Tuesday, February 14, 2006

India's vote against Iran-a right step

Before the US's push could turn into a shove the UPA government took a stand on the Iran issue at the UN meet.Without bowing to pressure from its main allies like the left parties the UPA government finally took a correct decision which was in the interests of the people of the subcontinent.It is an open secret that Iran has covertly been trying to build a N-bomb of its own for the past few years.We already have two "friendly" nuclear neighbours on either sides of the border.A third nation-that too a rogue state like Iran would have been a nightmare.Obviously we have never been a threat for Iran and vice versa.That still doesn't qualify any support for Iran from the Indian establishment.The knowledge of making the bomb has been exported from China to Pakistan which in turn has been really generous in helping out N.Korea and Iran with their weapons programme.A N-Bomb in the hands of irrersponsible states like Pakistan,N.Korea and Iran is a threat to world peace.We could leave out Pakistan as of now since big daddy is in control of its nuclear war heads(We can surmise that since US forces are in control of a sizeable part of the N-W frontier province which is the main hideout of the Jihadi elements) and the whole world knows that the sole superpower of the world never brings in ground forces unless it is sure about their safety.However, if countries like Iran and N.Korea have their own N-bomb it could trigger a third world war.Iran has always spoken against the Zeonist state of Israel.The same can be said vis-s-vis N.Korea and S.Korea.Israel already is surrounded by hostile neighbours on all sides.One can't really expect them to restrain military activities against their neighbours.Israel and Iran have already engaged each other in a war of words since the conservatives led by Ahmednijad seized power in the elections held last year.
Now that the Iran issue has been referred to the UNSC,we can avoid having an irresponsible country like Iran counted amongst the (in)famous group of Nuclear states.


Anonymous Ranjani said...

You know, I had the same idea in September or whenever last it came up for voting. But there are deeper ethical issues.

For instance, who gets to decide that some ppl can have nuclear weapons and some not. There ought to be collective disarmamment on part of all nations including India.

Plus the way it is going, we seem to be heading straight for a confrontational war with Iran, if there is one, whose side will we be on, now that we have voted against them?

Plus, what exactly is that agreement we seemed to have finalised with US?

Still, pros have out weighed the cons, I think. if one places 'national interest' highest, above other "ethical issues". I would still vote against Iran.

8:34 AM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Hey Ranj, a change of heart? I remember you had contested my blog on this.

Pranav, lets get a few things in order here. What constitutes a rogue state? I dont think that anybody or any country can brand any country as a rogue state. Lets put this in perspective. Lets view the country as a microcosm, say a house. Would you like your family to be branded as a "rogue" family by your neigbours? I seriously doubt it, irrespective of what you are.

Secondly, what are the implications of the deal with the US? I dont think any of us have clear cut details. And when dealing with the US, one always has to be on guard.

Thirdly, look at the people who mooted the referral to the UNSC. US, Britain, and India supported. All members of the nuclear club. Now this is fair, isnt it? I can have weapons, but you should not. Reminds me of arguments with my dad.

You speak of AQ Khan being instrumental in Iran getting nuclear weapons. What difference does it make how they get it? Fact of matter- they have it. And we acquired it in equally shady manners.

And when it comes to disarmament, no one puts their hand up. Everyone would say, let the others do it first. Can u put yourself in Irans shoes? Think how it would be to live in a land where you would know that your neighbor can raze your country in an instant? Would you not want a bouncer to guard your entrance? Here steps in the nukes.

Personally, I am ambivalent on the issue. I want to know what the deal with the US is. Like all tradings with the US, this too is shrouded in utmost secrecy, and I hate that. We have already almost lost out on the gas deal, and that is going to hurt us bigtime.

P.S: Ranj, close to being our first agreement

6:38 PM  
Anonymous Ranjani said...

Hardly. I said the pros outweigh the cons. I put ethics in " ", in case u didnt notice.

