Resignation and After
Many issues have been raised in the debate surrounding my resignation from the CPI (M) on 22 nd June protesting against the decision to support the Congress led UPA’s nominee in the Presidential elections. This article is an attempt to provide further clarifications on the context in which the decision was taken and explain its political objective.
Context of Resignation
The fact that the CPI (M)’s decision to support Mr. Mukherjee was not based on any sound principles or intelligent tactical considerations has already been borne out by subsequent events. The Trinamul Congress’ (TMC) decision to extend support to Mr. Mukherjee on the eve of the elections put paid to the hopes of “driving a wedge” between the TMC and the Congress at the Centre. The victory of the secular candidate was never at stake; CPI (M)’s decision to abstain in the polls would not have made any difference in the outcome. The point that abstention in polls amounts to non-intervention is facile. The option to abstain exists because it has relevance; had it been meaningless it would not have been there in the first place.
In the present case, abstention could have simultaneously conveyed two messages: that the CPI (M) is neither siding with the candidate supported by the communal BJP nor is it endorsing the record of the Congress led government tainted with anti-people neoliberal policies, relentless price rise and unprecedented corruption. The decision to support Mr. Mukherjee has blurred the second message considerably leading to an unfortunate situation where the Left parties could not maintain their unity on the issue. The official and non-official explanations offered so far have failed to establish why the CPI (M)’s position is superior to that adopted by the CPI and RSP.
Questions have been raised that even if it is the case that the CPI (M)’s position is unconvincing or erroneous, is it a “big enough” reason for someone to resign from a party? This issue deserves serious consideration. It should be made clear at the outset that had this been the first serious difference that one had with a decision of the party, the question of resignation would not have arisen. Rather than making a letter of resignation public, a note explaining the disagreement with the decision would have been quietly submitted to the party leadership.
However, the fact is that I have been expressing my disagreements inside the party on several issues which have confronted the CPI (M) over the past few years. I had written 6 letters (1 was actually a note) to the CPI (M) Polit Bureau on earlier occasions: on Industrialisation in West Bengal (17.10.2006), on Singur, Nandigram and SEZs (7.02.2007), Note on West Bengal Government (January 2009), on the Loksabha election results (18.05.2009), against the appeal made to “Congress voters” to vote for the Left Front in West Bengal assembly by-elections (3.11.2009) and after the KMC and other municipality elections in West Bengal (3.06.2010). These letters not only contained disagreements and criticisms on major political, theoretical and organizational questions related to the developments in West Bengal, but also suggestions and appeals to the leadership to set things right. These views were not merely private opinions but reflected the concerns and anguish of a number of comrades and well wishers of the party.
The responses received from the leadership, however, became increasingly dismissive and even my right to raise these issues about the party in West Bengal – while being a functionary at the party centre – was questioned. The interventions made in the discussions as a delegate to the 2010 Vijayawada extended CC meeting and 2012 Kozhikode party congress were also interpreted as attempts to create rifts within the party. The matter became particularly painful when fabricated stories started appearing in sections of the media at regular intervals that I was acting at the behest of certain party leaders and trying to settle factional scores against other party leaders. My resignation and going public with the differences on the Presidential election issue needs to be seen in the backdrop of this hostile environment that I found myself in, following attempts to raise issues within appropriate party fora, which I thought were in the best interests of the party and the Left movement.
Two Views
At the heart of the debate over the Presidential election issue are two basic positions related to the CPI (M) and the Left Front in West Bengal. The first view holds that there may have been certain problems with the party in West Bengal, but they were of a relatively minor nature and the basic policy orientation of the Left Front government underlying its industrialization drive and land acquisition spree, was correct. The problems were in their implementation. As per this view, the real reason behind the electoral debacles faced by the Left Front in West Bengal since 2009 was the coming together of the TMC and the Congress, which was facilitated by the Left’s withdrawal of support to the UPA-I government in 2008 over the Indo-US nuclear deal.
It is this understanding which has led some party leaders in West Bengal to desperately try to “drive a wedge” between the TMC and Congress since October 2009, when the CPI (M) supported a Congress candidate as Mayor of the Siliguri Municipal Corporation elections. Successive election results since 2010 has already proved the vacuity of such tactics. With or without the Congress, the TMC has been able to defeat the Left Front in most places for the simple reason that a major segment of the Left mass base has shifted over to the TMC. The Left Front vote share in West Bengal has witnessed a steady erosion from over 50% in 2004 Loksabha elections to around 41% in 2011 assembly elections, and there has been a concomitant increase in the vote share of the TMC.
