November 13, 2007...4:27 am
Nandigram: What Movement? Why?
Dialogue, debate and discourse is needed to make progress in the realm of thought. In an earlier post Nandigram & The Terrors of Tomorrow I had written critically about the CPI(M) because I felt that the party was making mistakes and it should practice self-criticism to rectify these mistakes so that it can remain in power. It was the criticism of a supporter and not the criticism of an opponent. However, while replying to a comment made by radicalhypocrite I realized that I had made an even bigger mistake - I had fallen victim to the madness all around me and instead of criticizing the CPI(M) and thereby giving a handle to anti-CPI(M) forces I should criticize even more severely those who are deliberately trying to distort the truth about Nandigram.
I now wish to rectify that mistake by repeating the comment by radicalhypocrite and my reply to him in the form of a post so that readers who tend to skip comments and replies do not miss my views in any way.
Radicalhypocrite wrote:
As far as the reports go, the BUPC is more of a spontaneous struggle platform of the people there.
IT IS NOT LED BY ANY POLITICAL PARTIES, WHETHER THE TMC, THE MAOISTS, JAMAAT OR THAT OF MEDHA PATEKAR. The problem with most people here is that they overlook the possibility of people organising themselves.
Biman Bose previously tried to make a boogie of the Jamaat, and when it fizzled out, now it’s the turn of the Maoists. They are totally irrelevant in Nandigram’s context, unless political perception limits us to view Pradip Banerjee, Shyamal Nandi of the Bandi Mukti Committee, the APDR, all those CPIMLs with their second and third brackets as a conglomerate whole.
My reply:
Regarding your views about the people’s movement at Nandigram. Maybe you are right as I have no way of claiming on the basis of first hand investigation as to what is happening there. I am relying on media reports and these reports have mentioned that there are TMC, Jamait and Maoists involved in providing leadership to the people. I do not think there is any spontaneous people’s movements as such. That is an utopian dream - people nowhere organize themselves spontaneously. They may be agitated spontaneously but to give that agitation the shape of an organized movement you need a leadership.
This is further proved by the fact that although the state government did announce no land would be acquired at Nandigram, the problem did not get solved. Why? Obviously there are leaders in that so-called people’s movement that you are referring to who are interested in pushing some political agenda that has nothing to do with land acquisition or denial of livelihoods to the people of Nandigram because this problem does not exist anymore - it did not exist in March when a few unarmed innocent people including women and children were killed by police bullets because these women and children were being used in the most inhuman and cynical manner as human shields.
This great people’s movement of yours helped to kill some innocent people when the very raison-de-etre for the movement had already been removed. Why? Whose interests were being served in continuing a movement when there was no further need to continue that movement?
And if the movement is all about driving out CPI(M) supporters or those who do not join the movement then what will happen if the CPI(M) now launches a “people’s movement” to drive out all those who do not agree with it? Will you support that movement as well?
The CPI(M) no doubt has many faults and I have tried to list as many as I could but they are not mad nor are they as rabid as the commie haters who resort to CPI(M) bashing at the slightest pretext and often for no reason. Such people are commie bashers because they have been brainwashed since childhood to be commie bashers to the point that they have no brains left - everything has been washed out. Such people are at once comical and at the same time rabid. [A few comments on this site are examples and I have published them in full only to prove to readers that commie bashing is always done by people who have no brains left and their comments require no further comment to prove that. See for example, the comment by Krishna. If you read the particular post and his comments to that post you will know what I am talking about]
The CPI(M) may resort to violence and killings but they always have a reason for that. They do not kill just because it is pleasurable to kill. They have done what they have done in Nandigram not because it is the kind of pastime they like to indulge in but because there was some problem at Nandigram and that problem had nothing to do with land acquisition.
There were armed people in Nandigram who were not allowing CPI(M) supporters to go back to their homes, not allowing the administration to enter the area, not allowing the police to do their job as policemen, not allowing the media to report properly and all this even after the state government had made it clear that no land would be acquired at Nandigram. So what were these armed people doing there under the banner of the BUPC?
If these people had the right to evict CPI(M) supporters from their homes and convert them into homeless refugees then the CPI(M) had equal right to beat the shits out of them and throw their dead bodies into the Ganga. There is no question of CPI(M) breaking up any genuine “people’s movement”.
