Memories of an Emergency Past and the Days of Turbulent Youth

IT WAS the chance discovery of an old photograph hidden in a family album, that triggered the train of memories of a youth in the seventies spent in the  turbulent days of emergency and political struggles all over the country.

The 19 boys at the Sir Syed College at Taliparamba in Kannur had been arrested following a demonstration in the college in protest against the emergency declared on June 25, 1975. The protest demonstration, called by the opposition students organisations in the state, was held on July 11 all over the state. At the Sir Syed campus, police swooped down and took into custody the 19 boys who led the demonstrations-- six from the pro CPM Students Federation of India, five from the Parivarthanavadi Congress, and eight from the pro Kerala Congress KSC-B. Among them 18 survive today and most of them came together for a get-together the other day at Kannur, at the residence of one of those incarcerated those days.

Ity was a demonstration that became memorable because of the photograph of eight of those boys tonsured by the police while in custody. They were picked up from the campus by the town sub-inspector Aboobacker and his party, all of them taken to the police station, kept there for the whole day with their dress removed except for their underwear, and then summarily tonsured with a trimmer. Two of them-- SFI district committee member K Jayarajan and KSC leader Zachariah-- were sent to jail charged under the draconian law of DIR and the rest let off, with an undertaking to report at the police station every week for the next many months.

Most of them were present at the get-together at Kannur, and among them well known lawyer P K Vijayan, journalist K Sunil Kumar, and others. They reminisced about those emergency days and the experiences of the internal emergency in the country, in the presence of a young brood of journalists who had barged in to cover the old boys’ get-together.

I had known P K Vijayan from the days he had come to Calicut, as a law student at the Calicut Law College, immediately after the emergency. We both worked in SFI those days. Now past 63, Vijayan happens to be a senior lawyer with his offices in Tellichery, with a nice practice and a reputation as an excellent criminal lawyer. Sitting at his home near the old sessions court in Tellichery, one of the earliest courts in Malabar set up during the days of the East India Company administration in the region, Vijayan talked to me about the incidents and the developments that took place in the wake of the students demonstration and police action.  

“We were very few in the SFI those days and also in the opposition students movements,” he said. There were rumblings of protests against the emergency, but only stray incidents. He was a second year degree student, with zoology as main subject, and he served as the area secretary of SFI in Taliparamba those days. They held protest demonstrations, mostly in the night with the students living in the college hostel taking part and put up wall posters painted in red: Down with Indira, Down with Emergency...

The police had taken note and on July 11 when the open demonstration  was taken out in response to a statewide call issued by the united front of various organizations, they lost no time to apprehend the students who were causing troubles for them. They were charged with holding unlawful demonstrations in violation of emergency regulations. They were all young and with a tonsured head and a defiant look, they spent the whole day in the lock-up room with nothing on them except their underwear.

The incident would have been long forgotten, but for the intervention of the legendary communist leader A K Gopalan who hailed from Kannur and represented the Palghat Lok Sabha seat at the time. AKG had reached Taliparamba a day or two later and he sent word to the boys to meet him at the party office.

“At the time comrade K K N Pariyaram was area secretary of the party and he sent me a message to the college that AKG wished to meet us urgently,” remembered Vijayan. He searched for all the 17 who were let off by the police, but could manage to find only eight of them and soon they were in the presence  of AKG who made inquiries about the incident, how the police treated them and such matters. He then asked them to get themselves photographed in the  dress they were in at the police station and they did so at the local photo studio, handing over a copy to AKG.

“The Parliament was in session soon after and AKG made a speech on how the police were making life miserable for ordinary people under the emergency regime,” Vijayan said and recalled AKG had raised their photograph in the  House as an example of how even young students were being harassed for simple acts of protests and peaceful demonstrations.

The rare incident of public protest by the students and police action had been noticed by the senior political leadership in the state, despite the fact that no newspaper reported anything on protests and demonstrations.

“A few months later, EMS Namboodiripad, who was one of the few senior leaders outside jail and active at the time, came to Taliparamba,” Vijayan said. The veteran leader sent word to the young students to meet him and they met him at the CPM office in the town. “EMS asked for details and while explaining things, I complained the party did not give us support,” Vijayan recalled. EMS, in his characteristic way, responded that the party had to support many and so naturally they could expect little! “The next day I received a scolding from comrade Pariyaram for complaining to EMS instead of telling him about it,” said Vijayan.

Advocate Vijayan, a writer who recently published three novels on the lives of legendary characters in Mahabharata and Ramayana, remembered many incidents police harassment as a student activist in the seventies. “We fought against heavy odds and with little support from the leadership,” he said and remembered how he and a few others in the SFI had been caught by the police later on when a government poster with prime minister Indira Gandhi was seen defaced with a smear of cow dung. “I really did not know how the poster came to be smeared with cow dung, but the police caught us anyway and wanted me to lick the dung away with my tongue and clean up the prime minister's face,” he said. But he refused, insisting he had not done it and did not know who did it either. But the police inspector was insistent, but then a policeman intervened with a suggestion, ” Sir, let him clean it up with his clothes,” which was graciously accepted by the inspector.

“That saved me tasting the cow dung at time, and you know why? During the days when we were reporting at the station every week to sign the  the register we had become chummy with the cops and that saved us a lot troubles in those days of police terror,” Vijayan chuckled as he walked down the memory lane on the student days in a period of youth turbulence against emergency rule in the country.

Jaswant Sigh and the Need for Examining the History of India’s Partition

JASWANT SINGH has paid a price for being an objective observer of the history of Indian sub-continent in its most crucial period. The division of the country has always been a matter of serious and grave disputes, but what has been most critical as far as historical inquiry is concerned is that all facts relating to the division were never made available to the public or even the scholars.

What we had, instead, was one version of history written by the winners in this game played out on the country in the run up to division. In this Nehru, Patel and the entire Indian elite, upper caste Congress leadership came out in flying colours and people like Muhammedali Jinnah and B R Ambedkar were the demons. This official history held good for almost five decades and our children learnt this history in their schools and colleges and we, the first generation Indian after Independence, also imbibed such a history in our younger days.

I was a particularly keen student of history from my school days and I had spent a lot of time for reading history. In fact, I remember reading such huge tomes like the History of the Freedom Movement by Tara Chand (a multi volume project launched by Government of India), and the History of India prepared by a few Soviet scholars, during the days of Emergency and curiously withdrawn from the market in 1978 or 79 when Indira Gandhi returned to power) and many others. What these volumes had in common was that they carried the official line of the freedom movement, the official version of what led to the partition of the country.

But it was definite that such a totally one-sided history would not stand scrutiny of the times, especially as historical inquiry is a continuous process and every generation would seek fresh answers to the questions that keep up popping up, like persistent ghosts from a long buried past.

And in the case of India’s division and what were the circumstances that led to it and who were the people responsible for it, there has always been so many yawning gaps in the narration, which were papered over by our official historians. It suited our ruling classes very well, as both the Congress and the right wing Hindutva forces shared in the benefits of such a demonisation project, painting the Muslims and the Muslim League as responsible and Muhammaedali Jinnah as the wily villain of the peace.

But politics has never been such a neat black-and-white business. There has to be elements of grey in it and there are forces which benefited out of such tragic events in history. The Muslims never benefited anything out of it and in fact hey became second class citizens in their own country. They were reduced to be a non entity in Indian politics despite the fact that they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.

And the Congress and Nehru family benefited with a decades-long grip on power in India. All other streams in our national movement, whether it be the socialist, dalit, minority or communist, remained in the periphery and what we have come to see is the sharing of power alternatively between the congress an the Hindutva rightwing in India’s independent history.

Not that there were no voices which feebly complained about this elaborate hoax that is called India’s contemporary history, and read carefully even Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s autobiography is a cry in the wilderness. If one reads accounts of the activities of people like K M Munshi, the man who launched the Somanatha temple movement, who was a major force in the Nehru-Patel administration in the partition days one cannot but wonder how effective were these schemes of these wily gentlemen who decided the destiny of this nation at its most critical hour.

