Walking with Comrades

[cooljat]

.

Good analysis of root cause, but I think this pictorial representation will be easier to understand -

Read: http://www.greatindiansale.org/2010/04/naxals-maoists-tribals-air-force-war.html


Hope it helps !!

I doubt if you have ever been associated with or experienced a village life. Usually these kinds of comments come only from people living in an air conditioned home having no clue of what an ordinary farmer’s hardship is. These are the only people who are getting benefited by this corrupt establishment (I agree that not all in the establishment are corrupt and there are really good people because of whom the nation is moving forward).

Imagine yourself as a farmer in a remote village. The farm that you plough has been fulfilling your family's food and other basic and essential needs for generations. Now, how would you react if the government throws you out of that farm to hand over that land to a builder?

The government and the media would give you reasons that it is doing this for the development of the county and that the entire village will get benefited by this development. However, tell me, would that builder be concerned about the development of the village or the money that he would be making out of that project?

There would have been no issues, if after negotiating the amount with the builder; the farmer voluntarily hands over the farm. But if, this is enforced by the law, then this is oppression by the state and violation of human rights. The farmer, as the owner and benefiter of that farm should have the ultimate right of selling that land, not the government.

In this situation, if the farmer protests to protect his rights, by any means available to him, would he be a coward? And to whom would be disloyal, his family, his future generation? Remember, today, the farmer is getting that food and living today because your for-fathers did not sell that farm. They could have also sold the land to live a comfortable life of their own in an air conditioned house without ensuring a sustainable earning for future generations and thus adding them to city's slum population.

And yes, could you elaborate on why Arundhati Roy should denounce all ties to the nation? Is it just because she had the courage to bring the other side of the story to the general public? Is the nation sole property of someone who do not agree with the other side of the story?

 

[brahmtewatia]

people are always in so much hurry to write the others off. though this holds true that a credulous admiration for the naxals is emblematic of the tendency among some of the indian intellectual class toward left-wing utopianism.

how it all started doesn’t really matter anymore, cos the naxal movement is now no more than a quest for money nd shadow political power. well, it has been like tht for quite some time. the ideology and the 'struggle for tribals and the marginalized' crap is used only in plush air conditioned studios for telecasting absolute turd into plush living rooms nd bringing pressure on the govt for whatsoever reason(s).

the situation is more complex than is ‘as apparent’. we talk of naxals being involved in the mainstream ?... how that is going to be implemented ? is a billion dollar question !!!

they have a way of life nd in a democratic setup they have a right to that way of life. this also doesn’t mean that we allow those tribal’s keep sitting on that goldmine like a hen trying to hatch her eggs nd say NO to any developmental change that is up there in the offing… if it really is ?

using brutal force or declaring a full-fledged war on naxals is not the solution. it may stunt or quarantine the problem momentarily... but definitely not the answer in the long run.

look, i am not siding with the movement... nor i'm totally against it. my concern here is that a more reasonable discourse with real motive for a solution should be the answer. this was just a wake-up call, emanating from the disgust/neglect nd frustration of past 4-5 decades. showing a little respect and empathy for them, the poor muted human beings, should be a bare minimum to begin with.

 

[singhvp]

/QUOTE]

Imagine yourself as a farmer in a remote village. The farm that you plough has been fulfilling your family's food and other basic and essential needs for generations. Now, how would you react if the government throws you out of that farm to hand over that land to a builder?
There would have been no issues, if after negotiating the amount with the builder; the farmer voluntarily hands over the farm. But if, this is enforced by the law, then this is oppression by the state and violation of human rights. The farmer, as the owner and benefiter of that farm should have the ultimate right of selling that land, not the government.

The land can be acquired by government in the broader interest of society as a whole. However, it would be unjust on its part to forcefully evict the owners, without proper/adequate compensation. Ideally, the offer should be made as lucrative as the owners themselves feel tempted to hand over their land.

The government and the media would give you reasons that it is doing this for the development of the county and that the entire village will get benefited by this development. However, tell me, would that builder be concerned about the development of the village or the money that he would be making out of that project?

It is true to a great extent. There is a nexus between, politicians, bureaucrats and entrepreneurs and the land acquisition is not always for purely altruistic motive i.e. development. There have been conspiracies too just for minting money.

In this situation, if the farmer protests to protect his rights, by any means available to him, would he is a coward? And to whom would be disloyal, his family, his future generation?

Armed protest is a highly conservative approach. Mao’s guerrilla tactics and the resources available with Naxals are a mismatch and not compatible with the cutting edge technology, sophisticated and high precision weaponry and overwhelmingly outnumbering man power readily available with the State.

And yes, could you elaborate on why Arundhati Roy should denounce all ties to the nation? Is it just because she had the courage to bring the other side of the story to the general public? Is the nation sole property of someone who do not agree with the other side of the story?