Ofocurse it matters how they got nuclear know how. And we did not get it in shady manners. Fact is whether i am a racist/communalist or not, I am uncomfortable/concerned with certain ppl, not ever known to be useful and friendly or in issues hostile to my own country having the ability to produce deadly weapons. Then when they side with fundamentalists, other rogue nations and behave in an immature and violent manner, blow-hot constantly like a kettle ( er, the cartoon controversy), I tend to conclude that they can be dangerous with nuclear warheads.

Then if somebody reminds me that equally if not less un-friendly countries like China and Pak are hobnobbing with Iran, I might snuggle up with the US whether they give us nuclear pact or not.

I did mention I would vote against Iran.
( its rude to rant in somebody else's blog like this, sorry pranav, couldn't help)

10:13 AM  
Blogger Pranav said...

Its ok re.I really like the way you comment on these issues.I too meant the same thing when I referred to Iran as a "rogue" state.And I really don't mind you ranting on my blog(as long as its not against me).It feels nice to know that I'm not the only one who disagrees with Sunil.
By the way Sunil,in which country did the "Islamic revolution" start?Who started the "fatwa" ? If a war breaks out between India and Pak tomm then whom will Iran support?Or for that matter whom will China support? Which Islamic nation has supported India on the Kashmir issue against Pakistan ? Except for the Muslims who stay in India which other Islamic country has recognised India as a genuine friend ? Whenever it comes to a choice between India and Pak,I guess Russia is the only country which has stood by us all along. I hope these are reasons enough for Iran and Pakistan to be counted as a rogue state.

10:43 AM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Pranav, I do not see how those factors contribute to Iran being a rogue state. I guess (as usual) when someone goes against you, you become perfervid.

According to your logic, Pakistan is a rogue state. Will that happen?

According to your logic, China is amost a rogue state. Will that happen? I would love to see that.

Just because a country aligns itself against or for some country, that doesnt mean that the country in question is a rogue nation. Want some examples? Saudi Arabia is becoming friendly towards us now- almost 60 years post independence. And if you are talking about fatwas, think about the "fatwa" (jihad) that has been declared against US by the most popular (ex)Saudi-Mr Osama Bin Laden. Does that mean they are a rogue country? That would be something right, if Saudi got N weapons? Let me see who votes for and or against. Will the US ask for sanctions? Thank your stars they have no intention of doing it either. This despite countries like Israel in its neighbourhood. And not to mention Iraq.

6:10 PM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Hey Ranj, I am in the mood now.
One question- when Hussain made a painting of a nude Saraswati playing the tanpura, do u remember what happened? Just think if that had happened in Ayodhya with a nude Ram! March 6, 1993 all over again I think.

6:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey, to clear certain points, we are digressing. And let us discuss the issue, not the people( I am not against Sunil per se nor am I against Islamists( devout or otherwise) and I do think Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Egypt (predominantly Islamic) and many others can be a friend of India.

10:21 PM  
Blogger Vivek said...

I somehow don't agree with you that the decision to support the proposal to refer the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Security Council on its refusal to accept the overlordship or even the supervision of the IAEA over its nuclear facilities is correct, especially for a nation like India. It is to be noted that we stand guilty of the same crimes that we accuse Iran of now, only the difference being that we are negotiating to ensure compliance in the future, whereas Iran is sticking to its ground.
The choice of weaponry that a nation is to resort to in its desire to protect itself is solely its prerogative, and no other nation should be bothered by it. Of course, the moment such weaponry is used more as a threat against some neighbouring state than as a defense against the same, the world must clamp down on such belligerance. If Iran had displayed such belligerance, as was displayed by the Hussein regime in Iraq, I am all for the referral, but there seems to be no reason other than Mr. Bush's decision to include Iran in his purported 'Axis of Evil'. Strong words coming from a 'strong' man!
I agree with Sunil when he comments on the unfair nature of the proposing party. Whether or not Iran is an Islamic State, that doesn't disqualify it from pursuing nuclear weapons as a defense option. Moreover, it's repeated comments against Israel also don't imply anything, as unlike Iraq, Iran has never even physically bombed Israel. That Iran chose to follow the Shariah and abandon the modernisation plans of the Pahlavis doesn't mean that the world must condemn it as a rogue state. We might as well look in the mirror.

