Alt Left: India Is a Shithole*

This article sums up what modern India is all about, written by a fairly progressive fellow named Sean Kelley. I’ve been studying India for a while now, and the more I study it, the angrier I get. India, quite simply, sucks. Sucks, sucks, sucks, sucks and then sucks some more. I don’t know how long this suckiness has been going on, maybe forever. When the British first showed up, they were appalled. They tried to civilize the place, but the small-c conservative Indians kept objecting to getting civilized.

What sucks? India sucks. What about it sucks?

First of all, the state.

The Indian state has sucked from Day One, birthed in blood-soaked imperial and neo-colonial sin like America, Australia and Israel, with even less of an excuse as a long-abused colony themselves. Now, via alliances with imperialist America, the UK and Israel, India seems to be aping the worst aspects of its former imperialist and colonialist master. Like a crime victim going on a killing spree. Of all the ways to react.

The lousy nature of the Indian state is of course rooted in Indian society, as all states are rooted in the cultural formations of their societies. The Indian state sucks because Indian society sucks.

Why does Indian society suck? It’s hard to sum it up. First of all, you have one of the most callous and uncaring ruling classes, with the usual upper middle class allies, found on Earth.

Missing the good old days? Go to India. Nostalgic for debt slavery and bondage, feudalism (the real deal, not the semi-feudal modern kind), slavery (child and adult), child labor, shit in the streets like the Middle Ages Europe pre-Black Plague? Go to India. It’s all there in spades.

Even more appalling is that no one in India gives a damn. The bourgeois either live in denial or could care less if the lower classes live, die, or flop, gasping, somewhere in between.

The poor are too stupid and/or ignorant to know better, and many think that their savage and inhuman abuse, like something out of 1400’s England, is actually religiously ordained by God Himself. Sure, the bourgeois sold the poor this rope to hang themselves with or gave it to them, but they wrapped it up all up in one of the most barbaric cultural-religious systems known to modern Man, Hinduism, to give it the staying power of superglue.

The article makes clear that neoliberalism has ruined India beyond its prior Hellishness. Which is possible, since you don’t need to read Milton to learn that Hell can always get worse.

The pollution and the filth.

The pollution and filth is destroying India and turning it into an actual open cesspool/sewage ditch/garbage dump. One that traverses the whole country. It’s not only nauseous to breathe or look at the filth that surrounds you without respite, but it’s actually literally sickening. A visit to India means a continuous low-level infectious illness from all the filth drowning out your world.

Worse, Indians don’t care. See that guy shitting on the sidewalk? Pay no attention to him. OK, he’s getting up and walking away now. No problem, just don’t step it. The rich pay the trash collectors to keep their neighborhoods clean, and the Hell with everyone else. A callousness reminiscent of Anglo-Irish absentee landlords in 1820’s Ireland.

The one good thing about neoliberalism is a decline in bureaucracy. You gut government so there’s not much left. Bureaucracy means too many idle government slackers wasting time and messing around when they should be working. It could also mean an insanely underfunded state, which is probably the case with India.

The government doesn’t give a damn about anything but the rich. The state exists only to suck up to the rich or in its human form to move up classwise and become part of the elite class. The state cares nothing about workers, consumers, the environment – Hell, about anything relating to the people.

Everyone who works for the state is a crook, and they are all on the take. Schools and hospitals in rural areas are empty. Doctors and teachers collect salaries and never show up for work.

Nothing works. The electric grid is down most of the time, but you pay at the end of the month anyway even if you got little or no energy use out of the system that month. The roads are nightmarish, traffic is horrifyingly dangerous, and everything is so congested it makes Los Angeles look like a breezy Sunday drive in the country. The ports don’t work either – they look like something out of 1900. Let’s see, the ports don’t work, the roads don’t work, and bureaucracy stifles everything. How is this neoliberal paradise economy supposed to function anyway?

It’s tough in this neoliberal paradise to even purchase a product. Getting a hotel room is a pain in the rear end. Buying a new SIM card for your cellphone is a nightmare best avoided.

The one thing that everyone raves about in India is the trains. Nearly all Indians will insist that the trains are wonderful. Maybe 5-10 years ago they were, but not anymore. The traffic has maybe tripled since that time, and almost no new cars or lines have been added as you would expect neoliberals to do. The lines are Hellish, and customer service is probably better in Hell itself. Worse, no one cares. Even worse than that, Indians think Indian Train Hell is Paradise itself.

Malnutrition effects 5

The starvation and malnutrition levels are actually worse than in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa. Kelly echoes this by saying that he’s been in 50 countries the world over, and even Ethiopia was less of a shithole than India. That’s a powerful indictment. To the Africans’ credit, most Africans, despite their IQ’s, will readily admit to you that their country is a shithole. They don’t like it, and they want change. Good for them.

The first part of getting out of a hole is not just to stop digging but to realize that you’re in a nasty hole in the first place and would prefer to climb out rather than digging your way towards China and sure death.

Indians not only won’t stop digging, they think that trying to dig your way to China is some kind of a cultural-religious noble endeavor. Any Samaritans stopping by to toss them a rope or offer a hand are showered with abuse for refusing to acknowledge that the Indian’s deep dug pit is actually the greatest civilization created by man. Predictably, most sane folks throw down the rope, say the Hell with em, and walk on.

The Indian keeps digging as the water fills in around his muddy and beaten feat. Hunger gnaws at his belly. In response to his dim and plunging prospects, he can think of nothing to do but shout, “Glory to Bharat!” while cursing Muslims, Christians and those nasty British. With every breath, the water’s creeping higher.

You wonder why I support the Indian Maoists. Of all of the people in India, only the Maoists seem to have a bat’s chance in Hell of negotiating some kind of a future lessening of the mess above. Everyone else is cheerily on board for stasis or worsening.

*About the title, I would like to sincerely apologize to all of the actual shitholes in the world. They were just poor innocent holes, sitting there in the ground minding their own business until some mean person came along and filled them up with shit.

I am truly sorry, shitholes, I didn’t mean to compare you with India.

Trailer for Oliver Stone’s South of the Border

Here.

Looks pretty good. Interviews with Raul Castro in Cuba, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Kristina Kirchner and her husband Nestor Kirchner in Argentina, Fernando do Lugo in Paraguay and Lula da Silva in Brazil.

Those South American accents the Presidents are speaking are really wild. I could barely understand a word any of them were saying.

Comes with another silly article in the Guardian by an interviewer who conducted a 1-hour interview with Chavez for the Guardian. Stephen Sackur’s interview is a bunch of distorted crap, as usual.

Yes, there is inflation in Venezuela, mostly due to an overheated economy but also due to the fact that the poor have so much more money now that they are buying so much more stuff. Also the producers are withholding products from the market to create artificial shortages in order to drive prices even higher. The US allies in Venezuela think that prices are not high enough!

Yes, there is an economic downturn, similar to one occurring all over the world, like in the US and Europe. I suppose the downturn there is due to the fact that capitalism is a failed system too?

Yes, there is unemployment in Venezuela, but the rate has been cut in half from 1

Chavez is not “manufacturing poor people” as the opposition media owner claims. The poverty rate has collapsed under Chavez. He cut poverty in half.

He has not turned the oil, agriculture and power industries into vast state bureaucracies . The oil sector has always been state-run, but it was run by the elite for their own benefit. Chavez made it into a company that works for the people. He got rid of the elitist bureaucrats. The vast majority of the ag sector is in private hands, mostly in large estates. The state has only conducted some land reforms and turned idle land over to landless peasants. The power industry has been nationalized, true, as it has been in many European countries. So what?

Yes, the bolivar was devalued, a good idea. This was an economically necessary move and there was nothing wrong with it.

7

RCTV was shut down for many reasons. Keep in mind that they supported the coup in 2002. If a TV station was a co-conspirator in a military coup to overthrow the US government, would it still be on the air. Anyway, they were kept on the air for years after the coup. They failed to abide by many reasonable regulations that they were asked to abide by, including keeping decent records.

They refused to abide by these rules in order to force a showdown with Chavez. Yes, they got suspended, but all they did was go to cable, where most of the Venezuelan media is anyway, like the US broadcast media. So they are still on the air and as wildly anti-Chavez as ever.

The owner of Globovision was arrested for economic crimes that he committed. The arrest warrant was issued not by Chavez but by a court. The charges are crimes related to his auto business. Chavez is cracking down on crooked businessmen all over the country. Too bad.

Yes, there is state corruption in Venezuela. It effects both Chavistas and economic pols in the states and cities that they rule. Corruption is a long-standing problem in Venezuela dating back to the early days of the Republic. It’s not going away anytime soon.

Interview with CPI (Maoist) Spokesperson Gopalji on the Current State of the Revolution in India

Great interview with an Indian Maoist spokesperson from the Monthly Review. The interviewer is hostile, as you might expect. The talk took place in Jharkand. We don’t hear much about Jharkand these days, but lately the Maoists have seriously overrun almost the entire state. The lower half of Bihar to the north is also seriously overrun as is the far east of West Bengal.

I believe that the situation in Jharkand is different from Chattisargh. Chattisargh is almost all adivasi tribals, but I think there are more Dalits involved in Jharkand – that is, it’s not a totally adivasi rebellion.

The spokesman answers a lot of good questions.

No, they are not opposed to mining and industrial development, only such that harms the interests of the people.

In the Maoist army, cadre of all different castes sit down at the same table and eat together. You won’t fight that scene in many other places in India. That right there is an excellent blow against caste. The spokesman actually mentioned caste and Dalits quite a bit, probably because of the dynamics of Jharkand. That’s a good thing, because they have been criticized by Dalit groups for ignoring the caste question.

The Maoists have their work seriously cut out for them. They need to expand a lot, and this Green Hunt offensive is a great opportunity. They need to move into urban areas from small towns to cities. They need to establish a foothold in the universities among professors and students, and also in the K-12 public schools. Making inroads with urban workers and slum dwellers is a must. Also, they need to move out of Eastern India and into the center and west of the country. But organization will be a lot more difficult in the West in Punjab, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

This interview answers a lot of questions about the Maoists and counters a lot of state propaganda. It’s long at 52 pages, but if I could get through it, than you can too.

In this wide-ranging interview, Gopalji discusses many important issues including: The development of Revolutionary People’s Committees and the Maoists’ efforts to establish fully liberated base areas; the agriculture, education and health projects the Maoists have built; how they conduct military operations to avoid harm to local people; Operation Green Hunt and moves towards a fascist police state; the challenge of developing the revolutionary movement in the plains and among the working class and petty bourgeoisie in the cities; how the Maoists plan to defeat the powerful Indian military and state; and what a New Democratic state would look like in India.

Interview with Gopalji, Spokesperson of the Special Area Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) in a Forest in Jharkhand, Eastern India

by Alpa Shah

Communism in the rest of the world seems to have collapsed. What hope do you have of achieving a socialist state in India?

The claim that there is no hope for socialism and communism, that they are dead, is mere propaganda unleashed by the imperialists and the apologists of capitalism. The 20th century saw the first round of revolutions led by the working classes and the toiling masses of the communist parties in various parts of the world – the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, the Revolution in Vietnam and many more. The 21st century will see a new wave of revolutions led by communist parties such as ours in India.

Massive socio-economic and political transformation takes time. The bourgeoisie took at least 400 years to achieve victory over feudalism and even then they entered into unholy alliances with the feudals in order to fight the working classes. These alliances are still prevalent today in many countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America in order to stop the revolutions of the toiling masses led by the communist parties.

After the Great Depression II, the recent economic crisis, there are very few takers of the bourgeois philosophy TINA, ‘There is No Alternative,’ to capitalism. Many intellectuals, many people in the developed countries, in the capitalist countries, have turned to Marx’s Das Kapital. Recent developments in the world have proved the theory of Marx, the invincibility of Marxism and the inevitability of socialism and communism.

Only socialism and communism can eradicate hunger, poverty and inequality and solve problems, such as that of climate change, which our planet is facing. In India we are trying to achieve a New Democratic Revolution as part of the world’s socialist revolutions.

What stage are you at in the Indian revolution?

In general we are in the phase of guerrilla warfare. This means that the armed struggle against the state is the principal form of struggle and armed organization is the principal form of organization.

In some places, such as in Dandakaranya and in some parts of Jharkhand, we have formed Revolutionary People’s Committees (RPC’s), which are the organs of alternative people’s power. If this continues, we will be able to build base areas.

Base areas are places where the enemy, the ruling classes (that is the Indian big-bourgeoisie and the landlords) do not have any organ of power – any military, any police force, or any administrative apparatus – and where people develop their own organs of power, their own army and their own administrative apparatus to implement economic policies of the people by the people’s government. Our immediate target is to build base areas in certain pockets of our country.

What are the strategies you are using to achieve a base area?

Our guiding ideology is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Our strategy is ‘protracted people’s war’. Comrade Mao taught us that the poor nations, the nations where semi-colonial, semi-feudal systems are in existence, should take the path of protracted people’s war – making bases in the countryside and then encircling the towns from the countryside.

This is the strategy taken by the communist party here in India and it is the strategy taken by Maoists in semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries all over the world. In India, there are certain changes; it is not exactly similar to pre-revolution China. So we have made certain changes in our tactics to suit the changes in our concrete conditions.

What are the main differences between the conditions that existed at the time of the protracted people’s war in China and the conditions in India now?

Internationally we are operating in a world where there is no socialist country or bases to seek help from. After the WWII, various national liberation struggles forced the imperialists to renounce the old form of direct colonial rule. So they resorted to neocolonial forms of exploitation. Internally, India now has a centralized and militarized state that has reached the remotest parts of the country. Transport and communications are far more developed. Chieftains who had their own armies dominated the Chinese countryside.

In India we don’t have such a situation. The loathsome caste hierarchy with a strict Brahminical order is the backbone of Indian feudalism and there is uneven development in every aspect of the socio-economic and cultural realms. The Indian ruling classes ruled this country for over 60 years in a so-called ‘democratic’ framework. India has a much bigger urban petty bourgeois class and a huge working class force.

It is a county of numerous nationalities at varying degrees of development. India has a long history of revisionist practice that still has considerable influence over the toiling masses and these revisionists have proved themselves an apologist of this reactionary rule.

There are also big differences in the process of building the army and the base areas. In China they already had a base area and an army. Even before the formation of the Communist Party, the Kuomintang was leading a bourgeois democratic revolution against imperialism and feudalism. We had neither a base area nor an army when we began. We started with a small squad and have been able to form a People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army.

So our struggle will be longer and different. Additionally, we have vast plain areas that need a somewhat different treatment than hilly and forested regions. The importance of urban work and the need for organizing the working class is greater in our country. Apart from organizing a strategic united front of the four classes, we are also making a special effort to organize adivasis, dalits, women, minorities and various nationalities.

The Indian bourgeoisie exists in some form even in remote parts of India. We see the effects of capitalism in all the nooks and crannies of remote villages here – people who want motorbikes, mobile phones, notions of private property, individualism. What hope do you have of creating an alternative set of values in the world?

The people know that our party is fighting for an India structured around principles of equality. We want an India where individuals cannot amass capital and private property while simultaneously driving large sections of the society into poverty. We are here to make a corruption-free India where corruption, dishonesty and lies have no place; and where honesty, labour and truth are rewarded.

They also know that we are fighting against discrimination based on gender, caste, religion and other sectarian identities. For instance we encourage inter-caste marriages. We want a society where no one is bigger or greater on the basis of his or her birth.

While the effects of capitalism and its affiliated values are certainly in the rural countryside, a vast section of the society is against their corrupting and deteriorating effects. By and large the peasants and the workers support the values that we are fighting for. They participate in the struggles, based on these values, that our party organizes. They are fond of our cultural troops, read magazines and listen to the audio-cassettes and the CD’s that we release.

Our supporters also appreciate and promote the values that are perpetuated within the party. For instance, caste hierarchy has no place in our community. People from different castes eat from the same plate amongst our cadres: a concept that is generally unthinkable for many people outside our party.

Women are treated equally to men and there is no division of labour based on gender roles within the party. Our cadres are not paid a salary; they live a simple life that meets basic needs without unnecessary luxuries. They appreciate the values and visions of living that are being created within the party and are here to promote them beyond the party. There is much hope that these values will spread like fire across the Indian countryside, despite the efforts to trample them out by the Indian big bourgeoisie, because our supporters are increasing on a daily basis.

Why are you boycotting elections in your strongholds?

The Indian parliament and constitution actually represent the big bourgeoisie class and the big landlord class – not the people, not the toiling masses or the middle classes of India. So for any basic change, if you want to bring any basic change in the lives of the ordinary masses, you must first bring a new constitution and a parliament based on that new constitution.

So any action like participation in elections will actually strengthen the same reactionary parliament that is causing havoc, which is causing tragedy to the lives of the ordinary people. That is why we call upon people to boycott the elections. They must boycott the parliament itself that is reactionary and anti-people.

India is often declared one of the world’s largest democracies. Clearly you disagree?

India is not even a bourgeois democracy. It is actually a semi-colonial and semi-feudal state. The vast majority of people in India do not have any democratic rights. The transfer of power from the British in 1947 went into the hands of the comprador Indian bourgeoisie and the big landlords – the tested servants of the colonialists. In fact these two classes served the British imperialists in pre-independence British India.

The vast majority of the people did not get any rights. The new government talked of land reform but in practice they did not give land to the actual cultivators. People did not acquire equal opportunities in the case of jobs, or in access to health and educational facilities. Corruption has become a way of life in India. Now crores of people are dying of hunger and diseases.

People are not allowed to speak openly and to organize, although they have written provision for so many things in their constitution. In fact the constitution carried majority of acts from colonial rule and has been prepared under their instructions. How can a bureaucracy, which was serving colonialism till yesterday, become democratic, pro-people and patriotic overnight?

So this claim of independence of 1947 is actually not for large sections of the Indian people who achieved no democratic rights. Moreover, today the Indian parliament obeys the dictates of the WTO and the World Bank. It is actually carrying out the instructions of US imperialism – the chieftain of world imperialism.

The Indian ruling classes claim that India is a federal and secular republic. But how federal are they? The Kashmiri people are fighting for the implementation of the provision of the plebiscite for a separate Kashmir and the people of the Northeast are fighting for their cause, for their own nations.

Observe how brutally the Indian government is treating them. Analyze the center-state relations. They claim that the provincial governments have so many powers. But actually the power is centered in Delhi and center-state relations are very feudal. The central government is least interested in decentralizing power to the state governments. When capital is concentrated in the hands of the comprador big bourgeoisie, backed by imperialists, how can you expect the decentralization of power?

As far as the claim of being a secular country is concerned, you have seen the state initiated and promoted massacres of the minorities over the years. Their claims that India is a democratic, federal and a secular republic are a big farce.

What does democracy mean for you?

Our immediate aim is to achieve a New Democratic Revolution. In a New Democratic India, power will be in the hands of a four-class alliance – a strategic united front where no one class is in power – the workers, the peasants, the petty bourgeoisie and the national bourgeoisie.

This new state will liberate the peasants from the clutches of feudalism. It will liberate national capital from finance and comprador capital, confiscate finance and big capital and assets, and write off the foreign loans. It will seize the surplus land from the landowners and distribute it among the landless and poor peasants. It will eradicate each and every instance of imperialism and feudalism in the realm of economy, culture and politics.

The New Democratic Revolution will thus bring a truly federal and secular democratic republic of India that will give the oppressed nationalities a right to self-determination and even to secede. That India will not favour any religion: religion will be a private affair. It will bring an India in which people have not only equal opportunities in jobs, medical and educational facilities but also the objective conditions for everyone to avail of them.

The united front of the four-class alliance will be organized under a decentralized organ of power of the people called Revolutionary People’s Committees (RPC’s). RPC’s will represent the majority of the people of India and will be elected by a truly representative body of the people. In fact in the countryside where our struggle is currently strong, particularly in Dandakaranya and Jharkhand, this united front, whatever classes we have in the villages, are already being organized under Revolutionary People’s Committees (RPC’s).

In Dandakaranya we have RPC’s at a village level, at a block level, and in one or two places at the district level too. These are in rudimentary form at present, they are just emerging.

In the last elections you blew up schools and hospitals in the areas where you have a strong presence. Why?

In our areas of struggle, the state’s paramilitary forces are establishing police camps in the schools. You will find hundreds of schools in the struggling areas where the enemy forces have built up camps. We blow up only those schools where the police regularly establish military camps for their combing operations – not all the schools.

The case of blowing up a hospital is rare. It is in fact very rare to have hospital buildings in the countryside and even in those cases where there may be hospital buildings, they are not functioning as hospitals: the doctors never visit them and there are no medicines.

As far as schools are concerned, this government is least interested in educating the boys and girls of the toiling masses. You can see the conditions of the education system, the way in which they are privatizing the whole education system and how the boys and girls of the ordinary people of India are unable to have advanced studies.

In some places where we have blown up schools, we talked to the villagers, to the supporters and sympathizers of the movement, before blowing them up. And in some places we are rebuilding the schools. Please be clear that when we blow up schools we make sure there is no one in the school and that we are also running many of our own schools in the countryside.

If the government stopped using the schools as military camps, there would be no need to blow up the schools. The High Court recently passed a verdict that schools should not be used as police camps. But even after this verdict the security forces have not vacated the schools. Many schools in the countryside are actually being built for military purpose, and the police humiliate the students and hamper the studies there. That is why we are forced to blow up a few schools.

India has made huge investments in developing the nation. Why are you so critical of the government’s development program agenda?

There are two things. First is the development programs of the government and second is more broadly their concept of development.

All these development programs are actually a part of their strategy of Low Intensity Conflict (LIC). This is a reform and dole program. The Indian government is least interested in the development of the common people. Even according to their own estimates, 7

This is the case after 62 years of so-called Independence! In 2000-2001, the average availability of food grains for an Indian was 157 kilograms, now it is hardly 140 kilograms. So this is the pathetic condition we have. On the other hand, a few Indians are becoming billionaires and the Indian state is boasting of that.

What the Indian government is actually trying to do through these developmental works is to create their social base in the form of petty contractors and other middlemen – becholia, we call them. Their aim is to divert youth who are naturally coming towards the revolution. So many youths are being diverted to petty contracts. These are sugarcoated bullets. Just observe the development projects in the countryside.

Even today, more than 6

Even this much-publicized NAREGA, National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, is a big flop because it has so many lacunae in it. Corruption is everywhere. People are not getting wages. The claim is to give employment for 100 days per person. But people are not getting employment even for 10 days. Moreover, NAREGA neither provides a permanent and stable form of employment nor does it challenge the power structure of inequality in our countryside.

So what they are trying to claim as developmental projects are not developmental at all. They are part of their strategy of Low Intensity Conflict to fight the armed struggle, the struggle of the people of India.

More broadly, there is much to criticize in their concept of development. The development of the country should not be related to Sensex and GDP growth rates. The government thinks that the development of the comprador big bourgeoisie, landlords, a few bureaucrats and multinationals is the development of the country.

