07-29-2006, 11:13 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Only Fatherland
December 7th, 2004
Thatâs the title of a book that Arun Shourie authored in 1991. It really doesnât take a genius to guess the bookâs subject matter: a tirade against Indian Communismâthe Indian Communists, to be specific.
Private to Ravikiran: It doesnât contain Nehru-bashing although he makes an extremely passing reference to how Nehru was cowed down by the Commies.
The bookâs blurb opens with these lines:
Are ideologies a pair of binoculars that enable us to see far? Or are they a pair of blinkers that keep us from seeing even that which is at hand? How is it that the communists, equipped as they say they are with the one great Theory which explains everything, fumble so very often in seeing the obvious?
The theme of the book can be summed up as follows:
The treacherous role of the Communists in betraying freedom fighters during the Quit India Movement
Their justification for why they did what they did to sabotage the Quit India Movement
Their support for the Muslim Leagueâs demand for Pakistan
Standard Communist techniques for shouting down and obscuring demands
Role of the Communists in contributing to the decay of standards in Indian public life
Communists on the Soviet Collapse in 1991.
The book opens with Shourie recounting his experience of how he was warmly received by the CPI(M) of Kerala. They apparently wanted to translate a book he had written. He narrates its subsequent shelving because of a singular instance: he wrote a series in the Illustrated Weekly about the Communistsâ role in sabotaging the Quit India Movement. The consequences can best be reproduced in his own words:
The denunciation and abuse and pasting of motives commenced at once. And they were a torrent. âit is an old canardâ¦â (they shouted) But how did that affect its significance or veracity? [â¦] E.M.S. Namboodripad⦠(he) declared that I was an agent of the rightâ¦the forces of which I was a mouthpiece⦠(which) had been unnerved by the growing strength of progressive and secular forces.
And the stage is set for the rest of the book.
Shourie exposes the blatant treachery of the Communists starting with the second chapter entitled 1942: Was there a Deal? through Stick the Convictâs Badge, chapter 6. A very quick summary of the whole 1942 episode:
When the Quit India Movement was called by Gandhi, the Communists initially supported it. Why? Stalin had then made a deal with Hitler to share certain European territories including parts of Poland. To achieve this, he sent out through the Comintern, pamphlets that the War was a war between the oppressive forces of capitalism and that the Commies should remain neutral and/or that wherever the forces of capitalism were active (read: European colonies), they needed to be opposed. Thus, Britain=Capitalist, India=British colony, therefore, oppose the British in India. The Indian Commies faithfully compiled. Not just that. In their obsession with The Marxist Gospel, they began to paint patriotsâincluding but not limited to Gandhiâas âvultures, decadent, traitors.â Their struggle was the only true struggle, their way the only way to expel the British, and so on. As evidence, Shourie presents an array of extracts from their party letters, cartoons, and articles. One cartoon shows Subash Bose as a midget being led by Japanese imperialists, another shows him as a cur held up Goebbels. Gandhi is depicted as a kangaroo in whose pouch a frightened JP (frightened by the Commies, of course) jumps right back. And a typical passage that tarnishes the freedom fightersâ reputations:
For six months these vultures (Congress Socialist Party) have been feeding on the Congress, doing the dirty work of their masters in the name of the Congress⦠clear out the vampires⦠Its politics is the politics of dirty vampires who have been sucking the life blood of the Congress for six months, but who now see the end of their days drawing nearâ¦.
Now I digress slightly. Notice how the Communists from so long ago had tried to make inroads into the-then respectable Congress party. They denounced CSP precisely because JP and others didnât yield to them. Yet, Nehru effortlessly broke the Congress spirit by bending backwards to every snarl that the Commies uttered(Ravi:a snide at Nehru).