The other position in the debate argues that the problems with the CPI (M) and the Left Front in West Bengal have little to do with the TMC and the Congress coming together. There are much deeper political, organizational and ideological dimensions. The very class orientation of the Left Front government, especially since the 2006 election victory, had become convoluted leading to at least a partial embrace of the neoliberal development model based on wooing corporate capital by providing myriad concessions and diluting the hard won rights of the workers (like the right to strike) and peasants (right to land). The pro-people initiatives of the Left Front government in the spheres of agriculture, rural development, education, health etc. also waned over time. This happened alongside an ascendancy of pernicious trends within the Left [mainly the CPI (M)] like widespread corruption, cronyism, involvement in land and property related racketeering, high-handedness and stifling of democratic space for criticism and dissent – not only inside the party and the Left Front, but also within the society at large, leading to the alienation of large sections of people. The growing unpopularity of the party and the Left Front government was a significant factor behind the failure to effectively combat the heinous violence unleashed by the TMC and the Maoists targeted against grassroots level party cadres and sympathizers across the rural districts since 2008.
In order to make a comeback therefore, the CPI (M) and the Left has no other option but to cleanse itself of its malaises by carrying out thoroughgoing rectification. The alienated masses mainly comprise of the peasantry and the rural poor as well as the urban working class, who also belong to socially deprived sections like the adivasis, dalits, Muslims and linguistic minorities like the Gorkhas. Women have also deserted the Left in a big way given the gender insensitive acts and patriarchal utterances of some Left leaders. Winning back the support of these sections require patient hard work among the masses, raising relevant peoples’ issues and building powerful mass movements both against the reactionary and autocratic TMC led government and the neoliberal Congress led government at the Centre. There is simply no short-cut.
After the 2011 election debacle and the subsequent party conferences, one thought that the first point of view - which arises not only out of a shallow and opportunistic political understanding but also a stubborn refusal to look within and rectify ones mistakes coupled with a hankering to return to power at the earliest opportunity - had been abandoned in favour of the latter. One does not recollect any party document or resolution adopted in the 2012 Kozhikode party congress underlining the need to create “fissures” between the TMC and the Congress. The second view, regarding rectification and building movements, does find some mention.
And yet one found that a mere phone call from the North Block to Alimuddin Street on 14 th June brought the line of “driving a wedge” between TMC and Congress back into action. To one’s further shock and dismay, the Polit Bureau endorsed the line on 21 st June without providing any justification whatsoever why supporting the sitting Finance Minister from the Congress in the Presidential elections became necessary even at the cost of breaking Left unity; a mere assertion was made that even as the CPI (M) will support Mr. Mukherjee in the Presidential elections, the struggle against neoliberal policies of the Congress led government will continue. Why did it become at all necessary to clarify that the CPI (M) will continue to struggle against neoliberal policies?
This manner of decision-making, besides being undemocratic and non-transparent, also raises the fundamental question of accountability. Now that the “wedge” could not be driven between the TMC and Congress, and the CPI (M) landed up voting alongside the TMC in favour of the Congress nominee, who takes responsibility for this goof-up? Here lies the basic problem with the structure of the party with regards to inner-party democracy and holding the leadership accountable for its decisions.