Now a person like Jaswant Singh, who spent a lifetime in the BJP, has dared to question this sham of history and I am sure it would prove to be a great contribution to understanding modern India and its history in demystified context.

Reporting Rape: A debate on Some Ethical and Legal Aspects

IN THE recent issue Tehelka weekly, my friend and the magazine’s editor-at-large, Ajit Sahi, has written an investigative story on the rape of a few tribal women by Salva Judum people in the deep forests of Chattisgarh. The story reveals a shocking incident, but what was, to me, more shocking was the revelation of the way our official agencies like National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), reacted to it. It appears the NHRC dismissed the allegations that these women were raped, provoking Tehelka to come out with the story, and to prove its point, reveal the names of the victims in their testimony published by them.

This has raised a controversy because revelation of rape victims’ names is against the ethical practices in the profession as also the present laws in the country. Naturally, the issue raised a storm and a debate in which I also had to take a part.

I reproduce the salient points in the debate, courtesy fourth-estate-critique, an internet forum:


N P Chekkutty: So just when did the NHRC convert itself into a trial court? Just when did it become the job of the NHRC to summarily dismiss, without proper investigation, the charges of rape directly brought forward by the alleged victims of that crime?

This question is raised by Ajit Sahi, in his recent investigation into the Salva Judum rapes in Chattisgarh.

I find this detailed report, with taped testimony from the rape victims, quite disturbing. It is disturbing not only because of the serious nature of the crimes committed against them; but it is all the more disturbing because of the way the NHRC (and of course State commissions too) which are supposed to uphold human rights, seem to take a completely different role in this case.

We do have many human rights people here and I would like to ask this question: What to do if the defender itself turns the predator? This seems to be present the case especially since there are reports that our human rights commissions are proving to be asylum for fortune-seekers who demand their pound of flesh for services rendered.

Why not take a hard look at what they are doing?

Bobby kunhu: This is a response to the Tehelka article. Since Mr. Sahi is a part of this forum, I thought that it is pertinent to bring these issues to his attention as well. The transgress mentioned in the below letter is serious and I am guilty of overlooking it as well.

Dear Friends,

Revealing identities of rape victims is against the law, as per Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) treats publication of the name of the raped woman or any matter, which may make known the identity of a raped woman as a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment of up to two years and fine.

It's also against media ethics as laid down by the Press Council of India. According to the Norms of Journalistic Conduct of the PCI (updated in 2005), “While reporting crime involving rape, abduction or kidnap of women/females or sexual assault on children, or raising doubts and questions touching the chastity, personal character and privacy of women, the names, photographs of the victims or other particulars leading to their identity shall not be published.”

Even the NBA's Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards (which came into force in October 2008) mentions the need to conceal the identity of victims of sexual violence.

Ajit Sahi: Dear Mr. Kunhu, Many thanks for responding to the piece written by me. I hope you have at least read the piece.

Tehelka is in receipt of such letters from concerned citizens as you have posted here. We will be carrying the 'sample letter' here as well as our rejoinder in our next issue. Let me just share with you here that Tehelka has received support from a wide number of people, including the (female) lawyer for the raped women who is seeking the prosecution of these raped victims in a local court in Chhattisgarh.

Another very prominent social activist, also a woman, who works with these tribal women in Chhattisgarh, has come out openly in support of the story.

I would be grateful if you could actually read the story and revert with your feedback. I am sure that Mr. Chekkutty's valuable commentary on my piece yesterday carries weight with you. Since Mr. Chekkutty has enumerated the facts of the story, I am stopping myself from repeating them here.

NPC: Dear Bobby, I am not going to dispute the points raised by you about the rape reports. The media should strictly follow the guidelines, no doubt.

Though I do not question the credentials of those who are now rising to the defense of the rape victims against media assault, I would like to put forward certain questions before you as you are a well known and erudite human rights lawyer and activist. I raise these issues not to dispute you, but to seek guidance as I, as a journalist who value ethical practices in my profession, am much confused as to how to proceed in complex situations as this one.

Now, what is this report about?

It is not a simple report on rape on a few women. It is much more than that and let me quote Ajit Sahi from his own report:

What happens when rape becomes a brutal tool of class oppression in a wider social, political and economic war that men wage against one another, the raped women merely the pawns on their chessboard, the act of rape itself a side story, a cold-blooded strategy to terrorize an entire population into submission?

I think this is the crux of the problem. It is a political act and what makes it more serious is the refusal of NHRC to take cognizance of the testimony offered by them. So in the interests of justice, is it not necessary on the part of the media to help them come out and testify before the public and that is what they have done here. In such a situation, how do the media become unethical? I think similar situations would arise while reporting crimes of a nature like genocides and mass murder and rapes. There, the letter of the law cannot be taken at face value because what is most important is to uphold the interests of justice.

Bobby: Dear Mr. Sahi & Chekkutty Saab, There is absolutely no question of taking offence and my post was not in anyway belittling the efforts of Ajit Sahi or Tehelka.

I have of course read the piece and I try and keep abreast of what is happening in Chattisgarh and off and on am involved with some of the activities - given the piquant and novel way the State is waging war against the people there. In fact we are on the same page in terms of the reading of the rapes (the paragraph that NPC quotes here) - this is also true of many situations of violence and I am on the same page on the responsibility of NHRC as well - with minor reservations - given that I have objections to the way the body is structured and functions - the statute makes it inherently flawed and why we can see these lapses in the functioning of the body.

Having said so much, I need to point out why revealing the identity of a rape victim becomes a serious lapse and the reason for that is rooted in the nature of crime that rape is. The woman becomes the site of violence - in Mr. Sahi's words - a side story - in social conflict situations because of the way a woman's body is "owned" by the society at large. It is in this context that criminal jurisprudence related to rape world over protects the victim and one of the most important protections offered therein is the protection of identity - given the importance and stigma attached to female sexual behaviour - I suppose this is not difficult to comprehend. In that sense revealing the identity of the victim (however noble the intentions might be) becomes a travesty against decades of struggles by women’s movements world over that got this protection in place, amongst other protections.

NPC: In that sense revealing the identity of the victim (however noble the intentions might be) becomes a travesty against decades of struggles by women’s movements world over that got this protection in place.

Dear Bobby,

Here I have full agreement with you.

But still, I think it is necessary to take forward this discussion because I do feel there may be occasions where it becomes imperative to give out the details and identity in the interests of larger justice, when such revelation of identity becomes a political act, an act of protest, an act of sacrifice to uphold larger issues rather than nursing a mere injury to one's dignity and safety.

As all of us seem to agree, rape is often an act of aggression carried out to force the surrender of a victim, to dehumanize them, to declare the victory of the assaulter/aggressor not only on the person but also the society/community to which she belongs. Here she represents the hapless society/community rather than being an individual. Hence her trauma is the trauma of an entire community. And the justice becomes not a personal need, but a social imperative for healing.

There are very interesting studies on this aspect of a woman being seen the symbol of society/community's honour in such situations of tension. This is a highly parochial view of womanhood but still a historical and contemporary reality. Hence, in such situations the struggle for justice for a victim of rape becomes a struggle for restoration of honour of a society/community at large, facing aggression.

Now let me try to explain my point with another example:

No serious media/news-person gives graphic pictures of frontal nudity. But when a group of women in North East came out in nudity in protest against the Armed Forces committing rape on their girls in Manipur, what could a media-person do? To look at the other way and say that it was ethically wrong on his/her part to picture nudity in public space? Or capture this terrible image and tell the whole world, look this is how things are in this place?

I know some newspapers in Kerala habitually add dress to a beautiful tennis player's legs because the original picture is repugnant to their sense of modesty. But I know they are people with a very curious sense of modesty and they are, to my mind, steeped in a decadent, patriarchal social mode. If they had to use that famous picture from Viet Nam war, where a girl is caught running away from bombs in nude, perhaps they would put it on photoshop first and dress her up properly even as the bombs explode!