The next in their list of treachery is the support for the creation of Pakistan. As Shourie documents, the Communists had earlier dubbed the Muslim society of India in their usual, terms of abuse: regressive, decayed, and feudal. Now they werenât. This heinous precedent was set by a seemingly-innocent vilification of Gandhi:
⦠the Communist Party now turned on the Congress, and on Gandhiji in particular for another crime: they were accused of disrupting national unity by not conceding âthe essence of the demand for Pakistan.ââ
Perhaps, this is a turning point that has come to affect so many things thatâs wrong with India today. Hereâs a summary (from the book) of that disastrous theme:
Now by incessant.repetition the Party started proclaiming the following theses:
1. India is not one nation but a collection of several separate nationalities, many of them being oppressed nationalities.
2. The Muslims are not..oppressed.but, as they fear that the Hindus could in the future oppress them, the demand for Pakistan is a just and democratic demand.
3. The Muslim League leadership has changed: âIt is no longer feudal-reactionaryâ¦.â
4. The Muslim League itself is now progressive⦠the growth of the Muslim League is now certified to represent not the growth of communalism but the rise of anti-imperialist nationalist consciousness among the Muslim masses.
So there! The tone set back then continues to this day. When Mullah M.F. Hussain paints Goddess Saraswathi in the nude, it is an expression of artistic creativity and freedom, and is sold at ridiculous prices. When Hindus protest this insult, they are communal and reactionary. When is the last time anybody heard about the victims of the Godhra train carnage seek for justiceâworse, which paper carried at least a report of a victimâs family that sought (if it did) justice? When is the last time anybody forgot about the Best Bakery trial? The precedent for this gross imbalance can perhaps be found in the scenario Iâve reproduced above, from Shourieâs book.
The British on their part, arrested top leaders of the Communist Party and generally viewed the Party as a nuisance that needs to be clamped down strongly. When the Quit India Movement was called, the Communists were in a pretty bad shape: low morale, top leaders jailed, fall in its membership, lack of fundsâ¦. yet the Comrades kept up with their glorious struggle.
And then something happened in 1941 which caused them to side with the British against Indian patriots. In other words: betrayal and treachery.
Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. The story of Stalin siding with the Allies is now old. What he did to not lose credibility is nothing surprising: he now proclaimed that the âcharacter of the war has changed.â It is no longer a war between capitalists, but one against Hitlerâs brand of Fascism. That the whole world should join together and defeat Hitler. Our comrades back home (obviously) changed hues overnight. Actually not overnight: they waited till December 1941 (for 8 months) to get the âfinal, official wordâ from Moscow before they changed sides.
Shourie gives copious extracts of the treachery, starting with the secret approach made by one P.C. Joshiâa revolutionary, of courseâwith Sir Reginald Maxwell, the Home Secretary. I wonât bore you with more extracts from the book. To summarize, the offer for help in sabotaging the QIM was a two-pronged strategy: in public, the Communists would cry hoarse for the Brits to quit India while behind the scenes, they got their jailed leaders released, and then spread their tentacles through trade unions, university campuses, and among the rural folk: they did their best to sabotage the QIM, and sent regular reports of the accomplishments to the British. Their reports painted a bright picture of their deeds from Lucknow to Vijaywada, to Madras to Bombay to Tellichery to Lahore to Behar (todayâs Bihar). When Gandhi later questioned their treacherous role, they said they âsuffer from no qualms of conscience.â That quite sums up the character of their deeds.
And from one of these chapters does the title of this book emerge. Sorry, but I had to reproduce this part:
Party Letter 55⦠contains as candid a statement of the principal motivation that impelled the change. The Letter contains an over 30000 word long torturous thesisâ¦
The actual letter:
⦠the attitude of the Communist Parties to war is always determined not by any national or local considerations but by the single consideration: international unity and action of the world proletariat to strike at world imperialism to defend the Socialist Fatherland. ⦠Our jail comrades guided by proletarian nationalism at once applied the test: how do the imperialist nations stand in relation to the fortress of World Revolution, the Fatherland of all workers? That at once enabled them to see that the world was not divided sharply into two warring camps. [â¦] Hitler-fascism stood isolated as the main enemy of humanity while against him stood the new realignment of the USSR, Britain and America. [â¦] It is axiomatic and self-evident to all Communists that a policy⦠required by the <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>supreme duty of defending the USSR must also be in the best interest of the country.</span> (Italics as in the book)
And then Arun Shourie gives some glimpses into standard Communist Method of Argumentation:
1. Everything is present in the TheoryâThe Theory explains everything.
2. (Therefore) Nothing which is not in the theory is true.