Repeating Mistakes
In his 1920 classic on "Left-wing Communism", Lenin had made a profound observation regarding mistakes being made by a political party:
A political party’s attitude towards its own mistakes is one of the most important and surest ways of judging how earnest the party is and how it fulfils in practice its obligations towards its class and the working people. Frankly acknowledging a mistake, ascertaining the reasons for it, analysing the conditions that have led up to it, and thrashing out the means of its rectification - that is the hallmark of a serious party…
The reasonableness of the Left stand on the nuclear deal should have become clear by now, even to the critics of the Left. However, despite adopting a strong and principled stand on the nuclear deal in 2007-08, the Left had failed to stall the deal from going through. Why did that happen? After deciding to withdraw support from the UPA-I government if it approaches the IAEA for the safeguards agreement in September 2007, the Left changed its stand and allowed the government to approach the IAEA in January 2008. While this change in Left’s position was driven by the CPI (M), the considerations for the change in stand was not made clear during that time, even in the March 2008 Coimbatore party congress of the CPI (M). Once the government was allowed to approach the IAEA the nuclear deal went into the “auto-pilot” mode and this enabled the Congress to cut a deal with Mulayam Singh-Amar Singh to break opposition unity on this issue. From a position of strength in September 2007 when neither the operationalisation of the nuke deal nor the longevity of the government was certain, the Left found itself in the lurch in August 2008, by when not only did the nuclear deal go through but the government survived the trust vote as well. It was onlyh in the 2012 Kozhikode Party Congress that the CPI(M) officially accepted in its Pol-Org report that:
The decision to withdraw support should have been implemented in October-November 2007, when the government had to go to the IAEA for talks…Not doing so at that time was a mistake.
The reason cited for not implementing the decision to withdraw support from the Congress-led government in October-November 2007 was the impending Panchayat elections in West Bengal in May 2008, where the Congress and TMC could have come together. This was thus the genesis of the line of “driving a wedge” between the TMC and the Congress. Despite the “wedge” that remained between the Congress and TMC in the 2008 Panchayat elections, the latter made major gains in rural Bengal and won a majority in two zilla parishads. The rural discontent against the CPI (M) and the Left Front was clearly triggered by the events surrounding Nandigram-Singur and other factors like slack implementation of rural development programmes like NREGA, rural electrification, tribal forest rights etc. This was the first elections since 1977 when the CPI (M) and the Left Front suffered electoral reverses and that happened without the TMC and the Congress coming together.
The decision to allow the government to approach the IAEA was therefore based upon a gross miscalculation, that not withdrawing support from the UPA-I government will help the Left Front electorally in West Bengal. Not only did the electoral downslide begin in West Bengal in 2008 but the entire struggle against the nuclear deal was also sabotaged in the process leading to demoralization within the ranks of the Left. The TMC gained in West Bengal and the Congress at the Centre. This eventually led to the major electoral setback for the Left in the 2009 Loksabha elections. Yet, not only was nobody held accountable for the errors, but CPI (M)’s election reviews since 2009 have also tried to obfuscate these important issues till the 2012 Kozhikode party congress. Why did it take 4 long years to admit a mistake made in 2007-08? Who is held accountable? Where is the scope left for rectification? Why keep facts away from the rank and file on such crucial issues and keep them in the dark?
Despite this sad experience, one thought that the admission of mistake – although coming too late in the day – was sincere and genuine. There was hope and expectation that the political line adopted in the 2012 party congress; of steadfastly fighting the neoliberal and corrupt Congress led regime, isolating the communal BJP and working towards a Left and democratic alternative; would take the party and the Left movement out of the present melancholic state into a phase of vibrant mass movements and broad based unity of Left and democratic forces.
Unfortunately, within months after the party congress one found that the same discredited tactics of “driving a wedge” between the TMC and Congress making a reappearance through the backdoor and leading the party into the decision to support a Congress Finance Minister in the Presidential elections in violation of the political tactical line adopted in the 20 th party congress. The considerations were as unprincipled as was in the case of allowing the operationalisation of the nuclear deal; the decision making as arbitrary and non-transparent; the political calculations as warped and the eventual outcome as messy. What does one conclude about a leadership which refuses to learn from its past mistakes and repeats them without batting an eyelid?
What Next?
Resignation from the membership of a party, of which one has been a member since 1992, was never an easy decision. But this was done with the purpose of expressing certain views in public so as to initiate a debate both regarding the direction of the Left movement in India as well as the structure and decision-making process within a communist party. In my view, the largest contingent of the Indian Left, the CPI (M), is suffering from a serious problem regarding its political direction. It is caught between contending theoretical as well as tactical positions and unable to resolve the debates in a transparent, democratic and purposeful manner, exposing it to charges of “double-speak” and political inconsistency. This is seriously affecting its credibility.