5:10 AM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Vivek, has hit the nail on the head. As I said, who the hell allowed us to have N weapons in the first place? We are a "clean" nation now, using N weapons solely as deterrents, but this wasnt true immediately post Pokhran. Give Iran time and possibly they shall too be labelled the same. I am sorry, but there is no defence to this double standards.

And yeah, lets toe the American line. What happened to the UNSC seat that we were promised??

6:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I feel all these arguments are equally valid, the only thing is that some give more weightage to 'ethics' and others to 'opportunities'.

For a country like India, which boasts of a clean image as a 'responsible nuclear power' on international stage what do u think is more important? Shall we go ahead with the US offer, just because we need n-fuel very badly ? You all must have read the comment the National Security Advisor Mr. Narayan made about the deal recently...that US is trying to shift the goalpost. (I appreciate sunil's comment on how careful a nation must be when it signs a treaty with US.) So I feel that instead of directing ourselves towards short-term goals (the goalpost of which keeps on moving away like a mirage), India must focus on retaining our image in the international scenario as a responsible nation.

and one more thing, nowadays, we all associate certain terms with certain contexts just because they are often used like that (yeah am referring to 'rogue states', pranav), and ofcourse, there are a lot of such buzzwords introduced by Bush administration recently....like WMD, axis of evil, rogue nations, and the most recent one being "the central banker of terrorism" (....Condoleeza Rice, referring to tehran in the US senate yesterday, demanding $ 75 million to promote 'democratic changes' in iran )...and the central figure in this being the US, let's think about the credibility of US defining moral standards and codes of conduct for other nations ....

1. Tell me which is the only country that has ever used nuclear weapon against another?...

2. Just have a glance at the revenue that US gets solely from military weapon trade, especially to developing countries....

3. Make a list of countries that US invaded after 1945... it includes the poorest of the nations like Somalia as well....

Cuba, one of the bitter rivals of US... us has plotted numerous assassination attempts against castro... and they are now using Gauntanamo camp (the pictures of Camp Delta detainees and the report of UN are out.... ) as a base to air anti-fidel programmes across that small country....

Australia, Chile (CIA backed coup ousts elected president, installs military Gen. Pinochet. decades of human rights abuses follow), Portugal, Angola, Afghanistan (US supports, arms, trains Mujahideen rebels including rebel leader Osama Bin Laden against USSR, and the same US-made missiles are later used against US-led army in 2001), El Salvador, Nicaragua,
Chad, Libya, vietnam, Honduras, Lebanon, Grenada, Iraq (US supports and arms Saddam Hussein's Iraq in war against Iran), Libya ( bombs capitol Tripoli killing several civilians.... Calls it "collateral damage"), Philippines, Panama, Iraq, Bulgaria, Somalia (US sends in humanitarian aid. Becomes involved in Civil war, takes sides attacking one Mogadishu faction..........), Peru, Colombia, Bosnia, Haiti, Sudan, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, now Iran....

if history and present are to be believed, US never had a philosophy other than one driven by their own selfish motives, and the countries like India which on a large-scale imitate US are just adopting those tactics (in PM's own words tactics on the "larger interest of the nation") ...thatz all...and let's wait and see wht ultimately wins..is it the one based ethics or on the opportunistic philosophies......but from the facts that history provides us, one can easily figure out that most of the fierce enemies of US had been their long-term partners somewhere in the past (for example osama, saddam...) .....and many of their friends of today will be 'rogues' in the future... (i suppose...pakistan, saudi, qatar, kuwait....and may be china... ).....and that is just due to certain inherent contradictions or inconsistencies within their policy.... and that is the mail flaw associated with opportunism...and thats its fate as well....