3. Logic and facts should be twisted to suit the need of the hour and/or The Theory.
4. Repeated assertion of falsehood becomes the Truth over time.
5. Any method is okay to secure the workersâ paradise.
6. Stick the Convict badge first: donât bother to explain why a person is called a convict. Paste the badge and assert it a million times.
For #6, Arun Shourie quotes Lenin, who first expounded the technique:
Marxism is a monolith conception of the world, it does not tolerate dilution and vulgarisation by means of.additions.. Plekhatnov once said to me about a critic of Marxism âFirst letâs stick the convictâs badge on him, and then after that weâll examine his case.â And I think that we must âstick the convictâs badge, on anyone and everyone who tries to undermine Marxism, even if we donât go on to examine his case. Thatâs how every revolutionary should react.
And shows by citing several of Leninâs works, the terms of abuse invented by the Marxists:
Curs, swine, scoundrels, brigands, rascals, lick-spittles, absolute ignoramusesâLenin routinely pastes such expressions on anyone who differs from him. (Emphasis mine)
Notice the words in bold. This approach guarantees that one with the most muscle is sure to win any argument. For example, the Indian media today, which is almost entirely dominated by this motley gang of Reds. More examples of this technique as used by Lenin:
Many of Leninâs speeches and works are altogether devoid of argument, reason, facts. They contain abuse and allegations alone. Typical of these is his polemic, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautskyâa polemic that is often held up as a model among our Communists. Here are some of the expressions that he hurls at his interlocutors in this single pamphlet: âUtter and ignominious bankruptcy, twaddle, windbag, the Marxist pedant, contemptible sycophants in the service of the bourgeoisie, Mr Muddleheaded Counsellor, what civilized belly-crawling before the capitalists, Kautsky, with the learned air of a most learned arm-chair fool, the pig-headedness of a philistine, fools or renegades like Kautskyâ¦.
Like the proverbial tip of the iceberg, the stuff I have excerpted from the book is hardly representative of the record of the staggering treachery that Communists have inflicted (and continue to this day) on India. Anyone who cares for the country needs to read this compulsorily to understand the danger India faces if these morons are given free reinâwhich they are given by the spineless Congress of today. Does anyone of us notice that it is not coincidence that the Naxals are suddenly active in as many as 13 states? That they are being âinvited for negotiationsâ by the cowardly Andhra Pradesh government? Or that Indian Naxals are pretty active in colluding with the Nepalese Maoists? Or that they are Indiaâs enemy within? Or that following the Communist diktat, they will not give up armed struggle to secure their objectives despite the UPAâs overtures?
And I forgot to mention that in the Postscript of the book, Shourie exposes more lies by our Communists that their beloved Fatherland had not collapsed while the whole world witnessed the glorious downfall. And heaps praise on Gorbachev.
How many thousands⦠and how many millions of young men and women had drugged themselves on this (Communist) opium! How many millions of lives were extinguished as a consequence! And this one man had taken the lid off and had held it away long enough for all to see what the reality was in these countriesâwhat it was now and what it had been in the years Communists the world over had glorified. He had allowed an independent examination of the past, and out had come the Hitler-Stalin pact that the Soviets had denied all alongâ¦
He then very briefly outlines the damage that the Communist menace has done to the country that struggles to stand on its feet even after five decades of independence.
