xposting
-----------
[QUOTE ]
http://www.ambedkar.org/News/hl/Ambedkar%20replaces.htm
Ambedkar replaces Marx in CPM's lexicon
By Smita Gupta
The Times of India News Service
NEW DELHI: Marx must be turning in his grave. In June 1883 he wrote that ``England has broken down the whole framework of Indian society'' and that it was a positive move forward as ``these little communities were contaminated by distinction of caste and by slavery''. But 117 years later, the Communist Party of India - Marxist has finally recognised that it cannot win the class war in India without taking on board the realities of caste.
In the draft of the updated party programme adopted by the central committee recently, the party has included three paragraphs on caste in its chapter ``State structure and democracy''.
The draft, stressing that ``the bourgeois-landlord system has also failed to put an end to caste oppression. The worst sufferers are the Scheduled Castes..'' says: ``The assertion by the Dalits has a democratic content reflecting the aspirations of the most oppressed sections of society. The backward castes have also asserted their rights in a caste-ridden society.''
Simultaneously, it says, `` a purely caste appeal which seeks to perpetuate caste divisions for the narrow aim of consolidating vote banks and detaching these downtrodden sections from the common democratic movement has also been at work. Many caste leaders and certain leaders of bourgeois political parties.. ignore the basic class issues of land, wages and fight against landlordism which is the basis for overthrowing the old social order.''
Underlining the fact that ``society under capitalist development has compromised with the caste system.. Working class unity presupposes unity against the caste system and the oppression of the Dalits, since the vast majority of the Dalit population is part of the labouring classes..'' it ends by acknowledging: ``To fight for abolition of the caste system is an important part of the democratic revolution. The fight against caste oppression is interlinked with the struggle against class exploitation.''
For the CPM, this acknowledgement comes after 36 years of existence in which it has not been able to grow beyond the boundaries of West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura. The party touched a high of 36 seats in the Lok Sabha in 1980 and the entire Left's best was 56 in 1991.
Clearly, the growth of caste-based parties in the Hindi heartland, the part of the country which is home to the poorest of the toiling masses, has made the comrades realise that they have to give a swadeshi touch to what Marxtaught them.
Not that Indian Communists never thought about caste. The undivided Communist Party had in 1930 in its Platform of Action said it would fight ``for the complete abolition of slavery, the caste system and ..caste inequality''. But as recently as 1982, BT Ranadive, in a monograph entitled Caste, Class and Proprty Relation wrote ``...the failure to develop a revolutionary movement in agrarian areas and the country as a whole prevented the development of a common struggle in which both Harijans and non-Harijans could participate'' and bridge ``the deep gulf that separated them.
Send e-mail to dalits@ambedkar.org with questions or comments about this web site.
No Copyright © 2000 dalit e-forum Last modified: June 29, 2000
[/QUOTE]
xposting - Thanks to Abdul
=====================
http://www.ambedkar.org/News/hl/Response%20to.htm
[QUOTE ]
Response to Badges of Color: An Afro-Dalit Story
Unfortunately Mr. (or Dr.) Vijay Prashad appears to belong to one of those breeds of the "hardcore left" or "old left", who can see no problem in the world other than economic problem. To them social, political, bureaucratic and educational inequities do not matter, or they think that all these inequities will be ameliorated once the economic disparity is removed, or sort of removed (via "to each according to their need" principle). That's why these old leftists do not believe in affirmative action here in the US, nor do they believe in quota system for jobs and admission to colleges in India. Indian old left opposes Mandalization (extending affirmative action to cover the whole society) more strongly than the upper caste fascist RSS.
Mr. Prasad talks about "communist government" initiated land reform. The said land reforms have definitely led to the upliftment of the dalits (the lowest castes, the ex-untouchables) to a certain extent but socially and politically I do not believe they have reached the state of self-respect and self-confidence that the dalits of Uttar Pradesh have reached. In West Bengal, I believe the dalits have hit a plateau of emancipation - emancipation brought about by virtue of land reforms. This plateau is definitely higher than the former abyss that they were living in. That no doubt is one of the reasons why the communists have been in power for more than twenty years in West Bengal. However, not much has been done to integrate them into the political hierarchy of the communist party. And their ethos are buried so deep in "economic disparity" being at the root of all problems, they refuse take any steps to ameliorate any other disparities. They are one of the states with the least amount of compliance for government job-quotas for dalits (In other words they have one of the least enforcement of affirmative action programs).