A major impediment before the purposeful resolution of the debate within the party and the broader Left is the ossified and bureaucratic organizational structure of the CPI (M), which is a relic of the past. Rather than opening up more space for democratic debate and discussion within the party involving the rank and file, which can both politicize the cadres and enthuse them, the decision-making process has become completely top-down: only decisions flow from the top leadership to the grassroots cadres. Feedback from the people or criticisms from below has ceased to flow upwards. Efforts by cadres to raise ideological or political questions are looked with suspicion and considered disruptive. The only forms of dissent that seems to have become acceptable are leaks and planted stories in sections of the corporate media, who have their own favourites and villains to pit against each other.
Besides the criminalization and demonization of forthright dissenting views from within, the friendly criticisms of committed Left intellectuals have also been met with resentment and antipathy. Today, the unofficial explanations emanating from the party headquarters as the “real cause” behind my resignation, ranging from unfulfilled organizational ambitions (how can they be fulfilled if I quit the party?) to hatching a conspiracy with the Maoists and ultra-Left to split the party over the past three years (how could it remain undetected by the party leadership for so long?), shows the ludicrous extents to which intolerance towards any form of political dissent can go. Such ascribing of motives or mala fide intent reflects a deeply sectarian mindset which is quite harmful for the interests of the party and the Left movement.
The last thing that the Indian people needs today is another Communist party. Rather, the problem is that there are simply too many of them. The political context of the 1960-70s, which led to the splits in the Indian Communist movement, has changed quite significantly since the advent of globalisation. The nature of imperialism today and its relationship with India’s big business class, the character and role of the Indian state, the impact of capitalist development in India under the neoliberal regime on the basic classes and the actual strength of socialist forces worldwide, have rendered the programmatic debates of the 1960-70s by and large outdated for contemporary Left praxis. There is much scope for building greater programmatic unity between the different streams of the Indian Left who believe in democratic means to achieve radical social transformation, based on anti-imperialism, progressive policy alternatives to neoliberalism, firm defence of secularism and steadfast pursuit of social justice.
The radical Left forces who have emerged in Latin America in the past decade and more recently in Europe following the economic crisis and anti-austerity movements – particularly in Greece – are throwing up interesting ideas for the Left across the world. The most relevant among them is the need for the Left to become theoretically less sectarian and dogmatic, structurally more democratic and open-ended and in praxis, more radical and dynamic. Can the Left in India engage with these ideas while trying to break the stasis afflicting the movement today? This is the question which I wish to probe through my writings and activism in the days to come, while entering into political dialogue with different streams of the Indian Left in order to explore possibilities of cooperation.
Despite my criticisms, I acknowledge the important role that the CPI (M) continues to play in the Left movement in India as its largest contingent and I appeal to the party leadership not to treat me as an enemy. Please counter my criticisms politically if they are ill-founded or erroneous and introspect if you find some merit in them.
Printer-friendly versionVideos from Newsclick
- Angelina Jolie's Mastectomy: Patenting Genes is Patenting a Discovery
- Pakistan Elections: Regional Mandate- A Threat or an Opportunity
- India's External Balance Deficit: Impending Macro-Economic Crisis
- Prison Reforms needed - not a Sanaullah for a Sarabjit
- Fighting for their land; two farmers in the West Bank
Recent comments
-
West Bengal: Theatre of the Absurd
-
Appeal to make the enquiry report on Com. TPC's killing public
-
TPC Memorial Committee holds Press Conference in Delhi
-
TPC’s Murder: Questions that Remain after One Year
-
TPC’s Murder: Questions that Remain after One Year
Comments
"Feedback from the people or
"Feedback from the people or criticisms from below has ceased to flow upwards. Efforts by cadres to raise ideological or political questions are looked with suspicion and considered disruptive." Com. Bose saying what he had been doing in JNU as an incharge of the mass organization. Can you give single incident of permitting a discussion in a democratic way when ever you physically presented in the meetings? I can give thousands of incidents of exactly opposite. With deep pain, let me say that each meeting with "Bose" tended to be a humiliating memory the death of democracy. anyway, all the best with introspection.