But I write this not to defend Tehelka or their decision to publicize the names of these women. However, I find the campaign that you have mentioned here quite interesting and a bit disturbing. They have nothing to say about the objective situation in Chattisgarh where these women seem to have been forced to come out in the open, where a social reality seems to have developed that personal dignity/shame, etc, are to be subsumed before the necessity to fight for justice, at whatever cost. Perhaps, that is why even the lawyers and social activists in the field (who may be aware of the legal position vis a vis revealing identity of rape victims) do seem to support the expose against NHRC and the looming presence called the State in its most terrifying aspects.

Bobby: Dear Chekkutty Saab,Let me clarify, that mail was sent to me by someone who has been involved in efforts to expose the state role in Salwa Judum and many people who have endorsed the letter are people who are involved in the protests against the state action in Chattisgarh and shares your angst about the role of NHRC - I also know this person to be a very committed activist. Of course others might also piggy back to score a brownie point against Tehelka.

So this is not without reference to the situation in Chattisgarh. This operates at multiple realms and these realms to my mind are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, I think it is possible to build a campaign/write about an issue, etc, in an inclusive fashion. I don’t think this protest on revealing names is about "women seem to have been forced to come out in the open, where a social reality seem to have developed that personal dignity/shame, etc,". I think it is possible to carry on the fight for justice in C'garh without revealing the names of the victims - there are multiple ways of doing it. (Neither do I think it is a question of modesty). The nudity against AFSPA was a deliberate act of protest - while these women were raped - it was against their will - and I do not think it is too much to expect news magazines like Tehelka to be aware of these discourses that have been happening in the public realm for quite sometime.

NPC: I think my areas of differences with Bobby in this issue seem to be narrowing. I was arguing from the outset that legal dictates cannot be the final arbiter in journalistic decision-making. If editors are going to take the words of lawyers as final, I do think the best of reporting of modern times including the Watergate and Pentagon Papers would have never been there. So the decision on whether to report-- and whether to name names-- or not rests with the editor.

In the present case, I would go by what Bobby says, that the situation in Chattisgarh does not warrant such a breach of legal norms by Tehelka. I am so far away and I can't have any other view. But Tehelka can always differ on it, I suppose. But I was more concerned about the principles behind it, as a person who has to agonize often whether to publish or not. I would always go by my own conscience or inner voice as Gandhi would describe it, in such situations whether there is a campaign for or against.

Bobby: I really do not think we have serious differences on this issue. I do not think that law should be an arbiter on any form of expression, journalistic or otherwise; nor do I believe law to be static - why the importance of judge-made laws in common law jurisprudence. In fact interpretations of laws are often arbitrated by social morality - very often also dictated by media - in that sense, I really do not see the need to disclose the identity of the victim - unless there is some empowering advantage that comes to the victim by such disclosure (which does not look likely in this story.)

Sashikumar Kurup: Just a question, not to be interpreted as disagreement or evidence of any expertise. Sometimes the disclosure of name and photos of the lady, has a marked effect on the readers. It brings home a point vehemently. The authorities fear such disclosures. It also lends veracity of credibility to the news, else the government could easily disdain it as a made up story. They cannot do that when real people with names of addresses are involved. Of course the disclosure can be
made after obtaining the consent of the victim in a case that has social ramifications and is not an isolated act of depravity. It is also possible that such publicity can embolden the lady to pursue legal and social action with more confidence in the support of many,and ensure her safety and security better than what anonymity would have ensured. The perpetrators may find it easier to threaten an
anonymous person than somebody whose case has been an issue in the active public domain.

NPC: Dear Dr Sashikumar,

I am glad that you have raised this point.

As you can see my point has been that the legal position that the names of rape victims should not be disclosed cannot be taken as a sacrosanct rule that applies to all times and all circumstances. There could emerge, in real life, situations where the disclosure becomes a need, may be even a responsibility, in the interests of
justice.

Such a situation can arise when rape is undertaken as a social act, a political act of aggression, and the victim is not just a victim,but a site of social and political invasion. Then the fight for justice becomes a social and political battle with wider ramifications and in such situations the victim might decide to come out into the open to fight not for the self but for the entire society. Such a decision
naturally entails braving adversities, like public humiliation, shame or insecurity or whatever.

That is why I raised some objections to the ongoing campaign against Tehelka as the petitioners do not seem to look at the larger social context in which these rapes were committed. They take a purely legalistic and mechanical view of the situation and thus, inherently,act as camp followers of those forces who are committing this act of aggression. This is what I could see but I am willing to be corrected if they are able to provide firmer evidence why they do think these
women have other, normal and routine means to get justice; that their choice of this extreme act was not warranted under the objective conditions prevailing there. It would be wrong to think the Tehelkaor a person like Ajit Sahi, who has been in this profession long enough to know the ethical positions in this case,decided to
disclose the names without deliberations; I do feel the decision was quite conscious and informed by a sense of social responsibility. If,in the event that Tehelka acted on its own and without knowledge or permission from the women concerned, I think the petitioners should take it up and sue the paper and its editor and reporter in a court of law.

Jayasankar Peethambharan: As a lay person, I think that the media can/should 'break' laws for the greater good. In a way, similar to their right to not divulge
sources.

My personal view is that this case fits that exception. I am sure that there will be many who don't agree with this. I read something yesterday by a doctor friend on 'informed consent' and its complications and am stuck by the parallel. In the end I think the primary factor is the 'informed consent' of the woman to divulging her identity. And that word itself is a swathe of grey than black and white.

When Even a Son's Dead Body Becomes Anathema to Our Mothers...

FOUR MALAYALI Muslim youths were shot dead by security forces recently on the India-Pakistan border in Kashmir. It is a mystery how these youths from Kerala, who hail from the remotest part of India, reached Kashmir to serve themselves as jehadi fighters, as the police and security forces claimed. Investigations are still on, and some of the leaks that come out seem to suggest that they were recruited by a group of shady spiritual groups who took them to Hyderabad and from there to Kashmir.

This raises a question: are there shady groups who try to entice Muslim youths to such adventurism, and get them into trouble? Is there a conscious effort to paint the entire community as anti-national as the Sangh Parivar in its frenetic campaign in the past few days tried to establish? This is an issue the Kerala society will have to address in the coming days, especially the more serious sections of the minority community and those sympathetic to their present plight.

But there were much more serious issues involved in this sordid drama. One was the way the parents of the slain youths refused to even accept their dead bodies. As the parents said they do not want to bring their bodies home, the security forces had to bury them somewhere in the border, unsung and without even a tear or prayer from their dear and near.

But why did the parents say in unison they do not want to see the bodies of their children? I feel we need to ask this question and face the terrible reality of the sense of alienation, fear and isolation our Muslim brothers are now undergoing in our midst.

Here is a note on this I sent to a discussion group on this topic:

The situation of ultra-nationalism and jingoism ruling roost even in our legal circles is so acute and has vitiated the atmosphere in our courts, from local courts to the highest. Now that even the lawyers in Mumbai Bar Association refuse to take up the brief for the Pakistani national caught in the Mumbai terror incident, I suppose this question of denying basic legal service on the basis of one’s community or nationality could be brought back into public focus and some redress sought.

It is worrisome the way our society is unwilling to look at the basic things from a legal and human perspective. The case of the four Malayali boys shot dead in Kashmir border is a dark pointer. Their bodies had never been brought back home because one of the mothers said she did not want it; and others followed suit. Why? Was it patriotism or was it simple, unalloyed fear at work?

And why fear to take one's son's dead body and bury him, even if he is the worst criminal possibly? Since when did we start finding fault even with a dead body?

Why nobody is asking who is behind this kind of engineered fear, a fear which is celebrated by none other than our Chief Minister himself, and why one can't ask questions? Why our lawyers, writers and intellectuals do not tell the people that we do have some rights and even a criminal has a right to a decent burial with his family and friends around, praying for peace for him at least in the other world?

I received some responses to my post:

Here is what a human rights lawyer, Bobby Kunhu, wrote from Bangalore:

I am with you on this- exactly what worries me: years of struggle to get the Government of India to see POTA/MISA/TADA as counter-productive and suddenly we are facing all of them together; the metaphor being the mother being scared of receiving her son’s body.