Yes, the people had organized themselves against land acquisition despite the CPI(M)’s presence in the area and if the state government had continued to acquire land despite the people’s movement then one could have indicted the CPI(M) blindly. But that is not the case. In fact, the opposite. The party and the government responded to the people’s agitation and declared there would be no land acquisition at Nandigram at all.
The land acquisition problem was removed entirely so why did this movement still continue? Why was this movement armed and resorting to violence? Why did the movement forcibly evict people from their homes and hearth? Why did the movement allow innocent women and children to get killed? What were they agitating about?
I admit I do not have clear and definite answers to these questions. Based on media reports I believe that the leaders of the movement were pushing an anti-CPI(M), anti-industrialization, and ultimately an anti-people movement there because that was the only issue that power-hungry, anti-people and mindless politicians like Mamata Bannerjee could think of to flay the state government and disrupt normal developmental activities.
They know their existence is at stake - if West Bengal industrializes, these politicians like Mamata Bannerjee have no future.
As for the Maoists, well, their agenda has a larger dimension - if they have to build up a radical nation-wide movement they have to try and get their foot in wherever they can. Nandigram provided an opportunity so they grabbed it. They will support militancy and armed struggle wherever they can.
Their issue is not just land acquisition or the fascist nature of CPI(M) or any such partial political aspect - their issue is a radical revolutionary change leading to smashing of the existing state machinery and establishment of a Maoist state so it is quite understandable that they would not give up simply because the state government had declared it would not acquire any land at Nandigram.
But what about Mamata Bannerjee? What about the media? What about the so-called intelligentsia? What revolutionary political agenda are they pursuing except a single-point agenda of opposing the CPI(M) come what may? But can Mamata Bannerjee remain chief minister for a month? Will she not resign on some pretext or the other within a few days? Can she provide any positive policies for the state? Does she have the intelligence to run a government? Does her party have anyone but a few goons as supporters who can provide any kind of governance?
If you have a better idea about what the Nandigram movement is all about after the land acquisition threat had been completely removed, why the BUPC continued to indulge in armed terrorism in that area, why they evicted people from their hearths and homes, why they were not allowing the police and administration to enter the area for more than 8 months after the government had announced there would be no land acquisition at Nandigram, why the hell were they armed in the first place, please let our readers know.
Please also share with our readers all instances of the CPI(M) or the state government forcibly acquiring land or taking away the livelihoods from the people of Nandigram with the use of arms or other forms of coercion that led the BUPC to launch an armed struggle and continue it even after it was made very clear that there would be no land acquisition at all - forcibly or peaceably.
It is a big mystery to me and I will be extremely grateful if you can solve it for me.
I am apprehensive because I find that I exist in the midst of total unreasonableness. I would be afraid if I were let loose in a loony bin and that is exactly what we, the people of West Bengal, now find ourselves in - killings of innocent people, forcibly denying people their livelihoods for days together by bandhs and Bangla achal, mindless agitations and road blocks - why? In whose interests? And it is a loony bin because all this unreasonableness is getting support from literate, educated people, from the media and now from the so-called intelligentsia, the opinion builders of civil society, as well. I am afraid that lunatics have now begun to control our fate.
My additional comments:
My mistake is before criticizing the CPI(M) I should have first written about the key issue with regard to Nandigram. I thought I had pointed it out in my earlier post on Rizwanur, Mamata and Mao: What Is The Connection. But I realize I did not make the point strongly enough.
The key issue is: what is the Nandigram movement all about after the state government had made it very clear that there would be no land acquisition?
Why is the media, intellectuals and of course, certain political groups raising a big cry about how CPI(M) goons are driving people out of their livelihoods, killing them and raping them at Nandigram and carrying out all kinds of atrocities when the truth is that it is CPI(M) supporters who have been driven out of their homes and hearth, it is CPI(M) supporters who were being killed and raped and it is the BUPC that has been committing all kinds of atrocities for nearly a year?