And in India⦠the Communists and the corpse they clutch, their ideology, are likely to continue to retard and harm for several reasons⦠there is the stalemate on all sides: no group, no party has the strength in India today to push things through in any direction; every group⦠has strength enough to stall anything⦠And the results of their expertise (in stalling) remain in place. They have helped each other to places in universities and in the media: members of these cliques secure places for one another and burnish one anotherâs reputation, they stick halos on one another⦠As the peer group in many an institution, the ICHR (abbreviations, mine)⦠JNU, publications of a wide rangeâconsists entirely of those they have allowed to survive, as they have been so systematically successful in shutting out the other point of viewâfrom so many of our newspapers⦠â their reputation survives in the face of facts.
These cliques remain in place. . Therefore their ability to derail discourse⦠to prevent people from learning the full facts .. to inveigle our poor and uninformed people into drawing the wrong inferences from . such cataclysmic events as the ones in East Europe and Soviet Union remain. [â¦] From this perspective the repudiation of Communism in the Soviet Union makes the immediate danger from our Communists greater, not smaller. To divert attention from those events, many of them will become even purer fundamentalists: V.P. Singh is an apt example⦠(emphasis mine)
The words in bold are prophetic. It is these communists who later tried to bolster the case that a (Ram) temple never existed at Ayodhya , and continue to postpone its stalemate. Some of these regularly strut about with âviewsâ in newspapers that Bangladeshi infiltrators are not illegal immigrants. It is they who support the likes of M.F. Hussain, Imam Bukhari, and the rest.
The antidote that Shourie suggests at the end is worth remembering at all times:
The record of the Communists and their âTheoryâ must be documented in minute detail and disseminated far and wide as a prophylactic, as must information about the techniques of their cliques in the media, in universities⦠we will . convince⦠our policy makers .. that the certificates of these cliques are just not worth having. [â¦] all this must be done thoroughly and with a sense of urgency because⦠for all their camouflage our Communists remain Stalinists at heart and in mind.
THE END.
http://www.sandeepweb.com/2004/12/07/the...atherland/<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
December 7th, 2004
Thatâs the title of a book that Arun Shourie authored in 1991. It really doesnât take a genius to guess the bookâs subject matter: a tirade against Indian Communismâthe Indian Communists, to be specific.
Private to Ravikiran: It doesnât contain Nehru-bashing although he makes an extremely passing reference to how Nehru was cowed down by the Commies.
The bookâs blurb opens with these lines:
Are ideologies a pair of binoculars that enable us to see far? Or are they a pair of blinkers that keep us from seeing even that which is at hand? How is it that the communists, equipped as they say they are with the one great Theory which explains everything, fumble so very often in seeing the obvious?
The theme of the book can be summed up as follows:
The treacherous role of the Communists in betraying freedom fighters during the Quit India Movement
Their justification for why they did what they did to sabotage the Quit India Movement
Their support for the Muslim Leagueâs demand for Pakistan
Standard Communist techniques for shouting down and obscuring demands
Role of the Communists in contributing to the decay of standards in Indian public life
Communists on the Soviet Collapse in 1991.
The book opens with Shourie recounting his experience of how he was warmly received by the CPI(M) of Kerala. They apparently wanted to translate a book he had written. He narrates its subsequent shelving because of a singular instance: he wrote a series in the Illustrated Weekly about the Communistsâ role in sabotaging the Quit India Movement. The consequences can best be reproduced in his own words:
The denunciation and abuse and pasting of motives commenced at once. And they were a torrent. âit is an old canardâ¦â (they shouted) But how did that affect its significance or veracity? [â¦] E.M.S. Namboodripad⦠(he) declared that I was an agent of the rightâ¦the forces of which I was a mouthpiece⦠(which) had been unnerved by the growing strength of progressive and secular forces.
And the stage is set for the rest of the book.