For us the development of the people is actually the development of the country. They are least interested in solving the fundamental problems of the people. Their development is dependent on imperialism that just prevents our country from becoming self-dependent. Following the instructions of the World Bank and the World Trade Organization, the government is promoting the policies of globalization, privatization and liberalization. They are trying to sell out our natural resources, our land, our forests, to the Indian big bourgeoisie and their imperialist masters.

Coincidentally, the natural resources are mainly concentrated in the areas of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal and Orissa where the Maoists have a strong presence. More than 8

I will give you some examples. In Singur they sold land with the help of the so-called left government to the Tatas. In Nandigram they sold it to an Indonesian bourgeoisie, the Salem group. And in Lalgarh they sold it to Jindals. And in all the three places, we organized movements against this naked selling of cultivable lands of the peasants and against the displacement of the peasants. And in all the three places they were forced to withdraw.

In Orissa, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh we are fighting against the plunder by the comprador big bourgeoisie of iron ore and coal. And in these areas, the adivasis, mainly the adivasis but also the nonadivasis, the moolvasis, will be forced to vacate their homes and villages.

They will be displaced in great numbers as they have been in the past for the sake of so many ‘development’ projects. So now we are fighting against this plunder. We are fighting this implementation of liberalization and privatization. That is why they are saying that we are against this kind of development. Now it is for the people to see who is against the development of ordinary citizens.

So are you against the development of mines altogether?

No, we are not against the development of mines or the installation of plants and factories. We are against the plunder of our natural resources, our motherland, by the Indian big bourgeoisie and their imperialist masters who are plundering them only for their own profit. The Indian government is not interested in opening plants and mines for the betterment of the people.

The people in these areas – they will be forced to vacate their areas. The people will be thrown out. They will become wage earners in towns. They will be displaced in great numbers as they have been in many development projects earlier. In earlier cases where they built mega projects in Bokaro, Tata, and other places, people couldn’t get sufficient compensation – most people did not get land or homes or proper jobs in the plants that were built. Hundred and thousands of people, adivasis and moolvasis, were displaced.

So what is the guarantee that this will not happen again? That is why we are organizing people against such plunder and such loot of our natural resources. We won’t allow the plunder of our land and our natural resources by the imperialists and their allies, the Indian big bourgeoisie.

Under a Maoist government a few things will be kept in mind before opening plants and mines in these areas.

First, such plants and mines are nationalized and must be used for interest of the country. They must not be open for the profit of certain capitalists, bourgeoisie and multinational corporations.

Second, in general the cultivable lands should not be taken for mining and other things.

Third, if taking such land is unavoidable, then proper compensation must be given to the affected families. They should be given appropriate compensation for the land. They should be given jobs, they should be given homes, and some lands for cultivation. The New Democratic state will look after the welfare of the displaced people.

Fourth, these mines and plants must be eco-friendly. You must consider the ecological factors while opening these plants and mega projects as this is becoming a vital thing in our lives, in the lives of the human civilization.

And fifth, people must be taken into confidence before you start such projects; they should be taken into the management of such plants and mines. In our state, when we will build a New Democratic India, we will take into account all these things.

You say you are against the corruption. However, it is widely reported that you fund yourself through the black economy of development schemes coming in through the state. How do you justify participation in the very systems of corruption that you are against?

This is not corruption. This is taxation. In the areas of our struggle, we are the authority that is serving the people. We therefore tax those who are amassing wealth through major development programs and their contractorship in order to use this wealth for the service of our masses. We are using the funds to accelerate our struggles and we are using them in radical reform programs under the leadership of RPC’s.

We have rules and norms around how we tax people. For instance large schemes and operations are taxed more than smaller ones. We don’t tax the building of schools, hospitals, small tanks, tube wells etc. We also have rules and norms around how we use the fund collected. So we are not simply collecting money for private gain – that would be corruption. We are collecting money for the service of our toiling masses.

Your struggles against corruption, against caste discrimination, against feudal values are also the struggles of human rights organizations and NGOs. How do you differentiate yourself from such organizations?

Social, political and cultural values are based on the economic structure. Unless you change the economic system any talk of reforming social-cultural and political values is just a farce. The NGOs and the government human rights organization fight cases on an individual basis and from within the system. Feudal and imperialist values are part of their system.

These organisations are being nourished by the system itself. Unless you eradicate the system, you overthrow the system, you can’t have another system that will promote an alternative set of values, the democratic values. Fighting individual cases of caste discrimination or discrimination against women, or discrimination against dalits and adivasis, won’t take us far; it won’t eradicate the system.

You must eradicate the whole system. And in order to eradicate the whole system of feudal and imperial values, you must seize power. The NGOs and the human rights organizations don’t go for the seizure of power. They fight within the confines of India’s pro-elite constitution. In most cases they work only as safety-valves for the state whose credibility is eroding fast. That is the limitations of their conception.

In areas of Jharkhand where the party has been around for 20 odd years, what are the concrete achievements of the Maoists?

The first and foremost achievement is that the toiling masses, the landless laborer and the poor peasants, have emerged as a political and military force in India. In our struggling areas feudal authority has been demolished to a great extent. The struggling people have developed a guerrilla army of their own in the form of the People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army.

The second important achievement is the dignity and place in society that the dalits and adivasis have attained in the face of the historic discrimination they have endured. Wrong practices such as abuses against women, abuses against dalits and adivasis, and the dominance of the upper castes and outsiders in the forest areas are all changing now.

The third is the emancipation of forests that were under the control of the forest department, the corrupt and repressive forest officials. Even the lower level staff were quite repressive and they were controlled by the forest mafias and landlords. The forests are now completely liberated and the people are free to use the forests according to their needs. We have been able to control deforestation.

The fourth is the achievements of the antifeudal struggle. People in our struggling areas are enjoying democratic rights. We have seized thousands of acres of the lands of landlords and in many places, most of the places, the landlords have been ousted from the villages. In many places we have implemented land ceilings – sometimes radical ceilings – decided by our party locally. And surplus in lands have been distributed amongst the landless and poor peasants. In many places, the peasants are cultivating the land.

The wages in Bihar and Jharkhand in agriculture were very low. The wages for the collection of kendu patta and other forest materials such as mohalaun patta were also very low. So we organized people to demand a hike in wages. Now people have a comparatively better wage rate. Usury, that is mahajani, has been widely abolished. You won’t find the old kind of mahajan or money lender any more in the struggling areas.

In our struggling areas we have stopped theft and dacoity. Apart from this, we have abolished the auction of tanks, river beds, bazaars, orchards etc by the government to big contractors. Now these resources are free for the people to use.

In our areas of influence there is almost no communal riot. The Sangh goons just cannot dare to organize this. In a few places where they have dared, we have punished them as in the case of Swami Laxmanand in Kandhamal, Orissa.

Another important achievement is that till now we have been able to restrict to a great extent the implementation of various Memorandums of Understandings that the state government and central governments have signed with the big bourgeoisie and the multinationals – so they have not been able to plunder the land, loot the resources, as comfortably as they might have thought they could.

As far as our developmental schemes are concerned – unless you seize the power centrally, it is not possible to implement pro-people policies thoroughly. But even then, in places where we have formed RPC’s, we have tried to develop pro-people economic policies.

For instance, we are promoting the formation of cooperatives in agriculture and other related occupations. Secondly we are trying to develop methods of cultivation in the backward areas – we are digging up canals, wells and tanks – mostly through shramdan – voluntary labour. And we are opening schools and hospitals. We are giving medicines at subsidized rates. These things we are doing where we have formed RPC’s. But all these things are in rudimentary form.

The Indian Government has labeled you a terrorist organization. How do you respond to this?

The first thing is that this labeling is a part of a so-called ‘War on Terror’ unleashed by the US imperialists. The Indian ruling classes are fast emerging as favorites of US imperialism in South Asia. Actually the ruling classes of India are vying with the Pakistani ruling classes to be the favorites of US imperialism.

So what does US imperialism mean by terrorism? Any movement, or any mobilization or any act of protest that goes against the interest of US imperialism, that goes against the hegemony of US imperialism, which goes against the grand design of US imperialism of a new Empire, is being labeled ‘terrorist’ by US imperialists.

The governments in Asia, Africa and Latin America are labeling the nationality movements, and the movements of the toiling masses in their countries, as terrorist. In India too, the ruling classes are labeling the movements waged by the people under the leadership of the Maoists, the nationality movements in the North Eastern Provinces, and the nationality movement in Kashmir as terrorist movements.

The labeling of the Maoists as ‘terrorist’ gives more power to the police to arrest any person who is progressive and democratic – he/she need not be related to any mass organization of CPI(Maoist). The police forces are able to pick people if they speak against any undemocratic method, any repressive method, of the state. This includes journalists, lawyers, intellectuals and civil liberties activists. So first of all, we severely condemn this labeling.

Second thing is that there are some significant differences between us and those who commit terrorist acts. Terrorist activities generally cause indiscriminate killing, including the killing of innocent people. We condemn such killing and we are totally against such actions in which innocent peoples become victims.

We have never supported even a small action that harms an innocent villager. Wherever our armed unit has committed such a mistake, we readily come out to make self-criticism on such things. We are totally against the killing of innocent citizens; we are against indiscriminate killing.

Moreover, we are not going to make India into a theocratic state. Religious fundamentalism is often observed in terrorist acts: some organizations using terrorist activities claim that they are working towards building a theocratic state. This is entirely the opposite of what we want to achieve in the New Democratic India.

Our ideology is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. We are fighting for a truly federal, secular and democratic Republic of India. The labeling of CPI(Maoist) as a terrorist organization is very malicious. It is full of cunning through which the Indian government wants to befool the people, deceive the people, by sheer propaganda.

As far as our functioning is concerned, the terrorist labeling is not going to affect us. Our party in any case has been functioning underground from the very beginning. So the only thing that the ‘terrorist’ label will achieve is that that it will give more power to the police forces to harass the common people, especially in the struggling areas.

The government has just declared that they are going to wipe you out totally in three years’ time. The largest military offensive against the Maoists has begun. What are you facing?

We condemn the Indian government’s military offensive against the Maoists. This plan is totally in tune with the imperialists – actually the Indian government has planned this offensive at the behest of US imperialism. This United Progressive Alliance government, under the leadership of the Congress party, is quite fascist in nature. When Chidambaran says that we won’t talk about development before the Maoists are wiped out, you can observe the reactionary content and the fascism of his intentions.

Repression campaigns are not new to us. We have faced so many repression campaigns in the past. But this is the greatest one. They are deputing 75 battalions of paramilitary forces along with an equal number of state forces to fight the Maoists. The rein of the operations is in the hands of the central government and the Central Reserve Police Forces are in command.

They are in addition preparing so many commando forces – like the Special Task Force, Jharkhand Jaguar and Cobra, the Indian Reserve Battalion, the Special Auxiliary Police, in the line of the Greyhounds. And they have established many jungle warfare schools at various places.

In Chhattisgarh they have started the military campaign in September 2009 – you know in one month they killed at least 27 people in two massacres – 27 innocent people. They burnt 12 villages. They looted, they raped and the burnt. Thousands of people have been force to flee, to vacate their villages. They are fleeing to Andhra Pradesh and Orissa.

In Lalgarh they have deputed 7,000 forces in just one district. And they are just killing innocent villagers. In Jharkhand they have also begun. You know the result is that they are going to involve even the army and the air force in so many disguised ways. You know all this means that they are going to kill many thousands and thousands of innocent people.

And the whole area of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa and West Bengal that is very rich in mineral resources and that this government is trying to sell to the imperialist comprador big bourgeoisie and other big contractors will then be clear for them.

There are many aspects of this offensive, this repression campaign. There is not only the military side; there are other sides too – what we call in Hindi, sam, dam, dande, ved (fear, temptation, punishment and division). So they are also strengthening their intelligence network. They will spend much more money in developing coverts and developing intelligence sources from the local people: police informers. And they won’t keep any record – this is the instruction of the central government – they can spend much money on this work.

Next, they have passed many black laws and they have allowed state governments to pass black laws to suit their needs. So actually what we are going to have is a complete police state in India. And again the centralization of power in Delhi will be observed more.

The state governments will lose much of their powers in the enforcement of laws and in maintaining what they call ‘law and order’. So the government is obviously not taking this movement as a democratic movement, and when Chidambaran says CPI(Maoist) is a terrorist organization, their stand is clear.

What they will add to these campaigns is the vicious propaganda against us that they have already been spreading. For instance, the notion that leading Maoist leaders are making money and there has been a large embezzlement of party funds by the party leaders. They spread the rumor that there is sexual anarchy in the party; that the Maoists are against development; and that Maoists are promoting the cultivation of opium; and that Maoists are obstructing the Public Distribution System.

They want to brand us as criminals; they claim that we kill innocent people. Every day you will see advertisements by the police in the form of news reports in the newspapers. Sometimes there are hoardings in the towns – propagating so many incorrect things about our party and our movement.

Moreover, the corporate media – both the TV channels and the newspapers and the other forms of the media that are controlled by the corporate world – are supporting the government and putting forward the government’s stand in spreading propaganda against our party, and against the leadership of our organization. The corporate media is supporting the government wholeheartedly.

So in the coming days we will see that this military offensive will bring India to a complete fascist state where not only the struggles raised by the CPI(Maoist) but also the struggles raised by the ordinary citizens against displacement, against the job losses resulting from privatization, against hunger, against anti-people economic policies – particularly agricultural policies – and many such struggles will face brutal state repression and all will be clubbed in one term, ‘terrorist’.

Any honest struggle will be branded terrorist; that is what you will see in the coming days.

Armed struggle involves a lot of deaths along the way. There are media reports that a thousand people a year are dying as a result of Maoist-related violence. How do you justify the death of so many people?

First, who are those whom the party eliminates? Annihilation is the last choice. We only annihilate those reactionaries – the landlords, the police agents and the members of the gangs raised by the government – who do not accept their crime and do not surrender before the people’s courts. The government and the corporate media create propaganda against us – that many people are killed in Maoist-related violence. I don’t know the exact numbers they are claiming and what they are propagating but a part of it is malicious propaganda against us.

Second, see the other side of the picture. What are the hundreds of thousands of army personnel and paramilitary forces doing in Kashmir and the North East? Each and every day they are killing youths in fake encounters. What are the paramilitary forces and state police doing in the areas of Maoist struggle – particularly in AP, and in Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand? They are killing youth in hundreds.

And do you remember the pogroms of the minorities organized by the ruling classes? The anti-Sikh riots in 1984, the recent murders of thousands of Christians in Orissa, and the 2002 riots in Gujarat? How many people have the Hindu chauvinists and the state forces killed?

Right from 1947, from Indian independence, the state forces were very much hand in glove with the Hindu chauvinist forces. The corporate media and the media persons should expose the other side of the picture too – how the minorities are butchered in state-sponsored pogroms; how the people belonging to the oppressed nationalities in the North East and Kashmir are being eliminated; how the dalits and the adivasis in the struggling areas of central India are being killed by the state forces in organized killings in the name of Salwa Judum and such projects.

And lastly, do you know that during the last few years, 500,000 peasants have committed suicide because of anti-people economic policies? In the last one year, 2008-2009, thousands of peasants have become daily wage earners?

Many people are dying of hunger. This republic, as Utsna Patnaik calls, is a ‘Republic of Hunger’. So who is responsible for such deaths? Who is responsible for the death of thousands of people dying out of starvation and hunger, from so many diseases? People are left with no other option. No one is going to listen to you. This violence has been imposed by the state on the people of India.

You are waging a war against one of the world’s emerging global economic superpowers. India is a very strong state. What hope do you have of achieving success?

There are two parts to this question. It is true that the Indian state is very powerful. We are quite aware of the strength of our enemy.

However, in a war, arms and armed personnel are not the most important things. The most important thing is the people. Who is getting the support of the people? We think that we have been waging guerrilla war for the last 40 years with very, very little armed strength. It is because of the support of the people in these states that we have been able to consolidate ourselves.

And naturally because we are a party of the people, we are a party of the common man, the toiling masses, so the appeal of the program of our party is much more than those of the comprador and those of the ruling classes. So the most important thing is the support of the people. It is people’s support that will ultimately decide the fate of the war.

The second important thing is sticking to the guerrilla policies, the guerrilla methods of warfare. If we could implement the guerrilla policies of warfare completely and thoroughly and in a more and more meticulous method, and if we continue to win the support of the people of our country, we do believe that we will win this war.

If we can achieve these two things then it won’t be possible for the ruling classes of this country to abolish us, to finish us, as they are claiming. There is every chance that we will survive not only this offensive, but also many such offensives, and defeat them.

As the war intensifies, though, as the military campaign of the government rises, inevitably a lot of ordinary poor peasants are going to get caught in the war in between. You have your AK47s, your landmines, and your 306s to protect you. But there are going to be a lot of bloody deaths of ordinary villagers in the process. How can you justify this?

Sorry, you are putting the question in the wrong way. This is not a war between the CPI(Maoist) and the Indian state. This is a war between the people of India and the Indian state. What is CPI(Maoist)? What is the People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army (PLGA)? It is nothing but the organized strength of the people.

So if they harm the CPI(Maoist), if they harm PLGA that is fighting under the leadership of CPI(Maoist), then actually they are harming the organized strength of the people. And the people understand this and that any such war is not a war against a party, it is a war against the people – we should look at the whole situation in this perspective.

In the same way that you do not distinguish between the CPI(Maoist) and the people, surely you cannot differentiate between the people and the present Indian government? For example, many of the policemen who are your main targets are coming from the same houses as some of your own supporters and cadres. So why are you killing policemen from poor village backgrounds in the process of the war?

It is true that in ambushes the policemen who are killed generally come from humble backgrounds. However, they have only ever been targeted when they have been on their area domination operations, on their combing operations, and they have come to suppress the people and the people’s movement.

I can give you a few examples. You know there are many policemen and armed personnel living in our struggling areas who are serving the police department and army elsewhere. Their families are our supporters. Whenever these officers return to their home village in festivals or on vacation, you will not be able to cite a single example when our party has harmed them.

Secondly, rarely have we harmed any home guards that are from the villages.

Third, we restrain ourselves from harming the zila police, the district police, who are actually in the main the local people. Whenever we have ambushed the policemen, we have ambushed them when they are coming as combat forces, when they come to suppress the people, when they come to suppress the people’s movement – only then they have been targeted.

In a war, if your enemy is using the persons who come from your own class, it is inevitable that they will become a target of the offensive. Our appeal to the policemen, to the army personnel, is that the state they are serving is not their state. The ruling classes they are serving are actually against the interest of their families. So it is better they come out from this reactionary army, reactionary police department, and join the PLGA.

P Chidambaram, the Home Minister, has been calling you to the negotiating table. Why don’t you go?

P Chidambaram actually proposed that the Maoists must lay down arms before they call them for any kind of negotiations. Then, after a massive protest by the intellectuals and progressive persons, he is now saying that the Maoists must abjure violence before the government can call them for any kind of negotiations. This simply means that the government is putting conditions that are unacceptable to us.

You just can’t have negotiations at gunpoint. You have your paramilitary forces inside the struggling areas and you are making statements daily that you will depute more and more paramilitary forces into those areas and you will depute choppers and all that. Then you say that the Maoists must come to the negotiating table: you know this is just unacceptable. In many press statements and press conferences time and again we have made it clear that we are not averse to negotiations.

But, for any kind of negotiations – history tells us that for any negotiations – you must have an atmosphere for the negotiations. In this particular condition it means that if you have your forces in the struggling areas and if you make threatening statements every day, it means that you are trying to have negotiations at gunpoint – that you are expecting us to surrender actually.

What conditions do you want for negotiation?

There is only one condition – that the government must make an atmosphere that is congenial for negotiation. Concretely speaking it means that the government must withdraw the paramilitary forces from the struggling areas, one. The government must release the revolutionary leaders and cadres and must treat them as political prisoners, number two.

The government must lift the ban from our party and the government must not prevent the democratic mass movements. These things are the basic things, but we can talk of so many things – such as the government must suspend the memoranda of Understanding that they have made with the big bourgeoisie and the imperialists. These are not the conditions – these will make the situation favourable for any kind of negotiation.

Making Sense of Kosovo

Repost from the old site.

Updated March 25, 2008:

Via Joachim Martillo, we have Backgrounder on Kosovo/Kosova.

This is one of Martillo’s pieces that I am going to support in full.

Almost the entire Western Left, and part of the libertarian Right, seems to be opposed to independence for Kosovo. This is a most sorry state of affairs and has a rather shameless history. I am very happy that Martillo has come out in favor in independence for Kosovo, no matter how problematic it may be. I am afraid he did so only because he is a Muslim, but no matter.

A background in the Balkan Wars of the 1990’s is helpful, if not essential, in understanding the declaration of independence by Kosovo.

It is also important to understand where the Workers’ World Party, of which Sarah Flounders is a member, is coming from. I don’t know a lot about them, but this Wikipedia article is a good primer.

WWP is a Trotskyite split dating from 1958. They split from the Socialist Workers Party, a standard Trotskyite group.

Their reasons were: the candidacy of Henry Wallace for President in 1948, support for Mao’s revolution in China and defense of the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956.

The SWP opposed all of these.

Mao is opposed by all Trotskyites, mostly on human rights grounds but also on the usual ultra-Left basis of not being socialist enough. Wallace’s candidacy, a revolutionary candidacy in the US in that an explicitly socialist candidate actually ran for office and got lots of votes, was probably opposed on ultra-Left reasons that he was not a Communist.

The invasion of Hungary would have been opposed on the basis that the USSR was “Stalinist”.

Trotskyites have always had a reputation of not being very pragmatic. In some ways, they are the ultimate splitters.

The WWP retains some Trotskyite leanings in that they are highly critical of Stalin. However, after Stalin died, they supported the USSR. Many Communist parties chose sides after the Soviet-China split, but the WWP continued to call for a union of all socialist countries, no matter what their ideology. In this sense, they are somewhat unique.

They also started supporting all states that were seen as resisting US imperialism. This led to difficult stances such as supporting Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

It is in this context that they opposed the breakup of Milosevic’s Communist Yugoslavia in the early 1990’s and thereafter supported Milosevic on the basis that he was a Communist. In this they reflected the views of most Communists and Leftists the world over – they supported the fascist Milosevic just because he was a Communist.

WWP is also behind International ANSWER Coalition, which led many antiwar marches. Ramsey Clark has unfortunately been associated with this group. I do not think much of the WWP.

Fascism is a nasty virus, and like many viruses, it can grow in most any human being and certainly can unfold in any society. This is what makes it such a dangerous and deadly enemy. In many ways, Russia is now a fascist state. Even Communist Vietnam has fascist tendencies of various types. It can even be argued that break away from Iran and take most of Iran’s oil wealth with them. Iran should not be expected to put up with that. A similar situation exists in Angola with Ahwaz, the Basque Country, Catalonia, Corsica, Brittany, Wales, Scotland, the here and here), Burma (separatists here , here, here, West Papua nor to its rule over Aceh, and its criminal performance in suppressing these rebellions cements those negations.

India never had any right to rule Kashmir and certainly does not now. Palestine at least ought to declare Kosovo-style independence. This blog has always supported the struggle of the Sahrawis in Spanish Sahara. The island of Bougainville deserves support for its separatism from Papua New Guinea.