It would be interesting to see how long the lower castes of West Bengal would continue to tolerate the upper caste hegemony under the communist government. Even if they continue to win for a good while, there is something definitely not quite right with a system which allows a condition in which the lower castes only occupy the lower rungs of political, bureaucratic and educational power. Social status of a segment is generally rooted in its political, bureaucratic and educational status. So is the disparity in political, bureaucratic and educational status is allowed to continue, certainly the social disparity is bound to continue. This means caste discrimination in India (strongest manifestation of social disparity) and race based social discrimination in the US (again, nothing but social discrimination rooted in the past) would continue as long as the deprived segments do not achieve parity with the rest in the political, bureaucratic and educational arenas. Thinking that bringing the lower castes to the plateau of land owning small farmer position is good enough is being an ostrich with head in the sand. We need to continually work to bring about parity in all spheres of life.
Unfortunately the left movements in India as well as in the West were initiated by those in the upper echelons of the society. They found it convenient to over-emphasize the "economic disparity" as the main malaise of the society, so much so they tend not to even recognize other disparities as things that may be undesirable. Needless to say that a recognition of other disparities as undesirable will force them to share the political and other power with the downtrodden, which would not be very convenient for them.
To my mind "racialist nationalism, of the sort preached by Rashidi and Rajshekar," are nothing but calls for equity among races and castes - equity in all areas of social intercourse, not just "economic". Myopic Mr. Prasad says "Many Dalit groups, taking their cue from civil liberties organizations, ignore much of the economic ground for untouchability." He conveniently doesn't see that without achieving political equity by organizing as deprived group, no matter whether it is caste-based or race-based, they cannot really achieve equity in any other area, economic included. If the struggle for equity overshoots and leads to unlikely exploitation in the other direction we will have to struggle against that too. However, that kind of fear appears to be unfounded from the lack of historical precedence.
In the age of market economy which seems to have come to stay around the world, including in China, I do not see economic disparity going away in the near future. Frankly speaking, if steps are taken to eliminate the influence of money on politics, I couldn't care less about economic disparity. Government is nothing but an organization of people, somehow arrived at. And most of the multinationals and other corporations are nothing but organizations just like government, but on smaller scales. I like the possibility of picking and choosing the organization to work for and earn my living. In the absence of the latter, we will be left with the state as the only corporation - the communist model of a society. Are these old leftists still looking forward towards the communist model of the society? If they are, they will have to look for a long time.
However, I do believe political, bureaucratic and educational inequities, and hence social disparities among different segments of the society "can be" and "should be" reduced, and the faster the better. As far as political equity of different segments of the society is concerned, I see no other way of achieving the same other than with the help of Proportional Representational (PR) system of elections. Bureaucratic and educational disparities among different segments of the society can be reduced most rapidly with help of strong affirmative action measures. With political, bureaucratic and educational parity, social parity will automatically follow. Unfortunately, among the old left I do not see any kind of commitment or inclination to work towards political, bureaucratic, educational and social parity. They "conveniently" co-opt themselves out of this kind of struggle by burying their head under their imaginary economic sand dunes.
Jai Bhim,
Sati Pasi
This is in response to
http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/march2000prashad.htm
Z Magazine, March 2000
Badges of Color: An Afro-Dalit Story
By Vijay Prashad
[/QUOTE]
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story....t_id=74629
Now, BSP targets trader votebank
Mohit dubey
agra, july 17 The BSPâs first Vaish Samaj Sammelan here failed to repeat the success of its recent Brahmin sammelans.
The absence of chief Mayawati and incessant rain made sure the gathering at the Mathur Vaish hall was thin. The directions to the workers did the trick and jeeploads of supporters were brought to the venue. This delayed the function by an hour.