Which farmer in Nandigram has lost his livelihood or his land? Which person in Nandigram has been in anyway attacked or harmed by the CPI(M) or the state government? Over the last ten or twelve months who were the armed people who captured Nandigram and adjoining areas, drove out thousands of CPI(M) supporters from their homes, raped and killed CPI(M) supporters and even killed policemen, closed down schools, banks and post offices, put up road blocks and stopped the entry of police and the administration, stopped the entry of that section of the media which was interested in reporting about the truth in Nandigram? What interest do the media have in supporting these armed people who took over Nandigram?
My criticism of the CPI(M) revolves around the view that I believe that the CPI(M) has the organization to garner the support of the people through democratic processes simply by standing beside them in times of their troubles but the party is gradually moving away from that situation because of the problems that arise from being in power for 30 years. My criticism that CPI(M) is fascist stems from a general criticism that all political parties today - from the extreme right to the extreme left - are fascist because the very structural conditions within which politics is now practiced is basically fascist in character. It does not permit true people’s democracy. I criticize the CPI(M) for not being Leftist and communist enough and for not doing all that it can do by dint of being in power. But I would still say that the CPI(M) is thousands of times better than any of the other parties in the political fray today in India. So my criticism of the CPI(M) should be understood and interpreted in that light.
My criticism of the CPI(M) is about how much better the party could have handled both Singur and Nandigram and why it did not do so when it knows that not only the opposition parties but also the media and intellectuals will jump at the slightest opportunity to vilify the party. So the party should be more careful while handling various issues. The party should show more sensitivity towards the people. The party should go out of its way and it should walk the extra mile to make sure that it cannot be criticized. It must do whatever it takes to make sure that riff raff like Mamata Bannerje cannot get any opportunity to disrupt normal developmental processes and normal public life. My criticism of the CPI(M) is about why the party is not launching a sufficiently strong people’s movement to shut up liers like Mamata Bannerjee for good. Why is the party allowing someone who has just 35 MLAs and 1 MP from the state - someone who has been completely rejected by the people in election after election - being allowed to hold the state’s development at ransom? Why is she allowed to go about disrupting normal public life time and again for no reason at all? Why is she simply not being tonsured, put on the back of a donkey and driven out of the state as used to be done in the past to those who consistently went against the society? Why is she being allowed to time and again spread misinformation and create a ruckus? My criticism of the CPI(M) is all about its poor handling of issues both politically and administratively which is giving a chance to the TMC and all other marginalized politicians in this state an opportunity to disrupt development and consistently work against the public interest. The CPI(M), given its huge mandate and its excellent party organization, can easily work in a fashion that in the next elections all opposition candidates in the state will lose their deposits. But it is failing to do that because of mistakes that it should not commit.
My criticism of the CPI(M) (and I will continue to do so in these posts) should never be construed as support for any of the other political parties operating in India - let me make that very clear. But if at anytime I feel the CPI(M) is doing something anti-people, is supporting or protecting people it should not support or protect, is not being pro-people enough I will raise my voice for whatever it is worth. But that should provide no cheer to the rest of the political scum! Because they are worse - that was the whole thrust of my post Nandigram & The Terrors of Tomorrow.
9 Comments
November 13, 2007 at 8:00 am
[...] For an extremely balanced reaction and analysis of the situation: Nandigram & The Terrors of Tomorrow and an follow-up post Nandigram: What Movement? Why? [...]
November 13, 2007 at 8:35 am
An important post again and I would like to add some observations. The only experience of participating in student-politics that I have is about 11 years of Students Federation of India, and that too not in a ‘political sanctuary’ like Kolkata. So, I had my political initiation within the CPI(M) bastion and I also learned how not to be political within it; now I have turned almost virulently anti-CPI(M), might be I need an entire post to understand why.
To just rapidly recall, it is the high-handedness, the way they functioned. The way the means always were justified by the ends, which - though always fair - were never achieved totally and you are only left with some instances of unfair means and all conscientious party-workers will be left with hidden pains of a certain guilt… Next, the priority of maintaining being in power, however you can, so I observed how the politics always was short-termed, it is the next election you keep in head (with always the consolation that we will take care of our higher ideals after the elections).
And you know the communists leaders like them always had a powerful grasp over a hackneyed language to silence arguments.
And relishing being in power…the party has turned out to be a peculiar hybrid between the feudal brahminical and the urban intelligent.