10:20 PM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Wow!!! This is plain brilliant Mr. PA. Absolutely fantastic.

I had totally forgotten about the help that Osama gave to the US. Thanks for the reminder.

5:49 AM  
Blogger Pranav said...

Sunil, US does have tons of N-weapons,but have they ever used them against any nation post World War II? No.On the other hand we all are sure that if nations like Iran,Syria or for that matter N.Korea land their hands on N-bombs they won't hesitate to use them.As for Israel,you cannot point a finger at them and say that they are "bad" since they have nuclear weapons.Israel is a country surrounded by enemies on all sides.I really mean "ALL SIDES".The nuclear weapons are a deterrent for them.They could have easily used nuclear weapons against Iraq,after the first Gulf war when Saddam and his army fired 60 hellfire missiles at Israel.But,they didn't do it.You know why?Because they realise the importance of human life.Same is the case for India.However,we definitely can't say the same for countries like Iran,Pakistan,China,Saudi Arabia or Syria.I do not by any means support the US when I say this.But,all these are facts.We must thank our stars that these nations inspite of having the money required to build a N-weapon do not have the know how for the same.Just checki out the humanrights record of all the above mentioned countries.You'll get an idea about what I'm trying to say.These so called "Islamic countries" and "Republic" countries which claim to be the sole guardians of their religion have always dealt with an iron hand with the common man(who happens to be a Muslim).If these countries do not value the lives of their own people then what kind of treatment can people of other countries expect from them.

P.S- Mr. pa I completely agree with all your arguments.But,we must realise that we are liveing in a materialistic world.The US has always troubled other countries so that they can stay at the top.In the end their main motive is to see to it that they have no other challenger.Rem'ber USSRs split.
If the US is ready to align itself with India,we too must reciprocate with the same kind of optimism.In the end we too will reap the benefits of such an alliance.It is high time Indian politicians rise above petty politics,party plicies and think in nterests of the country(Politics for them is just about winning the "khursi") I hope the leftists understand this.The sooner they do the better it is.
Mr. pa it would have been better if u had revealed ur identity

1:13 AM  
Blogger Vivek said...

Pranav, I disagree with your contention that the Israeli Government or the Israeli State for that matter is any different when it comes to the task of protecting its citizens, and I am not insulting the Israelis here. The only reason that it did not retaliate when Iraq bombarded it in the First Persian Gulf War was because the USA had assured it of a defensive shield comprising of Patriot missile systems and what not. The USA assured Israel that Iraq's launching vehicles would not cross a certain threshold line, beyond which launching a missile at Israel would be equivalent to chucking a paper ball at someone. Plus, bear this in mind that irrespective of whether or not Israel possessed nuclear weapons, it has always safeguarded its own interests, ignoring international protocols and niceties. The bombing of the Osiris reactors to preempt any possibility of a nuclear programme ever taking root in Egypt was not merely an act of defense, no matter how much Tel Aviv may argue; it was an outright act of aggression. And you talk of the value of human life. I don't see this respect in their treatment of the Palestinian people, who even if fighting a proxy war against them, are still worthy of basic human respect. And please note, Israel is not a land-locked nation. It has the Mediterranean Sea to its West, and is now bordered by a friendly Jordan, a compliant Egypt, other than a belligerant Syria, with a changing Lebanon.
Your clubbing China in the category of 'rogue states' is laughable. Moreover, you talk of the human rights records, and I will show you the human rights record of our own dear Motherland. The atrocities committed during the Emergency, the Bhagalpur blindings, the 1984 Sikh riots, the 1992 Mumbai riots, the 2004 Gujarat riots, the unchecked investigations in the North-East, sometimes bordering on torture. These are not acts of humanity, these are acts of barbaric people, and what's more, in all these cases, the State, the Government sanctioned all of this. And what great human rights record does the United States have?
It quarantined hundreds of thousands of its own Japanese citizens during World War II, merely ebcause they did not trust the loyalties of these people. It has imprisoned God knows how many people for how many years in bases like Guatanamo Bay. Look at the behaviour sanctioned by it in the Abu Ghairb prisons. Humanity, thy name be sullied!
You castigate the Islamic states, you deplore theocratic governments and term them the bane of the world. Look at Malaysia and Indonesia. Both are Islamic theocracies. Both are modern states. Iran is moving towards modernism, no matter how much Ahmadinejad and the clerics may want to go in the opposite direction. By opposing Iran's nuclear programme on merely the grounds that it was a rogue state, we stand the risk of ensuring that Ahmadinejad gains the upper hand and Iran remains a 'rogue' state.