Arundhati Roy’s credentials as a well-wisher of the “proletariat” are doubtful. She is more concerned with selling her books and journalistic skills rather than emancipation of the tribal Adivasis. She is a pastmaster in such tactics.

 

[upendersingh]

Walking with Comrades Naxals and Maoists


Walking With The Comrades: Gandhians with a Gun? Arundhati Roy plunges into the sea of Gondi people to find some answers...Arundhati Roy- click here to read the essay


This what I wrote to OUTLOOK after reading the article "WALKING WITH THE COMRADES"
Brig Lakshman Singh (Retd)

Arundhati Roy, the master story teller has in the mega article(OUTLOOK March 29 2010) made me walk along with her for miles and miles, took me where she went and made me see what she saw with her eyes and made me feel what she felt to some extent and also made me read the hard core of her article, the history of the Naxal/ Mao movement which I would have skipped had I not walked with her or seen with her eyes, which , possibly is the major success of her odyssey.
Arundhati has moved with the foot soldiers of the movement, meandering around the Jungle trails of Danatewada getting and imbibing the feel of their motivation, what drives them, their small joys and pains, worries, fears and aspirations.
The foot soldiers, totally and blissfully unaware of the setup of the higher echelons organising, planning, directing the movement of this magnitude and their motivating force, are content to carry out the bidding's; moving single file night in and night out, not even aware of the final destination and what awaits them at the next bound.
It is amazing how they are living, surviving, fighting, and also dieing totally unmindful of personal issues, emotional problems, privation, sickness and the fear of uncertain destiny awaiting them.
Though myself having been a foot soldier once, with no voice of my own in the on going affairs, obeying orders, emanating from somewhere higher up, like a robot. I am still not convinced about the method adopted by them and more so by those directing them from a safe distance, to achieve their political or otherwise goals, whatever they may be and whatever be the provocation. bls31

Arundhati Roy seems inexperienced of this world. She is a foolish or we can say too much liberal lady. Some time back she had said that "Kashmir needs freedom from India" and for this "A slipper was thrown at Arundhati Roy" also. And now she is seeming sympathetic towards the Naxals/Maoists, who are dreaming to put whole India in their stride as they have been killing the militarymen and Government of India's heads are busy to make money for their luxuries and for their coming generations.

 

[fateh]

The war needs to be declared against corruption, the state sponsored mafia and the government policies and not the naxals. Otherwise, the whole nation would soon be fighting within itself. Naxalwada is a symptom not the cause.

Read the post "Walking with the Comrades"

A very correct suggestion, I am happy to read your views. I also feel strongly that the problem is due to failure of the state, the democracy, rule of law & social system. It is purely internal problem created, supported & contributed by mismanagement of state affairs and our social system by our greedy & corrupt managers of the nation.

 

[virj]

/QUOTE]


Armed protest is a highly conservative approach. Mao’s guerrilla tactics and the resources available with Naxals are a mismatch and not compatible with the cutting edge technology, sophisticated and high precision weaponry and overwhelmingly outnumbering man power readily available with the State.

Arundhati Roy’s credentials as a well-wisher of the “proletariat” are doubtful. She is more concerned with selling her books and journalistic skills rather than emancipation of the tribal Adivasis. She is a pastmaster in such tactics.

Hi Bro VP,

The Naxalis also know that they cant win but still they cherish their "little wins". Like our freedom fighers(krantikari) very well knew that they cant win mighty britishers. The naxalis were quiet for many years protesting against the Govt but no one listened. They are dying anyway. Woman were raped, forced to sell their daughters, kids die of hunger. They had no option but to join this armed struggle. They saw a hope there. No one wants to die. Though I personally dont support all this voilence. But if I put myself in their shoes than this can be justified.

If nothing constructive is done than we cant rule out another partition in the coming years. And this would be a big one. Thats what our few neighbouring countries want. My chinease friend once asked me why India has problem with all the neighbours be it pakistan, be it srilanka, be it bangladesh, be it nepal or china.

Regarding Arundhati: She is just a journalist. We should make an informed opinion based on the facts available not by the influence of someone. We cant blindly trust Arundati not what the Govt says.

 

[singhvp]

Hi Bro VP,

The Naxalis also know that they cant win but still they cherish their "little wins". Like our freedom fighers(krantikari) very well knew that they cant win mighty britishers. The naxalis were quiet for many years protesting against the Govt but no one listened. They are dying anyway. Woman were raped, forced to sell their daughters, kids die of hunger. They had no option but to join this armed struggle. They saw a hope there. No one wants to die. Though I personally dont support all this voilence. But if I put myself in their shoes than this can be justified.

If nothing constructive is done than we cant rule out another partition in the coming years. And this would be a big one. Thats what our few neighbouring countries want. My chinease friend once asked me why India has problem with all the neighbours be it pakistan, be it srilanka, be it bangladesh, be it nepal or china.