I know how they maintained rural politics. A distorted backlash was inevitable; distorted, because it is not politically guided.
The land reform obviously yielded lots of goods; it was successful, but symptomatically so. A new ‘class’ was created who was moneyed, but no raise of political consciousness was achieved, was not possible within the parliamentary democratic structure. So one had a section of people who were ardent supporters but suddenly relishing power via money; the party had to be dependent upon them, these new spheres of power.
One talks about erosion of values in the cities, but an account of erosion of values in the rural also needs to be pondered upon.
Ironically, CPI(M) is still the most intelligent party around (apart from the BJP) with immense survival instinct and it is the presence of political imbeciles like Mamata and the irrationals like the Maoists who resist a possibility of revision of this party’s ills.
Nandigram makes it clear that it is not Buddhadeb but the likes of Lakhman Seths who are the more effective faces of the CPI(M) in the rural sphere. A cultural revolution within is needed, but unfortunately no one is there to call it, since its always the next election which gets priority.
What aches me, and I refrain from being political in my blog, is that the resistance which is growing is only sporadic and issue-based…one Rizwanur, one March 14, one week in November ‘07 and we heat up…tomorrow, in the 14th, a big ralley will be organised against the atrocities; but the likes of Mamata and the BJP will join it. This leads to nowhere; its just a momentary ego-trip and I am very doubtful of Bengal’s cream-intelligentsia, I have witnessed them basking on their glory for long. They are not those people who will expose themselves to danger.
I think the political scenario in Bengal is in fuzzy flux…we need to react, but should carefully watch.
November 13, 2007 at 3:24 pm
I have three precise points to make against your opinions on the situation at Nandigram and its consequences. And I do respect your right to call me a ‘rabid commie-hater’ even if I don’t entirely agree with you and wouldn’t like to see myself as one.
Many people have died, better to say killed, and some things need to be placed under observation, rather than be endlessly debated upon.
Point no.1: On land acquisition.
I don’t agree with any of the notions of compensation packages, recompenses, and those termed unfortunate collateral damages. Can we justify an acquisition, if it is not for a ‘private sector project’ and for ‘public purpose’? Please refer to your point 2(a) and I’ll not be stretching this point any further.
The conversion of agricultural land into industrial land— though the land in Singur will be used more for real estate purposes as in Rajarhat than for industrial purpose— is centred on the 19th-century notion of historical ‘progress’ formulated by some British economists who saw everything as dispensable to the forces of capital, and without the slightest feeling for individuals, populations and the ecology.
The conversion of whole of England’s countryside into sheepwalks and deer parks, the displacement of the agricultural populations for industry, the looting of the ‘east’ and ‘west’ indies, the conversion of the whole of Africa into a warren for slave-hunting, all these have been condemned by Marx himself— “and thank God he was not a Marxist”— in his first volume of Capital (the sacred text venerated by Marxist of all colours), and by Engels in his The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844.
Do understand— the opposition to SEZs springs from opposition to this distorted perceptual interpretation of “advancement”, now ever so popular since the introduction of the free market once again.
It’s not a matter of contrast whether the West Bengal government is providing the best of packages compared to other states, it’s a matter of concern whether this process of acquisition-through-compensation is justifiable in itself.
It’s not.
For there are more than enough fallow lands in West Bengal that could have been be provided for ‘industrial’ purposes, even if that were not justifiable in the first place when racketeering profit-making for there will be tenders accompanying, SEZs, and parceling out of real-estate forestry seems the actual purpose.
Point no.2: On the nature of the struggle in Nandigram.
I do believe the struggle in Nandigram has been, and is, largely spontaneous. There are political opportunity-mongers in it now, as in all cases, but it was the people there who fought and resisted the CPIM and the administration, not Mamata Banerjee, not Medha Patekar, not the Jamaat, not the fictional Maoist Ranjit Pal or someone rash, bold, dangerous and beautiful from a distance.
The proof of the Nandigram movement’s spontaneity lies in the fact that the resistance crumpled to superior force as of now and numerous people were killed, as in March, when bullets were fired on unarmed gatherings.