Poet and writer K Satchidanandan also spoke up as follows:

NPC, I am in complete agreement with you. I felt really bad about that mother who disowned her son, probably under visible or invisible pressure. The mother-son relationship has many dimensions other than political. Contrast her with the mother of the Naxalite in Hazar Chaurasi Ma by Mahaswetadevi or why, Gorky's Mother who helps the radicals: Remember the Naxalite and the Russian Revolutionary are also "traitors" in the jingoist's lexicon. Would Bhagat Singh's mother have disowned her son? Of course now the jingoist would say he was killing and dying for the motherland, but he was against the State too.

Now see how the media and society seem to lionize those who refuse to carry out their normal professional duties in the name of patriotism. Here is a report from a Mumbai newspaper:

A mere refusal to handle the case of captured terrorist Mohammad Ajmal Amir Iman, alias Qasab, has given lawyer Dinesh Mota, 46, a hero's status in the city. From train passengers to strangers on the street, everyone is congratulating him.

On Monday, as Mota boarded his regular first class compartment on the 8.15 am local to the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus from Bhandup, he was greeted with cheers from his co-passengers. "They gave me a standing ovation, amidst loud cries of 'hip hip hooray' and 'bravo'. Many people gave me the thumbs-up sign. Even the women commuters from the adjoining compartment began cheering and clapping when they learnt what the noise was about. I was completely blown away by such a reception."

Here is another report from Indian Express on how Surat’s real estate brokers are saving the Indian nation from jehadi threat:

Claiming Terror strikes like in Mumbai cannot take place without local support or contacts, Surat real estate agents and brokers have decided not to rent or sell houses to Muslims.

This decision was taken at a meeting last Sunday which was attended by some 300 real estate agents, many of whom responded to SMS invites. They initiated moves to form an association, hoping to complete the process before the month ends.

Well, our nation need not worry because the real-estate brokers (the comprador bourgeoisie of our times) are here to safeguard our freedom!

Salam Mumbai: An Elegy to the City of My Dreams

How Mumbai has changed: For Raj Thackeray, even Amitabh Bachchan is an alien!


FOR GENERATIONS of Malayalees, Mumbai, once called Bombay, has been their maximum city: It was the culmination of their hopes for a better life, the end of their aspirations of a world of glamour and glitter and for those poor ones who took a train there, often without a ticket, it was the only hope for survival.

It is surprising the way this city has changed: From a city of hope and asylum to a city of bigotry, hatred and racial oppression. In the forties and early fifties, there were huge number of people from Mabalar who took to Mumbai in the overnight buses and lorries, that returned after delivering their wares, and by the train that left Mangalore, and took the long and winding route via Coimbatore, Jolarpet , Vijayawada to Mumbai. There were thousands from the northern parts of Kerala who went there, worked their way through the life, made the city rich and enriched themselves in the process. Even today, when an election takes place in Kerala, candidates in northern areas like Kasargode, Uduma, Manjeswaram and Hosdurg take a trip to Mumbai to meet the thousands of voters who live there. During the 2006 State Assembly elections, I remember witnessing around a dozen buses, all air-conditioned video coaches, that took voters from Mumbai back home for the election-day and then toot them back, all five star comforts paid for by the candidates and their parties.

Bombay, in its earlier days, was a city known for its courage and progressive ideas: It was workers from this city who in early 1920s took to the street, for the first time in India, in protest against the arrest of a nationalist leader, Lala Lajpat Rai, an event that was taken note of even by Lenin. Then in 1942, Bombay erupted in a nationalist fervor as Gandhi made the historic call, Quit India, on August 9, electrifying the whole nation. Once again in 1946, workers of this city marched on the streets in support of the valiant sailors in the Royal Indian Navy who had taken control of the battle ships, a mutiny that shook the empire to its roots.

Mumbai has always been a center of Indian left wing, a place where socialist and egalitarian world view had an upper hand. It had a vibrant working class, a dedicated and highly motivated leadership, and a progressive mass base. It had some of the best progressive writers, theatre activists, playwrights, painters and other intellectuals that made the city India’s cultural capital.

But how things have changed, especially in the past two decades!

The left is no longer a force in Mumbai, thanks mainly to the decline of its strong trade union base. Even the progressive and liberal views, a tradition from the days of nationalist movement and for long held and supported by the middle class and secular forces like the Congress, are now facing severe threat. Instead, Mumbai has embraced the hard core, bitter, right-wing sloganeering and racial hatred that has become the hallmark of the Hindutva forces. Shiv Sena and the Sangh Parivar have taken over the soul of Mumbai. Mumbai today is a ghost of its past, a mute reminder of its glorious days.

Mumbaikars are now paying a price for allowing their soul to be hijacked by the forces of darkness and hatred. And the rude reminder came once again the other day, when a bunch of hoodlums who swear by Raj Thackeray, went on a rampage against Pratheeksha, where India’s cultural icon Amitabh Bachchan and his family live. It has been in the making when M F Husain, India’s best known artist, was hounded out of the city. It is going to be an unending tragedy, unless Mumbai of the past rebounds.

But is it possible? Is it possible that Mumbai would once again return to its former self; shedding its hatred, its bigotry, its racial mindset? Those who have watched the hounding of the Malayalees and other South Indians in the formative days of Shiv Sena by Bal Thackeray, witness the ongoing hate campaign against the Hindi-speaking North Indians, including even the Bachchans who through generations made the city proud, would think it to be a tall order. But for Mumbaikars, there is nothing impossible: They have proved it many times in the past the way they faced the agony of explosions on their trains, massacres on the streets, floods that stopped life for days…and came back with a smile on the face once again.

(Cartoon courtesy: Sudheernath, New Delhi.)

Civil Society Movements and Political Parties

Capitalism and Future of Democracy:A Debate-Part Three

N P Chekkutty: I would like to return to a critical issue of the democratic practice: The role of civil society organizations vis a vis the political parties.

While the existence of the dichotomies of the micro/macro worlds is fine, what seems to be a disturbing phenomenon is the way these micro level efforts trying to upstage or even subvert the larger political process. I am not going to any examples, but recently while going through the IMF/WB discussion papers I saw (World Bank president) Wolfenshon paying glowing tributes to some women’s groups in Andhra Pradesh. Nothing wrong with it, but it makes me a bit uncomfortable knowing fully well about the political agenda behind most of these organizations.

So the question is, who is there to monitor these groups, who are they accountable to?

Let me give an example from our own neighborhood. I used to report from Wayanad for almost 20 years and I have seen the growth of a large number of civil society groups there in these years. Many funded and promoted by church, some by Hindutva forces and others seemingly secular. They were very active in most of the areas and in the process have effectively edged out the political parties.

But what is the net gain of their work? In Wayanad, there has been no improvement in the life of the people. The larger the number of NGOs, the more the number of suicides there.

John Samuel: Good question! First and foremost, these formations, groups, or institutions (which people variously call NGOs, CSOs, Voluntary Organizations, etc) are very heterogeneous. The one thing you can generalize about them is that they can not be generalized. Like there are political parties of all colours and character, these formations too represent the contradictions, tensions, identities and ideological flux. There is a whole history of this process (I have explained this in detail in my book on Social Action: An Indian Panorama) in India and elsewhere and such process has different trajectories. As I have mentioned earlier, I consider such formations as transitional bridges, whenever there is any flux in terms of political process and ideological formations. We are at the moment going through a flux and hence they are relevant (whether someone like them or not). They are even called the Fifth-Estate.

Such process has more than two hundred years of history in India. Organizations like Anti-Slavery International has played a historic role in changing the politics of the world. In the early stages, even socialist and communist parties were very small formations.

The new institutionalized and funded NGOs are also are very, very diverse- in their character, purpose and programmes. So it is not easy to paint all of them with one brush. Also, just because some one has praised some NGO does not necessarily mean that they are bad. While there are indeed some very good NGOs, there are bad ones too (like any other field). There are good newspapers and bad ones. There are good editors and bad ones.