In Russia, the republics of the Caucasus deserve support in their drive for independence. This includes the Chechens, the Ingush, the Dagestanis, Karachevo-Cherkessia and Kabardino-Balkaria. The Tuvans seem to deserve the right to secede also.

The situation of the Mari, Chuvash , Bashkirs , Udmurts and Tatarstan are much more difficult because none of these republics exist on Russia’s borders. States should not be forced to carve out enclaves inside their own borders. All secessionists need to cleave off lands on the borders of existing states or even split existing states. The notion of independent islands wholly surrounded by a single state is preposterous.

In India, the nations of the northeast were never part of India and their secessionist movements should be supported. Nor can India ever be said to have existed at all until 1949, as under the British it was merely a collection of 5,000 separate princely states with ever-shifting borders.

In China, the cause of Taiwan and Tibet is clearly moral and East Turkestan also seems to have a valid cause. Abkhazia and South Ossetia should be allowed to cleave off from Georgia, and they already have anyway, de facto, though Russia is supporting these movements for only the most cynical reasons. The Tamils of Sri Lanka deserve support, despite their terrible tactics.

I have much more of a problem in supporting Islamist separatists in the Philippines and in Thailand. First, their tactics are horrible. In both cases, Islamists, as they always do in wars, are simply massacring non-Muslim civilians in countless numbers.

The Koran provides justification for mass murder of non-Muslims in wartime, so this is typical behavior of most Muslims when they go to war with non-Muslims. The historical antecedents are too painful and numerous to count. Furthermore, the war against the non-Muslims often takes near-genocidal proportions.

There are examples in this century from Indonesia (Muslims massacred animists in West Papua and Christians in slaughtering Christians in the 1840’s-1860’s) and Iraq (more mass murders of Assyrians in Iraq in the mid-1800’s) and the worst of all in India around 500 years ago, when Muslim invaders murdered up to and possibly more than 50 million Hindus in the worst genocide that the world has ever seen. Quoting Will Durant:

The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.

This continues a tradition set in the early days of Islam, when invading Muslims often committed massacres of non-Muslims in various places they conquered. Notable examples occurred in Palestine and in Iran. The only conclusion is that when Muslims fight wars with non-Muslims, they are frequently genocidal conflicts, and this genocidalism is sadly sanctioned by language in the Koran itself.

As such, it is difficult to support a bunch of Islamist murderers in the Pattani region of Thailand and in Mindanao in the Philippines. In Mindanao, Muslims are only 2

Hawaii deserves to go free, but the movement has no support except among Hawaiians, about 2

In most cases, like baby birds from the nest, these colonies need to be tossed out on their own. Most are welfare cases anyway that take in far more from the Western state they are umbilically attached to than they donate in services. In other words, to the colonizer, they are a gigantic money drain.

This begs the question then of why these colonies even exist, since the logic of colonialism, which is all about the loot, demands that money-losing colonies be cut adrift. In some cases, there are imperial reasons, in others, there is simply the logic of colonialism. Once a nation becomes a colonist, the power rush is as addicting as crack. It’s a tough habit to break.

Two essential rights are at stake here.

First is the right to self-determination. This has even been ratified by the UN.

The other is a totally phony “right of a state to be secure within its borders”, which was dreamed up by states after World War 2 in their paranoia over national secessionism. This principle has no standing, as state borders have been shifting forever, and many states have only the most dubious standing for drawing their borders wherever they did.

It’s clear that the only progressive stand worth taking is in favor of self-determination. However, we should make exceptions in certain cases as above, and only real nations should have the right to secede. The right to secede should not be granted on economic or purely political grounds (such as the rightwing state of Zulia in Venezuela the rightwing Sarah Flounders’ article below entitled Washington Gets a New Colony in the Balkans is fairly typical of the criticism of the Kosovo declaration of independence.

While the USA does a lot of evil in the world, the breakup of Yugoslavia may at least initially have been a project of the German government, which for historical reasons was much more interested in an independent Slovenia than the USA was.

Neocons like Joshua Muravchik fairly quickly saw a possible opportunity to cultivate a pro-Israel Muslim population (either Slavic or Albanian) in a divided Yugoslavia. Finding such a Muslim population has been a holy grail of Zionism since Herzl created the character of Reshid Bey in Old New Land (Altneuland).

Sorting out the various claims about Kosovo requires awareness of the changing boundaries of the region. Here are two maps of the Ottoman Vilayet of Kosovo:

The first map of the Ottoman vilayet (province) of Kosovo, from 1875-1878. Kosovo is now much reduced in size from this vilayet.

The second map of the vilayet of Kosovo, from 1881-1912, shows shifting boundaries once again. Kosovo today is much smaller than this vilayet.

Claiming that Kosovo is the historical center of Serb culture is somewhat tendentious. The Ottoman Vilayet of Kosovo was larger than present-day Kosovo, and its borders shifted during the 19th and early 20th century.

Territory that had been Ottoman Kosovo is today divided among Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Greece. Kosovo regions that were in some sense the historically important Serb centers have for the most part been incorporated into Serbia, Montenegro or Macedonia. Here is a current map of Kosovo:

A current map of Kosovo, much shrunken from its former vilayet. When Serbs scream about Kosovo, you really need to ask which one they are talking about.

Ethnic Albanian Kosovars could probably legitimately argue that they rebelled from the Ottoman Empire during the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 in order to achieve independence or union with Albania, whose independence European Great Powers endorsed in 1913, but the Serbian government opportunistically used to rebellion to expand Serbia at their expense.

The Serb obsession with controlling all of Kosovo results from the development of a nationalist mythology that focuses on the Battle of Kosovo (Косовски бој, Kosova Savasi, Bitka na Kosovu, Beteja e Kosovës, or Schlacht auf dem Amselfeld).

The mythology has little connection to the facts. Lazar’s army (the “Serb” side) included Croats, ethnic Albanians (who were mostly Orthodox at that time period) and probably Bosnians. Murad’s army (the “Turkish” side) included a large contingent of Serbs.

The population composition of Kosovo/Kosova in the 14th century and later is disputed. It was not unusual for a close relative of someone with a Serb name to bear an Albanian name. Later Serb literature refers to Albanized Serb populations, but the description is dubious. Bilingualism was simply common, and the ethnic boundaries that exist today really only came into existence in the 19th century.

The following paragraphs are propagandistic:

Yugoslavia was born with a heritage of antagonisms that had been endlessly exploited by the Ottoman Turks, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and interference by British and French imperialism, followed by Nazi German and Italian Fascist occupation in World War II.

The Jewish and Serbian peoples suffered the greatest losses in that war. A powerful communist-led resistance movement made up of all the nationalities, which had suffered in different ways, was forged against Nazi occupation and all outside intervention. After the liberation, all the nationalities cooperated and compromised in building the new socialist federation.

There simply is not much evidence of Ottoman exploitation of ethnic or religious antagonism either from Ottoman or non-Ottoman sources. The Ottoman rulers generally tried to discourage local Balkan hostilities because they were administratively costly and interfered with tax collection.

The omission of any mention of Czarist Russian imperial interference shows bias.

Terminology like Jewish and Serbian peoples is questionable. Yugoslavia contained Jewish populations of Ashkenazi ethnicity and of Ibero-Berber refugee ethnicity. The term “Jewish people” comes from Zionist propaganda. While there is a Serb ethnicity, there is no Serbian ethnicity because people of many different ethnicities live within the territory of Serbia.

The implicit attempt to connect Jewish and Serb losses during WW2 is misleading. Serb politics in the lead-up to WW2 had clear fascist and Nazi currents.

While many Serb political leaders wanted to work with Germany, the German government rebuffed them because too many Germans and Austrians blamed Serbs for WW1 and the subsequent dismantlement of the pre-WW1 German and Austrian Empires.

German and Austrian hostility toward Serbs increased during WW2 and probably influenced German policy toward Serbia during the 1990s.

The situation of Kosovo before NATO intervention was a mess. It has remained a mess, and there is no particular reason to believe that independence will lead to improvement.

Kosovo’s ‘independence’ Washington gets a new colony in the Balkans

By Sara Flounders Published Feb 21, 2008 8:13 PM

In evaluating the recent “declaration of independence” by Kosovo, a province of Serbia, and its immediate recognition as a state by the U.S., Germany, Britain and France, it is important to know three things.

First, Kosovo is not gaining independence or even minimal self-government. It will be run by an appointed High Representative and bodies appointed by the U.S., European Union and NATO. An old-style colonial viceroy and imperialist administrators will have control over foreign and domestic policy. U.S. imperialism has merely consolidated its direct control of a totally dependent colony in the heart of the Balkans.

Second, Washington’s immediate recognition of Kosovo confirms once again that U.S. imperialism will break any and every treaty or international agreement it has ever signed, including agreements it drafted and imposed by force and violence on others.

The recognition of Kosovo is in direct violation of such laws – specifically U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, which the leaders of Yugoslavia were forced to sign to end the 78 days of NATO bombing of their country in 1999. Even this imposed agreement affirmed the “commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Serbia, a republic of Yugoslavia.

This week’s illegal recognition of Kosovo was condemned by Serbia, Russia, China and Spain.

Thirdly, U.S. imperialist domination does not benefit the occupied people. Kosovo after nine years of direct NATO military occupation has a staggering 60 percent unemployment rate. It has become a center of the international drug trade and of prostitution rings in Europe.

The once humming mines, mills, smelters, refining centers and railroads of this small resource-rich industrial area all sit silent. The resources of Kosovo under NATO occupation were forcibly privatized and sold to giant Western multinational corporations. Now almost the only employment is working for the U.S./NATO army of occupation or U.N. agencies.

The only major construction in Kosovo is of Camp Bondsteel, the largest U.S. base built in Europe in a generation.Halliburton, of course, got the contract. Camp Bondsteel guards the strategic oil and transportation lines of the entire region.

Over 250,000 Serbian, Romani and other nationalities have been driven out of this Serbian province since it came under U.S./NATO control. Almost a quarter of the Albanian population has been forced to leave in order to find work.

Establishing a colonial administration

Consider the plan under which Kosovo’s “independence” is to happen. Not only does it violate U.N. resolutions but it is also a total colonial structure. It is similar to the absolute power held by L. Paul Bremer in the first two years of the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

How did this colonial plan come about? It was proposed by the same forces responsible for the breakup of Yugoslavia and the NATO bombing and occupation of Kosovo.

In June of 2005, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed former Finnish President Marti Ahtisaari as his special envoy to lead the negotiations on Kosovo’s final status. Ahtisaari is hardly a neutral arbitrator when it comes to U.S. intervention in Kosovo.

He is chairman emeritus of the International Crisis Group (ICG), an organization funded by multibillionaire George Soros that promotes NATO expansion and intervention along with open markets for U.S. and E.U. investment.

The board of the ICG includes two key U.S. officials responsible for the bombing of Kosovo: Gen. Wesley Clark and Zbigniew Brzezinski. In March 2007, Ahtisaari gave his Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement to the new U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon.

The documents setting out the new government for Kosovo are available here. A summary is available on the U.S. State Department’s Web site. An International Civilian Representative (ICR) will be appointed by U.S. and E.U. officials to oversee Kosovo.

This appointed official can overrule any measures, annul any laws and remove anyone from office in Kosovo. The ICR will have full and final control over the departments of Customs, Taxation, Treasury and Banking.

The E.U. will establish a European Security and Defense Policy Mission (ESDP) and NATO will establish an International Military Presence. Both these appointed bodies will have control over foreign policy, security, police, judiciary, all courts and prisons. They are guaranteed immediate and complete access to any activity, proceeding or document in Kosovo.

These bodies and the ICR will have final say over what crimes can be prosecuted and against whom; they can reverse or annul any decision made. The largest prison in Kosovo is at the U.S. base, Camp Bondsteel, where prisoners are held without charges, judicial overview or representation.

The recognition of Kosovo’s “independence” is just the latest step in a U.S. war of reconquest that has been relentlessly pursued for decades.

Divide and rule

The Balkans has been a vibrant patchwork of many oppressed nationalities, cultures and religions. The Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia, formed after World War II, contained six republics, none of which had a majority.

Yugoslavia was born with a heritage of antagonisms that had been endlessly exploited by the Ottoman Turks, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and interference by British and French imperialism, followed by Nazi German and Italian Fascist occupation in World War II.

The Jewish and Serbian peoples suffered the greatest losses in that war. A powerful communist-led resistance movement made up of all the nationalities, which had suffered in different ways, was forged against Nazi occupation and all outside intervention. After the liberation, all the nationalities cooperated and compromised in building the new socialist federation.

In 45 years the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia developed from an impoverished, underdeveloped, feuding region into a stable country with an industrial base, full literacy and health care for the whole population.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the Pentagon immediately laid plans for the aggressive expansion of NATO into the East. Divide and rule became U.S. policy throughout the entire region. Everywhere right-wing, pro-capitalist forces were financed and encouraged.

As the Soviet Union was broken up into separate, weakened, unstable and feuding republics, the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia tried to resist this reactionary wave.

In 1991, while world attention was focused on the devastating U.S. bombing of Iraq, Washington encouraged, financed and armed right-wing separatist movements in the Croatian, Slovenian and Bosnian republics of the Yugoslav Federation. In violation of international agreements Germany and the U.S. gave quick recognition to these secessionist movements and approved the creation of several capitalist mini-states.

At the same time U.S. finance capital imposed severe economic sanctions on Yugoslavia to bankrupt its economy. Washington then promoted NATO as the only force able to bring stability to the region.

The arming and financing of the right-wing UCK movement in the Serbian province of Kosovo began in this same period. Kosovo was not a distinct republic within the Yugoslav Federation but a province in the Serbian Republic. Historically, it had been a center of Serbian national identity, but with a growing Albanian population.

Washington initiated a wild propaganda campaign claiming that Serbia was carrying out a campaign of massive genocide against the Albanian majority in Kosovo. The Western media was full of stories of mass graves and brutal rapes. U.S. officials claimed that from 100,000 up to 500,000 Albanians had been massacred.

U.S./NATO officials under the Clinton administration issued an outrageous ultimatum that Serbia immediately accept military occupation and surrender all sovereignty or face NATO bombardment of its cities, towns and infrastructure. When, at a negotiation session in Rambouillet, France, the Serbian Parliament voted to refuse NATO’s demands, the bombing began.

In 78 days the Pentagon dropped 35,000 cluster bombs, used thousands of rounds of radioactive depleted-uranium rounds, along with bunker busters and cruise missiles.

The bombing destroyed more than 480 schools, 33 hospitals, numerous health clinics, 60 bridges, along with industrial, chemical and heating plants, and the electrical grid. Kosovo, the region that Washington was supposedly determined to liberate, received the greatest destruction.

Finally on June 3, 1999, Yugoslavia was forced to agree to a ceasefire and the occupation of Kosovo.

Expecting to find bodies everywhere, forensic teams from 17 NATO countries organized by the Hague Tribunal on War Crimes searched occupied Kosovo all summer of 1999 but found a total of only 2,108 bodies, of all nationalities.

Some had been killed by NATO bombing and some in the war between the UCK and the Serbian police and military. They found not one mass grave and could produce no evidence of massacres or of “genocide.”

This stunning rebuttal of the imperialist propaganda comes from a report released by the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Carla Del Ponte. It was covered, but without fanfare, in the New York Times of Nov. 11, 1999.

The wild propaganda of genocide and tales of mass graves were as false as the later claims that Iraq had and was preparing to use “weapons of mass destruction.”

Through war, assassinations, coups and economic strangulation, Washington has succeeded for now in imposing neoliberal economic policies on all of the six former Yugoslav republics and breaking them into unstable and impoverished mini-states.

The very instability and wrenching poverty that imperialism has brought to the region will in the long run be the seeds of its undoing. The history of the achievements made when Yugoslavia enjoyed real independence and sovereignty through unity and socialist development will assert itself in the future.

Sara Flounders, co-director of the International Action Center, traveled to Yugoslavia during the 1999 U.S. bombing and reported on the extent of the U.S. attacks on civilian targets. She is a co-author and editor of the books: Hidden Agenda:U.S./NATO Takeover of Yugoslavia and NATO in the Balkans.

Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

References

Durant, Will. 1972. Story of Civilization, Vol.1, Our Oriental Heritage, p.459. New York.

Indian State Goes Officially Fascist

The Indian state has now gone officially fascist in the wake of the Operation Green Hunt against the Maoists. Many unarmed opposition movements and leaders, who apparently have nothing whatsoever to do with the armed Maoist movement, are being called “Maoists” and arrested on ridiculous charges.

One wonders exactly what the laws are on this matter? Supporters of this shit government, tell me, what exactly is legal and what exactly is illegal in terms of these Maoists? Surely if you are a member of their armed force, that is illegal. If you are a member of the CPI-Maoist political party, that is illegal too.

What else is illegal? If you talk to a Maoist, is that illegal? What if you interview one? What if you let them stay in your village? What if you say, “I like these Maoists and I support them.” Is that illegal? It’s almost impossible to tell what is legal and what is illegal anymore in this conflict.

India is going to turn into another shit death squad terror state like (past or present) Peru, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Paraguay, Brazil, Panama, Philippines, Indonesia, Russia and Turkey.

Arundhati Roy is an outspoken Leftist from India who has written some penetrating articles on the Maoists there. Does she support them? Well, I suppose so, though she’s rather coy about it. Is that illegal? Who the Hell knows!

The Indian state is now going after Roy, an acclaimed author, with full force. State-sponsored demonstrators appeared outside her home throwing rocks. Two politicians in Chattisargh state has issued complaints for her arrest on charges of “supporting the Maoists.” A top Hindu fascist BJP politician in Chattisargh called for Roy to be shot on sight. The head of the Salwa Judum death squads called for legal action to be taken against Roy.

Internet Radio, Video and Blogging as a Form of Media Communism or Socialism of the Media

Actually, I think that blogging is a form of Communism. Under true Communism, the media will be so democratized, that, say, everyone can more or less own his own printing press in a sense. Like back 200 years ago in the US, when a major city may have had hundreds of little papers, often just little broadsheets run off by individuals.

As you can see, monopoloy capitalism has been a catastrophe as far as that goes. Most cities have one paper. Newspapers are becoming more and more consolidated. We only have a few newsmagazines. There are only a few news channels in any city, and they all take the same line. The national news channels are few, and all speak with the same voice. A few owners own almost all of the radio channels, especially the news channels in the US.

In this way, a few capitalists, all quite rightwing, have monopolized all forms of media. The Internet is the ultimate in socialism and democratization of media because the cost to set up and run a blog is basically zero. It’s a serious threat to the media monopolist capitalists, so they are trying to destroy it by getting rid of the open net via the FCC, making it pay to play, creating fast lanes and slow lanes,getting rid of net neutrality, etc.

I also support pirate radio and the ability of anyone to set up a radio channel. This is occurring on the Net as people set up Net Radio. I further support public (socialist) use of the airwaves instead of selling them off to the highest bidder. I would like to see say 600 channels on cable and allow you or me to have our own channels, if we could afford the equipment. That would put you and me on the same footing at CNN and Fox and lower the cost of entry to the market.

When Reactionaries Attack

It used to be that the average person was sane on most things. I will take my mother as your average person. Despite being a Republican for many years, she knew a few truths that were not friendly to capitalists.

That workers and owners are enemies under capitalism. That Communist regimes made great strides in health care, education, feeding and housing the people, and giving everyone a job. That unions are good for workers. That primitive people lived under a communist style culture. That the fencing of the Commons was a horrific nightmare for the average resident of the Britain and Ireland. That the US government gave away tons of free land to the railroads to keep workers from getting it and to proletarianize them and force them to sell their labor.

What we are seeing now is the horror that has resulted from the collapse of Communism. The rightwing has been radically emboldened by this failure, and they are pushing the craziest revisionist madness everywhere. The capitalists never give up, never say uncle, never concede an argument, never use logic and always and everywhere hate the truth. Information and theory is not a search for truth for the capitalist but only a sport or a form of warfare, one that will go on forever as long as they are capitalists alive to keep lying.

Did you know land reform always fails? Did you know that primitive man was actually a capitalist “free agent” negotiating his labor with his equals, like you now, chiefs and kings?

Did you know Mao killed 70 million? Did you know Stalin killed 60-110 million and the USSR period was one entirely of starvation, mass ruin and poverty? Did you know that Stalin and Mao were the biggest murderers of all time, much worse than the rightwingers’ hero, the far rightwing ultimate anti-Commie, Hitler? Did you know that Nazism was a leftwing movement? Did you know that Hitler was a socialist? Did you know that Stalin and Hitler were allies having a lovefest?

Did you know that mass budget cuts during a recession or Depression actually help the economy grow out of the downtown and do not worsen the economic crisis? Did you know that Roosevelt actually worsened the Depression with his massive spending and that Hooverism was actually the cure for the Depression?

Did you know that government health care and education always fail, and that private education and health care is the way to go? Did you know that privatization is the best thing for society in all cases, including especially the workers? Did you know that socialism is bad for workers? Did you know that unions actually harm workers? Did you know that deregulation is best for everyone? Did you know that tariffs and trade protectionism has been proven to be a failure, despite centuries of evidence to the contrary?

Did you know that the more socialist a government, the murderous the state is (RJ Rummel)? Did you know that libertarianism is the savior of the working class, the consumers, the environment, Hell, everything under the sun? Did you know that global warming is a fraud?

It’s really unfortunate that the Right has gotten so emboldened, because now the sane people have to spend all of our time refuting rightwing cant that was buried long ago, and has only been resurrected, zombie-like, from the dead, with the capitalist intellectual rally since 1989.

Peter Tobin “Clarifying the Primitive Communism Question”

The previous post on primitive communism was attacked by rightwing capitalist ideologues who insisted that primitive man did not live under primitive communism at all.

Peter Tobin responds:

These folks are profoundly wrong and apparently have read nothing, never mind bothering to find out what Marx and Engels actually said. Their knowledge appears to be derived from the first twenty minutes of Kubrick’s 2001.

Engels, rather than Marx, is pre-dominant in this area as the term arises in his seminal work Origins of the Family, Private Property and State. The key work that inspired them work was the American Morgan’s groundbreaking Ancient Society.

What Morgan does, in a serious materialist way, is to trace human progress from, what he terms, savagery to civilization. What Engels takes from this is that there are identifiable stages in human social evolution. So the primitive stage is sub-divided into lower, middle and upper stages. In the lower stage there were no classes, and state and economic relationships were broadly egalitarian. Hence there was a collective right to basic resources, and the question of a superior authority (kings, priests or elders) did not arise.

Morgan himself speculated on the “liberty, equality and fraternity of the ancient gentes.” He even finds contemporary evidence in the layout of the Native American village, which he calls “communism in living.”

At this time family groups were consanguine, and Engels refers to these family groups as the “original communistic common household” which lasted to the late middle stage of barbarism. There was even group marriage and incest, which existed in Polynesia and lasted until quite recently (to the horror of Christian missionaries). He does not hold this that stage up for emulation, instead, “communism” is used a technical terms to denote the “sharing” of sex with a related group.