Shourie exposes the blatant treachery of the Communists starting with the second chapter entitled 1942: Was there a Deal? through Stick the Convictâs Badge, chapter 6. A very quick summary of the whole 1942 episode:
When the Quit India Movement was called by Gandhi, the Communists initially supported it. Why? Stalin had then made a deal with Hitler to share certain European territories including parts of Poland. To achieve this, he sent out through the Comintern, pamphlets that the War was a war between the oppressive forces of capitalism and that the Commies should remain neutral and/or that wherever the forces of capitalism were active (read: European colonies), they needed to be opposed. Thus, Britain=Capitalist, India=British colony, therefore, oppose the British in India. The Indian Commies faithfully compiled. Not just that. In their obsession with The Marxist Gospel, they began to paint patriotsâincluding but not limited to Gandhiâas âvultures, decadent, traitors.â Their struggle was the only true struggle, their way the only way to expel the British, and so on. As evidence, Shourie presents an array of extracts from their party letters, cartoons, and articles. One cartoon shows Subash Bose as a midget being led by Japanese imperialists, another shows him as a cur held up Goebbels. Gandhi is depicted as a kangaroo in whose pouch a frightened JP (frightened by the Commies, of course) jumps right back. And a typical passage that tarnishes the freedom fightersâ reputations:
For six months these vultures (Congress Socialist Party) have been feeding on the Congress, doing the dirty work of their masters in the name of the Congress⦠clear out the vampires⦠Its politics is the politics of dirty vampires who have been sucking the life blood of the Congress for six months, but who now see the end of their days drawing nearâ¦.
Now I digress slightly. Notice how the Communists from so long ago had tried to make inroads into the-then respectable Congress party. They denounced CSP precisely because JP and others didnât yield to them. Yet, Nehru effortlessly broke the Congress spirit by bending backwards to every snarl that the Commies uttered(Ravi:a snide at Nehru).
The next in their list of treachery is the support for the creation of Pakistan. As Shourie documents, the Communists had earlier dubbed the Muslim society of India in their usual, terms of abuse: regressive, decayed, and feudal. Now they werenât. This heinous precedent was set by a seemingly-innocent vilification of Gandhi:
⦠the Communist Party now turned on the Congress, and on Gandhiji in particular for another crime: they were accused of disrupting national unity by not conceding âthe essence of the demand for Pakistan.ââ
Perhaps, this is a turning point that has come to affect so many things thatâs wrong with India today. Hereâs a summary (from the book) of that disastrous theme:
Now by incessant.repetition the Party started proclaiming the following theses:
1. India is not one nation but a collection of several separate nationalities, many of them being oppressed nationalities.
2. The Muslims are not..oppressed.but, as they fear that the Hindus could in the future oppress them, the demand for Pakistan is a just and democratic demand.
3. The Muslim League leadership has changed: âIt is no longer feudal-reactionaryâ¦.â
4. The Muslim League itself is now progressive⦠the growth of the Muslim League is now certified to represent not the growth of communalism but the rise of anti-imperialist nationalist consciousness among the Muslim masses.
So there! The tone set back then continues to this day. When Mullah M.F. Hussain paints Goddess Saraswathi in the nude, it is an expression of artistic creativity and freedom, and is sold at ridiculous prices. When Hindus protest this insult, they are communal and reactionary. When is the last time anybody heard about the victims of the Godhra train carnage seek for justiceâworse, which paper carried at least a report of a victimâs family that sought (if it did) justice? When is the last time anybody forgot about the Best Bakery trial? The precedent for this gross imbalance can perhaps be found in the scenario Iâve reproduced above, from Shourieâs book.
The British on their part, arrested top leaders of the Communist Party and generally viewed the Party as a nuisance that needs to be clamped down strongly. When the Quit India Movement was called, the Communists were in a pretty bad shape: low morale, top leaders jailed, fall in its membership, lack of fundsâ¦. yet the Comrades kept up with their glorious struggle.
And then something happened in 1941 which caused them to side with the British against Indian patriots. In other words: betrayal and treachery.
Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. The story of Stalin siding with the Allies is now old. What he did to not lose credibility is nothing surprising: he now proclaimed that the âcharacter of the war has changed.â It is no longer a war between capitalists, but one against Hitlerâs brand of Fascism. That the whole world should join together and defeat Hitler. Our comrades back home (obviously) changed hues overnight. Actually not overnight: they waited till December 1941 (for 8 months) to get the âfinal, official wordâ from Moscow before they changed sides.
Shourie gives copious extracts of the treachery, starting with the secret approach made by one P.C. Joshiâa revolutionary, of courseâwith Sir Reginald Maxwell, the Home Secretary. I wonât bore you with more extracts from the book. To summarize, the offer for help in sabotaging the QIM was a two-pronged strategy: in public, the Communists would cry hoarse for the Brits to quit India while behind the scenes, they got their jailed leaders released, and then spread their tentacles through trade unions, university campuses, and among the rural folk: they did their best to sabotage the QIM, and sent regular reports of the accomplishments to the British. Their reports painted a bright picture of their deeds from Lucknow to Vijaywada, to Madras to Bombay to Tellichery to Lahore to Behar (todayâs Bihar). When Gandhi later questioned their treacherous role, they said they âsuffer from no qualms of conscience.â That quite sums up the character of their deeds.
And from one of these chapters does the title of this book emerge. Sorry, but I had to reproduce this part:
Party Letter 55⦠contains as candid a statement of the principal motivation that impelled the change. The Letter contains an over 30000 word long torturous thesisâ¦
The actual letter:
⦠the attitude of the Communist Parties to war is always determined not by any national or local considerations but by the single consideration: international unity and action of the world proletariat to strike at world imperialism to defend the Socialist Fatherland. ⦠Our jail comrades guided by proletarian nationalism at once applied the test: how do the imperialist nations stand in relation to the fortress of World Revolution, the Fatherland of all workers? That at once enabled them to see that the world was not divided sharply into two warring camps. [â¦] Hitler-fascism stood isolated as the main enemy of humanity while against him stood the new realignment of the USSR, Britain and America. [â¦] It is axiomatic and self-evident to all Communists that a policy⦠required by the <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>supreme duty of defending the USSR must also be in the best interest of the country.</span> (Italics as in the book)
And then Arun Shourie gives some glimpses into standard Communist Method of Argumentation:
1. Everything is present in the TheoryâThe Theory explains everything.
2. (Therefore) Nothing which is not in the theory is true.
3. Logic and facts should be twisted to suit the need of the hour and/or The Theory.
4. Repeated assertion of falsehood becomes the Truth over time.
5. Any method is okay to secure the workersâ paradise.
6. Stick the Convict badge first: donât bother to explain why a person is called a convict. Paste the badge and assert it a million times.
For #6, Arun Shourie quotes Lenin, who first expounded the technique:
Marxism is a monolith conception of the world, it does not tolerate dilution and vulgarisation by means of.additions.. Plekhatnov once said to me about a critic of Marxism âFirst letâs stick the convictâs badge on him, and then after that weâll examine his case.â And I think that we must âstick the convictâs badge, on anyone and everyone who tries to undermine Marxism, even if we donât go on to examine his case. Thatâs how every revolutionary should react.
And shows by citing several of Leninâs works, the terms of abuse invented by the Marxists:
Curs, swine, scoundrels, brigands, rascals, lick-spittles, absolute ignoramusesâLenin routinely pastes such expressions on anyone who differs from him. (Emphasis mine)
Notice the words in bold. This approach guarantees that one with the most muscle is sure to win any argument. For example, the Indian media today, which is almost entirely dominated by this motley gang of Reds. More examples of this technique as used by Lenin:
Many of Leninâs speeches and works are altogether devoid of argument, reason, facts. They contain abuse and allegations alone. Typical of these is his polemic, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautskyâa polemic that is often held up as a model among our Communists. Here are some of the expressions that he hurls at his interlocutors in this single pamphlet: âUtter and ignominious bankruptcy, twaddle, windbag, the Marxist pedant, contemptible sycophants in the service of the bourgeoisie, Mr Muddleheaded Counsellor, what civilized belly-crawling before the capitalists, Kautsky, with the learned air of a most learned arm-chair fool, the pig-headedness of a philistine, fools or renegades like Kautskyâ¦.