N P Chekkutty: When we launched this debate on capitalism and democracy we started out from a gloomy premise: The (near) impossibility of any radical societal change as Zizek seems to point out (at least that is what I gathered from his article.) Capitalism emerged victorious with its twin sisters, an open and competitive market and liberal democracy. But today, it seems both are facing a reversal as we can see from the wave of protectionism even from the ' liberal' west, and the rising trend of shock and awe tactics. The other hope, socialism, is dead and peacefully buried too.

If one were to look back at the history of democracy, it would appear that it was generally moving forward, from the days of Magna Carta to French Revolution, to the parliamentary system and to more and more liberal ideals like universal human rights. Of course there were setbacks, but they were overcome.

Now from the way things appear, it would seem that the world is going beyond this phase of liberal democracy. No takers for it any longer. Everywhere, the liberal is a species facing threat, a species on the verge of extinction. It is the age of bigots that we see ahead.

So for any politically conscious person, it would appear that this is an age of losing hope, or at best, hoping against hope. If democracy, the last hope, fails what lies ahead?

N C Narayanan: About post modern discourse, it is like the question of 'development'. In post- development debates, we bury the possibilities of 'development' totally and then it becomes a question of development Vs anti-development or post-development. In post-development debates, even the idea of development is taken as subversive and equated to westernization and global capitalism. Though I would go with it to an extent (taking their arguments of environmental degradation, nuclear proliferation, etc), this is an extreme position.

To one of my teachers, once I told that I'm pessimistic. His answer was that "You can afford to be pessimistic but not many can. They might have to struggle and dream of a better tomorrow". I think this was a lesson to me to be a structuralist again. I agree with you.

John Samuel: 1. While Zizek has made some valid points, I do not agree with many of his conclusions.

2. As I have mentioned earlier, I believe that we are in the midst of a profound transitions, in terms of ideas, ideological premises, mode of governance, forms of mobilization, etc.

3. As a student of history, I noted that: Mode of technology often determines the mode of communication. The mode of communication determines the mode of thinking. The mode of thinking influences the mode of action. In the years to come, we will feel this more.

4. Few years ago, this kind of discussions would have been impossible. Many of us who are in different parts of the world, involved in different professions, are sharing a space debating, discussing and challenging each other. These too can change the world!

5. The idea of World Social Forum emerged through series of discussions on the net-- soon after the mobilization in Seattle against WTO. As someone who has been involved in such discussions and also mobilizations (Challenging WTO in Seattle, Cancun, Doha and Hong Kong; being a part of the WSF process from the very beginning; and instrumental in organizing Anti-war protest and GCAP), I do not agree with Zizek. There has been substantial change in the Latin America. More than seven governments came in the name of socialism. Tony Blair had to go. Bush is on his way out! Of course, none of them may look like revolution...

6.Yes, the role of political parties have changed. In a liberal democratic set up, political parties are very important -- as they are the chief instruments/institutions to capture state power and sustain state power. But politics is too important to be left to politicians or political parties alone. In the last decades, most of the important legislations emerged out of the non-party political process: Right to Information, Tribal Land Rights Bill, Bill to Stop Domestic Violence, Right to Education, NREGA and many.

7. The digital democracy initiative is also powerful. The entire campaign against Multilateral Agreement on Investment ( MAI) on trade was fought and won on the net. I am happy that I was the one who initiated the campaign against MAI in Asia.

There is an interesting book by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe – ‘The Hegemony and Socialist Strategy’. This book first published in 1985 actually predicted many of the political developments and suggested ways and means for a socialist strategy.

8. In fact, world is at the beginning of an economic turn down, and there will be substantial shift in the political process in India and elsewhere in the next ten years. In India, coalition politics has actually strengthened the quality of democracy.

So I still remain optimistic -- as a participant observer -- in the business of influencing and changing the world. Still not being apologetic about Socialism!

NP Chekkutty: Well, I can see John chuckling at me, the diehard socialist from the 19th century in an age of post-modern political discourse. But I remain an unashamed socialist partisan.

The basic thing, for me, is that the fundamental principle of socialist world view-- the idea of class struggle-- still remains valid. For me, the key to understand the riddles of history and society is the dialectical way, and in this confusing period I am hopeful that Marxism will regain its lost glory once again.

Having said this, I fully agree with the point that human thinking is shaped and influenced by the level of technology available in a given society. It was true in the days of Guttenberg and is true in the days of internet. But that in no way nullify the validity of historical and dialectical materialism.

John Samuel: Dear Chekkutty, we have come to the crux of the matter.

Socialism can mean different things to different people. For me it is an ideal towards creating a political system and policy framework that would ensure 1) Dignity and Equality of all human beings irrespective of caste, creed, gender and location; 2) Economic, Social and Ecological Justice; 3) Right to live with a sense of dignity; 4) Realization of all human rights to all people; 5) Accountability of the State to People; 6) Just and Democratic Governance. While I do not have anything against private property, I am against accumulation of wealth at the cost of others and monopoly of power, military and market. I do not think that Statism is Socialism. Hence I am more of a democratic socialist.

While I am immensely influenced by some of the writings of Marx, I do not believe in a Gospel according to Marx-- neither I think Marx got the last word about the dynamics of human history. His analytical model (dialectical materialism) is very valid in social, political and historical analysis. I have immense respect for Marx, the way I respect Newton or Einstein or Foucault. But I consider him the product of the 19th century economic, political and knowledge milieu.

When was the "glorious" period of Marxism, and where? But let us also not forget that some of the worst atrocities in the history of the world was also committed in the name of Marxism. Pol Pot too claimed that he was a Marxist. Stalin too was a Marxist. The North Korean leader also swears in the name of Marx, the same way his father used to do. When we make a Prophet or God out of a scholar or a thinker, that is a bit of a tragedy at least in terms of the integrity of human search.

The notion of class has undergone tremendous change-- due to number of factors-- in a post-industrial, service economy and information revolution. So the whole dream about ‘class struggle’ and ‘withering away of state’, etc, need further thinking in the changing context

So I am all for the ideals of Marx, Lenin, Gramsci and Che. They were all relevant in their own time and there are many things that need to be learned from them. But I do not consider Marx as the "Last Prophet", I consider him as a scholar and thinker who was also in the business of dreaming, influencing and changing the world!


N P Chekkutty: I leave the last word (and the last laugh) to my dear friend John.

But not without this caveat: Marxism is not the ideology of the ruling classes whether in USSR, China, Korea or Bengal...).
It is the world view of the oppressed and the exploited. It will remain so.

M P Chandrasekharan: So, for the last laugh: If you want more and more people to be Marxist, more and more people should be oppressed. Is that what you mean?

N P Chekkutty: Dear Prof. Chandrasekharan, Sorry for the confusion caused by my off the cuff remark. I did not mean anything like that.

What I meant, and do believe, is this: John had made a scathing criticism of our contemporary experience, the Marxism of praxis in the Socialist bloc, the one we know as the ideology of the ruling class in many places. It is the one the world rejected in the nineties. Djilas described them as the New Class, decades ago. What he said is absolutely true, I have no answer to it. What he referred to are more than devilish experiences of the mankind. So I was just accepting defeat on this point and saying goodbye.

Still, like Oscar Wilde, I could not resist the temptation of making a last remark: That Marxism for me, is something much more than a creed used, misused and wantonly abused by a group of power crazy buggers. For me Marxism is the revolutionary creed of the oppressed and the exploited, and that will remain so till the day there is a class society where human beings are exploited and oppressed by other human beings. That is the glory of Marxism to me.

R V G Menon: There is no denying that there is an inbuilt conflict of interests between capital and labour, even in the modern IT industry, which seems to be a win-win proposition on the surface.As long as this continues, Marxism has relevance, even though its prescriptions, or rather the prescriptions ascribed to Marx by his followers, may not be applicable, verbatim.