This stage gave way to new household communities (Hausgemeinden), which Morgan calls the punaluan family, which prohibits sex between brothers and sisters and children and parents, but allows it between cousins. But this is not the bourgeois form of the family where one man possesses and dominates one women, as women were common wives and men were common husbands.

Far from extolling the former, Engels make the point that as it withered, the human stock grew stronger and better by outbreeding as opposed to inbreeding.

The other important factor that must be considered is the emergence of man as a hunter of animals and hence an omnivore. His brain grew bigger and his teeth smaller. What is salient here is the behavioral changes took place, especially in the process of socialization. In order to hunt effectively man had to organize communally and develop stratagems for success.

Consider, by contrast, the earlier hominids, such as the australopithecines, who were herbivores and consequently had larger teeth and smaller brains – a trait shared by many vegetarian animals today.

You can all these forms, “communist,” “socialist,” “communal” or whatever nomenclature denotes shared activity, because this phenomena is self-evident.

These stages gave way as man settled down and took up agriculture. Private property and the growth of surplus and authority became prevalent, although residual forms of the earlier stages continued.

For example, Grote, in his History of Greece, defining the characteristics of the emerging Greek tribes, found evidence of: common religious ceremonies, common burial, common rights of inheritance, common obligation to help the tribe in times of struggle, and the common ownership of property, while at the same time he noted the growth of authority figures, kings, priests, lawgivers and even treasurers.

References

Engels, Frederick. 2001 (1884). Origins of the Family, Private Property and State. Honolulu, HA: University Press of the Pacific.

Grote, George. 2000 (1846-1856). The History of Greece: From the Time of Solon to 403 B. C. London: Routledge.

Morgan, Lewis H. 1887. Ancient Society, or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery Through Barbarism to Civilization. London: MacMillan & Company.

Primitive Communism, Feudalism, the Fencing of the Commons and the Genesis of Capital

A far rightwing commenter disagrees that there existed primitive communism in the past, as theorized by Marx. Instead, he opines that primitive man lived, absurdly, in some condition called “the free market.”

You could say primitive man was communal but NOT communist. There is no such thing as voluntary Socialism/Capitalism. Such are contradiction in terms, Robert. If work within a group are completely voluntary, then it is by definition a free market. If they were forced to work together, then it was some sort of authoritarian-ruled collective. Either way your argument is bunk.

Needless to say this fellow’s definition of free market (capitalism as per Adam Smith) is quite unlike any other I’ve ever heard.

Read Marx.

Many primitive tribes lived under primitive communism. There was no free market among primitive tribes, there was no market period, there was no capitalism, there was no exploitation other than maybe of slaves, there were no wages, people lived in communes, hunted, collected, farmed, etc. for the common good. Food was divided amongst all members. No one hired anyone to do anything, paid them, marked up their labor, and sold it or products based on it for profit. Hence, no capitalism, no free market.

In the Middle Ages, there were many artisans, but they were more or less free agents akin to the self-employed. Shoemakers, tailors, chimney-sweeps, etc.

Much of the rest of society was under feudalism. Before the fencing of the Commons in England that was necessary for capitalism, most were primitive artisans or small landholders. Small parcels were farmed and some livestock was held. In the meantime, households made a few items here and there for sale.

There was no labor force for the plants that the capitalists wished to build. They were building the plants and no one was coming to work in them. Since people were happy to work their small parcels and do a little household industry on the side, no one wanted to give that up to become a wage slave in some Godawful capitalist firm.

In order to create a proletariat, the Commons was fenced off, and the small landholders were driven off the land into teeming towns where they crowded, starving and in rags, a new army of proletarian workers for the capitalists. There were long debates about this in the English Parliament about the necessity of throwing all of the small householders off their land and depriving them of their livelihoods in order to create a captive workforce who needed to sell their labor to capitalists or starve.

This process has actually been repeated over and over in the modern era and continues to this day in places like India, El Salvador, Paraguay, Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, Philippines and Colombia where the poor are continuously being thrown off their small parcels so their lands can be seized by large landowners, and the poor farmers are hence proletarianized and turned into landless peasants.

There are even suggestions that this occurred in the early days of the US. So many Americans were becoming small landowners in the West that this raised serious problems for the creation of a captive proletariat. Hence much of the land was grabbed by the state and turned over to the railroads in an attempt to deprive small landowners of land and force them to sell their labor or starve.

Read Marx, “The Genesis of Capital.”

Capitalism is a new thing, mostly since about 1400 or so.

References

Marx, Karl. 1978. Genesis of Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers.

The Fate of Workers Under Capitalism and Communism

One problem of Communism was that workers did not work very hard. This occurs to this day in Cuba.

As the workers in the USSR used to say, “We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us.”

It’s true that wages were low under Communism, but so was rent and prices, so it was not such a big deal. Education, health care, transportation, culture, etc. was free, and rent was very low. Wages had to be low because the state spent so much money.

The state was responsible for all of education, health care, transportation, infrastructure, housing, and the building and maintenance of all structures in society. Everything was owned by the state. If the state did not keep it up with continuous repair and construction, everything would fall apart.

If workers were paid more, the state would not have enough money to fund health care, education, transportation, infrastructure, to buy raw materials and manufacture things with them, etc. Everything would start to fall apart.

But low wages were not the real reason that workers do not work hard under Communism. Workers need to be disciplined, otherwise, according to human nature, they will tend to screw off. Under Communism, workers quit at half day, call in sick, don’t show up at all, fulfill their quota and go home for the month, etc. This sounds like a lot of fun, but unfortunately, productivity suffers and workers screwing off is a big reason for a lot of the problems of Communism – shortages, poor products, lines, etc.

The problem is that under Communism it was hard to get rid of slackers. Say you have ten slackers in your plant. Sure, you can fire ten of them, but then what? Communist countries had full employment. If you fire ten slackers, you may well not be able to fill those positions with more workers, so you will have ten unfilled vacancies in your plant. Hence, slackers were usually just kept on the labor force.

Under capitalism, workers are typically horribly abused. The only places where they are not is when they have labor unions. Cheerleaders for capitalism need to own up to the fact that under capitalism, workers are the enemy. The capitalist state is dead set against the workers, as is the capitalist media, and in many cases, the capitalist army and police. Even capitalist society opposes its own workers, as it portrays workers as failures and losers.

Workers need to own up to the fact that capitalism is a purely worker-hostile system. Under capitalism, bosses (and their management lackeys) and workers are essentially enemies. The bosses hold all the cards, not only that, but they have the entire machinery of the state backing them up.

The only way that workers can even the score is via their own organizations, labor unions. But capitalist societies hate labor unions. The state, the media, and often the army and cops are dead set against labor unions, who are seen as the enemy of society.

Even society itself is typically against unions. Here in the US, many workers have been brainwashed into hating unions, which are only their own organizations to represent their interests.

The middle classes are typically not unionized, and they see unions as overpaid organizations of working class inferiors – the blue jeans and lunch pail crowd. For this reason, many middle class members of society do not wish to join unions, since to do so transforms you into a redneck with a high school education, a beer belly, work boots and a lunch pail. The middle class sees themselves as superior to the working class, so to join a union is to lower oneself in society.

Middle class rage at striking workers was important in the ushering in of Margaret Thatcher under the Tories in the UK in 1980. The public got behind efforts to break strikes of the trash collectors and to privatize the coal mines, which broke the coal miners’ unions. There was a strong class element to Thatcher’s election.

To the middle classes, Thatcher was sticking it to the overpriveleged working class unions. The British workers have always voted for Labor – they never voted for Thatcher. But the UK is now like the US in that most of the population identifies as “middle class,” whether they are or not.

Even in Communist states like Vietnam and China, workers are horrifically abused in the parts of society that have been handed over to foreign firms. There seems to be no way around the terrible abuse of workers under capitalism, in particular under developing capitalist states. Can the defenders of capitalism on this site show me any possible universe in which capitalism in developing states does not involve monstrous abuse of workers? And if it’s inevitable, what good is the system?

The Communist societies really were workers’ paradises in a way. The workers ran the show. Probably never in modern history have workers been treated as well as they were in the Communist countries.

Nevertheless, when workers ran the show, they fucked off and ran the system into the ground.

And under capitalism, workers are terribly abused.

Truth is that neither system works very well.

Let Us Put Another Anti-Communist Lie to Rest, While We Are At It

On the previous post, a commenter reiterates a classic rejoinder about Communism:

But anyway, the point is that Communism hasn’t worked, and it never will. It simply goes against human nature.Capitalism, on the other hand, fits perfectly with human nature. People are selfish, self-interested, ambitious, and opportunistic beings by nature.

This isn’t really true. This lie has two parts:

1. Communism has never worked.

2. Communism goes against human nature.

The problem with this is that capitalism is a fairly recent invention. Before that, there was feudalism. Many primitive tribes lived in what is called “primitive Communism.” Read Marx to understand these essential facts.

Many of them still live under primitive Communism to this very day. Sure, some people had more than others, but there was no exploitation of labor, marking up of labor value and profiting from the exploitation of labor.

Many other societies seemed to work according to some sort of collective ownership like modern-day collectives, but once again, without profits. People who worked harder did not make more money, or get more of anything for that matter. Sure, the chief had more, but that was it. There was little reward for working hard, and little punishment for not pulling your weight.

So there answer to #1 is that Communism has in fact worked, maybe not in the modern era, but surely for the vast majority of man’s past.

The answer to #2 is that Communism cannot possibly go against human nature, since mankind lived under primitive Communism for most of his history.

I suppose that this capitalist talking point could be reworked to say that Communism had not worked in the past century, and that it goes against human nature as human nature has evolved in the past century. This might be a more accurate framing of the argument.

Can We Please Put an Anti-Communist Lie to Rest?

The capitalist West’s war against Communism has been pretty vicious. There are few lies that they have not bothered to toss about. Most here in the West simply uncritically swallowed all of this stuff no questions asked.

I would like to take to task at least bit one anti-Communist dogma: That Communism (and by analogy socialism) has failed, and one of the reasons for that failure was that people hate it.

We really need to ask, “Failed how, and in what way?” If you ask your average person how it is that it failed, you won’t get much of an answer.

One of the ways we can determine if a system failed or not is if the people themselves accepted it or enjoyed. Anti-Communist dogma long held that the people living under Communism were miserable. But this is now coming under question. An earlier post laid out well that after 20 years, large sectors of Eastern Europe, in some cases a majority, prefer Communism to the capitalism that replaced it. Keep in mind that these are folks who experienced both.

More evidence is forthcoming from a new poll from Tajikistan, indicating that 7

Another poll says that 6

Ok, so if it failed, it wasn’t because the people hated it, right? In many cases, large sectors of the population, even majorities, preferred it to capitalism. So we can’t say it was a failure based on lack of popular support.

How about another argument? This argument says that no one has ever immigrated from a capitalist country to a Communist country, with the exception of a few Western Communists. But this is not the case. After Germany split into West and East halves, many West German Communists left their half and immigrated to East Germany. I’m not sure how long they stayed. This info comes from a German friend of mine from Hessen. She told me that most of her Communist relatives in the West took off for the East.

In Cuba, we have yet another case. Eastern Cuba is now full of Blacks from Jamaica and Haiti who have fled capitalist Haiti and Jamaica (largely failed states) for Cuba. They reportedly like Cuba much better than Haiti and Jamaica.

A better way to look at it is that Communism and capitalism (as economic systems) are different systems, both of which can and often do have immense problems and also immense benefits. Some humans prefer to live under Communism while others prefer to live in a capitalist system. The type of person who prefers to live under one system or the other probably depends on personality and life experience.

A rightwing friend of mine told me that it’s true many people prefer Communism, but he said that they are the “lazy failures” of society. I’m ok with his objection. I just wish that the capitalist media of the West would agree that a lot of humans prefer Communism over capitalism. Then we can argue about who they are and why, whether or not they are “lazy failures,” etc.

As for the larger question of whether Communism failed or not, that goes beyond the preferences of those who lived under it and deserves another post.

White American Decline: A Confession

I have a confession to make.

Part of me wants to retain White culture as the dominant American culture.

Problem is that US Whites are unspeakably rightwing. So with White decline in the US should come to the decline of this horrible White US conservatism. White decline should lead to a more liberal America, which I support in most ways.

The US non-Whites are very liberal. The young CA Hispanics are almost Communists or socialists. A non-White America could finally give us a shot at a socialist America, like the socialist states in much of the world. So my preferences for White culture clash with my politics. This crap could all be avoided if US Whites would just be sensible and vote liberal. But they won’t. As it is, it’s pretty much a wash, and a strong part of me wants White decline due to the political benefits.

I like White culture, but I hate this ridiculous conservatism, so out of step with civilized humanity. Non-Whites oppose this nonsense much more than Whites do. Looking for someone to blame because your Senator or Representative is a conservative dinosaur? Look no further than the White

I like liberalism and socialism, but I’m not wild about Black and Hispanic culture. But increasingly, non-White areas are just developing the “multiculture” instead of some explicitly Black, Hispanic or otherwise culture. The multicult is hard to describe, but it’s not White culture, at least politically, and it doesn’t dive into the depths of Black or Hispanic culture. It’s common among civilized Blacks and 2nd generation people of all ethnicities, not just Hispanics.

As you can see, I’m torn. At this point, it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. I live in a non-White town in a non-White state, and it’s not exactly the end of the world. I figure we are going to transition towards a Latin American model with a White elite anyway. I’m White. What’s not to like?

Another Huge Maoist Attack in India

The Indian Maoists engaged in another massive attack in India, once again in Chattisargh, Ground Zero for the Maoist insurgency in India. A bus filled with state police, containing 40-60 people was blown up by a Maoist land mine, killing at least 50 of those aboard. The attack probably took place in the Dandakaranya Region, which was where the previous devastating attack took place.

One problem for the Indian Maoists is that they have not yet set up any base areas. However, word is that they are just now finally setting up a base area in the Dandakaranya Region. I have seen videos of Maoist forces swarming over the dirt highways in this region. There are huge columns of both sexes that seem to have scores or hundreds of members.

The people in this region are Gonds, and they speak the Gondi language. The Gondi language is in bad shape, as it has never had any state support. The Maoists have started to support the Gondi language, and the state has finally started to do so too, to “stop the Maoists.”

The problem is the same as with all civic action programs. They throw the starving people a few crumbs to ward off revolution, but crumbs don’t fill your stomach. So revolution is warded off, but the system barely changes at all. Instead, it makes just a few rudimentary changes around the edges. If the state would really fundamentally change to ward off the Maoists, that would be nice, but it’s never going to happen.

There is a lot of talk on this site about economic growth in India. True, there has been some impressive growth in recent years. But only 5-1

One problem is that the Maoists are going to need to expand beyond tribals in their war. An obvious target is the Dalits or low caste untouchables. However, 8

The Maoists have actually been very pragmatic about religion, and have not said much about Hinduism. Maoist ranks are full of religious Hindus, and the Maoists have not even been able to get rid of caste in their own ranks. Maoists do not wish to engage in the issue of caste as they see it as too divisive. They want Hindus to join their movement, and an all-out war on caste will leave them tagged as a Dalit movement.

Dalits are angry at the Maoists in both Nepal and India since their leaders are high caste Brahmins. But Brahmins have always led movements for good or bad in both countries. And the more advanced classes tend to lead revolutions, while the oppressed and less advanced classes tend to be foot soldiers. The leaders of Sendero Luminoso look like White Peruvians, but a look at the ranks of Sendero’s foot soldiers shows deep Indian features in almost every guerrilla you see of either sex.

The Maoists have a huge presence in southern Bihar, Jharkand, Chattisargh, western West Bengal, northern Andhra Pradesh, eastern Orissa, and far western Maharashtra. They’re going to need to expand quite a bit outside of this region in order to make some good gains. The state is waging a huge offensive against the Maoists. The offensive could either wage deadly blows against the Maoists or it could paradoxically cause them to dramatically increase their power in the land. It will be interesting to see what unfolds.

One of the Great Photos of the 20th Century

The Red Army hoisting the flag atop the Reichstag, the seat of Nazi power, amidst the apocalyptic horror of the Battle of Berlin. The Battle of Berlin was one of the greatest battles of the 20th Century. In only two weeks on 1945, an incredible 181,000 were killed, 8

This must rank up there with the Iwo Jima hoisting the flag photo with one of the great photos of WW2. Actually, along with the Iwo Jima photo, it’s not only that, but it’s also one of the great photos of the last century.

The Soviet contribution to the defeat of the Axis in WW2 is completely underestimated. We didn’t even seem to be against the Nazis much before the end of 1941. I saw an article from Time Magazine in 1940 about the takeover of Poland by the USSR and Nazi Germany. There was nothing about the Nazis. It was all about the cruelty and evil of the Soviets. One would think that the piece was Nazi propaganda.

Even before 1940, there was a battle against fascism going on in Spain. A Leftwing government had been elected in 1936. There was a military coup soon afterwards, as there always is (which is why a lot of Communists say that the peaceful road to socialism is doomed), and Franco’s forces declared war on the state. I think the Army split, but I’m not sure. Hitler and Mussolini supported Franco.

The US and the rest of the rest refused to support the Republican government despite their desperate pleas for help. But the US did not stop US corporations from supplying the Francoists with military gear. These supplies along with the refusal of the West to support the Republic, led to the fall of the Republic in 1939.

Thousands of Americans went off to fight with the Republicans. They were excoriated at home, and in the 1950’s, they were purged from their jobs by the McArthyites as “premature anti-Fascists.” Amazing, huh? It was only ok to be anti-fascist after, what? 1940? 1941?

8

The Nazis were essentially defeated by the USSR.

Nevertheless, revisionist history holds sway. Going to school in the Cold War, we never learned about the Soviet role in the defeat of the Nazis. Most popular US WW2 books have reams about Roosevelt and especially Churchill, oh, and don’t forget D-Day and the Battle of the Bulge, but little to nothing about the crucial Eastern Front, where the war was won.

New books and articles in Time excoriate Stalin’s role in the war. The Nazi invasion caught him off-guard, since he was a fool.

Not really so. Stalin knew Hitler was going to attack, he just did not know when. There had been endless false claims of a Nazi attack, almost one a day, for the previous year. Most of these were coming out of Western intelligence, especially “war hero” Churchill’s MI-5.

While under brutal attack by the Nazis, amidst Soviet cries for alliance, Churchill the die-hard anti-Communist could not be bothered to help the “evil” USSR. Instead, his intelligence service was busy serving up Stalin a fake Nazi invasion about every day. The reason?

To set off a war between Germany and USSR in which the two enemies, one as bad as the other to Churchill, would destroy each other, meanwhile laying off the Brits. So these reports developed a boy who cried wolf quality, but Stalin knew of the invasion as soon as it started. Yes, there were tactical retreats at the beginning, now recoded as defeats by the Western media.

The same books and articles even, appallingly, try to lay responsibility for the 27 million Soviet deaths on Stalin himself! I have seen analyses of “Stalin’s Death Toll” that apportion say 10 million of those deaths to the Nazis, and the other 17 million to Stalin! Why? For being a shitty commander in chief, apparently. What a disgrace to the memory of the fallen.

The West regularly republishes the tragedy at Katyn. Yes, 40,000 Polish officers, possibly fascists, were executed. So much about this, but is there one word of the fireboming of Dresden (28,000 Germans killed in one night) or the firebombing of Tokyo (100,000 Japanese killed in a night).

We often hear reports of atrocities committed in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania by Stalin. Yes, there were some killings. Keep in mind these states had elected fascist governments when the Soviets took over. Supposedly, a few of those taken away to Siberia by the NKVD were even Jews. So Stalin was an anti-Semite?

Let’s look at the facts. There were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Baltics when the Nazis overran them and the Red Army retreated. That was only a few less than when the Soviets took over. In a year or so, there were basically zero Jews left in the Baltics. Those who had not escaped were gassed at concentration camps. Huge numbers of locals had gleefully joined in with the Jew-killing, even forming large Nazi auxiliary armies to help the process along. Now who’s the anti-Semite anyway? Not a word of any of this in the Western media.

Yet we do hear of the Red Army reportedly waiting outside Warsaw, supposedly to let the Nazis finish off the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, though I have yet to corroborate this.

With all the sacrifices the Soviet people made in defeating the Nazi Orcs, it’s sad that we have to trash and ignore them like this.

Great Article on North Korea

This is a great new article on North Korea, an interview with a fine North Korea scholar, Colin Marshall, an American who teaches at a university in South Korea. He has been intensively studying North Korea for 20 years now, mostly by reading their official publications.

A few points:

First of all, he disagrees that this is a classic Marxist-Leninist state anymore. North Korea recently removed the word “Communism” from its Constitution. Indeed, many Leftists and even Communists have washed our hands of these guys a long time ago. Instead, he argues that this is a state that results when the Far Left and Far Right meet in a sort of a circle. So, it is kind of a Marxist-Leninist-Fascist state, if such a thing is even possible.

The state is based on a racist rhetoric (Marshall sees North Korea as possibly the most racist state on Earth right now) that sees the Koreans as the pure people, untainted by evil, who are being menaced by these evil forces, specifically the Americans. The South Koreans are included in this racist view of the world. Kim Jong Il and his father are romanticized as some kind of blood and soil fathers of the people.

Even with access to outside media in recent years (Yes, many North Koreans can now access outside media) the overwhelming majority of North Koreans still buy into this philosophy. Even if they realize that many of the stories about Kim and his father are not true, they believe in them the same way that some believe in religious stories – that the story may not be factually true, but it represents the essence of what Kim is all about.

The article also plays up the paranoid, belligerent and irrational nature of the state, whose view revolves around the Korean War and specifically the US bases and military in South Korea. South Korea is seen as a good land of the great pure Koreans that has been colonized by the evil Americans. I’m not sure if Kim even wants to negotiate a peace treaty with the US, because then he would have little to rally his people around.

In recent years, North Koreans have begun to realize that most South Koreans live pretty well, and regime propaganda about the horrible lives of South Koreans was not true. Now the regime has to justify to the people why it is that their lives are in general so much worse than South Koreans’. This cognitive dissonance may well set off a new war.

The author says it’s true that the North has a command economy, but fascist Germany and Japan had command economies too. He draws some analogies to the fascist and extremely militaristic states and the North Korean state.

North Korea is not nuts enough to attack the US or Japan. This is what the crazy anti-Communist North Korea haters in the US continuously harp on. However, they may well be nuts enough to attack South Korea, and that’s a disturbing thought right there.

The North Korean military is a vast military machine, the 4th largest on Earth. They are well-fed and supplied with a tremendous amount of innovative vehicles and weaponry, some of which would boggle your mind. They also have excellent skills at information warfare. They are not to be dismissed or messed with at all.

The article, ultimately, was depressing. I’m not sure how the world can appease or accommodate North Korea. This is important because if we don’t, we may see more risky type provocations on their part, with potentially ominous consequences.

The regime is definitely desperate for money. I’m not sure what can be done about that either.