Regarding Arundhati: She is just a journalist. We should make an informed opinion based on the facts available not by the influence of someone. We cant blindly trust Arundati not what the Govt says.

It would be only demeaning to compare the freedom fighters like Bhatat Singh and his comrades with a group of anarchists misguiding rural youth while sitting in safe havens on foreign lands. A poor man(Adivasi) killing another poor man (constable). What kind of socialism they are preaching? Have you ever heard of any big shot being killed by Naxalites? They are not even sparing schools (today they blew one school).

Arundhati: I remember a fracas between this ‘revolutionary litterateur’ and the communist ideologues consequent upon her diatribes against them in her Booker winning novel in 1997. There is no love lost between Arundhati and Maoist Philosophy which is an offshoot of Marxism. All gimmicks to hog the headlines plus best selling tactics. She is against India’s nuclear policy, against globalization, against corporate sector, against dams and also against a progressive outlook. I do not know what is her vision. Therefore, I do not admire her. People are, however, free to support her views.

 

[jitender.singh]

Walking with Comrades Naxals and Maoists


Walking With The Comrades: Gandhians with a Gun? Arundhati Roy plunges into the sea of Gondi people to find some answers...Arundhati Roy- click here to read the essay


This what I wrote to OUTLOOK after reading the article "WALKING WITH THE COMRADES"
Brig Lakshman Singh (Retd)

Arundhati Roy, the master story teller has in the mega article(OUTLOOK March 29 2010) made me walk along with her for miles and miles, took me where she went and made me see what she saw with her eyes and made me feel what she felt to some extent and also made me read the hard core of her article, the history of the Naxal/ Mao movement which I would have skipped had I not walked with her or seen with her eyes, which , possibly is the major success of her odyssey.
Arundhati has moved with the foot soldiers of the movement, meandering around the Jungle trails of Danatewada getting and imbibing the feel of their motivation, what drives them, their small joys and pains, worries, fears and aspirations.
The foot soldiers, totally and blissfully unaware of the setup of the higher echelons organising, planning, directing the movement of this magnitude and their motivating force, are content to carry out the bidding's; moving single file night in and night out, not even aware of the final destination and what awaits them at the next bound.
It is amazing how they are living, surviving, fighting, and also dieing totally unmindful of personal issues, emotional problems, privation, sickness and the fear of uncertain destiny awaiting them.
Though myself having been a foot soldier once, with no voice of my own in the on going affairs, obeying orders, emanating from somewhere higher up, like a robot. I am still not convinced about the method adopted by them and more so by those directing them from a safe distance, to achieve their political or otherwise goals, whatever they may be and whatever be the provocation. bls31

Brigadier Singh, thanks for bringing the issue at very right time.

Gandhians with a Gun? Its a shame to compare a person, who just for the his principle of non-voilence, declined a his biggest ambition (freedom of India) just because his movement was marred by voilence (refer Non-cooperation movement and Chauri Chaura incident).

The story Arundhati Roy, the marvellous story teller, presents is the outline that is the creation of the people like her who have put the tribal people in a war that they can't win by brainwashing them for the sake of their communist ideology. The face of the Naxal movement are not poor tribals, but hardliner left sympathisers, who belive in breaking a liberal democratic country with help from China. They have put the tribals in a situation where even if the Government of India wants to help them, it can't. The natural resources, read forests, possesed by the tribals in question are full of landmines. The stories of rape and torture are the truth of an unstable area, where there is no law of land. How can she be sure that its always the Government Machinery who is commiting such crimes and not the people who are driving the marxist ideology. Is ruining the life of a tribal girl, who want to study, by making her a foot soldier not a form of mental torture. Most of the runaway foot soldiers complain of being used by their leaders. Further, which ideology supports employing child soldiers? Arundhati Roy talks of Human Rights voilations in Jammu Kashmir, why can't she raise the question of the voilation of the Human Rights of these foot soldiers? Its very easy to glorify them as change agents, but its very difficult to assume what they are losing, and we possess. By raising a conflict with the state, what Naxal leader Kishen Ji is trying to do? Help tribals and deprieved? Nopes.

 

[jitender.singh]

Brigadier Lakshman, tell me why does India, or for that matter any country, has defense forces? Aren't they directed by someone from a safe distance? Aren't they there to achieve or safeguard political positions? Thousands of soldiers have laid their lives in India and Pakistan fighting each other, for what purpose?

Weren't these brave soldiers insulted when medals were distributed like sweets to a handful of policemen who died in the parliament attack just because someone’s safe havens were threatened?

I don't think a soldier is insulted or offended, if somebody else is decorated. Its is not always possible to acknowledge all acts of bravery and soldiers are trained to act bravely, because it is their day in day out job and not that they expect to be decorated for every action.