Dialectics for betterment-If bose changed? Why can't party?
what if that bose that you are talking about has changed for better? let the party also change. Remember bose's any criticism of CPIM is also a criticism of himself (for he was part of it even if writing letters). He was carrying out(even though having differences) all the organizational and political problem with the party and himself. if party was functioning undemocratically so was he ...let it all change for better. That is what dialectics for any progressive party and individuals belonging to it is supposed to be, right? Personal is political but political is not personal. Criticize bose politically if his personality (also an outcome of his doing politics that way) was problematic but do not let personal issues decide your politics. bose's will come and go ...what will remain is idea and its material manifestations that matter. If he is not introspecting enough, even now, make him do that but for that you do not have to side with some which you do not fundamentally/politically agree with (just because bose is criticizing them now) then it will be like playing into the hands of right deviations just like CPIM played into the hand of capitalist rightist parties in trying to 'drive wedge' between TMC and Congress. Let your stand be principled and political; strategic and tactical. If you remain so maybe today bose and you may turn out to be on same side but tomorrow if bose turns out to be another undemocratic and non-introspective then you will have to struggle against that tendency. We will then stand with you as we stand today with bose. Let us not remain with past but walk bravely into the revolutionary future in which individual matters but so does society and progressive ideology to make it better i.e. socialism. Let us stand for that- with or without bose; Let history decide that.
A sound analysis of why the
A sound analysis of why the decision to support Pranab was a violation of the political line and the principle of the admission of the mistakes, taken in 2012 Party Congress. A clear analysis why this decision is also the part of the vicious circle of political and ideological mistakes committed by the CPIM in the recent past.
Will the leadership have that political integrity to engage with the views presented in this paper? Or is it too much to demand "criticisms politically if they are ill-founded or erroneous and introspect if you find some merit in them"? Or will it attract the same attempt of silencing political dialogues through personalized slanders?
If bose was so undemocratic
If bose was so undemocratic and humiliating, why was he incharge of the mass organization in JNU during all the years of successive SFI victories and defeats? Was it the case that no one was willing to really take charge of JNU SFI when the electoral reverses and political adversities started and those writing these comments were nowhere to be seen?
High expectation
CPM and other communist have to their credit many missed oppourtunity After 2004 results communist should have progressed in geometric progression but They have fallen flat.
Muslims were neglected and there were many signals from community and the top leadership of CPM ignored and neglected the minority very badly and taken them for granted,as was done to them by Rjd ,Sp and congress.Muslims will not come back to Communist easily by Great DIDI is commiting one mistake after another.
I think CPM should do some soul searching and take up political issues and i am hopeful that if Communist has a good future in the country
Sir, If you had any sense at
Sir, If you had any sense at all you could not join CPM at the first place. With Regards.
Agree. Everyone knows, if you
Agree. Everyone knows, if you want to do profits for yourself, Congress is a better option, or DMK, or BJP.
Democracy versus Centralism
While agreeing with the points raised by Comrade Prasenjit, there are 2 more points vis-a-vis democratic centralism which i would like to raise:
1. Decisions like supporting Pranab Mukherjee or allowing the UPA-I to go to the IAEA which were taken by the Polit Bureau have become more like fait accompli for the grass root workers. Any democratic debate becomes redundant if the real considerations are revealed 4 years after the decision (like in the case of allowing the government to go to IAEA). This is not only a mockery of democratic processes within the party, but also makes any ex-post review redundant, in a case where irreparable political damage already been done.
2. All those who swear by democratic centralism should at least unite on the issue that it cannot be implemented selectively. Repeated acts which have compromised Party's political line (remark against strikes, gender insensitive comments, motivated sabotage of party's political positions like suddenly realizing the importance of nuclear energy when the party was opposing the Indo-US nuclear deal) have gone completely unnoticed. I am sure members of the Polit Bureau are more capable of "maligning" the party's political line than people who do not even hold any organizational positions.
Prasenjit Bose is a renegade
“real cause” is that he has always been a bully, undemocratic and abusive in his behaviour and he thought that he was the most brilliant brain in the Party, and was the most suited person to be included in the central committee of the Party at Kozhikode. But this did not happen.
He was projected by the Party prematurely and therefore he lost his head. He thought by his resignation the Party would split and nothing of the kind happened except in JNU where he could bully young people to follow him. Had he become a central committee member he would not have done this.
A "renegade" is a renegade for ever. Pragoti has carried such a piece on its website about D.P. Tripathi. Prasenjit Bose is a renegade. And he should be treated like that.