11:13 PM  
Blogger Pranav said...

Let me very clearly state that I have the utmost respect for all religions and communities.I am not against any religion.But,when I point out some radical Islamic states,what I mean to say is that these states have a sole point agenda-to spread violence in other countries using the plank of religion.
I was really suprised to see that u found my clubbing of China in the category of rogue states laughable.I would like to remind you that China is still a Communist state.Remember the Tiananmen square massacre,the blatant human rights abuse in Tibet.The "cultural revolution" in Mao Tse Tung's regime spread nothing but bloodshed and terror througout China.Behind the economic progress in the last 20 years they still have many horrific tales of violence,bloodshed and poverty.Which country do the Maoists get support from?The Maoists of Nepal as well as India.Obvioulsy its clandestine support,but where do they get their inspiration from?

10:04 AM  
Blogger Sunil Natraj said...

Pranav, you had always wished for comments and I think you have had your fill here, but I am still not satiated. So here goes.

Human rights violations eh? As Vivek pointed out, Israel is nototrious for it, and both history as well time bare testimony to the fact. Lets not discuss the US here, they apparently are our real close allies, who always "show interest" in doing things for us as well as "promise" help to us.

According to Pranav, China is a rogue nation. Fair enough, but how come the US conveniently missing that point? Isnt it ironic that of the 2.5 lakh people on the US hit list, the Chinese number can be counted on fingertips? They too commit the same human right violations that Iran commits.

Russian aggression is not something new. Their violations in Chechenya is top draw. Are they a rogue nation too? And please refrain from saying that they would desist from a pre-emptive strike. Thats not a Russia the world knows.

Continuing on pre-emptive strikes, can someone please explain as to how an Iraq, located a good 10000 miles from the US, do it any harm? And please remember it is a country that is in the doldrums. So, by your analogy of aggressive nations, the US is a rogue state. (wow!)

And last, but not the least, lets not cast aspersions on other states. India found itself in 1998 the exact same place where Iran is today. But we fought through. Give them a chance as well. As the saying goes, "The only way to make a man trustworthy, is by trusting him."

6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

quite right sunil and vivek..... and pranav I hope u wont ever think of moderating the comments on ur blog as most of em contradict ur original post..!!!!!!!!!!!!

and i would like to elaborate a little bit on israel.. ... .. especially becoz of its increasing importance in internation affairs..."the pre-emptive strikes" which vivek mentioned and even the history of its formation itself are very strong arguments against Israel...and I feel, if one look at the problems in todays world in a broader sense, the conflicts between Isreal-supporters and the muslim world can be traced back to the days of crusades in the sense that either side still retains the images of 'old enemy' of the otherside....and the rhetoric in suport of establishment of a jewish state in 1948 in the
'arab land', can be traced back to the Bible ...... and I personally feel that the roots of all these
problems lie in the way in which semitic religions deal with theological ideas..they dont accept any god other than their own (and their supreme god has human enemies as well... pharaoh for eg...quite ironical for a god who has built and .. and operates the entire world!!!!)...their preachings are valid and fully consistent in a world of their own only...and whatever thoughts, ideas, and principles comes out of this box is considered simply blasphemous (scientific thoughts, idol worship...) ...and see, in India, we had a totally different notion about these aspects of life... it seems the hindus have as many gods as followers!!!!!... and as long as one consider this as personal matter, its not going to give rise to any conflict at all, atleast theoretically... and why did all those communal riots
and violence occur in India...... ofcourse, the hindustanis are also running after westernisation, not
only by bringing in more of industries but by adopting their philosophical perspectives as well... i strongly feel that thiss wht happened in Gujarat... it has blindly imitated the west under the leadership of Mr. Modi..(pranav.....anyobjection?. )...and many of the 'hindutwa' leaders are also trying to
figure out ways to compete with semitic religions...they dont basically realize that the hindu strategy
is entirely different and that it does not 'persuade' or 'convert' any...and that its just a lifestyle