Are you also not convinced by the struggle for independence by Neta Ji Subhash Chander Bosh and likes? Or do you think that Mahatma Gandhi's was enough to get India independence?

Freedom movement was not for individuals and nobody alone can take credit for it, we are gratefull to everybody who contributed in the movement: from Netaji to his soldiers and from Gandhiji to each and every satyagrahi. No two people can be compared as they all played different roles.

Yes, peace and harmony is something which is adorned by nature and preached by everyone. Even a so called terrorist is fighting today for tomorrow's peace (in his own views). However, when it comes to survival and dignity, doesn't these adhivasis have right for self defense? Could you let me know, what alternative and the chance does these adhavasis have without the weapons?

The only solution is to stop the voilence. Whoever dies is an Indian, whether he is from CRPF or from Naxlites. Its a propaganda from the Chinese sympathiser Naxal leadership, who thinks they can make India weaker to such a level that they can offer to mediate with China and get a pie in ruling India in bargain.

Few months back, there was a peace march from hundreds of nomads/adhivasis who had walked on foot all the way from MP to Delhi; could you tell me if any of their demands have been met so far? Why has media forgotten that peace movement? Are they not chased away from their land today by land mafia today as well?

[/QUOTE]

The media has nothing to do with people or journalism. Its all about making money by spanking breaking news and create sensation. All the media houses are owned by business houses and they dont care about people, but about tricks to make money.

 

[jitender.singh]

Hi Bro VP,

The Naxalis also know that they cant win but still they cherish their "little wins". Like our freedom fighers(krantikari) very well knew that they cant win mighty britishers. The naxalis were quiet for many years protesting against the Govt but no one listened. They are dying anyway. Woman were raped, forced to sell their daughters, kids die of hunger. They had no option but to join this armed struggle. They saw a hope there. No one wants to die. Though I personally dont support all this voilence. But if I put myself in their shoes than this can be justified.

If nothing constructive is done than we cant rule out another partition in the coming years. And this would be a big one. Thats what our few neighbouring countries want. My chinease friend once asked me why India has problem with all the neighbours be it pakistan, be it srilanka, be it bangladesh, be it nepal or china.

Regarding Arundhati: She is just a journalist. We should make an informed opinion based on the facts available not by the influence of someone. We cant blindly trust Arundati not what the Govt says.

Its a shame that you compare the Naxalistes with freedom fighters. Even communist freedom fighter didn't killled their fellow citizens. Naxals are nothing but terrorist, who are indoctrinated by some people, who have the agenda of running parallel government or autocratic people who want a share in power.
Your Chinese friend will always point that India have problems with all its neighbours, but I think India never has problems with Burma, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Tibet, Bhutan and Nepal. China on the other hand has had problems with all their neighbours except Russia or countries separated from Russia: Mongolia, Korea, Japan, Taiwan (they claim it their property), Tibet (they are occupying it), Vietnam (when it had democratic governments), and Laos. You have a Chinese friend, so I assume you will have a scope of share in power, should india fail as a state, so I would recommend you keep on writing your testimonials by keeping on quoting him. By the way I know a few Chinese, who are settled in US and never want to go back to China. You can ask your Chinese friend to fix that issue before suggesting you on the problems India has.
I have already expressed my noble views on Ms. Arundhati Roy and her comerades.

 

[virj]

This reply is for dear VP and Jitender exclusively.

Before you jump up and down again let me explain that I didnt compare krantikaris to naxalis all in all. I just told you that even a person knows that he/she cant win the mighty oppressor doesnt mean that they wont/shouldnt fight. I didnt compare their motives, their nobleness, their deshbakti or any other thing. Ghandi ji and other didnt support these krantikari but still they fought because they were happy with their little wins. I said personally I dont like this violence be it from state or be it from people.

I dont understand why u think Arundhati is an integral part of this issue. I didnt read Arundhati's article completely and I am not influenced by her article. The first time I thought about this issue was when it was written in 'India today' many years before when I was in college.

These newspaper dont cry when innocent naxalis/adivasis are killed.

Before you jump from your chair again its not a bad idea to read Arvind's posts one more time once again.

Jitender shaheb what I wanted to say is we have problem with our neighbours because of failed political vision. We never tried sincerely to resolve the issues with our neighbours. And this naxali problem is also due to failed political leadership. When I read that you think I have a scope of share in power. I couldn't stop laughing. Let me know if you want more explaination on this.



BTW the below is not from Arundhati

An independent journalist from Jagdalpur alleges in an eight-page pamphlet that from August 10 to October 24, 2009, 44 adivasis have been killed in the villages of Gompad, Murregudum, Gacchanpalli, Gattapada, Palchelima and Singanmudgu by security forces in what are termed encounters. Among them were a 65-year-old man and a 10-year-old child. The pamphlet alleges that only two of the 44 were true Maoists. The rest were innocent adivasis. The pamphlet calls for the incidents to be probed further.