Like the proverbial tip of the iceberg, the stuff I have excerpted from the book is hardly representative of the record of the staggering treachery that Communists have inflicted (and continue to this day) on India. Anyone who cares for the country needs to read this compulsorily to understand the danger India faces if these morons are given free reinâwhich they are given by the spineless Congress of today. Does anyone of us notice that it is not coincidence that the Naxals are suddenly active in as many as 13 states? That they are being âinvited for negotiationsâ by the cowardly Andhra Pradesh government? Or that Indian Naxals are pretty active in colluding with the Nepalese Maoists? Or that they are Indiaâs enemy within? Or that following the Communist diktat, they will not give up armed struggle to secure their objectives despite the UPAâs overtures?
And I forgot to mention that in the Postscript of the book, Shourie exposes more lies by our Communists that their beloved Fatherland had not collapsed while the whole world witnessed the glorious downfall. And heaps praise on Gorbachev.
How many thousands⦠and how many millions of young men and women had drugged themselves on this (Communist) opium! How many millions of lives were extinguished as a consequence! And this one man had taken the lid off and had held it away long enough for all to see what the reality was in these countriesâwhat it was now and what it had been in the years Communists the world over had glorified. He had allowed an independent examination of the past, and out had come the Hitler-Stalin pact that the Soviets had denied all alongâ¦
He then very briefly outlines the damage that the Communist menace has done to the country that struggles to stand on its feet even after five decades of independence.
And in India⦠the Communists and the corpse they clutch, their ideology, are likely to continue to retard and harm for several reasons⦠there is the stalemate on all sides: no group, no party has the strength in India today to push things through in any direction; every group⦠has strength enough to stall anything⦠And the results of their expertise (in stalling) remain in place. They have helped each other to places in universities and in the media: members of these cliques secure places for one another and burnish one anotherâs reputation, they stick halos on one another⦠As the peer group in many an institution, the ICHR (abbreviations, mine)⦠JNU, publications of a wide rangeâconsists entirely of those they have allowed to survive, as they have been so systematically successful in shutting out the other point of viewâfrom so many of our newspapers⦠â their reputation survives in the face of facts.
These cliques remain in place. . Therefore their ability to derail discourse⦠to prevent people from learning the full facts .. to inveigle our poor and uninformed people into drawing the wrong inferences from . such cataclysmic events as the ones in East Europe and Soviet Union remain. [â¦] From this perspective the repudiation of Communism in the Soviet Union makes the immediate danger from our Communists greater, not smaller. To divert attention from those events, many of them will become even purer fundamentalists: V.P. Singh is an apt example⦠(emphasis mine)
The words in bold are prophetic. It is these communists who later tried to bolster the case that a (Ram) temple never existed at Ayodhya , and continue to postpone its stalemate. Some of these regularly strut about with âviewsâ in newspapers that Bangladeshi infiltrators are not illegal immigrants. It is they who support the likes of M.F. Hussain, Imam Bukhari, and the rest.
The antidote that Shourie suggests at the end is worth remembering at all times:
The record of the Communists and their âTheoryâ must be documented in minute detail and disseminated far and wide as a prophylactic, as must information about the techniques of their cliques in the media, in universities⦠we will . convince⦠our policy makers .. that the certificates of these cliques are just not worth having. [â¦] all this must be done thoroughly and with a sense of urgency because⦠for all their camouflage our Communists remain Stalinists at heart and in mind.
THE END.
http://www.sandeepweb.com/2004/12/07/the...atherland/<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->