I don’t understand why you have to sense the presence of an organized absence, unless you seriously believe the dogma propounded by Lenin in 1903 that consciousness always comes from without— all those emotional educated urban elite descending upon the poor and giving a condescending ‘revolutionary’ edge to their struggles.
Centrism in any form, whether it be of the Party (claiming to represent proletarian dictatorship) or that of the state is harmful, acrid, stinky. And the most successful movements in history have been those that have seen collective leadership, not individual leaders.
Your question hinges on: “although the state government did announce no land would be acquired at Nandigram, the problem did not get solved.” Hey, hey, it’s not that easy.
The entire informal armament ‘industry’ in West Bengal is almost run through the Haldia docks, and there was a peaceable person called Lakshman Seth, remember, who sent in his peaceable men to put up a notice for peaceable acquisition and ask the unruly people who had once belonged to the peaceable party to peacefully vacate their homes and lands and stay put peacefully for the ‘best package’ to come. A year has not passed and we’re beginning to forget.
Remember the charred corpse of Tapashi Malik? Well, the Singur peasants didn’t involve themselves in ‘armed violence,’ except the occasional stones pelted at the police when their lands were seized.
When the chief minister asked someone to tear away the notice, trenches (don’t take this too literally) had been dug. Who is to blame for that? Withdrawing a statement after harm has been done doesn’t do any good.
Let’s refresh our memories. The BUPC had been formed primarily in reaction to the violence inflicted on them by the very peaceable people, remember the March 14 killings, when the police and cadres attacked a religious gathering and did very peaceable things. The APDR and an all-India fact-finding team had compiled a comprehensive report on that and if you are really interested, you will find that in the development-dialogues blog [development-dialogues-at-blogspot-com].
True, the BUPC tried organising an armed resistance with matchlocks and crude bombs supplied by the TMC, but truer still they were being continually attacked by the oh-so-peaceable people armed with sophisticated weaponry from the Haldia dock who couldn’t digest the fact that these leaderless people, mostly poor farmers had the audacity to revolt against them.
So the garbled sweet metaphors of returning peasants. When was the last time did you find a Bangali peasant sporting an AK-47? And riding on a motorbike, throwing bombs at random, raping like sadists their own village folk?
Now, now, let’s be reasonable instead of blurting out—“ If these people had the right to evict CPI(M) supporters from their homes and convert them into homeless refugees then the CPI(M) had equal right to beat the shits out of them and throw their dead bodies into the Ganga.”
We have had enough of that rhetoric already from the types of Biman Basus and Benoy Kongars, with all respect due to their cadres’ arses, which they were supposed to show to Medha Patekar.
Let’s instead try answering this simple question and it doesn’t require much theory:
I slap you out of no reason, try breaking into your homes, try to lynch you for eight months, while my godfather in faraway Kolkata denies I did or am doing anything, for he says the issue is settled and he’ll be not having your home for his picnic spot any more? What do you do? Oblige me and try to forget all and live a very peaceable life, where my godfather sets and upsets the definitions for peace?
I am sure you won’t.
The claiming of land for SEZs in West Bengal as in this sub-continent is not a settled issue and not easy as it seems. And we better remember that in Nandigram— unless we’ve been seriously brainwashed by Ganashakti, 24 Ghonta and the ABP media or the TOI— the only people killed, raped and mutilated, the ONLY people who had been unfortunate enough to believe that a peaceful ( in the original sense of the word) gathering of men, women and children cannot be attacked by people who have ceased to be human beings.
Point no.3: On governance
I entirely agree with you that “the CPI(M) are not mad neither are they as rabid as the commie haters who jump on to CPI(M) bashing at the slightest pretext and often for no reason.”
The CPIM is not mad. Oh no, it only pretends to be.
Its logical and consistent in everything it does, until now. It is not a question of making mistakes, it’s the sheer impudence on part of the government and the party.
What if there are elements like Subhas Chakraborty who flaunt their religiosities. There are elements like Rabin Deb who talks sweetly at TV talk shows while once leading a lynch mob to kill and burn Anandamargis at the Bijon Setu. And here are leaders like Jyoti Basu who can say four different things on the same line when asked about something— “We will not let them survive even if a hundred of us may die, yes, there’s the need for peace and endless violence, yes, Mamata is a sensible politician who wished me on my birthday, no, Mamata is mindless and dumb.” I can well agree with the last part, without making sense of the whole.