Nostalgia For Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhAXtVRopaw&feature=related]

From the video, we see the following startling figures taken from recent surveys:

Slovakia, 2003 (Public Relation Institute, Bratislava): 6

Russia, 2005 (New Russia Barometer Survey): 4

East Germany, Nov. 2007 (Forsa Institute): 7

Bulgaria, Dec. 2007 (Mediana): 3

Romania, May 2007 (BERD): 5

Romania, Nov. 2007 (Soros Foundation): 4

Romania, Feb. 2008 (World Bank): Only 2

Hungary, June 2008 (Gfk Piackutato): 6

There are a lot of commenters on this site who oppose socialism and Communism for a variety of reasons. I am wondering how these folks can reconcile these figures with their views.

I imagine that most of these folks feel that Communism and socialism are failed ideologies that simply don’t work in practice, however noble they may be conceived. If it’s really true that they fail so miserably and obviously, why do so many of those who have lived in the same nation under both Communism and capitalism feel that Communism was better and capitalism was worse?

Are these people simply so insane that they can’t figure out that things are obviously so much better now than they were back then? If their views are not insane, how do you reconcile their opinions with your view that Communism has been a miserable failure?

A common line among anti-Communists is that Communism inevitably starves people and enslaves them. If this is true, and I say it’s not, then are these people simply masochists who enjoy being starved and enslaved? How can we account for their behavior?

Most of you feel that capitalism is obviously superior to Communism. If it is, then why do so few of those who lived in the same nation under both systems agree with you?

Is there any way for you folks to account for the opinions of these folks. Are they simply lazy people who don’t want to take risks and enjoy being coddled and taken care of by a cradle to grave welfare state?

Keep in mind that by 1989, the socialist systems of most of these states were highly heterodox, with lots of collective and even limited private enterprise alongside public property. Censorship laws had been relaxed in most states and there was considerable freedom of speech. In places like Hungary, Goulash Communism or market socialism had created a quite high standard of living.*

*However, in Romania, a terrible Secret Police had instituted a terror state, and this in addition to a ferocious austerity program was the main reason for the violent overthrow of Nicolae Ceauşescu. In the few years before the Revolution of 1989, Ceauşescu had instituted brutal austerity measures in order to try to pay off the nation’s foreign debt.

While this made him very unpopular, I don’t see why anti-Communists, deficit hawks all of them who never been an austerity program too savage for a capitalist state, should object to Ceauşescu putting Romanians on a diet, as Thomas Friedman and his globalist buddies like to quip. Ceauşescu had also created a ridiculous personality cult and blown huge amounts of money on lavish construction projects dedicated to himself.

Neoliberalism and the Creation of Oligarchies

One of the things that you seem to reliably end up with via the neoliberal model is some sort of an oligarchy of one type or another. One might even argue that this is the purpose of neoliberalism. It probably isn’t, but neoliberalism is definitely in service of an elite group.

The Neoliberal Era since 1980, perpetuated by World Bank and IMF policies, supported by both US political parties, most parties ruling parties on Earth and the entire world MSM media, has a reliable record. Everywhere it has been implemented, it has resulted in the creation of wild inequality.

One can argue that inequality is just fine or even natural, but isn’t it obvious that extreme inequality is destabilizing. Things can only get so unequal before you get a revolution of one sort or another. Take away Marxism now that history has ended, and the peasant revolts will go on.

Marxism was revoked in Thailand, but instead we have the Red Shirt Revolt, exemplified by the urban and rural poor, now armed and waging street battles in the middle of Bangkok. The Red Shirt Revolt has arisen in the context of wild inequality in Thailand via neoliberal reforms of the past few decades. Malnutrition in Thailand continues at around 30-4

Latin America has largely turned its back on neoliberalism after two or three decades of trying it on for size. Not only did it only benefit the top 2

Neoliberal creation of oligarchies:

In Indonesia, free market economics in 80’s and 90’s led to a

Figures are similar for the Chinese minority of the Philippines, a

7 men, 6 of them Jewish, the oligarchs, now control 6

HBD bloggers like to say that the

Let us assume that the Chinese are smarter. Let us put their IQ generously at 110. The Island SE Asian IQ is 86. That is a 25 pt difference. According to Richard Lynn, a 25 IQ point difference in some models equals about a 3.5X greater intelligence. So let us assume that the Chinese are 3.5X smarter than Indonesians and Filipinos. They then have a right to 3.5X more money than native Island SE Asians. That would give the Chinese a right to 10.

Some of my friends say, “Well the Chinese work harder.” I find this dubious. Indonesians and Filipinos work very hard. Down there, you don’t work, you don’t eat, real simple. For this model to work, the Chinese would have to work 23 times harder than the Indonesians and Filipinos. Does anyone believe that this is the case? Let us generously say that they work twice as hard. No problem. But 23 times as hard? Forget it.

These extremes of wealth accumulation by market dominant minorities cannot be justified logically either by appeals to their brains or industriousness. It’s simply not fair. In fact, it’s outrageously unfair.

Let us look at it from another point of view. What people anywhere on Earth would allow a minority, not even of the native people, but instead foreigners, of

Everything I said about the Overseas Chinese in Island SE Asia goes for the Jews in Russia. You can call them anti-Semites all you wish, but why should the Russian people put up with Jews owning the whole place? Jews who not only see themselves as not Russians, but also have no allegiance to the state and are often filled with hostility towards the natives.

Their loyalty, if any, is to their co-ethnics in Israel, the US and the UK. When the Russians start to crack down on these Jewish crooks, they quickly shift all the money they stole to their buddies in the US, the UK (Rothschilds) and Israel. There are TV dramas in Israel that deal with the fleecing of Russia by the Jewish oligarchs, and they are extremely popular with Israeli Jews. Fine, it’s paybacks. But why should the Russian people sit still while a hostile minority is robbing the country blind?

The Total Failure of Indian Capitalism

Facts:

In India, 4

In North Korea in the mid-1990’s, there was a terrible famine that killed 600,000 people . At the very worst of the famine, the malnutrition rate in North Korea was only as bad as it is year in and year out in India. Yet the MSM never tells you about starvation and malnutrition in India, only in North Korea. In 1986, 14 million people a year were dying from the effects of malnutrition, mostly in the South Asia region of which India is the most prominent part. There’s no reason that think that figure has improved with time.

Tens of million Indians live on the streets of India! Yes, that is right, they do not have homes, and they are homeless, living on the streets. This where they eat, drink, bathe, fuck, shit and piss. This is India: millions up millions live, camped out like animals, on the streets of the cities.

Even if you can get a place to live in the slums of Indian cities, it is little better than the streets. Raw sewage flows in the streets and during floods, often fills the homes in the slums. People end up standing in ankle deep sewage water that has filled their home. This is India, every day of every year.

More facts:

6

Indian health care is a failure. State health care exists, but a friend of mine said that if you have money, you get out of a state hospital and into a private hospital. Why? State hospitals may well be a death sentence. You will get treated little if at all. If you have money to bribe the doctors to actually treat your loved one, you stand a better chance. In most rural areas, there is no health care period.

In many rural areas, there are no schools. The state may build a schoolhouse, but the teacher never shows up, and he still gets paid anyway. Many villages have no schools period. In those that do, they are ridiculously underfunded, and most drop out as very young children to go to work. Child labor is everywhere in India, as is out and out slavery. The state does nothing to stop it.

Untouchables in India.

The life of the untouchables or Dalits in India is so horrible that it virtually beggars description. This state of affairs is mandated by the Hindu religion, and there is no hope in sight. If you get rid of caste, you get rid of Hinduism. Hinduism probably cannot exist without caste. Hindu ideologues like to argue that a casteless Hinduism can exist, but it seems dubious. No caste, no Hinduism. Since caste is an integral part of Hinduism, one wonders exactly what good this religion is, and why it should even exist at all.

Any thoughts? Why should Hinduism exist?

Almost as bad as caste oppression, mostly in the rural areas, is the opposite, caste based affirmative action. Dalits and other low castes now have affirmative action policies mandated by the state. This would not be so bad, but things at the university level are not positive. For instance, Dalit and low caste gangs at universities threaten professors to pass Dalits and low castes or at least give them passing grades. Those teachers who refuse to comply may be attacked and beaten. Increasingly, a diploma from an Indian university has dubious value.

100 million excess deaths in Indian 1947-1979.

Lately 4 million excess deaths per year. People are always saying what a failure Communism is.

One way to test this theory is to look at China and India. In 1949, their developmental figures were nearly identical. Since then, China has completely surpassed India in every way. This was true even during the Mao era. In fact, by 1979, Indian capitalism was causing 4 million excess deaths a year as opposed to the alternative model in China. In other words, the Chinese “murderous” Communist model, if adopted by India, would have saved 4 million lives per year.

Failure to adopt the Chinese model resulted in 4 million deaths per year in India above and beyond the Chinese model. Note that the 4 million excess deaths even holds after the numerous excess deaths caused by Chinese Communism. So, the Indian model had killed about 100 million Indians by 1979 since 1949 – this is above and beyond the deaths in China, including famine deaths in the Great Leap Forward.

Extrapolating from 1979-2010, we can estimate another 100 million deaths in India, for a total of 200 million excess deaths in India (above and beyond deaths caused by Maoists in China) since 1949, directly as a result of Indian capitalism.

There are proponents of the Indian capitalist model on this site. They urge to “just give us some time.” With a bit of time, Indian capitalism will soon develop and provide a great standard of living for everyone. Look, you guys have had your chance. 60 years is long enough. You had your day in the sun, you blew it, and it’s time to try something new.

True, India is getting some great economic growth these days. But during the period of this wild economic growth, from 1995-present or the past 15 years, the malnutrition rate in India has been flat at 5

Some wonder why I support the Indian Maoists. A stark look at the figures above ought to tell you why. The Maoists are the only folks in India who have a plan to even begin to deal with these issues. Let’s give them a chance.

Recent List of Attacks by the Defeated FARC

I received this list of attacks from a pro-FARC website. It was written in Spanish and I had to translate it all into English, so it took a little while. The MSM all over the world is crowing that the FARC is near defeat and total collapse. They are said to be at their lowest level since 1964, when they only had a few dozen fighters. That’s an interesting assessment considering that the FARC has about 18,000 forces under arms and probably another 55,000 militia.

All I can say is these guys fight pretty good for a force that is nearly defeated.

There are those on this site who support the Colombian government. I ask them what the Left in Colombia is supposed to do. Everyone on the Left in Colombia is automatically accused of either being a member of the FARC (dubious, and if it’s true, just arrest them) or being FARC supporters. How can you tell if someone is a FARC supporter? Is it illegal to be a FARC supporter, and anyway, how could such a law ever be enforced?

The truth is that if you are on the Left in Colombia, you are automatically accused of a relationship with the FARC, no matter how you feel about them. At some time, you may well be at first denounced by the army and/or the paramilitaries. At this point, if you have not gone into hiding, you can be attacked at any time. Keep in mind that even legal politicians who have no relationship with the FARC at all are liable to be murdered in Colombia.

Colombia is ruled by a genocidal oligarchy that stays in power by threatening and often killing those who oppose them. As such, it’s no democracy at all.

The truth is that the attacks on the Left in Colombia have little to do with the FARC. After all, those slaughtered are unarmed activists. It’s just, identify the Commies (the Left), and then, kill the Commies (the Left). It matters not whether you pick up a gun or not, if you’re on the Left in Colombia, you’re a target.

Some argue that the FARC should disarm. But why should they do that? The last time they tried to do that, they formed a party called the Patriotic Union and 5,000 of them were murdered over a period of several years. Given that, why would the FARC lay down their arms again (keep in mind they have made cease-fires with the state in the past). The supporters of the Colombian state on this site do not seem to have any arguments. If you do, please speak up. Violent revolution isn’t exactly ideal, but what’s the alternative?

January 1

Eastern Bloc: Mine attack on the army, Santana, Colombia, Huila. 1 soldier killed, 4 wounded.

Government arial bombing killed 31 FARC, wounded 14, 9 taken prisoner, 2 deserted.

January 2

Eastern Bloc: Air Assault in on the FARC in Sinai. 6 FARC killed.

January 3

Eastern Bloc: 2 attacks on the army in San Jose Macuare, Guaviare. 1 soldier killed, 3 wounded, 1 damaged helicopter.

January 4

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Attack on the marines and the army in Citadel, Buenaventura, Valle del Cauca.

January 5

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Attack on the army at a farm in Jamundi, Valle del Cauca. 1 FARC wounded.

Eastern Bloc: 3 attacks on the army in the village of Uribe Tierra, Adentro, Meta. 2 soldiers killed, 10 wounded. 1 FARC wounded.

Attack on the army in the village of Buenos Aires, Miraflores, Guaviare. 2 soldiers wounded.

January 6

Eastern Bloc: Arial bombing attack on the Guayabero unit of the FARC, Guaviare. 4 FARC killed.

January 7

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on an army patrol in the village of San Antonio, Tetuancito, Tolima.

Eastern Bloc: Heavy fighting in the village of Brisas del Palmar, Guaviare. 2 planes damaged.

Two attacks on the army in Uribe Tierra, Adentro, Meta. 2 soldiers wounded.

January 8

Eastern Bloc: Attack on the army in Arauca. 1 soldier killed, 2 injured.

Harassment attack on the army in the urban area of Tame, Arauca. 2 soldiers killed, 2 injured.

Land mine attack on the army in Inirida River region, Guainía.

January 9

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on the army in Filo, Policarpa, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Attack on the army in Galaxia, Tame, Arauca. 2 soldiers killed, 3 wounded.

January 10

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on the army in the village of San Luis, Corinth, Cauca. 2 soldiers killed, 3 wounded.

Eastern Bloc: Land mine attack on the army in Esperanza, Arauca. 1 soldier killed, 2 injured.

January 11

Eastern Bloc: Land mine attack on the army in the urban area of of Uribe, Adentro, Meta. 2 soldiers wounded.

Ambush on an army patrol in Laguna San José, Barajas, Guaviare. 8 soldiers killed, 7 wounded. 3 FARC wounded.

Attack on the army in the village of Mitar, Mapiripan, Meta.

January 12

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Sniper attack on a police checkpoint in Mallama, Andalucia, Nariño.

Attack on a fleet of helicopters in the Mira River region. 2 helicopters damaged. 1 made an emergency landing on the streets in Azucar, Tumaco, Nariño.

Attack on an army patrol in Quebrada la Junta, Maguí, Roberto Payán, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Land mine attack on the army in the village of Esperanza, Tame, Arauca. 1 soldier killed.

Attack on the army in Ciare, Mapiripan, Meta.

Attack on the army in Puerto Príncipe, Vichada.

January 13

ARTURO RUIZ COMPANY: 30 minute battle with the army and the Arturo Ruiz XXIII Brigade at 11:15 AM in Platanal, Teorama, Norte de Santander. 5 soldiers killed, 1 Captain, 1 Sergeant and 3 troops, and several more injured. 1 rifle, 5 magazines, money and intelligence material seized. 1 FARC slightly wounded.

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Attack on a helicopter fleet in the village of the municipality Agupí, Tumaco, Nariño.

Land mine attack on the army in Filo el Zorro, Maguí, Roberto Payán, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Attack on the army in the village of the Turpial, Macarena, Meta. 2 soldiers killed, 4 wounded.

Attack on the army in the village of Victoria, Arauquita, Arauca.

January 14

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on a Marine brigade in Buenaventura, Cundinamarca. 4 DEA agents wounded.

Eastern Bloc: Land mine attack on the army at the mouth of the Chigüiro River, Uribe, Adentro, Meta. 1 soldier wounded.

Attack on a helicopter in Mocuare, San Jose del Guaviare, Guaviare damaged 1 helicopter.

Attack on the army in the urban area of Oasis, Macarena, Meta. 1 soldier killed, 1 wounded.

January 15

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Battle with the army in Filo Fox, Magui, Roberto Payan, Nariño. 1 soldier dead.

4 land mine attacks on the army.

Attack on national police in the urban area of San José, Nariño.

Ambush on a national police patrol in Íquira, Huila. 1 policeman killed, 1 wounded.

Eastern Bloc: Attack on an Air Force plane in the village of Patio Bonito, Guaviare damaged 1 aircraft.

Mine attack on the army in Paradiso, Uribe, Adentro, Meta. 1 soldier wounded.

Army harassed in the village of Siriza, Miraflores, Guaviare. 1 soldier dead.

Harassment attack on the army in Normandy, Tame, Arauca. 1 soldier dead, 4 wounded.

January 16

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Harassment attack on an army patrol in Jamundi, Valle de Cauca. 1 soldier killed, 1 wounded.

Motorcycle bomb detonated outside the national police station in the town of Palermo, Huila. 2 policemen killed, 1 wounded.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on the army in the village of Puerto Rondon, Progresivo, Arauca. 3 soldiers injured.

January 17

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on the army in the village of Cominera, Corinto, Cauca. 6 soldiers killed.

Attack on Colombian Air Force aviation in the Pumal municipality of Saint Joseph Roberto, Roberto Payan, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Battle in Centro, Mapiripan, Meta. 1 soldier killed, 2 injured. 1 wounded guerrilla.

January 18

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Harassment attack on an army patrol in the village of Tarsus, Caldono, Cauca. 1 soldier wounded.

Sniper attack on a police patrol in town of San Joaquin, Florida, Valle de Cauca. 1 policeman killed, 1 wounded.

Harassment attack on an army patrol in Caldono, Cauca. 1 wounded soldier.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on a plane spraying coca fields in the village of Puerto Cubarro, Calamari, Guaviare.

Harassment attack on the army in in Naples, Puerto Inírida, Guainía.

January 19

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: army were harassed in the village of Pueblo Nuevo Valle, municipality of Florida, Valle de Cauca. 3 soldiers injured.

It clashed with army troops in the village of Santander de Quilichao, Paramillo, Cauca. The same day, three times harassed the same patrol. 2 soldiers killed, 5 wounded. 1 guerrilla killed.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on the army in Ciara, Limones, Guaviare. 1 soldier wounded.

Grenade attack on a police checkpoint in Mesetas, Meta. 3 policemen injured.

FARC Propaganda distributed.

January 20

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Attack on two policemen riding on a motorcycle on the Panamerican Highway. Harassment attack on Air Force aviation in site Tardan, San José de Cúcuta, Cúcuta.

Land mine attack on an army patrol in Inguapil, Policarpa, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Land mine attack on the army in Uribe, Gaviotas, Meta. 1 soldier wounded.

Attack on an Air Force plane in the urban area of of Rojo, San José del Guaviare, Guaviare.

Harassment on the army in the village of Locacion, Arauca. 3 soldiers injured.

Harassment attack on the army in the village of Puerto Cordoba, Miraflores, Guaviare. 2 soldiers wounded.

Heavy fighting in San Antonio, Alto de Macarena, Meta. 2 soldiers killed, 3 wounded.

January 21

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Ambush on a checkpoint in La Calera, Buenaventura, Cundinamarca.

Eastern Bloc: Mine and booby trap attack on the army in Mangos de Ciara, Mapiripan, Meta. 5 soldiers killed, 7 wounded.

Mine attack on the army in Azul, Arauca. 1 soldier killed, 1 wounded.

Harassment attack on the army in the urban area of Darien, Colombia, Huila.

Harassment attack on the army in Cruces Perico, Arauca. 2 soldiers killed, 3 wounded.

Heavy fighting in Santa Ana, Arauquita, Arauca. 2 soldiers killed, 2 injured.

January 22

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Harassment attack on an army patrol at Prado, Magui, Roberto Payan, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: 2 mine attacks on the army in the village of Playa de Cabrera, Cundinamarca. 2 soldiers wounded.

Results: Battle with army in Uva, Guerima, Vichada. 1 soldier killed, 3 wounded.

January 23

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Harassment attack on an army patrol in the town of López de Micay, Cauca.

January 24

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Three way ambush attack on the army’s piranhas forces in Coquito, Guayabal, Buenaventura, Cundinamarca. 1 wounded soldier.

Guerrillas harassed army troops at the mouth of the Sunica River, Copom, Chocó.

Attack on the army in the district of Siberia, Caldono, Cauca.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on the army in Darien Alto, Colombia, Huila.

Mine attack on the army in the urban area of Nubes, Tame, Arauca. 1 soldier dead.

January 25

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Ambush on an army patrol in Buenos Aires, Cauca. 3 soldiers killed, 7 wounded. One MGL with 60 grenades, 1 Galil rifle, 525 cartridges, nine teams, 2 MK-1 machine guns and a cartridge belt, 6 60mm grenades and various materials containing military and intelligence documents were recovered. Own without incident.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on a helicopter in the village of Mitar, Mapiripan, Meta.

Attack on police in the Julio 20 Barrio of Tame, Arauca. 1 policeman killed, 1 wounded.

Land mine attack on a helicopter launching pad in Mitar, Mapiripan, Meta. 9 soldiers killed, 1 captain, 1 corporal and 7 soldiers.

January 26

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Sniper attack on an army patrol in the village of Santa Lucia, Santander de Quilichao, Cauca. Harassment attack on the army at the mouth of the Sunica River, Copom, Chocó.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on the army in the village of Rompida, Guaviare. 2 soldiers killed, 1 wounded.

Harassment attack on the army in Mocuare, Guaviare.

January 27

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Mine attack on the army in La Victoria, Cisneros, Valle. 6 soldiers killed, an undetermined number wounded. No FARC casualties.

Harassment attack on the police in Yaco, San José, Nariño.

January 28

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Battle with an army patrol in the upper regions of Policarpa, Nariño.

Eastern Bloc: Harassment attack on the army in the village of Paradiso, Arauca.

January 29

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Battle with the army in Manso, Iscuandé municipality, Nariño. Afterward, there was another firefight with the same patrol. 1 dead soldier. 1 wounded guerrilla.

Eastern Bloc: Sniper attack in El Milagro, Arauca killed 1 soldier.

January 30

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Attack on the national police between Pulví and Negrital, Tumaco, Nariño. There were police casualties.

Eastern Bloc: Attack on an army patrol in the village of Nuevo Colombia. 1 soldier killed, 1 wounded.

A combined army-national police patrol was annihilated in the urban area of Puerto Rondón Corosito, Tame, Arauca. 8 soldiers were killed. 7 2.23 rifles, 440 bullets, 1 revolver and other items were seized other things.

January 31

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: A national police checkpoint was cornered and destroyed at EMCAR Andalucía in the municipality Mallama Via Pasto, Tumaco, Nariño. The battle lasted 20 minutes. 8 policemen killed, 3 injured. 23 Febrero 11 Galil rifles with 1265 cartridges, 1 MGL with 25 grenades and other material were seized. No FARC casualties.

Harassment attack on police in the urban area of Negrital, Tumaco, Nariño.

3 harassment attacks on an army patrol in the village of Bethany, Caldono, Cauca. Landmine attack on the same patrol in the same village. 1 soldier dead.

Harassment attack on the army in Silvia, Cauca. 2 soldiers wounded.

Eastern Bloc: An exploratory patrol ran into an army force and a 4 hour battle ensued.

There was a 1 hour battle with the army in Charras, Mapiripan, Meta. 4 soldiers killed, 6 wounded. 2 guerrillas wounded.