And I must tell the editorial board of Pragoti that in past three weeks I posted three single line comments on various posts on Pragoti related to that "great bose' and his disruptive outfit so named as "SFI JNU". None of them was finally approved. All anti-CPI(M) comments are uploaded. I have reports from many others like me who complain that their comments have also been censured. And if any comment against him or his outfit is uploaded, then it is followed by several abusive, dictatorial, dismissive and humiliating comments by others.
This site has now become a site for CPI(M) bashing for a person who thought by appearing on various news channels he was above the party. I am saving this page and I am telling the editorial team of Pragoti that if this post is not uploaded then I shall send this page to every one that I know on Internet and various blogs and website telling them this website has become a website for defending the ambitions of Mr. Prasenjit Bose and suppressing the other point of view.
A renegade is a renegade and an enemy. You think Mr. Prasenjit Bose that you are so intelligent that you can befool the people at large. By your appeal not to be treated you "as an enemy", people will have sympathy with a renegade.
Pragoti comment policy
Pragoti has a comment policy - http://pragoti.in/node/1278
"* The comment and forum pages of Pragoti.org shall be open to all, including anonymous contributors
* All comments and posts will be carried except those that are abusive, indecorous and/or disruptive."
We carry all those comments which fit the criteria and we keep deletions to a very minimum.
There have been various comments on issues that have been put up by Pragoti over the past few weeks and all sides of the debate have been covered adequately.
There is however only so much tolerance for buffoonery and indecorousness and you should keep that in mind.
If you wish to contribute to the debate in a substantive manner, try writing articles or submitting pieces like the Pragoti Editorial team does on a voluntary and non-commercial basis in order to run a site besides their day jobs.
If you intend to disrupt, muckrake, you are free to do it elsewhere in the wide world of the internet. You can do that in the comment sections of the Pragoti website too, but you are best served if it fits the comment policy criteria.
And never use threats to make a point.
Who is a renegade?
A renegade is someone who gives up on the core of a Left organisation's programme in order to make benefits for self.
Prasenjit Bose has broken away from an organisation which he served to the hilt, on the basis of principle - against a decision that went again to a failed strategy of wooing the Congress. This nonsense about wooing the Congress has exercised the left movement for decades and for those who are with the CPI(M) for years, it must be well known that the party itself was formed in the first place on the necessity of taking on the "dual role of the bourgeoisie".
Unlike people like DP Tripathi who gave up on their core beliefs in order to get closer to a coterie that was run by the big bourgeoisie and the landlord classes, Prasenjit Bose has remained true to the CPI(M)'s vision and party programme.
As he has mentioned in this article, it is necessary to engage with him as a critic of the party's right wing deviation and not abuse him in order to make a political point.
If you have the gumption, intellectual knowledge to provide a political point, do so, if not, stop abusing or using ad hominem insinuations. In fact, people use that techniques when they run out or don't have an argument.
this comment seem to be by
this comment seem to be by some one who has personal axes to grind with prasenjit.
The real renegade is
The real renegade is Budhadeb. I think I know who you are. It is nic e to see the level at which you can stoop. Carry on with your abuses. Has Pranab called you to Raisina? Get well soon! :)
the absolutely sick mindset
the absolutely sick mindset revealed by this post shows the cpim in such a bad light. makes it clear who the bully is. pragoti has done a good thing by publishing this so that people know what kind of frustrated lunatics have now started defending the cpim. must be someone who is misusing a party office computer to settle personal scores. cpim seems to be full of such people nowadays. i congratulate prasenjit bose for taking a timely decision to leave this party which has become the refuge of politically bankrupt persons who have no other job but to post threats and abuses in websites. what a way to advance the revolutionary movement? please hurl more such abuses. bose will be celebrated as a "renegade" for nincompoops like you...
This person clearly
This person clearly represents some of the shameless faces of Left Front, who stubbornly refuse to be educated. Before calling someone renegade, you should know the implication of the word first. If Prasenjit thinks himself intelligent, he is quite right! He has done an extra-ordinary ph.D work from JNU. And as a student he has been brilliant throughout. Prasenjit is a brilliant brain that Mr. Karat would most probably also certify (though it is beyond his certification!!). And this has been probably the reason behind his eviction. He understood too much of this dirty politics. Prasenjit dedicated his brilliant career for the sake of the party. If he wanted, he could have been an outstanding professional earning millions and preaching crash courses on leftisms in leisure time as many self proclaimed marxists do. But he became wholetimer of the party and dedicated his life for the party. Lets atleast appreciate his dedication before using any abusive word.