All of that party’s action is sanctimonious, nothing of its sayings can be profaned.
Oppose a little of what it’s doing, and you are facing a blind wall— those who are not with Bush, are with Laden, those are not with the CPIM( inspite of being a little wee critical), is with Mamata. Ha, ha, and I think I’ve made Mamata proud.
But how am I to forget that her goons did the same things in Garbeta and Keshpur in 1999? How am I to forget that this very lady danced to her glee atop police jeeps when Kolkata had devils dancing on her streets in the early seventies, all those loathsome cheers for Priyo-Subrata when the police and the youth Congress were hounding out leftists, Naxalites, and yes, CPIM cadres too?
Whether Mamata is or is not at the head of governance is not the question here. It doesn’t require much of political sense to understand that the problem is not with who does the governing, but with the system of governance itself. My previous commenter had correctly done most of the explaining.
But the question here is, in simple terms, whether or not we’re indirectly justifying the violence against the people in Nandigram?
And the answers are blowing in the wind.
A final word here.
I’ll not be ‘debating’ this anymore. And I hope you do respect my right to differ with you without being subject to improper adjectives.
Comradely yours…
November 13, 2007 at 11:09 pm
[...] is how I responded to another post in another blog why - being a leftist irreparably - I hate your party; let me repeat myself with expansions and [...]
November 14, 2007 at 2:58 am
[...] the post I am referring to and here’s the comment I made. Gentle reader, spare yourself this [...]
November 14, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Point well made and whoever said ur a commie hater? this is the most painstaking effort at saying sorry I have ever seen. believe me i know, once i was a part of the party machinery entrusted with rerouting ‘wayward’ members of the intellectuals, but the long winded way of ur saying that u have not criticized the CPM has left me winded - frankly. i know certain things of how the machinery works, so dont give me the crap that nothing happened once cm said there would be no acquisition. certain members of the party have grown huge egos and cannot take no for an answer. have u been to Nandigram? i have been. its muslim dominated, a communist stronghold with a solid party machinery. where from suddenly these TMC people materialise? Mamta snatching at a god gifted political opportunity is normal - any politico would do it. the main point of pondering over nandigram is not the apparent bloodshed, not the takeover by force, but the trend. does the Cm really in control of all his party functionaries? for that matter is the party in full control of its self-created-and-nurtured power centers. more directly can the cpm control people like laxman Seth. the answer is no. one laxman Seth is worth far more than say 20k commoners. but herein u r providing a small chink, a chink that the CPIML would and is exploiting. purulia is for all intents and purposes a gone case and if ml can lay its hand on haldia, just imagine- south asia -arms-open supply route - what happens? whats hurting the cpm most at this point is not the TMC, its the ml - its the left vs the left and the state machinery has brought it upon themselves. yes nandigram has been tamed, so is Singur, maybe - but i have been taught in my student days to recognise early signs and i cant help but say the signs are not encouraging - the disassociation with the grassroot have started, unarrested it would uproot what Basu so meticulously cultivated since 1977. i am no commie basher mate but this is more disturbing than losing a couple of marginal seats in the elections.
November 14, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Yes you are right - that is exactly my worry. Too many years in power is working against the party and it should wake up to the dangers of losing touch with the grassroots. This is more so given the fact that now the party is not only fighting the Congress or TMC but also the Left (Maoists) because the party being in power now represents the right. Also the party should never take the support of the Indian ruling classes for granted. It’s sharing of power at the Centre and its growing influence in national politics will surely be making the ruling classes somewhat uneasy. Also the growing influence of Maoists may make the ruling classes feel that the party in the Opposition will be better able to tackle the growing Maoist influence than if it remains in power. This is probably the reason why the media has suddenly again turned against the party though for some time in between they were surprisingly being pro-party.
I hope the party is keeping track of all these trends.
November 16, 2007 at 5:26 am
[...] have done it once one way (see earlier post on Nandigram: What movement? Why?) and now I have to do it again - this time the other [...]
November 17, 2007 at 3:27 am
[...] Nandigram: What Movement? Why? [...]
Leave a Reply