February 1

WESTERN AND CENTRAL COMMAND: Land mine attack on a Piranha convoy in the municipality of Buenaventura, Pital, Huila. 2 piranhas destroyed, 5 soldiers killed, 3 wounded.

ARTURO RUIZ COMPANY: At 4 PM, guerrillas harassed the army command on the edge Torcoroma, Aguachica, Cesar for 20 minutes.

Video of the FARC Overrunning Mitu, Vaupes

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZgy8rgWYs&feature=related]

Mitu is a city in Vaupes, Colombia on the Brazilian border in the middle of the Amazon. The FARC overran the small police detachment there on November 1, 1998.

The attack begins at 4:58 AM, and the town is overrun later in the day, the remains of the police detachment all surrendering. The prisoners will be treated pretty well. They won’t be tortured or murdered, although some were killed when the Colombian army tried to liberate some of these prisoners.

You can see the use of the some of the FARC’s homemade mortars here. The last part includes a battle against the reinforcements that were sent in by the army to retake the town. This battle takes place outside of town, in jungles and plains.

You can also see that the FARC is a huge army, with bases, full uniforms, huge detachments that march in formation, chains of command, etc. The war in Colombia is really a war between two gigantic armies, not between a single army and a band of ragged guerrillas.

This video is by the FARC.

Overall, it’s a pretty amazing video of urban warfare, shot in the midst of a huge and savage battle with some cool jungle and plains warfare at the end.

Those opposed to the FARC are asked what the Left in Colombia should do instead. Now that Uribe is committed to military defeat with no negotiations, the prospects for the FARC are bleaker than ever. They can’t negotiate an end to the conflict, so they must fight. They can’t really surrender either. Even if they disarm and try to seek power peacefully, they are going to be massacred anyway like the rest of the Left. So it’s fight or die for the FARC.

The model of the Colombian state is based on capital formation by way of violence, similar to the US model in the 1800’s. Land is stolen from peasants and the indigenous at gunpoint, and they are killed or attacked if they resist. Then their land is given to large landowners who already have almost all of the land, or else given to large multinational corporations for various land exploitation development projects.

It’s development by violence, with the paramilitaries and army clearing the way. Communities, organizations and peoples who resist multinational development projects or the theft of their land are attacked by the Colombian military or the paramilitaries and often killed. Labor unions that try to organize in multinational or any other enterprises are also attacked by the army and the paramilitaries.

Refugees flood into urban slums with few amenities, no electricity, no running water, no indoor plumbing, and few jobs. These slums are now policed by paramilitaries, the enemies of the people. If these slum-dwellers protest conditions in their shantytowns, they are likely to be attacked and killed by the paramilitaries who patrol them. Women’s, human rights, campesino, indigenous and Afro-Colombian organizations are all attacked as agents of the Left.

Most of those attacked by the army and paramilitaries are first vilified as supporters or members of the FARC. In most if not all cases, it’s not true. They are definitely not members of the FARC in most if not all cases. Are they supporters? Who knows? Probably not openly. Keep in mind that anyone and everyone on the Left is automatically accused of being a “FARC supporter,” so you don’t need to support them to get killed. It’s a pretty hard accusation to prove anyway. How do you prove if someone is a “FARC supporter” anyway?

In this way, the Colombian military serves the interests of the Colombian oligarchy, especially the large landowners, and the multinationals. and wages war on their own people.

This is the model that the Colombian urban middle class, both US political parties, the Obama Administration and the entire US mass media support to the hilt. There’s nothing to support here for any progressive person.

A new political party has sprung up recently called the Democratic Pole. The Polo varies from social democrats to Communists, but they have little to no relationship with the FARC. Nevertheless, there is a huge vilification campaign going on against the Polo and its candidates, and the military and paramilitaries are starting to kill Polo figures on a regular basis.

That’s some background on the Colombian conflict and on the Colombian government, the US’ biggest ally in Latin America and one the top recipients of US aid in the world.

Defeated Armies Can Still Fight Pretty Well!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HshxcZBxcuQ&feature=related]

This is an attack on the Colombian military base in Miraflores in Guaviare Province. Guaviare has always been overrun by FARC, and it still is. Even today, when they are on the verge of defeat and collapse, they still control the province. Funny how that works.

This attack took place in August 2008. At this point, the capitalist world media was already saying that the FARC were on the edge of collapse, and “at their lowest point in 44 years.”

That’s manifestly untrue. That means that they are at their lowest point since 1964, when they were founded with a few dozen ragged forces. Forget it. Even in the late 1970’s, they only had 2,000 fighters or so. In 1998 they easily had 18,000 fighters. I figure a good 55,000 “militia” too. Militia are just peasant farmers and whatnot in the daytime, but at nighttime they may well be armed fighters.

The attack starts at 4:30 AM and utilizes a force of 500 troops. By 9 AM, they have seriously overrun the base and are carting away supplies. The battle continues all through the day, and by 4 PM, the military has finally sent in helicopter air support, but they can’t seem to do much. By this time, the remaining troops at the base have all been taken prisoner.

It’s not so bad to be taken prisoner by the FARC. Better than being killed. They keep you alive, don’t torture you, give you medical care, etc. If you try to escape, you get punished, but that’s how it goes. The majority of the “hostages” who have been “kidnapped” by the FARC are just POW’s like the guys seized in this video. They would not have to be held long if Colombia would agree to a POW swap, but they’ve never done that in 46 years, and they never will. Amazing, even the Israelis agree to such things.

There is nothing lower than a bourgeois Latin American, I am quite sure of that. Very uncompromising folks, if even the Zionists in Palestine have softer hearts.

This conflict is all about class, and a lot of it is about race. Notice that every time they interview a Colombian military guy on the media, he’s a White guy. A spokesman for the Colombian state is always a White person. But videos of the FARC are very interesting. Many mestizos, often dark mestizos, and many who look very Indian. And many mulattos or even Black FARC troops. Fact is that racism is endemic in the Colombian military, as is extreme and overt class hatred by the light-skinned officer class towards the darker-skinned conscripts.

Here it is two years later, and the FARC are supposedly even more collapsed than when they epic failed and captured this military base two years before. I suppose now they can only overrun half a base and take half the force POW.

Although reports of their demise seem to be premature.

I’ve gotten reports out of Colombia recently (I forget which region) but there is a government-death squad offensive in the area that has long been held by the FARC. Reports indicate that in this region, “many young people are joining the FARC every day.” Not that that matters, since they are defeated, right?

“Protest Song,” by Alpha Unit

The public image of Woody Guthrie captivates me.

It’s quite a romantic image, even though there wasn’t anything romantic about much of his life. He is known mainly for being a songwriter – particularly for This Land is Your Land – and for being a Communist sympathizer, the worst badge you could wear in this country next to “Communist.” Some of you may have seen photographs of him on stage, his guitar sporting a label that read, “This Machine Kills Fascists.”

He began his career performing traditional music on the radio in Los Angeles. The way he ended up in California was the same way many of his fellow Oklahomans had – escaping the Dust Bowl. These “Okie” migrants were the object of a lot of resentment and sometimes abuse from California locals.

Woody Guthrie’s music found a ready audience among California Okies. It was during his time in radio that he began writing protest songs, one of which got the attention of a newscaster named Ed Robbin. He brought Guthrie into contact with some of the socialists and communists in Southern California.

Although never a member of the Communist Party, Guthrie wrote a column for The Daily Worker, ensuring his status as a fellow traveler. Success found him, but his lifelong fondness for being on the road and his discomfort with the entertainment business kept his life unstable. But his legacy is intact: the outsider giving a voice to all the other outsiders looking in on the American dream.

The Woody Guthrie song I love the most is a protest song not against injustice or fascism but against grown-up seriousness. It’s about one of my favorite things to do as a child and even now – going for a ride in the car.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUDtFdnn9oQ]

What Good Is the FARC?

In the comments section, James Schipper asks pointedly:

The FARC may not be near defeat, but it isn’t anywhere near victory either. The FARC has been active for decades now. Has it accomplished anything positive for the Columbian masses?

That is a good question.

Considering the murderous nature of the Colombian state, why should the FARC lay down its arms? Recall that it was the murderous nature of the Colombian state that started this whole mess by forcing the Left to take up arms in the first place, since they were getting massacred while they were unarmed.

The History of the Colombian Civil War

A little background. This conflict actually started in 1928 with the Banana Massacre in the Far North. There was a banana workers strike and the state sent the army in there to break it up. They massacred something like 60-70 workers to break up the strike.

Then in 1948, Gaitan, a very progressive Liberal, was elected President on a platform of land reform and other reforms. He was quickly murdered by the Conservatives. The people rose up in rage and rebellion all over Colombia. This degenerated into general conflict between the Liberals and the Conservatives, basically over the issue of land reform and the fact that the Liberals had many progressives with them.

This led to the decade of violence called La Violencia, in which 200,000 Colombians were slaughtered. La Violencia was caused by an attempt by the Conservatives and the oligarchy to wipe out the Left. La Violencia continued into the 1960’s.

Some Communists were so sick and tired of all the fighting that they lay down their arms and formed a commune on some land called La Marquetalia. They all moved there and set up farms and whatnot. The Colombian oligarchy started agitating about “Communism in Colombia.” The CIA and the US military went down there to advise the Colombians.

As it turned out, the Colombian military waged a huge armed attack on La Marquetalia, including the use of chemical weapons, in an attempt to exterminate them. The people of Marquetalia tried to fight back, but they had few weapons. They were effectively slaughtered, but a few survived. The survivors of La Marquetalia went on the become the FARC! So that is how the FARC got its start in 1964.

What Good is the FARC?

Actually the FARC does defend the people a lot. When the death squads and army come out to murder and abduct the people, rampaging through the communities, the FARC often wages an offensive to clear them out. The FARC plays a role in defending the people from the murderous state. If the FARC gave up their guns, the people would be defenseless. I’m opposed to that.

Also, look what happened the last time the FARC laid down their guns They were slaughtered like flies. Why should they do it again?

The FARC should only disarm if they can negotiate a solution with the state such as the FMLN did in El Salvador. The FMLN negotiated an integration of the two militaries, getting rid of some notorious security forces, major changes in the corrupt judicial process, and a huge land reform. Via these changes, many of the reasons for the armed struggle went away and the FMLN was able to compete peacefully.

As is, the death squads are tremendously reduced, but still active. They kill about 6 Salvadorans a year. But the FMLN opened up enough space to compete peacefully, and they just won the Presidency. And the land reform produced lasting changes in the countryside. The FARC is only going to give up its guns if it can negotiate some major changes in the system and defang the state enough so that they can compete peacefully in elections.

If you study Latin America, you will see that rightwing death squads rampage through the region, killing progressives. Often the conflict is over land and the death squads are often run by large landowners. Also the police and military operate in the interests of the wealthy, killing progressive people. They kill peasants to steal their land or they kill peasants involved in land disputes and land takeovers.

200 have been killed in Venezuela.

1 person every day is being killed in Honduras.

About 6 a year are killed in El Salvador.

Death squads operate regularly in Guatemala, even after the war.

In Brazil, death squads in the countryside have killed 2-3,000 people in recent years.

As you can see, the Right in Latin America is murderous, whether the people are armed or not. Even if you’re not armed, they come out and kill you anyway. If you arm yourself, at least you get to fight back.

For the record, the Democratic Pole favors a negotiated solution to the war.

Is The FARC Near Defeat?

There is a lot of propaganda in the media that the FARC is near defeat in Colombia. True, Death Squad Leader President Uribe has led a huge offensive against the FARC, the biggest in the history of Latin America, and the FARC has been hit hard. But the figures of 9,000 rebels and loss of 5

The truth is that the Colombian state is a Terror State. Anyone and anyone protesting against the state or the military in any way from the Left is denounced as a “FARC member” or FARC supporter.” Typically, there is no evidence for any association with the armed group, it’s just that FARC association is a way to denounce anyone on the Left or pursuing any kind of popular projects.

Often, death squads or the military then threaten, arrest, abduct, torture, and most commonly just murder the civilians that get denounced. People who are denounced this way are peasant, rural, women’s, human rights, small farmers, anti-mining, Afro-Colombian rights, union members, Indian, and community activists of any shape and form.

All are seen as “terrorists,” though as a general rule, they have nothing to do with the armed FARC, since the FARC is an armed group and doesn’t have much to do with the civilian Left, keeping a strong wall between them.

Much of the war involves clearing peasants, Indians and Afro-Caribbeans off their land and just flat out stealing it. Then the land is given to large landowners or foreign corporations to be exploited. The military and death squads are used to clear the poor off the land under the charge that all the poor getting their land stolen are “FARC members.” Probably none of them are.

The entire Colombian state has always been run by a small group of rich people who have long used terror and mass murder to stay in power. This is the reality of the “War Against the FARC,” and this is why the FARC took up weapons in the first place in 1964.

At the moment, a Left party, the Democratic Pole, has formed, consisting of moderate liberals all the way to Communists. This party polls about 2

Previously, a section of the FARC broke off, laid down their weapons and decided to compete for power peacefully in elections as the Patriotic Union. They quickly started getting killed like flies. The FARC saw the danger and pulled all their people out of the UP, but the killings went on, though the new UP had nothing to do with the FARC anymore. After several years, 5,000 UP members had been slowly slaughtered by the government, and the UP was decimated.

So there is no peaceful route to power for the Left in Colombia. The government is likely to kill you one way or the other if you oppose them, either peacefully or with a gun. I guess you can either wait for the state to come out and kill you, or you can take up arms to try to defend yourself when they come out to kill you, which is essentially what the FARC has done.

Too Sick For Words

Here.

You know, something is seriously wrong with the men in this part of the world.

Everybody and their brother in the US was cheering on the glorious mujaheddin in Afghanistan. I did myself for a while, as my politics was not well-formed yet. In the early 1990’s, I learned that our glorious mujaheddin were blowing up girls schools and forcing the girls out of school at gunpoint. That was one of the things that got them fired up about the Communists in the first place.

The Communists banned the buying and selling of women and sent the girls to school. For that sin, they were as good as dead in reactionary Afghanistan. That the US egged this charade on with mountains of guns and money is beyond sickening. The Communists were pretty bad, but the reactionary warlords and religious idiots who have replaced them are no better, and are arguably worse.

“The Indian Independence Movement,” by Kumar Sarkar

A nice, short analysis of the Indian independence movement, written by Kumar Sarkar, the nom de guerre of an Indian Maoist revolutionary. Most Indian and Nepalese revolutionaries use noms de guerre due to state repression in their homelands. This is a good piece, nice and short, well-written by a smart guy, from a Marxist perspective, that you might enjoy if you are interested in the subject.

I believe that India was deindustrialized in the 18th – early 19th centuries. Following that, colonialism succeeded in preventing the growth of a national bourgeoisie capable of leading a democratic revolution and industrialization. Emerging bourgeois forces were not independent, and they compromised with Brahminic ‘feudalism’ instead of smashing it, as it happened in Europe during the ‘classical’ bourgeois democratic revolution.

The product was a predominantly comprador bourgeoisie, often still with feudal roots and a strange mixture of bourgeois-Brahminic feudal ideology. The non-comprador elements never gained any real strength.

Thus, the democratic revolution failed to take place, probably nipped in the bud that was once about to show itself, in Bengal. Casteism, discrimination against Muslims, which is an extension of casteism, Brahminic land relations and social order remained virtually intact.

The so-called nationalist movement that started in 1905 in Bengal against its partition was a deformed phenomenon from the beginning, without the support of the Muslims, and in fact often directed against them. This was repeated all over the sub-continent till 1947 with its abortive end and partition of India.

The role of Nehru, Krishna Menon, Subhas Chandra Bose, etc. cannot be understood with the European model of Marxism. The political philosophy of Bose and that of the so-called ‘socialist group’ within the Congress have not been researched yet. Nehru’s individual pro-Marxist attitude ended after his association with Gandhi. The class base of these people remains to be investigated and can only be understood in the background described above.

Interview With Communist Party of India (Maoist) Spokesperson Azad

This is an interview with Azad, a spokesperson for the Indian Maoists who are waging war against the Indian state. It’s wide-ranging and covers a wide variety of topics. This interview is very long – it runs to 80 pages – but I think it’s worth the read if you are interested in the subject.

In an exclusive interview with The Hindu, Azad, spokesperson of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) , answered in writing questions about the party’s proposal for a mutual ceasefire and talks with the Union government, how the party views the necessity of meeting the violence of the State with the revolutionary counter-violence of the masses, the issue of the role of schools in combat zones, and the building of a united front of all revolutionary and democratic forces against the Indian state.

Edited text of 12,262-word response by Azad, Spokesperson, Central Committee, CPI (Maoist)

1. In recent weeks one has seen statements by the Government of India and leaders of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) saying they are in favor of dialogue and talks but each side seems to lack seriousness. There has also been an element of drama or more precisely, theater, with Kishenji and P. Chidambaram exchanging statements through the media.

Our first question is whether Kishenji’s statements can be treated as authoritative pronouncements of the CPI (Maoist) central leadership in pursuance of a national strategy? Or are these tactical announcements by him keeping only the specifics of the Bengal situation in mind.

Azad: It is true our Party leadership has been issuing statements from time to time in response to the government’s dubious offer of talks. But to generalize that there is lack of seriousness on both sides does not correspond to reality. To an observer, exchanging statements through the media does sound a bit theatrical. And it is precisely such theatrical and sensational things the media relishes while more serious things are swept aside.

Now the stark fact is lack of seriousness has been the hallmark of the government, particularly of the Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram. It is Mr. Chidambaram who has been enacting a drama in the past four months, particularly ever since his amusing 72-hour-abjure-violence diktat to the CPI (Maoist) in the course of his interview with Tehelka Magazine some time last November.

As regards Kishenji’s statements, they should be seen with a positive attitude, not with cynicism. Though our Central Committee has not discussed our specific strategy with regard to talks with the government at the current juncture, as a Politbureau member, Comrade Kishenji has taken initiative and made a concrete proposal for a ceasefire.

Whether Comrade Kishenji’s statements are the official pronouncements of our Central Committee is not the point of debate here. What is important is the attitude of the government to such an offer in the first place. Our Central Committee has no objection to his proposal for a ceasefire. But as far as the issue of talks is concerned, our Party will pursue the guidelines given by our Unity Congress-9th Congress held in early 2007.

2. Both the Government and the Maoists are also laying down preconditions. Chidambaram says the Maoists should “abjure violence and say they are prepared for talks…I would like no ifs, no buts and no conditions.” Now ‘to abjure’ can mean to renounce or forswear violence, or even to avoid violence, i.e. a ceasefire. What is your understanding of Mr. Chidambaram’s formulation? What do you think is the implication of what he wants the Maoists to accept?

Azad: It is a very pertinent question as no one knows exactly what Mr. Chidambaram wants to convey by his oft-repeated, yet incomprehensible, abjure-violence statement. Hence I can understand your confusion in interpreting Mr. Chidambaram’s “abjure violence” statement. It is not just you alone but the entire media is left in a state of confusion. His own Party leaders are a confused lot.

Some interpret Mr. Chidambaram’s statement to mean that Maoists should lay down arms. Some say it means unilateral renunciation of violence by Maoists. Yet others say what this could mean is a cessation of hostilities by both sides without any conditions attached.

It is indeed very difficult to understand what Mr. Chidambaram wants to convey.

This seems to be a characteristic trait of Mr. Chidambaram whether it be his pronouncements on Telangana, which are mildly described by the media as “flip-flop” behaviour and interpreted by both pro and anti-Telanganites according to their own convenience; or on Operation Green Hunt which he describes as a “myth invented by the media” even as the entire political and police establishment, and the entire media, give out graphic descriptions of the huge mobilization of the security forces, and the successes achieved by Operation Green Hunt; or on MoUs signed by various MNCs and Indian Corporate houses with the governments of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, West Bengal and others.

The Home Minister himself had displayed his split personality, not knowing what exactly he wants when he says Maoists should “abjure violence.” To a layman what this proposal obviously implies is that the state too would automatically put a stop to its inhuman atrocities on the adivasis, Maoist revolutionaries and their sympathizers. But not so to our Home Minister!

When you ask us what our understanding of Mr. Chidambaram’s formulation is, our answer is: we are very clear that the real intent behind his rhetoric is not a ceasefire between the government and the Maoists, like that with the NSCN, but an absurd demand for a unilateral renunciation of violence by the Maoists. Anyone with a bit of common sense would understand the unreasonableness of the Home Minister’s demand.

It is not that our so-called political analysts and others who appear on TV channels or write articles in the print media lack this common sense. It is their vested interests that come in the way of questioning the Home Minister in a straightforward manner.

Can they not put a simple question why the government cannot stop its brutalities on the people, adhere strictly to the Indian Constitution by putting an end to the police culture of fake encounters, abductions, rapes, tortures, destruction of property, foisting of false cases and such indescribable atrocities on the people and the Maoists?

Chidambaram is cozy in studios and press conferences before English-speaking TV anchors and correspondents but can never answer the questions put by illiterate adivasis. That is the secret behind his skipping the Jan Sunwaayi in Dantewada last December. For drama and real life are entirely different.

The implication of what Mr. Chidambaram wants the Maoists to accept is crystal-clear. He wants the Maoists to surrender. Or else [the state’s] para-military juggernaut would crush the people and the Maoists under its wheels. It is total surrender, pure and simple.

While repeating that he never wanted the Maoists to lay down arms – as if he had generously given a big concession – he comes up with an even more atrocious proposal: Maoists should abjure violence while his lawless forces continue their rampage creating more Gachampallis, Gompads, Singanamadugus, Palachelimas, Dogpadus, Palods, Tetemadugus, Takilodus, Ongaras, and so on.

Not a word does he utter even as scores of inhuman atrocities by his forces are brought to light by magazines like Tehelka, Outlook, a host of websites, and, to an extent, some papers like yours. What is it if not sheer hypocrisy on the part of the Home Minister to ask Maoists to abjure violence while his paramilitary forces indulge in crimes every day, every hour, in gross violation of the very Constitution by which he swears?

3. The Maoists also have their preconditions for talks.

In his recent interview to Jan Myrdal and Gautam Navlakha, Ganapathy made the following formulation on the issue of talks:

“To put concisely the main demands that the party has placed in front of the government [of India] for any kind of talks are:

1. All-out war has to be withdrawn;

2. For any kind of democratic work, the ban on the Party and Mass Organizations have to be lifted;

3. Illegal detention and torture of comrades had to be stopped and they be immediately released. If these demands are met, then the same leaders who are released from jails would lead and represent the Party in the talks.”

My question is whether these are realistic preconditions. For example, the “all out war” can be suspended first before it is “withdrawn,” i.e. a ceasefire, so why insist on its withdrawal at the outset? Are you asking for a ceasefire or something more than that?

Secondly, you want the ban on the Party and its mass organizations lifted and prisoners released. Usually in negotiations of this kind around the world between governments and insurgent groups, the lifting of a ban is one of the objects of talks rather than a precondition and the release of political prisoners an intermediate step.

Is the Maoist party not putting the cart before the horse, making demands that the government may be unlikely to accept as a starting point, rather than positing the same as one of the end points of the proposed dialogue?