Doing politics in AC room markedly differes from real life political struggle. What Prasenjit has undergone was a struggle with conscience....and he has won that. We must appreciate him for that. Prasenjit has won a battle that many noted leaders like Mr. Karat, Mr. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, Mr. Biman Bose etc could not win. They all succumbed to lust for power and position. And leaders like them actually caused the failure of the party in WB. To overcome failure we need winners. Winners like Prasenjit are the need of the hour. But their existences are also deliberately thrashed by the people with vested interests. We should all unite to resist this.
Very Very true. Regards
Very Very true. Regards
Agree with you comrade bose.
Agree with you comrade bose. The CPI(M) needs to really introspect. Budhdhadeb Bhattacharya said - 'Reform or Perish'. I would say - 'Introspect and Rectify or Perish.' Your write-up has clarified many facts which were otherwise shrouded in mystery. Made me understand why the Pranab Mukherjee issue was so important. At least now, the person in Alimuddin Street who received the phone call from the North Block should own up responsibility for the fiasco.
Nikhilesh
"The last thing that the
"The last thing that the Indian people needs today is another Communist party" there are already so many..i am not an activist one of my friend listed the following..only Naxalite..
there are lots of other communist/socialiswt party..
Subidhabadi Naxalpanthi Goshthi
Communist League of India (M-L)
CPI (M-L) Liberation
CPI (M-L) Mahadev Mukherjee
CPI (M-L) Organizing Committee
Communist Party Reorganization Centre of India (M-L)
Communist Revolutionary League of India
CPI (M-L) Red Star
PCC, CPI (M-L)
Modhyoponthi Abasthan
CPI (M-L) New Democracy
CPI (M-L) Central Committee
CPI (M-L) Janashakti
CPI (M-L) Central Team
Sangrami Naxalpanthi Goshthi
CPI (Maoist)
CPI (M-L) 2nd CC
COC, CPI (M-L)
CPI (M-L) Pratighatana
CPI (M-L) Praja Pratighatana
CPI (M-L) Pratighatana Godavariloya
Now AISA mainly attack cpi(M) on this issue..akta choto link dichi..
http://www.cpimlnd.org/november-december-2002/rohtas-bihar--killing-of-c...
"The alienated masses mainly comprise of the peasantry and the rural poor..... patriarchal utterances of some Left leaders" you were member in this party around 20 years...working in Delhi tell honestly one thing...why in this ncr where exploitation (unorganized labor, crime against women , atrocities in the name of Bangladeshi...) is maximum..no marginal people stood by you..except few JNU fellows ...
Reply to above comment
When you analyze present condition of so-called left or communist parties in different countries you can see that even in small countries there are a number of organizations or groups. So the unity question should be approached based on ideological-political line rather than names of orgns. In India the main trends are: Firstly the social democratic trend led by CPI(M) which include the LF parties and even Liberation like former Naxalite organizations, Secondly, the anarchist led by CPI(MAOIST) which include all those who abndon mass line and relies on armed struggle as only or main form of struggle, Thirdly, a number of Naxalite groups you have mentioned who analyze India as semi-colonial and semi-feudal, and path of revolution like the Maoists but do not practice it, Fourthly, starting from RSP and SUCI a number of groups who consider India is a capitalist country with the stage of revolution as socialist, and Lastly, the trend led by CPI(ML) whose central organ is Red Star and to which I belong, which analyze that in post-Second World War period Imperialism led by US transformed its form of plunder from colonial to neo-colonial, with the entry of finance capital, market forces and technology the agrarian sector was transformed through reforms from above and India is transformed to a neo-colonial country, working as a junior partner of US imperialism. The PDR should be completed by the overthrow of the Indian state led by comprador bureaucratic bourgeois-big landlord forces, serving imperialism through a countrywide uprising mobilizing all revolutionary classes and sections under the leadership of the proletariat whose unorganized componenet is becoming more numerous and important day by day, paving the way for socialist transformation. Let us approach question of unity based on a debate on these trends.