 

[singhvp]

Before you jump up and down again let me explain that I didnt compare krantikaris to naxalis all in all. I just told you that even a person knows that he/she cant win the mighty oppressor doesnt mean that they wont/shouldnt fight. I didnt compare their motives, their nobleness, their deshbakti or any other thing. Ghandi ji and other didnt support these krantikari but still they fought because they were happy with their little wins. I said personally I dont like this violence be it from state or be it from people.

[FONT=&quot]Dear Bro Vipin,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] I did not find anything offensive and personal which might provoke me to jump up and down. You have every right to express your opinion.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] What are the “little wins” of Naxalites so far? Nothing except destruction of whatever minimal infrastructure existed before insurgncyand a big full stop to any future development unless they lay down the gun. Killing of poor soldiers would prompt the establishment to unleash a counterattack with much greater force, due to pressure from their constituents. In such a scenario nothing comes out but innocent killings from both sides. Leadership from both sides watching from their respective safe havens, sipping scotch or blends of coffee, waiting in the wings for their political gains. [/FONT]

[FONT="]I dont understand why u think [/FONT][COLOR=#3e3e3e][FONT="]Arundhati[/FONT][/COLOR][FONT="] is an integral part of this issue. I didnt read Arundhati's article completely and I am not influenced by her article. The first time I thought about this issue was when it was written in 'India today' many years before when I was in college. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[B][I][FONT=&quot]Because we are discussing an articles written by Aru. Moreover, you had challenged my knowledge about Aru. I have been following her right from the time of her first publication “The God of Small Things” to her tirade against Pokhran nuclear test “The End of Imagination”. She has been crying foul to some other progressive policies as well which, are however, not related to this issue. So, I am not blank about Arundhati. I know something about her. [/FONT][/I][/B]


[QUOTE][FONT="]These newspaper dont cry when innocent naxalis/adivasis are killed.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Newspapers are controlled by the corporate world, which, I am sure many of our ‘Corporate Boys’, and you perhaps, would never like to hear anything against. Govt. has little say in this coverage. [/FONT]

[FONT="]Before you jump from your chair again its not a bad idea to read Arvind's posts one more time once again.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As explained above, not jumping from chair as the innocent remarks from the younger bro have so far not provoked me to take such a step. So far I have never found your remarks objectionable. Hence, always sitting firmly in peace and serenity doing a little meditation. I am sure you have tried to add a little humour. Keep it up bro.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] Have read Arvind’s post (a boy next door like you). I admire and respect his deep sympathy with the oppressed class but beg to differ in approach to solve the problem, notwithstanding the fact that I have even greater sympathy for the have nots and totally condemn the criminal socio-economic disparity.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Jitender shaheb what I wanted to say is we have problem with our neighbours because of failed political vision. We never tried sincerely to resolve the issues with our neighbours. And this naxali problem is also due to failed political leadership. When I read that you think I have a scope of share in power. I couldn't stop laughing. Let me know if you want more explaination on this. [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]A few mistakes in the past cannot nullify the whole gamut of our otherwise balanced and pragmatic foreign policy having consensus from wide political spectrum of India (including main opposition party). It is a complex subject and you have to come up with more facts and figures for eliciting further comments.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]



[/FONT]

 

[jitender.singh]

Vipin,
My apologies for being sarcastic, but I still feel that you expressed your concerns in a provoking manner.

Just to confirm you my theory on Naxal Agenda, here is an interview by TOI of a tribal journalist:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...lp-us-rise-like-Obama/articleshow/5783176.cms

I really see her concerns genuine and her suggestions valuable and viable. What you guys seem to be writing without even reading the core article by Arundhati on which debate is based makes my opinion even stronger.

Here is another research, which would make the naxals ideology hard to explain, why they are burning the money to fight rather than improve the lives of tribals with the same money:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...s-1500-crore-counting/articleshow/5783114.cms

I really fail to understand, how can we treat a group that can destroy a school, that can kill people (I am not talking the killing of CRPF personnel only) with ruthlessness that only cannibals or indoctirenated terrorists can posess, that enrolls child soldiers rather than educate them (sarcastically educates them as murderers), that forcibly employs girl soldiers in their ranks as people's saviours.

I have debated the same issue with AISA's top leadership (the same leadership which won them elections in next couple of years) in JNU and they failed to answer these simple questions got irritated after around 3 hours and left my room. They are just fanatics who just want revolution for the sake of revolution, don't know against whom (I think against the same people with whom they live), don't know what they will achive (they say people's rule, what is it right now). And their way of winning was not ideology based, but the same theory of brainwashing the SLC Graduate course students with fanatic and fictional reasoning glorifying them as future comrades, who will go on to get the same fate as that of Lenin etc.