Azad: I concur with the logic of your arguments. It is logically a valid argument that such demands could be resolved in the course of actual talks and not as a precondition for talks. But you must also understand the spirit of what Comrade Ganapathi has said in his interview given to Mr. Jan Myrdal and Gautam Navlakha. Some clarification is required here. I will try to clarify what Comrade Ganapathi has said.

Firstly what he meant when he said the government should withdraw its all-out war is nothing but a suspension of its war, or in other words, mutual ceasefire. Let there be no confusion in this regard. What Chidambaram wants is unilateral ceasefire by Maoists while the state continues its brutal campaign of terror. On the contrary, what the CPI (Maoist) wants is a cessation of hostilities by both sides simultaneously. This is the meaning of the first point.

A ceasefire by both sides cannot be called a precondition. It is but an expression of the willingness on the part of both sides engaged in war to create a conducive atmosphere for going to the next step of talks.

Secondly, if peaceful legal work has to be done by Maoists as desired by several organizations and members of civil society, then lifting of the ban becomes a pre­requisite. Without lifting the ban on the Party and mass organizations how can we organize legal struggles, meetings, etc in our name? If we do so, will these not be dubbed as illegal as they are led by a banned Party?

According to us, the ban itself is an authoritarian, undemocratic, and fascist act. Hence the demand for the lifting of the ban is a legitimate demand, and, if fulfilled, will go a long way in promoting open democratic forms of struggles and creating a conducive atmosphere for a dialogue.

Thirdly, what Comrade Ganapathi asked for is that the government should adhere to the Indian Constitution and put an end to the illegal murders in the name of encounters, tortures and arrests. We must include the term ‘murders’ which is missing in the third point. There is nothing wrong or unreasonable in asking the government to stick to its own constitution.

As regards the release of political prisoners, this could be an intermediate step as far as the nature of the demand is concerned. However, to hold talks it is necessary for the government to release some leaders. Or else there would be none to talk to since the entire Party is illegal. We cannot bring any of our leaders overground for the purpose of talks.

4. Would the Maoists be prepared to establish their bona fides on the question of talks by announcing a unilateral ceasefire or, perhaps the non-initiation of combat operations (NICO) after a particular date so as to facilitate the process of dialogue?

Azad: It is quite strange to see intellectuals like you asking the Maoists to declare a unilateral ceasefire when the heavily armed Indian state is carrying out its brutal armed offensive and counterrevolutionary war. How would the unilateral announcement of ceasefire or NICO after a particular date establish the bona-fides of our Party on the question of talks? What purpose would such an act serve?

It is incomprehensible to me why we are asked to “display this generosity” towards an enemy who has not the least concern for the welfare of the people and derives vicarious pleasure in cold-blooded murders, rapes, abductions, tortures and every kind of atrocity one could imagine.

And how would this “generous Gandhian act” on our part facilitate the process of dialogue with the megalomaniacs in the Home Ministry who do not spare even non-violent Gandhian social activists working in Dantewada and other places?

5. What do the Maoists hope to achieve with talks? Are you only looking to buy time and regroup yourselves – which is what the government said the CPI (Maoist) did during the aborted dialogue in Andhra Pradesh?

Or is it part of a more general re-evaluation of the political strategy of the party, one which may see it emerge as an overground political formation, engaged in open, legal activities and struggles, and perhaps even entering the electoral fray directly or indirectly at various levels in the kind of ‘multiparty competition’ that Prachanda says is necessary for the communist movement?

When you say you want the government to lift its ban on the party, are you also undertaking not to indulge in methods of struggle (e.g. armed struggle) which led to the imposition of the ban in the first place? There are other Maoist and revolutionary communist parties across India that are mobilizing workers and peasants through mass politics. They have not been banned.

Why does the CPI (Maoist) not believe those are legitimate forms of struggle? In Kashmir, the Hurriyat conference stands for the self-determination of J&K and seeks to mobilize people for this but the Indian state, which may use violence and repression and excessive force against people who peacefully protest, has not banned the Hurriyat. Does this not indicate that there is some space in the system for the Maoists to press their demands through peaceful political means?

Azad: Your question, or rather, a whole set of questions, requires a detailed answer. I am afraid it will take much space but I will try to be as brief as possible. Before I proceed, let me clarify at the very outset that the proposal of talks is neither a ploy to buy time or regroup ourselves, nor is it a part of the general re­evaluation of the political strategy of the party that could lead to its coming overground, entering the electoral fray, and multi-party competition as in Nepal.

Our CC had already dealt in detail with the question of multi-party competition in our Open Letter to the UCPN(M) and various articles and interviews by our Party leaders. So I will not go into it again here.

Now let me take up each point that you raised.

First, you asked what we want to achieve with talks. My one sentence answer is: We want to achieve whatever is possible for the betterment of people’s lives without compromising our political programme of new democratic revolution and strategy of protracted people’s war.

People have a right to enjoy whatever is guaranteed under the Indian Constitution, however nominal and limited these provisions are. And the government is duty-bound to implement the provisions of the Constitution.

We hope the talks would raise the overall consciousness of the oppressed people about their fundamental rights and rally them to fight for their rights. Talks will also expose government’s hypocrisy, duplicity, and its authoritarian and extra-constitutional rule that violates whatever is guaranteed by the Constitution. So talks would help in exposing the government’s callous attitude to the people and may help in bringing about reforms, however limited they may be.

Another important reason is: talks will give some respite to the people who are oppressed and suppressed under the fascist jack-boots of the Indian state and state-sponsored terrorist organizations like the Salwa Judum, Maa Danteswari Swabhiman Manch, Sendra, Nagarik Suraksha Samiti, Shanti Sena, Harmad Bahini, and so on.

Those who sit in studios and insulated rooms and make their expert analyses about how Maoists want to buy time or utilize the respite to regroup themselves, can never understand the ABC of revolution or the ground situation. This is actually not an argument at all.

If the Maoists try to utilize the situation, so would the police and the government. Why wouldn’t they? They created an extensive network of police informers during the six-month period of ceasefire in Andhra Pradesh in 2004. The intelligence hawks attended every open meeting and activity of the Maoists, took videos of people, and could easily target them after the clamp-down. Maoists definitely increased their recruitment but so did the enemy.

It doesn’t take much common sense to understand that both sides will utilize a situation of ceasefire to strengthen their respective sides. Then could this be called an argument at all? These cynics, or, I would rather call them, war-hungry hawks, itch for a brutal suppression of the Maoists and the people they directly lead, even if it means genocide.

They do not care if in the process thousands of police and paramilitary personnel also perish, for they are nothing but cannon-fodder in the eyes of these gentlemen.

So let me make it crystal clear: the proposal of talks is meant neither to buy time nor to regroup ourselves but to give some respite for the people at large who are living under constant state terror and immense suffering.

How many of our countrymen know that three lakh adivasis were driven away from their homes, that half the adivasi population in our country is already living under conditions of chronic famine and now even the rest of them now being pushed into a famine condition?

And why? Because of the insatiable greed of the corporate sharks that is fueling Chidambram-Raman Singh’s war in Chhattisgarh, Chidambaram­-Naveen Patnaik’s war in Orissa, Chidambaram- Buddhadeb’s war in West Bengal, Chidambaram-Shibu Soren’s war in Jharkhand, and so on.

Whoever has the minimum concern for the well being of the masses, no matter what his/her ideology is, would naturally think of how to save them from being decimated. But those who have nothing but sheer contempt for the poor and helpless people and only think of how to maximize the profits of a tiny parasitic class, put forth weird and cynical arguments deliberately intended to confuse the people.

They depict the Maoists as terrorists, create a fear psychosis in the middle and upper classes that the Maoists will soon come to your cities and disturb your supposedly secure lives; that they will seize power by the middle of this century, and what not.

By such hysteria whipped up by the rulers through the various means at their disposal, they justify the brutal war on the people and make the massive displacement, mayhem, massacres, rapes and atrocities appear like collateral damage in the larger noble objective of achieving peace, progress and prosperity for all.

On the question of the re-evaluation of political strategy of CPI (Maoist), demand for lifting of ban, and the issue of the legitimacy of open, legal forms of struggle:

There are a lot of questions related to the above and I feel this needs some detailed explanation keeping in mind several misconceptions making the rounds. Firstly you are wrong in assuming that it is the forms of struggle (armed struggle) pursued by the CPI (Maoist) that had “led to the imposition of the ban in the first place.”

On the contrary, it is the other way round. It is the imposition of the ban that had led the Party and mass organisations to take up arms in the first place. People are easily misled to believe that it is the violence of the Maoists that had compelled the government to impose the ban.

This is a classic example of how a white lie can be dressed up and presented as the truth by endless repetition. If you have even a cursory glance at the history of the revolutionary movement in our country you will find that the forms of struggle adopted by the Maoist revolutionaries from time to time corresponded to the forms of suppression pursued by the rulers.

A stark example of the transformation of a peaceful mass movement into a violent armed struggle is right in front of our eyes.

Lalgarh’s peaceful mass movement with its simple demands for an apology from the police officials and an end to brutal police repression was  transformed into a revolutionary armed struggle due to the brutal suppression campaign unleashed by the state and state-sponsored terrorists like the Harmad Bahini. Such was the case also in Kashmir and various states of North East.

Even in Naxalbari in 1967, the first shots were fired on unarmed women and children by the police. The people retaliated in their own manner and the party took birth and evolved a correct political line for the Indian Revolution.

In Srikakulam, Koranna and Manganna the first martyrs were killed, and these murders transformed the movement into an armed struggle. Even during the first great armed mass uprising of Telangana during the late 1940s, the spark was first lit when the cruel feudal lords murdered Doddi Komaraiah.

If you take the case of the transformation of the movement led by the erstwhile CPI (ML)[PW] or MCCI or the present CPI (Maoist), you will find the same pattern. The revolutionaries go to the oppressed, make them conscious of their inherent strength and the reasons for their misery, make them aware of their fundamental rights, organize and unite them, mobilize them into peaceful forms of protest and struggle.

Then the state enters with its baton in defence of the class of big landlords, contractors, industrialists, land mafia and other powerful forces that control the state and economy. Everywhere, the peaceful struggles are crushed brutally, entire areas are declared disturbed, fake encounters, abductions, disappearances, rapes, burning down villages, and untold atrocities become the order of the day. The Indian Constitution becomes consigned to the dustbin by the rulers and is not even worth the paper it is written on.

At that point of time any revolutionary party has to quickly switch to non-peaceful and armed forms of struggle if it is really serious about transforming the lives of the people and the oppressive conditions in the country.

The alternative is to surrender their revolutionary aims, make adjustments with the system and sail with other parliamentary parties albeit with some revolutionary rhetoric for a while. This, however, will not work for long as people cannot distinguish between the bourgeois-feudal parties and the ML party that has turned into a new parliamentary party.

When people are fighting a do-or-die battle, you cannot turn your tail but will have to provide them with new appropriate forms of struggle and forms of organization. And this is what our Party had done from the days of Jagtyal Jaitra Yatra.

What shook the rulers at that time and compelled them to declare the Jagtyala and Sircilla tauks in Karimnagar district of North Telangana as disturbed areas in 1978 was not the armed struggle of the Maoists (which had suffered a complete setback in Naxalbari, Srikakulam and elsewhere by 1972) but the powerful anti-feudal militant mass struggle that upset the hitherto established feudal order in the countryside.

And one of the main forms of struggle at that time was social boycott of the feudal lords and their henchmen, which witnessed the unity of over 9

From then on, the undeclared ban has been in vogue in parts of North Telangana until 1985 when it encompassed the entire state. CRPF was deployed for the first time to suppress the peaceful mass struggles that broke out against liquor. I remember how the mainstream media like the Indian Express published stories of policemen selling arrack at the police stations and forcing people to consume liquor in order to foil the anti-liquor agitation of the revolutionaries.

We find the same story in the urban areas too. The Singareni colliery workers organised themselves into a trade union called Singareni Workers’ Federation (SIKASA) in 1981, but it was unofficially banned within three years. An undeclared ban was imposed on the students and youth organisations, women’s organizations, workers’ organizations, cultural organizations and every form of peaceful, democratic protest was brutally suppressed.

One must see the development of armed struggle in the background of the strangulation of even the limited democratic space available in the present semi-colonial, semi-feudal set up, and the brutal suppression of the movement by unleashing the lethal instruments of the state.

To cut a long story short, it is not the forms of struggle and organization adopted by a party that led to imposition of ban but the very ban (whether declared or undeclared) on every type of open, legal activity including peaceful public meetings that compelled the revolutionaries to adopt non-peaceful and armed forms of struggle and underground forms of organization.

Our Party appeals to all independent observers and unbiased media personnel to look at this phenomenon historically and analyze this with an open mind. You will realize that what I said is 10

Revolutionaries never mince words. There is no need to. We believe that ultimately people have to take up armed struggle to seize power. But this does not mean we take up armed struggle at the cost of all other forms of struggle and thereby invite the state to unleash its brute force on the people.

On the contrary, it is only when all other forms of struggle fail to achieve the objective, when these are crushed under the iron heels of the state, that we resort to non-peaceful and armed forms of struggle.

It is very important to understand this, as it has become a common practice for some so-called political analysts and representatives of the ruling classes to charge the Maoists as responsible for all the violence since their very ideology talks of armed struggle. Hence, they conclude, there is no use in talks with the Maoists.

These simpletons resort to the method of reductionism: Maoists believe in violence and armed struggle to overthrow the state; hence they indulge in endless violence; there is no use of talking to people whose very ideology is rooted in violence; and hence there is no other way than to crush the Maoists with all the means at the disposal of the state. So goes their argument. I will deal with this later on.

I didn’t quite understand what you meant when you said referring to other open Maoist and revolutionary communist parties across India that are mobilizing workers and peasants through mass politics: “Why does the CPI (Maoist) not believe those are legitimate forms of struggle?”, you ask. Who has said we do not believe these are legitimate forms of struggle?

We consider all forms of struggle as legitimate, the right of social boycott as we practiced in Jagtyala, the hunger strikes as our comrades in various prisons and the various militant demonstrations. Armed struggle is also a form of struggle and assumes importance depending on the tactical moves by the enemy.

While all forms of struggle are legitimate in our eyes, some so-called revolutionaries, veterans of yesteryear, surprisingly exclude armed struggle from the forms of struggle and lay a one-sided emphasis on peaceful forms of struggle. They can just as well go join the Gandhian organisations and fight for some reforms instead of calling themselves  part of the ML stream or Maoists aiming for the revolutionary transformation of society.

For some of them, the ML ideology or label is only a fashion. They do not wish to bring about the revolutionary transformation of the society and state but instead only want to make a few cosmetic reforms.

The question of imposing or not imposing a ban on a certain party or organization depends on several factors. It would be too simplistic to conclude that just because a party believes in armed struggle and indulges in acts of violence it is being banned, while those who pursue open, legal forms of struggle are allowed to function freely.

During the Emergency, as we all know, both the revolutionary Left as well as the reactionary Right parties were banned. Yet even at the height of sectarian violence indulged in by the Hindu fascist gangs, they are allowed a field day.

They carry arms, display them openly, threaten the religious minorities with genocide, indulge in violence against the Muslims and Christians, and yet are deemed as legitimate organizations since they are part of the ruling classes and their integral culture of violence.

The acts of destruction in the violence that was organized in a planned manner [in Andhra Pradesh] by a faction of the Congress in one day far surpassed the so-called violent acts carried out by Maoists in an entire year! Yet our Union Home Ministry issues advertisements against Maoist violence while keeping mum about the mayhem and arson by his own Congress Party hooligans.

Thus the question of how you look at violence is colored with a class bias. The violence by the ruling class parties is considered legitimate while those by the oppressed masses and their organizations are dangerous and a threat to the security of the rulers. This has been true from the time of Charvakas.

6. If the government believes the Maoists “misused” the Andhra talks, your party believes the dialogue there was abused by the authorities to identify and then target your leaders. How, then, do you hope to deal with the risks of once again entering into a dialogue with the Indian state?

Azad: The talks we held with the Congress regime in AP provided us with important lessons. And these lessons will guide us in any future talks with the governments of the exploiting classes. It would be too simplistic to conclude that the police could identify and target the leaders by utilizing the talks interregnum.

They used it to some extent just as we used it to take our politics widely among the people in the State and outside. The setback we suffered in most parts of AP was not a fall-out of talks but due to several inherent weaknesses of our Party in AP and our failure to adopt appropriate tactics to confront enemy’s tactics. This is an entirely different subject and can be dealt with some other time.

What is of relevance here is that the talks in AP have given us a rich experience and important lessons. If a situation for talks arises once again -which we do not foresee in the near future given the inexorable compulsions on the government from the corporate sharks for total control of the mineral-rich region – we can instruct our leadership in various prisons to take the responsibility.

Our General Secretary explained this in the course of his interview with Mr. Jan Myrdal and Mr. Gautam Navlakha. The mistakes committed in AP during talks with the government will not be repeated.

7. There is a contradiction between the recent offer for talks made by Kishenji and the spate of violence and killing by the Maoists which  followed that. The Home Ministry has compiled a list of such incidents and circulated it to the media (attached as an annex).

No doubt there has been no letup in the government offensive during this period and you could produce your own counter-list, but many of these attacks by the Maoists do not appear to be ‘defensive’ but ‘offensive’. Can the offer of talks go hand in hand with the intensification of offensive Maoist military activities?

Azad: This is not as complicated as it is made out to be. The crux of the matter is: no ceasefire has been declared either by the Maoists or by the government. The Maoists made an offer of talks, which was immediately dismissed by the government as a joke and spurned by Chidambaram himself who wants nothing short of total surrender, whatever the language he uses.

When the government is not serious about a ceasefire and dialogue, and is placing a condition that Maoists should abjure violence without spelling out whether it will reciprocate with a simultaneous declaration of ceasefire, then what is the use of grumbling about acts of violence by Maoists? The acts of violence by both sides will cease on the day a ceasefire is declared.

Now I am not going into the innumerable atrocities by the police forces and the paramilitary gangs sent by [the state]. There has been wide coverage in magazines like Tehelka, Outlook and our own Maoist Information Bulletins. The statements and fact-finding committee reports by various organizations and Gandhians like Himanshu Kumar clearly show how savage the state has become.

Equally atrocious is the list compiled by the Union Home Ministry regarding the violent acts by Maoists to justify its rejection of the Maoist offer. The annex appended to your questionnaire speaks volumes about the duplicity and lies spread by the war-mongering hawks in the Home Ministry as part of their psy­war.

This is meant to lend an element of legitimacy to their rejection of the ceasefire offer by Maoists and also to their war waged for nipping in the bud alternative organs of people’s power and alternative development models, and for grabbing the resources in the mineral-rich region for the benefit of the class of tiny parasitic corporate elite they represent. I will not go into all the incidents listed.

The very first “heinous act of violence” cited by the Union Home Ministry in its annex circulated to the media to manufacture consent for its dirty war goes like this: “In West Bengal (February 22, 2010) – attack on a State Police-CRPF joint patrol party in PS Lalgarh, District West Midnapore. In the ensuing gun battle Lalmoham Tudu, President of the Police-e-Sangharsh Birodhi Janaganer Committee (PSBJC) was killed.”

The above incident was said to have taken place within three hours of the offer of a 72-day ceasefire made by Comrade Kishenji. Chidambaram himself has gone on record several times repeating this fabricated “heinous act” in a desperate bid to justify his rejection of the Maoist offer. Earlier, Chidambaram deliberately hurled an accusation against the CPI (Maoist) of massacring villagers in Khagaria District.

Coming to the so-called attack by Maoists on the joint patrol party, it is a 10

Initially, the SP of Paschim Mednipur asserted that Mr. Tudu died when the CRPF men “bravely” retaliated an attack by the Maoist guerrillas on the fortress-like CRPF camp in Kantapahari. Later, realizing the hollowness of his own story and fearing that it would evaporate like dew drops with the first rays of the sun, they changed the version by [saying] that Tudu and other two were killed when a Maoist guerrilla squad attacked the CRPF’s raiding party.

This lie is being propagated consciously, with a clearly worked out strategy of justifying the gruesome offensive by our own brand of George Bushes and Donald Rumsfelds. Tehelka Magazine, Star Ananda and other media sources have graphically exposed this lie.

As for your question regarding offensive and defensive actions, I wish to clarify to every well-meaning person who desires a reduction of Maoist violence that there is no such thing as defensive and offensive actions once the war has commenced.

However, our revolutionary counter-violence is overall defensive in nature for a considerable period of time. This does not mean we will retaliate only when we are fired at and keep silent the rest of the time when the police, paramilitary and the vigilante gangs unleash terror and engage in preparations for carrying out genocide.

To make this clear, let us suppose the men sent by Chidambaram are combing an area. When we come to know of it, we will carry out an offensive, annihilate as many forces as possible in the given circumstances, and seize arms and ammunition. We will also take prisoners of war where that is possible. This will be part of our overall defensive strategy although it is a tactical counter-offensive.

In the war zone, if you do not take the initiative, the enemy will seize the initiative. Likewise, we may have to attack ordnance depots, trucks carrying explosives, guards at installations such as NMDC, RPF personnel, and even outposts and stations far beyond our areas to seize arms, as in Nayagarh, for instance.

To fight a well-equipped superior enemy force that has no dearth of arms supplies and logistical support, what other option do we have but to equip ourselves with the arms seized from the enemy?

Some of these men are killed when they offer resistance. We feel sorry for their lives but there is no other way. Chidambaram may yell that innocent CISF jawans were targeted even though they were in no way related to the state’s offensive against Maoists. But that is how things are in a war zone.

The war will get dirtier and dirtier, engulf new areas and affect hitherto unaffected regions and sections of society. But this is precisely what [the ruling] coterie want.

We will also destroy the informer network built by the enemy, his supplies, bunkers, communication network and infrastructure.

We have to confiscate money from the banks and other sources for funding the revolution.

There is no use of yelling about the indiscriminate destruction by Maoists. We have to paralyze the administration, immobilize the enemy troops, cut off his supplies and perhaps even target the policemen engaged in removing the dead bodies of the enemy. There was a hue and cry when our guerrillas placed mines under the dead bodies.

But why such a hue and cry? Where are the rules in this war? Who has defined the rules? If there were rules, then why are the peace-chanting pigeons in the Home Ministry completely silent about the beasts in police uniform who chopped off the breasts of 70-year-old Dude Muye before killing her, who murdered in cold blood over 120 adivasis since August 2009 in Dantewada, Bijapur, Kanker and Narayanpur, and yet roam free and continue their atrocities without hindrance?

Chidambaram, Pillai, Raman Singh and their like should first define the rules of engagement and then, and only then, do they have a right to speak of violations of the rules. I am sure they would never dare to discipline their own forces while preaching meaningless sermons about Maoist “atrocities.”

We appeal to all peace-loving, democratic-minded organizations and individuals to ponder this question, pressure the government to adhere to the Geneva Convention, punish those who are creating Gompads, Gachampallis, Singanamadugus, Palachelimas, Tetemadugus, Takilodus, Dogpadus, Palods, and other massacres. If it is to be a war, then let it be, but the state should clearly state whether it will abide by its own Constitution and the International Conventions on the conduct of war.