But what really frightens me is that capitalism might not fall under its own internal contradictions, as many Marxists seem to believe. On the other hand it displays remarkable powers of recuperation and regeneration. Given its propensity to put profit before not only people, but even before survival of the planet, this is sure to lead to the destruction of our life support systems, as is happening in several parts of the world.

So, I repeat, some kind of social control over the market forces is critical for the survival of humanity. But the neo-liberal forces are acting as if they have rediscovered leisez faire just now. Even the vestiges of social control which were prevailing in the western welfare economies are being dismantled by the neo-liberal advocates. That means 'responsible capitalism' will not be allowed to work, by the die hard capitalist fundamentalists. But what is the way out?

The only solution I can think of, is more democracy, and stronger advocacy by those who believe run away capitalism cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. If the majority were able to identify what is really good for them and their children in the long run, they will not support many of the measures which now enjoy the support of the middle class. For this ardent and informed advocacy is necessary. This is where the new e-media can play a vital role.

Social Democracy (I am yet to find out why or how it became a dirty word among the leftists!), in the sense of a democratic society with social control over the instruments of production, seems to be the only viable alternative. But nobody will vote for state capitalism, as exemplified by USSR.So, we have to think of alternative models of social control. There is no ready-made solution.Each country will have to experiment and evolve an answer suited to its genius.


N P Chekkutty: Thanks RVG, for taking this debate to a higher level.

I agree with your basic position that more democracy would be the only check on the run away capitalism. My contention right from the beginning of this debate has been that for this to happen we need political parties with firm class basis; trade unions for protecting the rights and interests of the working people. We are in the process of disintegration of the trade union activity in the new world. They speak of changing the labour laws. Fine, we need to review those archaic ones. But what is coming in their places? Nobody asks. This can be dangerous.

However, I accept that the trade union activity and its methods itself will have to undergo a deep process of introspection and change. It will have to accept the new realities and adapt itself to them. We need new kind of leaders. This is becoming all the more important with the new realities emerging even from the glamorous areas of new economy like the IT industry. I am sure, a few years from now we will see thousands of cripples coming out of those sparkling edifices called IT parks. It will be a great sad story, which is in the making now. I am not a prophet of doom. I was in some posh ayurveda resorts at Kovalam and Kumarakam as part of a TV documentary programme last month. Some of the best clients they had were those youngsters-- very young, you know-- from the IT industry who came with nagging physical problems. They came with plenty of cash. But tomorrow when they are not earning they will still be left with those problems... No one will be there to take care of them. We will see suicides shifting to a high tech area from our poor farmsteads

Santhakumar V. Nair: Somebody becoming a software chap, making some money, then realizing that it is not so good for my health, and I can do something more relaxing (since I have made some money, as can be seen very often these days) is much better than a situation where educated people see no jobs or can get only meagre salary. Who said that “Our real problem is that nobody is coming to exploit us”?. There is a serious issue of un-freedom in the latter (unemployed) case.

T T Sreekumar: Who said that `our real problem is that nobody is coming to exploit us'?
A Polish economist during the democratic struggle against Stalinism in Poland (quoted by Pranab Bardan in a seminar in CDS.)
Santhakumar V. Nair: Yes TT, I remember it was by a Polish economist, but I may have heard it from someone else, somewhere else.
N P Chekkutty: Dear Dr. Santhakumar, I have no objection to any capitalist coming and investing in anything here, so long as it is legal. They are welcome. My concern is that as one who sell myself, I should get the minimum to keep myself and my family going. In many industries, the present contract raj does not ensure it. It is no exception in most of the IT firms too.
Your Polish economist seems to think that those money bags are doing it for charity, to help us poor wretches out of our difficult plight. How familiar this is... When those missionaries and gun-toting mercenaries landed here and Africa and Latin America, they also said the same thing, that they were discharging the white man's burden. Even in Iraq the other day they said the same thing that they are exporting democracy there.
What a cock and bull story..

Santhakumar V. Nair: I share your concern that sometimes the reward is not adequate. When many people invest our freedom to shift from one master to the other increases. May I know the situation of journalists in Kerala today? Is it not better today since many newspapers and channels compete for them today (and since many boys and girls have options other than journalism)? Getting a higher salary through strikes/ trade unions is not that satisfying always even for the workers. Exiting from one job and taking up another for higher rewards need not be painful always.

N P Chekkutty: As a person who has been subjected to this "freedom of choice" (not for me, but for the boss: I was asked to pack up a few times...) I can assure you that the free market enthusiast in you might face a rude shock when you see the reality of how it works…

(Concluded.)

Is the Concept of Class Struggle Still Relevant?

Capitalism and Future of Democracy:A Debate-Part Two

M P Chandrasekharan: Has revolution resulted in anything other than transfer of power from one clique to another? Oppression of the innocent and powerless is a continuing feature before and after revolution. Even Communism has fostered emperors like Ceausescu. What is the difference between Revolution and Counter-Revolution? When members of CITU come to power do they not emulate Maharajas? When I asked these doubts to a Naxalite (long back) he asked me to read a book by K.Venu (I did not get the book). Venu later underwent a metamorphosis, passed through communal parties and ended up in Congress? (I am not sure). I think most people who talk about this stuff authentically are not too sure about themselves.

D K Warrier: Nothing wrong in fighting to better the conditions of your constituency (the working class). Problem is how to avoid the "silver bullets". The lead bullets are not lethal as far as ideas are concerned. There is a readily understandable heroism in facing the possibility of death for the cause, and so it is easy-- in a way. Even getting killed inadvertently by a stray bullet can make one a respected martyr. However, resisting a bribe is not at all easy. Poverty is by no means colourful and so far as I know few are respected for accepting deprivations rather than compromise of principles. This is perhaps the reason why peace and security have proved to be so disastrous for revolutionary ideas. It seems a matter of time before former radicals get transformed into admirers of capitalism. I think we need to invent a new method to keep our ideas sharp in the corrosive atmosphere of consumerism and cultural degradation exuded by modern capitalism. This is the need of the hour, without which all efforts to fight for a better world within the constraints of the present order will unfortunately go the way of the communist parties.

N P Chekkutty: John asks, Why do you think Communist Parties are capable or competent to absorb or address the issue of social class or subaltern politics?

To answer this, it is necessary to take a hard look at the alternatives. One option, as far as I can see, is the NGOs who are now taking over a great part of the work political parties used to do in the past. But NGOs do have inherent limitations. They, at least some of them, are doing good work at the social level, fighting evils and an unjust system and organizing and empowering the most deprived sections of the population. So far so good.

But beyond that politics is about a constructive rebuilding of society. It needs an involvement in the administration of power, and a conscious effort to lead the society on a more egalitarian principle. Here the NGOs are up against a wall. They are essentially grassroots organizations with a narrow focus. They do not have any programmatic understanding about the approach to take for social reorganization.

A few years ago, while I was at Kairali TV, I had a debate with Medha Patkar on this aspect. Her work was commendable, she had brought to the forefront the issue of the displaced at Narmada. But beyond that how do you go for changing the society on an alternative platform? She had no answer but that their work should influence political parties. It did too, for example, the RTI Act and the rural employment act in India. She agreed with me that only a political party with its own policies and programmes can take up such a task.

Then if this is the reality, only the organized communist parties which are still the most democratic in the country in spite of all their failures, the only forces available to take up this role. They are the only ones with a clear understanding, agenda and necessary power to effect change.

My complaint is that instead of taking up this role of a political alternative to the ruling classes, our communist parties are toeing their own class line. What use is the Communist Party if it voluntarily takes up the Congress agenda?

K Satchidanandan: The local struggles, transversal or micro-struggles as Foucault calls them -- on specific issues(Narmada, Nandigram, Plachimada, the Adivasi struggles for land, the struggles of women, Dalits, people with different sexual preferences, human rights struggles on diverse issues, anti-war struggles etc -- do have and have played their role in changing the set mores of the society and challenging/ revising/ reforming the State agenda and even changing the laws. After all what we call the Kerala Renaissance was but a conglomeration of such movements for internal reform, and similar movements across the country have played a major role in changing the attitudes of the society towards issues and towards marginalized/ oppressed social sections which get gradually reflected even in our legal systems.