I am sure you are blaming the politicians for what is happening now, but its not the politicians fault, niether it is system's failure, its is rather we, the people of India, who are to blame for choosing the people whom we think are incapable. I don't remember the exact numbers right now, but the number of middle class people, who don't vote, are more than the number of votes polled by the winner in 30-40% of the parliamentary constituencies and 60-70% of assembly constituencies. Its very easy to blame system, but very hard to help the system evolve.

 

[jitender.singh]

For the left wing politics I had the understanding that they are liberal and progressive people and used to associate my thinking with the same knid of thoughts.

"In politics, left-wing, leftist and the Left are generally used to describe support for social change with a view towards creating a more egalitarian society. The terms Left and Right were coined during the French Revolution, referring to the seating arrangement in parliament; those who sat on the left generally supported the radical changes of the revolution, including the creation of a republic and secularization.
The concept of a political Left became more prominent after the June Days Uprising of 1848. The term was applied to a number of revolutionary movements in Europe, especially socialism, anarchism and communism. The term is also used to describe social democracy and social liberalism"

However, when I came in touch with so called Comerades, I found that they are neither liberals, nor progressive; instead they are as hardliners as the right wing politicians are. They pursue individual agendas and not social and collective agenda. The way CPI-M threw away Somnath Chatterjee indicates the kind of liberals they are. The way Chinese and Soviet communists have build (and tried to build) homogenous societies by oppressing their own people and they way their top leaderships use and throw human beings to dustbins show the kind of ideaology they possess. Most of the communist leader are found to posses lot of personal wealth build through illegal activities during their tenures. And this had make me decide that if that is the left ideology than I dont belong to these people.

I have always taken pride in being liberal and progressive, but that does not mean being a fanatic change agent who takes lives of scores of people for the sake of eventual gain for top 5-10 people in the leadership chain. And democratic setup guards against such things.

Coming back to current debate, any system which has anarchy causes harm to weaker components of the system, and by causing the anarchy to strech the Naxals rather then help tribals are harming their cause. Had they levelled the same allegations of rape and torture, when the government machinery was runninng the show, I would have agreed to those concerns. But in present case you can never acertain the real culprit. It can be the Naxal propaganda, it could be some local goons, it could be some security personnel taking advantage of anarchy, it could be some security personnel keen on revenge. The way I know the left propaganda wagers, saying that only 2 out of 44 people were Maoists can be read as 'All but 2 people were either Maoists or their sympathisers'. For your kind attention here is the interview of one of the top Naxal sypathiser on rediff.com, who says the CRPF peope were killed by tribals only:
http://news.rediff.com/interview/20...-himanshu-kumar-on-the-dantewada-massacre.htm

Here is a girl Arundhati failed to mention in her story:
http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2...-1-how-i-joined-the-naxals-and-why-i-left.htm

"When I saw that big leaders also leave the party themselves I realised that I shouldn't stay. Their ideology is wrong. Villagers work for them because they fear them, they fear for their lives.
The Naxalites say they have no desire for money, then why do they run away with the money? What are they struggling for then? "

This is what I was able to understand in my discussion with AISA folks, which I dont think a 10 year old girl would understand. But as she understood she left them.

 

[virj]

[FONT=&quot]Dear Bro Vipin,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I did not find anything offensive and personal which might provoke me to jump up and down. [/FONT]

Hi VP Appreciate ur remarks but by jumping up and down I mean jumping in excitement. Good that you didnt take it personally, I never intended that. Let the things move on. I didnt challenge ur knowledge and how can I being much younger to u.

No need for the apologies Jitender. I just felt u didnt read my post carefully. . Your opinion shouldnt based on one article man. There is a comment in ur pasted article that how coma a 10 year old girl was studying class VII.

Btw Jitneder do you know most of the schools in naxal areas are CPRF/Police camps !

Take it easy and keep bringing your views

 

[jitender.singh]

Hi VP Appreciate ur remarks but by jumping up and down I mean jumping in excitement. Good that you didnt take it personally, I never intended that. Let the things move on. I didnt challenge ur knowledge and how can I being much younger to u.

No need for the apologies Jitender. I just felt u didnt read my post carefully. . Your opinion shouldnt based on one article man. There is a comment in ur pasted article that how coma a 10 year old girl was studying class VII.

Btw Jitneder do you know most of the schools in naxal areas are CPRF/Police camps !

Take it easy and keep bringing your views

I have not built my opinions on one article. It has taken a lot of years of education and experience to build these opinions. You seem to be taking the things literally by explicitly quoting the things from single articles and not reading even the article on which we all are debating. BTW I don't think you have read the complete article once again and tried to correlate 10 year old and class VII. That simply shows that you dont even trying to read things completely and try to draw conclusions. So let me get you what she has stated, literally:

"When I was young and studying, the Naxalites came and took me. I lived in my village and have studied till class VIII. My school was 5, 6 kms away and I used to cycle to school. Then teaching stopped in my school (actually I did not complete class VI) -- I went to the next village for private classes to appear for class VIII. I had three sisters and mother in the village. I have no recollection of my father. My sisters are all younger to me.