8. The Maoists are engaging in armed struggle but have not hesitated to use violence against non-combatants. The beheading of a policeman, Francis Induvar, while in Maoist captivity shocked the country and was a blatant violation of civilized norms and of international humanitarian law, which the Maoists, like the Government, are obliged to adhere to.

If civil society condemns the security forces for killing civilians in places like Gompad village in Chhattisgarh and elsewhere and demands that justice be done and the guilty punished, it has an equal right to condemn the Maoists whenever they commit such crimes.

There have been some reports that the Maoist leadership has apologized for the killing of Induvar, but what steps have you taken to punish those who were involved? What steps have you taken to ensure such crimes are not committed by your cadres?

If your answer is that the state has also not punished those among its ranks who have committed crimes, are you then admitting that the political culture and moral universe the Maoists represent is the same as that of the state which you decry as illegitimate?

Azad: I already covered part of your question in my answer to your earlier question. Our attempt will always be to target the enemy who is engaged in war against us. Non-combatants are generally avoided. But what about the intelligence officials and police informers who collect information about the movements of Maoists and cause immense damage to the movement?

It is true most of them do not carry arms openly or are even unarmed. What to do with them? If we just leave them, they would continue to cause damage to the Party and movement. If we punish them there is a furor from the media and civil society. Caught between the devil and the deep blue sea!

Our general practice is to conduct a trial in a People’s Court wherever that is possible and proceed in accordance with the decision of the people. Where it is not possible to hold the People’s Court due to the intensity of repression, we conduct an investigation, weigh the opinion of the people and dole out appropriate punishment.

I agree there is no place for cruelty while giving out punishments. I clarified this in one of my earlier interviews while referring to the case of Francis Induvar. But it is made into a big issue by the media when a thousand beheadings have taken place in the past five years by the police-paramilitary and Salwa Judum goons. You are saying the beheading of Francis Induvar was a blatant violation of civilized norms and of international humanitarian law which both sides in the war are obliged to adhere to.

Do you really think the government is adhering to the law? And has the media ventured to ask Chidambaram why [the state] hasn’t been following international law or at least the Indian Constitution when dealing with the people in the war zone or citizens elsewhere?

Just ten days ago, two of our Party leaders – Comrades Shakhamuri Appa Rao and Kondal Reddy -were abducted from Chennai and Pune respectively by the APSIB and the Central Intelligence officials and were murdered in cold blood. What cruel tortures these comrades were subjected to by the lawless goons of the Indian state no one will ever know. I can give a thousand such examples of killings of our comrades in cold blood while in police captivity in the past five years.

Why is the media silent about these murders but becomes hysterical when one Police Inspector is beheaded? What is civil society doing when such cold-blooded murders are taking place in police custody? Why single out a rare case of the beheading of one Induvar and play it up whenever you need an excuse to bash the Maoists?

When our comrades hear of these cold-blooded murders committed by the APSIB or other officials of the state, it is natural that their blood boils and they will not bat an eyelid to hack any of the perpetrators of these inhuman crimes, say a man from APSIB or Grey Hounds, to pieces if he fell into their hands. In the war zone, the passions run with such intensity which one cannot even imagine in other areas or under normal circumstances.

Could someone who has seen women being raped and murdered, children and old men being murdered by hacking them to pieces in the killing fields of Dantewada and Bijapur, ever give a thought to your so-called non-existent (I say non-existent as none of the combatants know what these are nor would follow these conventions as the history of fake encounters by the Indian state shows) international laws when the perpetrator of such crimes happens to fall into their hands?

The pent-up anger of the masses is so intense that even the Party General Secretary would perhaps fail to control the fury of the adivasi masses when they lay their hands on their tormentors.

Maoists are not for crude and raw justice as some are trying to make it appear. Maoist guerrillas are not thugs and mercenaries like the men who carry out their brutal heinous acts in the name of democracy and the “rule of law.” Maoists have great respect for human life. Democratic values and norms are an integral part of socialist and communist ideology. Yet at the same time we think it is necessary to destroy the few poisonous weeds to save the entire crop.

I once again request you and all others to imagine what you would have done if your mothers, sisters and daughters were raped in front of your eyes, and your fathers, brothers and sons were murdered by being hacked to pieces. And worst of all, when there is no guardian of the “rule of law” to receive your complaints and the complainant himself/herself is abducted.

When we do not understand the feelings of the affected people, it is better to imagine ourselves in their place. This may help us get nearer to the truth.

9. The Supreme Court has asked the petitioners who filed a PIL against Salwa Judum atrocities to draw up a rehabilitation plan for those displaced by the violence perpetrated in Chhattisgarh by Salwa Judum, the regular security forces and the Maoists.

Is the CPI (Maoist) prepared to give an undertaking that it will allow the rebuilding of schools and the establishment of basic government services (primary health care, anganwadi, PDS etc.) as part of a court-backed plan for the welfare of the tribals affected by the conflict? Will you agree not to attack government employees and officials who enter to provide services to the tribal masses?

Azad: Asking us to give an undertaking that we will allow the rebuilding of schools and establishment of basic government services in the areas we control and that we will not attack government employees and officials is quite bizarre, to say the least. The welfare of the masses is the first priority for the Maoist revolutionaries.

You should request Mr. Chidambaram to allow you to visit the areas in Dandakaranya, Jharkhand, Orissa, or the villages of Jangalmahal by keeping his paramilitary forces, SPOs, Salwa Judums, Shanti Senas, Nagarik Suraksha Samitis and Harmads from obstructing you. Then you will see with your own eyes a hitherto hidden story of how the adivasis are prevented from pursuing their normal activity by the state and state-sponsored terrorists.

You will find how the forces occupy school buildings for six months to a year, thereby preventing the children from pursuing their studies. You will find how the adivasis are prevented from buying their daily necessities from the weekly bazaars, most of which were forcibly closed through threats and intimidation by the so-called security forces.

Who is blocking the development of the adivasis, who is preventing them from carrying on their normal activity like cultivating fields, tending animals, collecting minor forest produce, picking tendu leaves, obtaining their daily necessities, and so on will become as clear as daylight once you visit these remote villages. Hence the government, its “security” forces, and vigilante gangs are hell-bent on preventing independent observers and fact-finding teams from visiting these areas.

It is worthwhile to keep in mind that it is not the lack of development that has become the problem in the rural areas, particularly adivasi-inhabited areas. On the contrary, it is its imperialist-dictated anti-people development model that is driving them to displacement and deprivation, death and destitution, and extreme desperation.

There need be hardly any doubt that the poor adivasis were a happier lot before the civilized [corporate] goons set their foot on their soil. The development model pursued by [the rulers] displaced them and made them aliens in their own land.

The so-called development you are referring to is the development that India saw under the British colonialists. The talk of roads in remote areas is not for the benefit of the people, who are without food and drinking water, but only for the speedier movement of the raw materials from the hinterland to the cities, to help the mining sharks transport the mineral wealth and forest produce.

And, of course, for rushing in the state’s troops to quell any militant people’s struggle against the rapacious plunder by the tiny parasitic class of blood-sucking leeches.

The entire world knows that George Bush invaded Iraq for oil even as the media in the US barked about Saddam’s non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction. All India knows that [the rulers] and the vultures they represent are itching to lay their hands on the abundant reserves of iron ore, coal, tin, bauxite, dolomite, limestone and other minerals of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa and other states where their Operation Green Hunt has been launched.

Lastly, banding together Maoists with the state and vigilante gangs, and equating their revolutionary counter-violence in defence of the rights of the people with the counterrevolutionary violence of the state and vigilante gangs like the Salwa Judum is a despicable trick played by the rulers and those so-called democratic forces to obfuscate the stark reality of the brutal violence of the state and state-sponsored terrorists.

I can say with full confidence that there was no displacement, whatsoever, of innocent people due to the revolutionary counter-violence by the Maoists. It is only a handful of anti-people exploiters, tribal heads and landed gentry who fled the villages in the course of the class struggle. Many, however, surrendered to the people, mended their ways, and continue to live in the villages like others.

The Supreme Court should know that the displacement of the adivasis was done in accordance with a pre-meditated plan to evacuate the villages and settle them in Vietnam War-type strategic hamlets. And this policy is being continued by the BJP government in Chhattisgarh with full assistance from the Congress-led government at the Centre.

The Supreme Court, if it is serious about the displacement of the adivasis, should direct the central and state governments to immediately halt its brutal armed offensive on adivasi villages in the first place, which is resulting in the massive exodus of people estimated at around three lakhs since the current brutal war began in the name of Operation Green Hunt.

10. Human rights groups have condemned the security forces and the Maoists for not respecting the sanctity of schools. If the security forces take them over and convert them into barracks, the Maoists have also been guilty of destroying school buildings and infrastructure. Even in the absence of a ceasefire or dialogue, don’t you think both sides need to come to an understanding that schools and school children should not become targets of this war?

Azad: It has now become a fashionable thing for some human rights groups and the media personnel to play the role of referees in a sports event. By criticizing both sides equally they imagine they are being impartial or neutral in the war. If someone says that both Indians and the British were responsible for the violence in India during the two centuries of British rule, would you accept it?

Or that both Iraqis and the American occupiers are responsible for the violence in Iraq? Any freedom-loving person would unequivocally say it was the British colonialists that caused the bloodshed in India, and it is the American aggressors that are the cause of the unending violence in Iraq.

By criticizing both the so-called security forces and the Maoists for not respecting the sanctity of schools, these human rights groups imagine they are playing a neutral and impartial role. But they do not see the cause and effect chain of events.

They do not ask themselves the simple question: If the police and paramilitary do not occupy schools, then where is the need for the Maoists to destroy them? Do you know that in many villages it was not the Maoist squads but the people themselves who demolished school buildings since they did not wish to see the security forces create insecurity in their villages?

How can you ask the Maoists and the people to assure you that they will respect the sanctity of schools occupied or likely to be occupied by their tormentors?

My request to media people like you is: please do not be misled by an act or how it happened, but go deeper into why it happened. Only then you will reach the truth.

However, we agree with your proposition that even in the absence of a ceasefire or dialogue, both sides should come to an understanding that schools and school children should not become targets of the war. We take this occasion to convey to the GOI that it should immediately withdraw all its forces from school buildings and stop recruiting school children as SPOs and police informers.

If they withdraw their forces and assure they will not reoccupy school buildings, then our Party will desist from targeting schools. And if the government stops recruitment of school children as SPOs and police informers, then the very basis for punishing these people disappears.

But the larger issue is: can schools function even if the buildings are intact when the parents of the school children are murdered, raped, abducted, tortured, and are forced to flee? What do you have to say of the children of the three lakh people who fled the villages due to Operation Green Hunt I and II? What use are the school buildings and the talk of sanctity of schools when the villages themselves are deserted?

A more rational proposal would be to ensure that the inhabitants of the villages are resettled with the assurance that the police and paramilitary will not continue their atrocities and let them live in peace. This should assume first and foremost priority in the war theaters all over India, particularly Dandakaranya.

11. Is the Maoist party and leadership under pressure because of recent top-level arrests like that of Kobad Ghandy? Is there also a wider crisis of leadership with fewer activists from the intelligentsia getting attracted to Maoists?

Azad: I did not understand what pressure you are referring to. Is it the pressure for a ceasefire and talks? If so, then I would say you are completely off base. One cannot overcome pressure through such tactics. Actually the Party and leadership is growing rapidly in times of war.

Several new leaders are emerging out of the struggle. War is giving birth to new generals and commanders, which we never anticipated in normal times. While it took several years to produce a leader of caliber in relatively peaceful times, it is taking a fraction of that time in the midst of the war situation.

Today we even find children acquiring high level of consciousness at an early age. War is transforming the world outlook of the illiterate people, their understanding about the class nature of the state and its various wings, and how they have to get rid of the anti-people state and establish their own organs of power.

People have begun to understand from their own lives what Comrade Lenin had taught in his State and Revolution. This transformation has contributed to the development of leadership at all levels. At the central level, I agree there are some problems, though not very acute, after the losses in the past two years.

Overall, it is not true to say that there is a wider crisis of leadership due to drop in recruitment from the intelligentsia. You would be surprised to know that contrary to the assessment of various analysts and media personnel, the appeal of the Maoist movement has actually grown stronger in the intelligentsia.

And it is precisely this fact which is rattling [the rulers] and [their] trumpeters in the media. The threats and attacks on intellectuals have been increasing in tenor, and there are growing attempts at isolating the intellectuals who seem to sympathize with the Maoists. The more the growth in popularity of the Maoists and their politics, the greater the cacophony about the erosion of the mass base of Maoists, especially among the intellectuals.

You must also look at it from another angle, instead of concluding that [a] lack of intelligentsia has created a crisis of leadership. The mass base of the Maoists has actually grown stronger, notwithstanding the attempts of the rulers to destroy it by brute force. The more you try to crush it, the more it bounces back.

Our leadership is drawn basically from the oppressed class of adivasis, dalits, agricultural labourers and poor peasants. It is precisely because of this circumstance that our movement has become invincible. Intellectuals are a good asset for the party, but it is the basic classes that are the lifeblood of the Party. And we have plenty from these sections.

12. In Ganapathi’s interview to Jan Myrdal and Navlakha he said:

“I reiterate that at present no one party or organization is capable enough to be a rallying center for all revolutionary, democratic, progressive and patriotic forces and people. Hence, at present juncture our Party can play a significant role in rallying all revolutionary, democratic, progressive and patriotic forces and people.”

This suggests you see the Maoists as one part of a wider force of progressive, patriotic people. Who else do you consider part of these forces? Which organizations or parties do you regard as progressive and patriotic part of these forces? Does this not include the CPI and CPI (M)? Why then have Maoists in Bengal been involved in assassinating cadres of other communist parties like CPI (M)?

Azad: It is not only now, but all along we have considered ourselves an indivisible part of the broader force of other revolutionary, democratic and patriotic sections of people. Firstly, we are one of the several revolutionary detachments in the international detachment of the world proletariat, and we see ourselves as a part of the broad worldwide anti-imperialist front.

Our mass organizations are a part of the International League of People’s Struggles (ILPS) and are in the forefront of the struggle against American imperialism.

Within India, our Party was born in the midst of the revolutionary upsurge of the late 1960s, particularly with the glorious Naxalbari Uprising, and hence we are an indivisible part of all that is revolutionary in the Indian political stream.

We are also an heir to the great Telangana Armed Agrarian Uprising (1946-51), the Tebhaga Uprising of 1946, and all the revolutionary struggles led by the Communist Party since its birth in 1921, notwithstanding the betrayals by its central leadership at every critical turning point in the revolutionary political history of our country.

Second, and more pertinent to your query, is the fact that the Communist revolutionaries are politically (i.e., in terms of its program), a part of the wider democratic stream of all anti-feudal and anti-imperialist forces in the country.

This is the essence of our program of new democratic revolution (NDR), which seeks to unite all those opposed to imperialism, feudalism and comprador bureaucratic capitalism into one broad front to overthrow these enemies and establish a government comprised of the four-class alliance of the working class, peasantry, urban petty-bourgeoisie, and the national bourgeoisie.

Once you grasp this political basis of our NDR, it will not be difficult to understand why we are trying to form numerous tactical united fronts as part of forming a strategic united front in various states and at the all-India level.

To identify the organizations or parties that can be called progressive (usage of the term ‘democratic’ would be more appropriate) and patriotic, one has to determine not only whether they have any anti-imperialist, anti-feudal and anti-state or anti-authoritarian aspect included in their political programmes, but also one needs to look at their actual practice. We consider most of the ML revolutionary forces as part of this front.

We consider national liberation organizations like the NSCN, ULFA, PLA of Manipur, and the JKLF in Kashmir as part of the wider democratic forces fighting the Indian state.

We consider the non-parliamentary trade union organizations, the progressive organizations belonging to the religious minorities which are persecuted by state-backed Hindu fascist organizations; the organizations of Dalits and other oppressed castes, adivasis and women; the non-parliamentary organizations that are fighting for demands like separate a Telangana, Gorkhaland, Vidarbha, Bundelkhand and so on; the organizations that are waging struggles against SEZs, mining and other so-called development projects leading to massive displacement of people; organizations fighting against the Liberalization-Privatization- Globalization (LPG) policies of the reactionary rulers; the organizations which boldly confront the growing authoritarianism and unbridled state repression resulting in fake encounters, mass murders, and violation of all fundamental rights of the people; and so on, as part of this broad-based non-parliamentary democratic people’s front.

There are also a large number of intellectuals and other democratic individuals who are concerned about the well-being of the people and the sovereignty of our country at large. We consider all these as genuine patriotic forces that are deeply concerned about the future of our country and about the well-being of the overwhelming majority of the Indian people rather than of a tiny parasitical class that runs the country through the so-called mainstream parliamentary parties.

I am obviously leaving out the names of the organizations and individuals who in our opinion could play a crucial role in the revolutionary transformation of our country into a self-reliant, genuinely democratic society. Today we are passing through a phase of Indian McCarthyism that brands every form of dissent and anyone who questions the authoritarianism of the Indian state as Maoist in order to legitimize its witch-hunting and brutal repression.

Today immense possibilities have unfolded for the rapid advance of the revolutionary war in India, and the task of the revolutionary Party lies in how effectively and ably it can utilize the present situation, rally all those who have become the victims of the anti-people, imperialist-dictated policies of the comprador-feudal forces ruling our country, and forge a broad-based united front of all these affected sections of our society and all revolutionary, democratic and patriotic forces in the country.

This task should be achieved by defeating the brutal all-out countrywide coordinated war unleashed by the reactionary ruling classes of our country with the aid and assistance of the imperialists, particularly the American imperialists.

If we fail in achieving broader unity of all these forces, the fallout would be disastrous for the Indian people at large, since the aim of this cruel armed onslaught is not only to suppress the Maoist movement, but also to suppress every form of democratic dissent and struggle of the people against the authoritarian, feudal and autocratic structure of the Indian state and socio-political system.

As put forth by our General Secretary, Comrade Ganapathi, in a recent interview: “This war is principally against the Maoist movement but not limited to this movement and is aimed enough against all revolutionary, democratic, progressive and patriotic movements and the movements of oppressed communities of our society,  including the oppressed nationalities. At this juncture, all these forces have to think together how to face this mighty enemy and how to unite to go ahead.”

Now coming to your specific question regarding the CPI and CPI (M). Are they not a part of the wider democratic and patriotic forces? I would say yes and no. As far as the rank and file cadre of these parties is concerned, there is still some sincerity and zeal to work for the well-being of the people among a section of them.

But the leadership has completely capitulated to the exploiting ruling classes and pursues a reformist line that only helps sustain the status quo albeit with a few cosmetic changes.

Here too, we have to differentiate the CPI from the CPI (M). We do not place both the CPI and the CPI (M) in the same category. The CPI leadership has been critical of the policies of the CPI (M), has consistently opposed counter-revolutionary vigilante gangs like Salwa Judum propped up by the State and central governments, and is opposing the Operation Green Hunt launched by the Centre.

One can witness the reactionary anti-people nature of the policies of the CPI (M), especially in States where it is in power. Singur, Nandigram, Lalgarh, and a host of other names have stripped the CPI (M) of its guise of anti-imperialism and anti­-neoliberalism.

The CPI (M) is not even a democratic force, let alone  Communist. However, we are prepared to join forces with even these revisionists if they support non-parliamentary struggles on the basic issues of the people, and to the extent they uphold democratic values.

It is wrong to say we are assassinating the cadres of the CPI (M). We are confronting the armed onslaught by the stormtroopers like the Harmad Bahini and other armed [men] maintained by their party leaders by putting up courageous resistance. The struggle against the CPI (M) is part of the class struggle of the people against exploitation and oppression. We challenge them to an open debate on any issue.

Despite their diplomatic and opportunistic stance that their fight with the Maoists is mainly political, they are in the forefront in the war waged by the Indian ruling classes against the Maoists. Unable to confront us ideologically and politically, their leaders and spokespersons have unleashed a vicious campaign of outright lies and slander against the Maoists.

We call upon the cadres of the CPI (M) and other so-called left parties to come forward to unite with other forces to fight against the disastrous policies of the central and state governments and to unite with others to oppose the brutal war waged by the reactionary rulers guided by the US imperialists against the Maoist movement and all forms of democratic dissent. We are prepared to unite with all sincere and genuine forces in these parties who take the side of the broad masses of people.

13. Why has the CPI (Maoist) decided to reach out through the columns of The Hindu? To use a newspaper to clarify its views vis a vis the government?

Azad: Among the daily newspapers, The Hindu has a reputation for printing serious news and less of the sensational stuff that has become the norm of the media these days. Our party leadership has given interviews to this paper earlier, such as my interview on the developments in Nepal, which was covered in a two part article. In a lighter vein, I think it will reach out to our direct Enemy No. 1 at the present juncture, Mr. Chidambaram, too.

I think the media can play a role in carrying the views of a banned party to the government and the people at large, particularly at a time when facts about our Party are distorted, misinterpreted, and obfuscated in a meticulously planned manner. And when there is no scope for a dialogue given the determination of the rulers to carry out their pre-programmed war offensive that was worked out a year ago, we think it appropriate to reach out to the people at large through the media too.

Finally, I thank The Hindu for the thought-provoking and incisive questions it placed before our Party. We look forward to more such interactions with the media in future. On behalf of our Central Committee and our entire Party, I welcome any questions related to our ideology, political programme, strategy, tactics, and practice.

I hope through regular and active interaction between organizations like ours that are proscribed by the government and the media, an opportunity is provided to the people to arrive at a correct judgment and seek truth from facts. Otherwise, truth is certain to become a casualty in this world dominated by corporate sharks that control virtually every source of information that is fed to the people.

Cuba Versus the Rest of the Region

Good article.

I should point out that death squads are back in El Salvador. They are not killing many, but they are killing a few.

And they are back in a big way in Honduras ever since the US-sponsored and promoted coup that removed the democratically elected President for the crime of raising the minimum wage. Death squads are killing people just about every day in Honduras lately. I wonder how much longer this can last before the Left takes up guns again.

And Haiti has always been run by death squads. After the US-sponsored coup which removed President Aristide (US mercenaries and Marines appeared at his mansion and ordered him to leave the country), death squads have rampaged through Haiti. At least 3,000 people have been killed. Those targeted were the supporters of Aristide. The US supports the death squads in Haiti and Honduras to the hilt, and probably supports them in Guatemala and El Salvador too (they always did in the past).

On this question, Obama is no socialist or Communist. He’s just another far rightwing US imperialist running interference for the reactionary cliques down South. There’s barely any light between Obama and Bush on Latin American policy. Democrats or Republicans, it’s always the Monroe Doctrine down there.

Anti-Communists like to say that no one ever flees to a Communist regime, but the eastern part of Cuba is full of Haitians and Jamaicans who have fled their countries. Cuba took them in, and they like it a Hell of a lot better in Cuba. Everything is relative, you know.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)