's democracies. In a sense, it is thus a doomed concept.
The Basu bombshell came as the State party was holding its district conferences in a highly charged atmosphere with the two factions seeking to extend their influence.
But it did not figure in the deliberations.
The only leader of standing in the State to comment on Basu's statement was Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who warned that advocates of the capitalist path would have to flee. His reaction surprised observers as it appeared to pit him against Basu, who has been a source of support to him at the national level. He dropped the subject quickly.
In his long perorations at the district conferences, State party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan invariably covered the whole gamut of regional, national and international issues. However, he did not dwell much on ideology.
Pinarayi Vijayan fully shares the West Bengal leadership's position, which Basu outlined.
In fact, since the party regained power in 2006, his faction has been pushing schemes in keeping with that line. Yet he chose to soft-pedal the issue in his speeches.
There are two explanations for Vijayan's silence on ideology. One is that he realises that open repudiation of the idea of imminent revolution may not go down well with the cadres, who had been fed for long on revolutionary slogans. The other is that as a practical politician he knows that factional loyalties are determined by mundane factors, not by ideology.
P. Govinda Pillai, once billed as the chief ideologue after Namboodiripad, has been silent on the role of socialism in today's context. KEN Kunhahammad, who has lately been projected as the authoritative spokesman on ideology, has also not made any worthwhile contribution to the debate.
The participants in the debate generally fall in two categories: one consists of persons who were associated with the Naxalite movement in its heyday and the other of persons whose sympathies lie with its successors. Both groups regard the CPI-M as essentially a social democratic party with a Marxist label.
Civic Chandran, Naxalite turned social critic, probably voiced the feelings of both groups when he recently wrote: "What right do our Communist parties and party comrades now have on the red flag? Let them kindly put it down."
Away from public gaze, intellectuals with Left leanings are known to be exploring the possibility of an alternative to predatory capitalism and authoritarian socialism. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 21, 2008
The debate was touched off by CPI-M veteran Jyoti Basu's statement that the State governments led by the party are working within the capitalist system. Without mincing words, he said capitalism was the reality and socialism a distant goal.
Basu's statement came in the context of the difficulties encountered by his successor, West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, in pursuing plans to set up industrial complexes with the help of domestic and foreign capital. Both national and State media suggested that the statement represented a shift in the CPI-M stand. Party general secretary Prakash Karat clarified that what Basu said had been the party's position since 2000.
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of the East European regimes had led to introspection by Communist parties the world over two decades ago.
At that time, the CPIM, under the guidance of EMS Namboodiripad, who was its chief ideologue, evaded the issue.
In 2000, two years after Namboodirpad's death, a party conclave at Thiruvananthapuram agreed upon changes in the party programme in the light of new realities. The party congress, held at Hyderabad in 2002, approved the changes. The shift in the party's position did not attract much attention as there was no effort to educate the rank and file on the changes.
The significance of the changes lay in that the party acknowledged that a socialist revolution was not imminent. It set the immediate goal as people's democracy, which was an intermediate stage in the march towards socialism.
The people's democracy concept is not a new one. The East European countries, which had come under Moscow's control at the end of World War II, were all designated as people's democracies. In a sense, it is thus a doomed concept.
The Basu bombshell came as the State party was holding its district conferences in a highly charged atmosphere with the two factions seeking to extend their influence.
But it did not figure in the deliberations.
The only leader of standing in the State to comment on Basu's statement was Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who warned that advocates of the capitalist path would have to flee. His reaction surprised observers as it appeared to pit him against Basu, who has been a source of support to him at the national level. He dropped the subject quickly.
In his long perorations at the district conferences, State party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan invariably covered the whole gamut of regional, national and international issues. However, he did not dwell much on ideology.
Pinarayi Vijayan fully shares the West Bengal leadership's position, which Basu outlined.
In fact, since the party regained power in 2006, his faction has been pushing schemes in keeping with that line. Yet he chose to soft-pedal the issue in his speeches.
There are two explanations for Vijayan's silence on ideology. One is that he realises that open repudiation of the idea of imminent revolution may not go down well with the cadres, who had been fed for long on revolutionary slogans. The other is that as a practical politician he knows that factional loyalties are determined by mundane factors, not by ideology.
P. Govinda Pillai, once billed as the chief ideologue after Namboodiripad, has been silent on the role of socialism in today's context. KEN Kunhahammad, who has lately been projected as the authoritative spokesman on ideology, has also not made any worthwhile contribution to the debate.
The participants in the debate generally fall in two categories: one consists of persons who were associated with the Naxalite movement in its heyday and the other of persons whose sympathies lie with its successors. Both groups regard the CPI-M as essentially a social democratic party with a Marxist label.
Civic Chandran, Naxalite turned social critic, probably voiced the feelings of both groups when he recently wrote: "What right do our Communist parties and party comrades now have on the red flag? Let them kindly put it down."
Away from public gaze, intellectuals with Left leanings are known to be exploring the possibility of an alternative to predatory capitalism and authoritarian socialism. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 21, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)