They (the Naxalites) came to my home in the night and took me. I had come home in the village after giving my class VIII exam. They were the platoonwale -- the military dalam -- commander Jaymati came to my house. They were four -- the remaining stayed in the jungle. They said 'You don't have a father, you can come and work for the party.' They did not show any force, they spoke nicely.

I had seen them in the village before and they used to talk to me. But I did not know who they were. They did not tell me what they did.

People from the platoon taught us how to lay ambushes, plant bombs and attack the police. The trained us in basic infantry tactics -- fire from standing position, sitting position, high kneeling position, low kneeling, crawling etc. I trained for a month, five other women trained with me.

I was 10. I did not know that they did all this till I got there.

We were in South Bastar and training was rigorous. We used to wake up at 4 am for PT and drill, followed by breakfast of poha and then studies. They taught us about the teachings Mao and their way of life."

This also answers your last statement, all the schools in Naxal areas are either CRPF/Police camps or Naxal camps. Otherwise, Naxals will blast that as the schools don't teach what Naxals want them to be taught.

 

[jakharanil]

Naxalism: biggest threat ...

A nightmare is beginning to unfold in the heart of India: latest intelligence reports say that armed Naxalites have a presence in 170 districts in 15 states of India as of now, and spreading wide and far.
Just months back, the Naxals were present only in 156 districts in 13 states. Not just numbers, what adds to the administration's worry is that they are armed with sophisticated weapons.
From the peasant uprising in Naxalbari village in Darjeeling district of West Bengal in May 1967, the movement is today a complex web that covers some 15 states of India, and with active links to the Maoists of Nepal.:rock

http://naxalwatch.blogspot.com/
http://naxaliterage.com/
http://naxalrevolution.blogspot.com/

 

[virj]

BTW I don't think you have read the complete article once again and tried to correlate 10 year old and class VII. That simply shows that you dont even trying to read things completely and try to draw conclusions. So let me get you what she has stated, literally:

They (the Naxalites) came to my home in the night and took me. I had come home in the village after giving my class VIII exam.

Are these lines from your pasted article?

If not----------------->> than forget it.

If yes---------------->> than go above and read my post again. Naxalis took her when she was 10. Now I said in that post there was a comment in that article ( by some reader who has read this article apart from you, I assume) that how come a small girl (10 years) old was studying/completed class VII/appearing for the exams.I know she took private tution or whatever but still?? In simpler and plain words he questioned on the authenticity/truth/source of this article.

Does this make sense (what was intended by that line) to you now???

If not------------->> please forgive me for my ignorance, I even don’t read things properly(as not everyone can be as intelligent and experienced as you) and please don’t limit the discussion to me and u.

If yes------------->> I will buy u a cup of tea anyday!

Take it easy and we move further but before that let me answer one more thing which could be your another possible query.

One more time I must tell you I am also ( like Big Bro VP) personally not a big fan of the violence (for reference read my post #26 again). Because who ever gets killed is an Indian citizen and if we cant resolve internal problems than how can we expect to fight external threats.Moreover other people/countries can take advantage of this and as I mentioned above another unfortunate partition cant be ruled out.I honestly want this to be resolved ASAP. What I said above is adivasi has little choice but to support Armed struggle or Maoists. And yes,again, I did say above that adivasi has little choice but to fight with weapons because they see no hope in the present democracy. and hence are fighting with weapons. But they see hope in Maosist. I also said if we put ourlself in their shoes this violence could be justified. This would not have happened had the govt tried a little bit to eradicate the root cause of the problem. If the govt can convince them and work towards their betterment why would they go and fight in jungle where life is more like a hell. The Naxalism is not the problem but an offspring from the above said problems. Naxalism/maosim or terrorism,whatever u say, in this nearly 40% of indian land cant be stopped unless the root causes are eradicated. Like our fellow member said above that 'The war needs to be declared against corruption, the state sponsored mafia and the government policies and not the naxals. Otherwise, the whole nation would soon be fighting within itself." That’s why I said this debate is not limited to Arudhati's article and those who didn’t read arundhati's article can also take part.!!

I hope this answer your below question, in bold, even if it doesn’t please forgive me once again and lets move on
You seem to be taking the things literally by explicitly quoting the things from single articles and not reading even the article on which we all are debating

I also admit that I didn’t read as many articles as you did and the one which I read didn’t read completely(lazy me ) but with the little knowledge I have I still believe in what I just said above. But I welcome you to educate me further and help me change my views.

If you have further questions except above already answered shoot them otherwise let the thread move on.