With the numbers taken care of, the function took off with speeches on how the need of hour was to "join hands with behenji (Mayawati)".
Satish Goel, the national spokesperson of the BSP and the chief guest said after the Brahmin conventions, the party had the support of all sections of the society and urged the traders to back it too.
<b>"Mayawati is the icon of the Dalits and is fast gaining the support of the upper castes, traditional votebanks of the Congress and the BJP", he said, adding the party would organise a bigger sammelan in Delhi on similar lines soon. </b>
This, he added, would be addressed by party president and former UP chief minister Mayawati.
xposting
---
Do not criticise elected government, minorities told
http://www.hindu.com/2005/09/04/stories/...970700.htm
Special Correspondent
It will be preposterous to question the sincerity of the Government: NCM chief
JAIPUR: The Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, Tarlochan Singh, on Saturday called upon the minority communities to discard the habit of criticising democratically elected governments with constant complaints of "perceived discrimination.'' He said the fear psychosis created among the minorities would harm them in the long run.
Mr. Singh was interacting with reporters during his visit to attend a function of the Sikh Sangat here. [/size]He said minorities had no right to denounce the elected governments as the latter had the people's mandate in their favour. "Holding the Government or the ruling party responsible for communalism in the society is improper,'' he said.[/size]
Mr. Singh â who is also a Rajya Sabha MP â pointed out that an elected government was answerable to the people at large irrespective of who voted for it and a Chief Minister was duty-bound to fulfil the aspirations of the entire population of the State. It would be preposterous to question the sincerity of the Government, he said.
The Minorities Commission chief said he had led a delegation of Muslims that met the Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, in the aftermath of violence in 2002, when Muslims had announced boycott of the Bharatiya Janata Party-led Government. The grievances of the community were settled in a "congenial atmosphere'' with his intervention.
On the observations of the Prime Minister's high-level committee that visited Rajasthan recently to study the socio-economic and educational status of Muslims, Mr. Singh said he did not find any atmosphere of fear, distrust or terror among Muslims in the State.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Fueling âminority complexâ among Indian Muslims </b>
Sudheender Kulkarni
Indian Express
February 19, 2006
My good friend M J Akbar raises a question in his introduction to late Dr Rafiq
Zakariaâs seminal book Indian Muslims: Where Have They Gone Wrong? that is at
once fundamental and flummoxing. ââAt what point in the last thousand years,ââ
he asks, ââdid Indian Muslims become a minority?ââ In terms of numbers, they
have always been a minority. Muslims didnât constitute more than 30 per cent of
Indiaâs population even at the time of Partition. <b>However, if the term
âminorityâ connotes discrimination, disempowerment and systemic injustice by
the majority community, history gives a big jolt to our understanding of
Muslims as a âminorityâ.</b>
<b>For did Muslims consider themselves a minority in this sense ââduring the Mughal
empireââ? Or during the reign of other Muslim rulers?</b> Akbar writes: ââAs long as
Muslims felt that they were an important, and even decisive, element of the
ruling group they did not feel that they were a minority, a term that
implicitly condemns a community to the margins. Even a Badshah that wobbled was
better than no Badshah at all.ââ Not that all Muslims shared power and enjoyed
prosperity under all those strong or wobbly Muslim rulers. The socio-economic
status of most of them was indistinguishable from that of a majority of their
Hindu brethren. <b>Yet, neither rich nor poor Muslims identified themselves as a
âminorityâ. </b>
<b>Were Muslims a âminorityâ during the British rule? To think so is to posit that
the Hindus felt liberated and empowered when the British enslaved India with
the collapse of the Mughal empire. A patently absurd supposition, indeed.</b>
Letâs come to the post-Partition era, when two Muslim nations were carved out of
what was once a united India. Did Muslims become a âminorityâ Â in the sense of
being ââcondemned to the marginsââ Â in the truncated, but democratic and
secular, India? Not at all.