rather than a religion itself...and it is quite ironical to see that the most vulnerable ones to this sort of

attitude are those who boast themselves to be quite modern..quite liberal...in the history we have

got a fine example of M Jinnah... who consumed alcohol... who smoked tobacco (all unislamic)...

purportedly to show that he was modern.... and he is out of the narrow views of religion.... and in

factat the same time he was a fundamentalist who ultimately used religion to his advantage, by

arguing for an 'Islamic' nation...see the contradiction... but think about Gandhi (whom i would call a

true hindu...)... who used to carry a Gita always with him.. who lived a life of a typical hindu saint...

who loved bhajans..and lived life strictly based on religion.... but can any one cite out any example

in which he has used religion in the way jinnah had...or an incident in which he inflammed religious

sentiments...never...... so I feel (personally ofcourse...) that could have been avoided if semitism had

a more liberal outlook... had more fraternal elements... could atleast accept 'other gods' ......... and

ofcourse if Abraham had only a single wife.....only a single son (either ismaeil or jacob...)... and he

never visited 'prostitutes' (no offence meant to sarah or hagar.... i did nt get any other appropriate

word thatz all... )........if atleast any of these was the case, none of these religions would have ever

turned out to be iconoclast world wide....

These are ofcourse my personal views.... no offence whatsoever is meant...

and pranav... about my identity...am aneesh... aneesh pa... one day u asked me to comment on ur

blog ... may i know who is vivek ?.. from sies itself?...

11:17 PM  
Blogger Pranav said...

Thanks a lot Sir.I do appreciate the time you have taken out to comment on my blog.Vivek is the present GS of our college.He is from B.E Comps.
Firtsly let me clarify that I'm not anti-semetic.Neither am I pro-Hindutva.In fact I have been one of the most voracious opponents of the Hindutva forces whenever it comes to discussions on politics with my friends and family.I'm really ashamed to say that a man like Narendra Modi was born in the land of the Mahatma,who as you very rightly said was a true Hindu.The Gujarat pogrom was a state sponsored attack on the minorities.There is no doubt about that.Thankfully,the Saffronites lost the General elections in 2004.Otherwise,the same "experiments" would have been carried out elsewhere in India.

Sir,you spoke of communal riots occuring in India because Indians have started running after westernisation,liberalisation etc.
This really makes me wonder if I'm speaking to a communist (CPI/CPI(M))?
The leftists only speak about communal riots.What about the violence that they have instigated against the "fraud" landlords and the bourgeois ? I think the leftists need to be reminded about the Naxalite movement in the late 60's in a small village in W.Bengal called Naxalburi.Heads of the landlords and rich people were cut and hung outside their houses for weeks.What about the flare ups in the factories and industries which occur in the name of "social equality" ?What about the left wing extremists like the CPI-ML,PWG,the Maoists ? The violence that they carry out in the name of social equality,in the name of the poor man.Is it justified?

When the leftists talk about the drawbacks of westernisation and industrialisation they very conveniently forget the drawbackls of socialism and communism.I guess the only major plus point they have is their secular credentials.No other party in India can claim to be as secular as the leftists.But, just being secular is not enough.I too was a leftist supporter after the Gujarat riots.I really admired the way they spoke out against the inhuman crimes commited in the state.But,I have realised that their economic policies are much more harmful than those of the western capiltalists.Do you have any answers for all these arguments ?

11:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

have i accused u of being anti-semetic??.. never..i was just expressing what i thought would be right...thatz all......

and regarding the questions that u raised.. i feel there are much more things to ponder about in that context... The accepted and proclaimed agenda of communism is to safeguard the interests of working class...it's based on a simple logic that those who work should get utmost benefit... and when there exist a feudalistic system through which the bourgeois had been exploiting everything out of the working class, the stigma associated with which is passed down the generations almost 'genetically', dont u think that a little bit of bloodshed is inevitable if a sudden change is to be brought about to establish atleast a "fair distribution system" if not a communist state... and though it's inhumane and beastly, i would say that its good to have atleast a few 'royal heads' hung over the trees, to mark the end of an unjustified centuries-old suppression ( ..think about the 'effectiveness' of tools like 'bonded labor' in the hands of landlords ... so many mortals born and died literally in petty debts, which had grown over and over even with several generations of bonded labor)... such heinous acts like executing so called born-to-rule leaders in public may reduce the effects of those 'genetic traits' atleast in the generations to come ... both in the upper and in the lower classes ... its psychological and hence social implications are very strong and real...(which not only the communists, but many others who fought for a regime change often acknowledge ....)

and to be frank, though i appreciate the humanitarian outlook and elegance of communism, i dont want to be called a communist...and i dont think that the communists will ever accept me as one of em ... and I dont think that we in India face sucha kind of threat from the communists...afterall CPI-ML and the naxalites do not have broad public base, and have got significant influence only in a very few parts of india ... and the fact that the most of the communists fractions are part of the existing parliamentary system is a strong deterrant to any large-scale "communist revolution" in the near future..

and pls dont understimate the advantages of a fair distribution system which comes through socialism...dont u think that its better to have a society in which everyone works and enjoys the fruits of it than having islands of luxury in a vast ocean of utter poverty... just think about the social status of villagers and that of city-dwellers in maharashtra... here we have a few islands of luxury like mumbai and pune which depend heavily on the surrounding villages for food and water and yet the actual 'producers' remain in poverty forever...and where do we the lose logical connections in the supply-demand system, which the capitalists say always ensure justice in a maket-driven economy? .... that will never be the case in a state thats ruled on some socialist principles.....(and there is a group of economists who believe that 'capitalism' is just a transitional phase of any economy in its journey towards a socialist one .... i too believe in that......)

.... i could nt format the previous post ... as i had to type it in a notepad as it was almost 1, the time of loadshedding... and hastily posted in just minutes before that..sorry...

11:11 PM  
Blogger Pranav said...

Dear Sir,
Your arguments in support of socialism,communism and against the capitalist model of economy still makes me wonder if you are a hardened communist(although personally I really don't mind if anybody is a communist,capitalist,conservative etc).You spoke of wealth being equally distributed in a communist state.For the past 27 years the guardians of "social equality" the CPI(M) and their allies have ruled W.Bengal without ever sitting in the opposition benches.I would like to ask you if that has made every man/woman in W.Bengal a happy person.Has it ensured that not a single soul in the state is left without food.Has it ensured equal job oppurtunities to everybody(did I just say "job" ? Have the Marxists left any industry in a healthy state so that it can offer jobs?)I can say the same thing about your home state Kerala where almost every alternate term we have a CPI/CPI(M) and Caongress led government.Have the leftists ensured that everybody gets an equal oppurtunity as far as the job scenario goes.I had read I a daily few months back that a poor woman was harrassed by a local leader of the Communist party who wanted to take over her land.Strict instructions were given to the villagers to not help her out otherwise...... Social equality did u just say ? God knows how many such incidents must have occured in W.Bengal,Tripura etc.
Idealogy,idealism and all that is fine to a certain extent.But,these communists have just bent the statements made by Marx,Lenin etc to suit their own needs.Otherwise how will they get the required votes to form a government ? Right?I was really surprised to read about your views on the hanging of a "few royal heads". I agree that the landlords had exploited the peasants and landless labourers.I also agree that many of them had illegally taken away their lands.But,the government is equally responsible for that.Why was no action taken against the landlords at that time.All that is past now.No point in talking about that.
I would just like to ask you what exactly is "social equality"?The communists say that an industry runs because of the labourers(i.e. the grade IV,V workers).What about the higher level people,mamagers,CEO's,Chairman?Don't they work?Of course,they do.The work done by the labourers is basically physical work.I agree that its a very difficult job and these poor people should get their respective dues.But,that dosn't mean that the management of the company should be handed over to them.Just because the physical work is done by these poor people,they shouldn't be paid exorbitantly for their jobs.They should be paid on merit.In the end,any industry works on capital,infrastructure and knwoledge sources which always comes from the highest level(the management,CEO's middle level staff).
I would like to get answers for all these questions.If even 50% of the questions are answered I'll support the communists.

11:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Pranav.......

We have deviated much from the original topic...anyway I would like to clarify my points a little more...

First of all, the arguments that u raised against today's communists are valid and no one except a hardcore communist can anyhow find some contradiction in em......., but my ideas are entirely different in the sense that i believe not in revolution, but in an evolution...a natural process that ultimately refines and improves the society... so i very much believe that capitalism will have to give way to socialism one day or the other...and I dont think there is any better system than socialism when it comes to the matter of social justice and equality...its like a dream ... and when one dreams, its better to dream big...

And regarding CPM/CPI/..ML/Maoists... many of the leaders and followers of these communist factions believe in communism as if it's a religion. They make it a point not to change a single word Marx wrote in the last century... Thatz their understanding of the concepts...and from them no one can expect anything more than what can be expected of any other party in a democratic system...and for me, socialism is something to be achieved in the future...and there is no doubt that to survive in the future much more mutual interdependence will be needed which will of course favor a socialist economy... by this i dont intend to say that sucha a system will be a panacea for all the problems, but it will be better than todays system... and later that system may give rise to someother one...(and I wrote about these concepts in a broad perspective...an ideological point of view....thatz y i referred to even bible....)

and when i wrote about the exploitation of laborers by landlords, i was not referring to that in today's society, but to a much more cruel and heinous one which prevailed in our society before atleast about 50 years or so and which had great psychological influences...and to change sucha system and for the betterment of society, a little blood shed is justifiable...

And regarding the way in which todays' communists rule ...as i mentioned earlier, they are not to be called communists for communism as such cannot be practiced in a democratic system... they have diluted the ideas to suchan extent that often they contradict marxian views...

And about the managers and workers... yeah, both are to be there in a system...but an average person, media, or anything for that sake usually underestimates the importance of labourers ... they are usually looked down upon by the society....(personally, i feel a similar kinda sympathy for all the militants and terrorists in the world, including OBL)... they are always marginalized... even the very importance of their existence is often played down by the authority and general public......I feel that has to be changed...thatz the only intention behind my arguements in favor of the working class.....

2:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

arre sab log kya shot maar rahe hain be....... patty u r nver gonna accept the facts too stubborn...... mr. pa(with due respect) is gonna weild behind the sheet to fight like the naxals...... sunil as ranjani pointed out is disgressing.... saale ka kaam hi wohi hai.. u dont seem to understand tht.... ranjani is desperately trying to be modest yet moderate.... maloom nahi kyun.... vivek is articulate.... playing his cards close to his heart...... bol bachhan saala.... full time talkin abt facts and figures.... law and order... koi kaam ka nahi((u knw wht i intend to say??)).....
and me the biggest maandh reading abt all this..... bhanti yaar how many tims hv we had this discussion.... no matter who it is ... in a competition u shud alwys hv the upper hand.... one step ahead..... nahi tho finish....

the devil

2:59 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home