 

[virj]

Vipin,

Just to confirm you my theory on Naxal Agenda, here is an interview by TOI of a tribal journalist:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...lp-us-rise-like-Obama/articleshow/5783176.cms

I really see her concerns genuine and her suggestions valuable and viable. What you guys seem to be writing without even reading the core article by Arundhati on which debate is based makes my opinion even stronger.

Being a lazy person I read ur this pasted article now. But I couldnt understand what ur theory is. Questions in the article says:


Have you ever tried to find out just how backward your tribe is compared to the rest of the country?

Oh, we're yet to take-off... Others are already on the victory stand. I myself couldn't do much because of poverty. Only a handful of tribals work as officers. Lately, we've been encouraging our people to make use of schemes like the Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission. The government should make our people aware of NREGA and other development programmes. Tribals don't get their share. Everything goes into the pockets of officials and contractors. Some time ago, the government started a one-house-one-cow scheme. But tribals were given sick and old cows because they don't know how to milk them. We believe it's the calf that has a right over its mother's milk.


And how do they see the Maoists?

As people who don't kill innocent people and who punish guilty government officials. Maoists don't stage fake encounters. At least they claim responsibility for the killings they carry out. But violence cannot be the solution to a problem. Things will get better if our basic needs like education and employment are fulfilled... if we're allowed to live with dignity and respect... if we're not cheated and looked down upon.

Now is this ur theory??

 

[arvindc]

Dear young chap, you have missed the point. What I had questioned was the need for India or any country to have armed forces? The Naxals, for the same reason, also built armed forces.
So, let us think about the need for the armed forces for India as a country. Is this need for offensive purpose, that is, does India wants to attack and siege other countries? Or is it for defensive purpose, that is, India wants to safeguard it's political position if someone attacks the county?

The answer is simple, it is for defense, and I believe, this is the case for all other countries as well. So, if every country has forces just for the defense, then why are they fighting? Can you ponder over this and tell us the answer?

For India, I can explain this a bit, it is because of the fear factor. It needs to fight and maintain its armed forces because it fears that it will be attacked if does not do so. So, may be the case with Pakistan and other countries (assuming that human are peace loving creatures).

Imagine, if every country declares that it would not attack any country, would respect the current status queue of the international boundaries and would discuss every political issue through a non-violent process, then any country need not waste so much of money and energy in the defense forces. The money spent for maintaining weapons and defense forces could then be used to enhance the living condition of every soul on this earth. However, we all know this is not the case and today, the country must give billions of rupees to other countries for buying weapons even when its own people are dying of hunger. And all this is because of the fear of an attack.

So how did this fear factor originated? With my little knowledge of history, let me explain this a bit. India, just after independence, went with the above principle and did not spend so much on the defense forces. It thought it better to use that money for elimination of hunger. However, it was attacked, first by Pakistan and then by China. This lead to India awakening to the fact that the world is not ideal world and thus India started building a strong armed defense force.

Now if you look at the Naxals, they have a similar story. They were attacked, exploited in every way by the government (I say this as government, because the forest department people or the police people who raped and looted them were the government employees and represented "the government" to them). So, raising an armed defense force for them has the same merit as it has in any country.

I don't think a soldier is insulted or offended, if somebody else is decorated. Its is not always possible to acknowledge all acts of bravery and soldiers are trained to act bravely, because it is their day in day out job and not that they expect to be decorated for every action.

You seem to be a student, so let me ask this question in your context. Let us say that in your class, there are three students who scored above 95% because they had answered the questions very well. Obviously, these three students must have studied hard thought the year. Now, how would these three students feel if the teacher also gives 95% to someone, who has left half of the questions unanswered, just because that someone has helped the teacher personally in some way?
Remember, medals represent a value, a class, an accomplishment and also serve as a motivation for others. Distributing them, just like that, would undermine their value.

Freedom movement was not for individuals and nobody alone can take credit for it, we are gratefull to everybody who contributed in the movement: from Netaji to his soldiers and from Gandhiji to each and every satyagrahi. No two people can be compared as they all played different roles.

Ok, thanks for views. So, I take it that you approve of the Netaji's army and the method (violence).

The only solution is to stop the voilence. Whoever dies is an Indian, whether he is from CRPF or from Naxlites. Its a propaganda from the Chinese sympathiser Naxal leadership, who thinks they can make India weaker to such a level that they can offer to mediate with China and get a pie in ruling India in bargain.

This is what the British use to say for Netaji's violence as well.
What they share with China is the philosophy for governance. And if you are so much against any thing that is linked to China then why do you have that mobile phone (made in China) in your hand?
There are different approaches for everything. What’s wrong if they choose a different approach for governance? After all democracy has failed, if looked through their eyes.
I am not debating on the merits of “left” and “right” approaches for governance. I am trying to highlight the context of the issue.