Indian Muslims do face some Muslim-specific problems that no sensitive Hindu can
deny. These, unfortunately, are problems arising out of history-induced
prejudices that often colour the Hindu attitude towards Muslims, and vice
versa. For example, I have a Muslim friend in Mumbai, a reputed professional,
who was denied office space when the owner of the building learnt that he is a
Muslim. But I also know of Hindu traders in mixed areas selling off their shops
and houses to Muslims when their neighbourhood started to become predominantly
Muslim. This kind of segregation bodes ill for social harmony and national
integration. <b>But the point to note is that there is nothing either in Indiaâs
socio-religious ethos or in our Constitution and laws that legitimises unjust
and discriminatory treatment of Muslims.</b>
<b>Sadly, a systematic effort has been underway to create and sustain a minority
syndrome among Indian Muslims, persuading them to believe that they have been
wronged in post-1947 India. </b> Pakistanâs ruling establishment aided this
propaganda for several decades after Partition because this notion indirectly
justified the creation of Pakistan as a separate Muslim nation. (Akbar mentions
how the Muslim League leadership ââturned a minority complex into a separate
nationââ.) <b>But what is astounding, even alarming, is that some of our own
parties, solely with an eye on Muslim votes, seek to keep the âminority
complexâ alive among Indian Muslims, thus perpetuating the pernicious notion of
India as a nation that is an uneasy admixture of a majority and a minority.</b>
Examples, old and recent, abound  religion-based reservation for Muslims;
legislative and administrative protection to Bangladeshi infiltrators in Assam;
Muslim census in the Armed Forces; and the UPA Governmentâs proposed 15-point
programme for minorities, with a dubious provision for population-based
minority quota in government spending (something like âMuslim Budgetingâ on the
lines of âGender Budgetingâ). <b>All these are designed to convey a simple message
to Indian Muslims: ââYes, you are separate. You are discriminated against. You
are unsafe. We alone will protect you. Therefore, vote for us.ââ</b>
This kind of dishonest wooing of Muslims as a âpermanent minorityâ hasnât
benefited Muslim masses. Instead, it has led to three undesirable consequences.
It has strengthened the hands of communal forces in Muslim society. It has
prejudiced and further communalised the mindset of a section of Hindus, who
already harbour many negative perceptions about Islam and Muslims. Thirdly, at
the political level, the perversion of secularism for the sake of Muslim votes
has made parties like the BJP, which are constantly dubbed anti-Muslim by its
opponents, ignore Indian Muslimsâ legitimate concerns, thereby alienating
them.
Dr Zakaria, a great patriot who spent his entire political life as a devoted
Congressman, has this to say in his book: ââAfter Independence, Indian Muslims
became a pawn in the hands of political parties and were manoeuvred merely to
obtain their votes. This so angered the communal Hindus that they mounted an
India-wide pro-Hindu and anti-Muslim campaign.ââ He remained committed to the
ideal of Hindu-Muslim unity throughout his life. But he was a sad man when he
passed away in July last year, pained by the divisive and confrontational
nature of Indian politics, disillusioned by the unprincipled conduct of his own
party, and heartbroken by Muslim politics in India both before and after
Partition. That pain and sadness showed on his face in his last TV appearance,
a panel discussion (in which I too participated) on the Jinnah debate triggered
by L K Advaniâs Pakistan visit.
Hence, this column is a belated but heartfelt tribute to someone I deeply
admired and frequently interacted with. Itâs appropriate to close it by
recalling Dr Zakariaâs sane words: ââA gigantic effort is now needed to check
and replace the present divisive pattern of politics by a broadbased common
brotherhood, which does not recognise any distinction of caste and creed.ââ
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Speaking truth to terror</b>
Tavleen Singh
http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/21943.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The 'Islamofascists' who operate in our country make it clear with every one of their evil deeds that their aim is to destroy India's economy and its secular democracy. Is this something that we can discuss over a negotiating table? If we want to win the global war on terrorism we have to begin by acknowledging that 'Islamofascism' is as evil an ideology as Nazism once was and those of us who are its victims must fight back with everything we have.
<b>What is worrying is that instead of doing this our political leaders seem more concerned about heightening the Muslim sense of grievance by giving us nonsense like the Sachar Committee report. Can we at least hope for a report on 'Islamofascism' as well? </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
|