At the same time it is true that their interests are at times mutually contradictory (See some Dalit leaders welcoming globalization as a new opening enabling them to transcend caste barriers and join a global technological society.) Ambedkar and Sree Narayana Guru also had found colonialism preferable to feudal landlordism and the suffocating caste system. Narayana Guru even said it was the British who had given “us” sanyas, meaning the Brahmins would never have allowed an Ezhava to be a sanyasi, which has a kind of truth in it in a specific circumstance and from a specific perspective, but may not be true in a larger national or human context. While macro programmes and mega ideologies seem to be under attack from post-Modernists, countries like ours still need larger, more inclusive and basic agendas of social reconstruction. The Indian State certainly has such an agenda which is the New Capitalist agenda, and it is in this context that we need to develop alternative agendas. I would not say that it is only the communists who need to, or are qualified to, think about such an agenda, socialists of various hues, radical intellectuals, even genuine Congress men who have not forgotten Gandhi entirely, if that species still exists, and activists from social reform organizations and secularists need to come together and work on an alternative agenda. This again may be a mad dream, but can't we think of an Indian Socialist Forum, like the World Socialist Forum --but not as its branch, as our context is as much specific as it is general-- where people of different persuasions but working towards another form of society can come together and initiate a national dialogue on change and reform? Let diverse thinkers address us, including Zizek-- I don't think he has visited India -- and let us speak, argue, and arrive at a consensus as to what is the best form of just and egalitarian social reorganization possible (by which I mean not only economic, but also cultural and ethical reorganization) and what are its modes in the given global and Indian circumstance!

John Samuel: Thanks Satchi for your perspective. Here again, we seem to be on the same page. World Social Forum was an initiative many of us promoted, where there is a diverse group of people-- as an open space to discuss, debate and think through alternatives. I have been a part of the process from the very beginning. While it helped to bring together a whole group of actors opposed to imperialist globalization, and build up solidarity beyond the English-speaking world, one wonders whether WSF will be able to sustain itself and keep its organic form. The India Social Forum too has active participation from CPM, CPI, progressive NGOs and social movements. But your suggestion is worth taking up for further discussions. In fact many friends (like Aruna Roy and others) too have been talking about such a possibility...

V. Sasikumar: John writes, "Often anything that happens in Washington, New York, London or Brussels or any such cities qualify an action to be “global”. Anything that is appeared in the BBC or CNN is worthy enough to be “global'. Any book that is published in London or New York or reviewed in the Time or the News Week or the Economist is supposed to have “global” influence. Any theory or knowledge that gets manufactured or processed in the northern universities or think-tanks is supposed to have “global significance”. By the same token cities of the South, knowledge from the south and the
media in the south are still “local” or “national”."

Interestingly, this reminds me of what our senior scientists have always been telling us: You should publish in international journals. I used to wonder what these are, or how a journal becomes International. As you said, a journal seems to become "International" when it is published in
the west, or sometimes even in countries like Japan. Journals published in India are merely national, and have little value.

John Samuel: Yes, Sasi Kumar. This is something that needs to be challenged-- the political economy of knowledge production, legitimization and dissemination. It is there in science, technology and every field...I wrote an essay in 1994 (on people-centered advocacy) but till it was published in a book (in 1999) brought out by Kumarion in the US, it was never quoted (now it is in the curriculum of few universities). Some of our best authors and books are not even quoted or mentioned in any of the standard books published in the west....

We need to create journals, research institutions and publications of of the best quality that can compete with any other such things in the world.

V Sasikumar : And we certainly can, if only our own scientists would be willing to publish their good papers in Indian journals instead of sending them abroad.

Your contention was that a big, powerful body/movement has to evolve to counter the beast. But I have some apprehensions about that. A beauty can possibly be big, though I am not very sure about that. But will not a big, powerful beauty soon evolve into a beast? Intuitively, I feel that is bound to happen. We may be building another beast to counter the existing beast. What form that beast will take, I have no idea. But if that happens, then we would be back to square one. Again, just intuitively, I have a feeling that only small beauties can ultimately eliminate the beast, or beasts of any kind, though this is bound to take a lot of time, and a lot of suffering.

N C Narayanan: I'm glad to read your last line. This is what I thought when I read Sasi Kumar's mail. When the west 'sets' standards we have two options. First is de-linking and creating our niche of scholarship. Second is to surpass them with quality work. In the first case, we should be self-confident enough not to look to the west for recognition and pat. In social science, our own Economic and Political Weekly is one journal that has survived the test of time and adapted to times. Until recently (or still?) EPW was not a refereed journal. However, it is respected and widely read at least in this part of the world and has much wider audience than any western refereed journal.

John Samuel: Chekkutty, Yes. You have a point. In fact NGOs and the role of NGOs are rather transitory or transitional or like a bridge when there is flux of political process and ideas. If we look at the history of 19th century, many of the political ideas, ideals first started with small groups or organizations and many of them got transformed into bigger political formations. There were a number of them, from Servants of India Society to Tolstoy Farm of Gandhi, in the 19th century and early 20th century. Such small formations or institutions operate in the political and social vacuum at a given point in time -- mostly in a reformative mode, but sometime with revolutionary potential.

Left parties do have a very important role to play in Indian politics. But let us be real: What is the real presence or influence of these parties beyond three states? Why is it that all the key leaders of these parties came from Brahminical or upper caste background? Why is it that the left parties failed to understand the issue of adivasi communities, dalits and women? In most of the states of India (except two or three) the left parties do not even have the influence of NGOs or social movements. So if it is not a real pan-Indian party in terms of mass base and real presence, how can it be competent to absorb and even mobilize the tribal communities, and poorest of the poor in MP, UP, Orissa? When these parties are by and large run by NGO (non- gazetted officers) class, is it a wonder the party is more about the privatization of airports and less bothered about the land struggles of Ekta Parishat and others in Madhya Pradesh and elsewhere? The tragedy is that such a political space in many of the states are occupied by the Sangh Parivar, Maoists or the likes of Minority Front in Bengal.

(To be concluded.)

When Resistance Becomes Surrender...

Capitalism and the Future of Democracy: A debate--Part One

This is the edited version of an online debate that took place at Fourth Estate Critique, a Google discussion group. The participants (in the order of their appearance) are:

John Samuel, international director of Action Aid, Bangkok, and editor, www.infochangeindia.org;
N P Chekkutty, executive editor, Thejas daily, Kozhikode and former director of news, Kairali TV, Kochi;
K Satchidanandan, eminent poet and critic, former secretary, Sahitya Akdemi, New Delhi;
R V G Menon, former president of Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad;
P J Cheriyan, director, Kerala Council for Historical Research;
M P Chandrasekharan, former principal, National Institute of Technology, Kozhikode;
D K Warrier, scientist at C-DAC, Thirvuvananthapuram;
V Sasikumar, scientist at Centre for Earth Sciences Studies, Thiruvananthapuram;
N C Narayanan, economist, Hyderabad;
Santhakumar V. Nair teaches at the Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram;
& T T Sreekumar teaches at the department of social sciences, Singapore National University.


John Samuel: Here is an interesting piece from Zlavoj Zizek-- a rather provocative one.(Resistance is Surrender, London Review of Books.) Those who are interested in discussions on the role of left in the context of the new capitalism and changing world may be interested to read, challenge and comment.

My own sense is that we are going through one of the profound transitions-- in terms of ideas, institutions and political process in the history of the world. It is also most like living in those "rupture points" of history. Hence, there is a flux of ideas, action, ambivalence and confusions-- both in the world of capitalism (the emerging pan-global identity politics) and that of the left. Where do we go from here?

N P Chekkutty: Thanks for bringing this article of Zizek for discussion here. Last week when I read it at the London Review, I had the same feeling you share, that our politics need to have a thorough re-examination. It is very clear that what we used to describe as radical in the past is no longer so. Even those who spent life time in this kind of politics seem to think that it is nothing more than a benign form of fascism. It is sad indeed, but instead of sulking, one should make a thorough and deep analysis of the ways politics is evolving in our times.

My feeling is that instead of accepting the liberal face of left wing politics which some of our reformists from M A Baby to Budhadev Bhattacharya seem to favour, what we need is a political party that is more conscious about its class nature. A party of the working class and the peasantry is what we need today as liberating the established left from the tentacles of the middle class is next to impossible.
K Satchidanandan: That was interesting reading. At the end of it all I begin to wonder how difficult it is to separate realizable goals (practical demands) completely from unrealizable dreams (impossible demands). When we begin to think of demands within the realm of the possible, are we not collaborating with the State whose reasoning is always confined to the realm of the possible (possible Vs impossible)? Will we not finally end up endorsing the reformist agenda that the State claims it is pursuing, but is finding it difficult to implement due to practical constraints imposed by reality? May be as a poet I dream of the impossible and will never understand the argument! What we need to do is perhaps to keep on enlarging the realm of democracy and of the so-called possible so that what seems impossible gradually enters the realm of the possible and the marginalized sections who are outside the present working of democracy enter the process, slowly changing the very nature of democracy. Since anyway the State has no plans of withering away, we may at least give it a tug and try to change its nature and make it more inclusive: a limited 'social democratic' agenda?

RV G Menon: Personally, I think there is nothing wrong in fighting for ‘realizable’ goals, keeping the ’immediately unrealizable goals’ as a long-term ideal. Come to think of it, most ideals are unrealizable in this imperfect world. Our commitment to such ideals should not prevent us from attempting what is possible, at the risk of appearing to be compromising.
It depends on what we want.
If we want to die with a ‘clean image’ --that of a person who never compromised on ideals-- well and good. But if we want to make a teeny weeny bit of a difference to the lot of the poorest and the most miserable, we must accept what is possible, as an immediate goal.
At the same time, we should pitch our long-term goal further and higher, towards the ideal.
I don't think these two are inconsistent. The ‘best’ should never be the enemy of ‘the better’.

John Samuel: Thanks for the comments. 1. The analytical categories like ‘class’ and other markers of identity may not be necessarily eternal or even universal. Because these analytical categories and many others are based on some key assumptions as well as the predominant economic-technological, social and cultural paradigm of a given time. So though we use the term ‘class’ or even ‘working class’, the exact notion may not be the same as that of Germany or Britain of the early 19th century in the context of old industrialization, urbanization, etc. Even the notion of the Nation-State is a relatively new concept-- after the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. These notions and ideas-- particularly the social and political ones-- keep changing their character over a period of time. So the Athenian notion of democracy is actually far removed from the character and notion of democracy today. In a post-industrial situation or that of new economy or information/media driven politics, these categories also may undergo change.

2. Ideals and the zest for the perfect seem to have a universal appeal. That is why in theology, philosophy and even science, these notions recur over a period of time: from Vedas, Buddhism, Old Testament, Gospels, the sayings of Muhammad, Socrates, Plato, Aquinas, Kant, Hegel and Marx. I do not think one should put a full stop in any one person ( Philosophers or "Gods", the last Prophet) in our perennial search for ideals and perfection. Such a search is what makes beauty-- poetry as well as political ideals. When we realize there is no Gospel according to Marx or Newton, or Einstein...our search will continue: always trying to negotiate between the real and the ideals, keeping our feet on the ground....raising our eyes to the end of horizons, spreading the wings to fly....that search for perfection, that curiosity for ideals…that is what makes us creative...the art of breaking dogmas....like the shell of egg...and making ideas and action alive-- dreaming of ideals...and doing things that are possible...hence politics is both the art of the possible as well as the art of the impossible....it is the art of selling dreams as well as making oneself relevant with certain amount of impact...

3. Every institution is a product of its time: Communist Party is an Institution. So is Catholic Church. Each Institution with survival instinct will redefine itself or perish in the wave of time and new realities. So while the Communist party of the USSR got smashed up by its own contradictions, the Communist Parties of China and Vietnam redefined themselves to survive as well as to keep some core ideals alive even at the cost of mortgaging those ideals.

4. So it is a bit unrealistic to think the Communist Parties of India will have the same ‘class’ base of 1940s 0r 50s. Because the world has changed; the notion of ‘class’ too changed. Many of those from the erstwhile working class became Middle class in Kerala and many of the middle class became rich (either through global labour market or through the emerging service sector). So while I can understand what Chekkutty says, the fact of the matter is Kerala is by and large a middle class and mediocre society: all political parties (in spite of the claim or colours) will reflect the contradictions, aspirations and competing identities of the middle class in Kerala. So it is natural for the left parties in Kerala to try and be relevant to the competition and contradictions of India and Kerala. They are still relevant in the larger tragedy and comedy of the Indian Politics. So Left parties also signify the tragedy and comedy of the Indian politics in all its size, shape and smell....What is the big deal about it?


P J Cheriyan: What is important is to have discernable goals may be even 'unachievable’!. To cherish 'unachievable' goals has always been there: Thomas Moore termed it as 'Utopia' - dreams of heaven that could never exist on earth.

I remember reading a lecture by Immanuel Wallerstine on 'Utopistics' --he invented that word as a substitute to Utopia –Utopistics, he says, is the serious assessment of historical alternatives. It is the sober rational evaluation of human systems, the constraints on what they can be and the zones open to human creativity. e adds Utopistics is about reconciling what we learn from science, morality and politics about what our overall goals should be.

N P Chekkutty: The question of class has come up often here in these discussions. It is good that it is back again because for any discussion to move ahead, we should know what we are talking about.
Earlier in another note Sachi master, in the context of Nandigram, had pointed out that he was not using the term class in the pure classical Marxist sense and he is including the social class also in this category. I too share the view that the 19th century understanding of class is not sufficient to explain our new world. There is no doubt also that in India when we think of working class we will have to take into account the millions of subaltern castes like the dalits. So I have no quarrel on the inclusive nature of the term class.

But my main concern is the erosion of the fundamental left wing values. Of course you aim for the moon, but are happy with the mango. However, simply because our left politics has to contend with contemporary realities, we cannot wish away the reality of class antagonism and class exploitation that appear in a thousand different ways. Earlier it might have been the working class, but today it is the peasants, the unorganized workers, the landless and many others. Simply because those who came to the communist parties in the seventies, like myself who came from the poor rural peasantry today find a middle class existence, we cannot say that the whole life has changed. It is not so. A few weeks ago I was at my village and I find little has changed even among my own friends and relatives who were not lucky to go for a higher education.

So they do exist out there. Only that the leaders of our own times seem to forget; they forget their own past and the present of the majority of our people.

I think this is the crux of the problem. A part of the communist party's rank and file is making real progress, progressing from subaltern to the mainstream and are influential at all levels of the social and political spectrum, while the party itself remains, in paper, a working class entity. But most of the ranks think it is no longer their own party. So I eagerly submit that unless we go for an ideological battle within the working class party to regain its original ideals, we will be allowing the party's own disintegration and in the process, accepting that the mindless violence of the Maoists or the fundamentalists is legitimate and there is no alternative but to take up arms.

John Samuel: In India, all political parties, with a mass base, are in the business of capturing or sustaining the State Power. Revolution itself is more like a promise eternally postponed....Ideology is more like a veneer. Power has its own logic; and the state power has its own magic! Why do you think Communist Parties are capable or competent to absorb or address the issue of social class or subaltern politics? If so why Shiv Sena managed to absorb some of the very same social and economic classes when the leadership of the socialist and communist parties in Maharashtra faded away and my childhood hero George Fernandes took refuge in the Sangh Parivar?

Why do you have high expectations from the CPM or CPI? They too need votes, they too need media, they too need funds and friends, when they are in the business of capturing and sustaining the state power? Revolution has taken long holiday and Che is the most celebrated logo on tea-shirts in the market place. Is it what we call Tragedy? Or is it a comedy?

A translation in Malayalam of this debate is available in the Mathrubhumi Weekly, dated January 27,2008.

(To be continued.)