Dear Mr. Bose, after your
Dear Mr. Bose, after your resignation and expulsion from CPIM and after the coming out of SFI-JNU ( now dissolved ) unit in public, floodgates gone open in respect of a debate on the current issue as these. You were within the party and according to your statement you had raised your views within the party , whenever you thought that CPIM was tilting towards opportunist path. If it be so, and I believe your statement in totality, then why not you continued your inner party struggle , even now? Why did you ceased your struggle within the party ? You have mentioned that since last few years, in CPIM, the alternate views have been met with'resentment and antipathy' and the persons raising such issues have been branded as disruptive forces. This part of your statement is partially correct, one can not defy it. But even then, a mature and political person like you should not give up the fight, within the party and succumbed to one's emotional self. This is not expected of you. We all know that inner party struggle is a long drawn process and a tiresome battle to be fought, relentlessly.We also know that much sacrifices may have to be made during this entire process, but even then there is no short-cut to inner party struggle and who better than you know this ,in the true sense of the term, as it was made clear in your above written experiences.Taking liberty, as being a well wisher of Left movement and as in your statement you have mentioned CPIM as the largest contingent and acknowledge it's role in the Left movement, I would like to inform you that there are several persons within CPIM , who don't label you as their enemy but in the worst may branded you as an in-disciplined political worker,only and at the same time would also like you not to behave and/or act as an enemy either.
I hope pragmatism will prevail and CPIM also will also find merit in your views, if those genuinely deserve so and if CPIM reviews those with an open mind. At the same time I hope you also should give it a second thought considering the compulsion of CPIM, as for it's organisational structure, which you know better than me.
i could not understand the
i could not understand the entire Nuclear-Deal fiasco till now. It just left a bitter taste in the mouth. Thanks for bringing out the facts in the open for people like us who have been tossing and turning over our failures.
So while the CPM was telling the people of the country that opposing the nuclear deal was of paramount importance as it involved saving our national sovereignty, in its own practice it gave it less importance than even panchayat elections? How sad.....
http://timesofindia.indiatime
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/No-space-for-democracy-in-CPM-E... The above link is a story (based on this article) published in Times News Network at 4.09 am on 27th July, 2012 (Friday), while the pragoti article got published at around 8 pm on 27th July, 2012 (16 hours after the story got published in bourgeois media). So much about Prasenjit's claim that he is not going to the bourgeois media independently and debating on Pragoti! Shameless!!
if my knowledge of english is
if my knowledge of english is correct, then this article finds no mention in the TOI report.....secondly, u r not so disturbed when Politburo meetings and WB state secretariat meetings details are published in the bourgeois media....some shameless idiots leak stories to the newspapers at the cost of the party....where is your anguish about that act....criticize prasenjit yes....but at least be consistent on what u r saying...
some people have described prasenjit as a renegade...what about Ashok Mitra? Is he a renegade too? after somnath chatterjee was expelled from the party, he was invited to the West Bengal Assembly to deliver the first Jyoti basu memorial lecture organized by the erstwhile LF government....why no anguish when that happened? or is it the case that any attack from the left will be branded as renegades while the right wing assertions within the party will go unchallenged....somnath chatterjee will be celebrated because he turned out to be a stooge of the congress....prasenjit will be vilified because he opposed the congress....that essentially shows that we are moving steadily towards oblivion....our leaders are stooping low to the congress for their blessings while the left opinion is attacked left right and centre without any political argument....
What is wrong in talking to
What is wrong in talking to the media? Has Budhadeb stopped talking to the media? It is one thing to talk to the media and it is another thing to carry forward the political line given by the media. The latter was done by Budhdeb and his cohorts. Everybody in Bengal knows that. Budhadeb was/is politically convinced by Anandabazar and thus those famous words about strikes. Innumerable examples can be given when he tomtomed the line of Anandabazar. Budhadeb will see to it that there is only a signboard called CPM. Budha is our Sidhartha!
People are getting ashamed
People are getting ashamed for one variety of reason, while not-ashamed for another variety of reason. Like in this case, the shame is here because the article not only came out in Pragoti (a public domain web-portal), but before that a interview airing similar views came out in "bourgeois" media! What a ridiculous shame this is, when we also consider the fact that same set of "ashamed" people find no reason of shame when a communist party starts batting for a bourgeois party and one of the agents of neo-liberalism!
SURPRISED THAT YOU ARE NOT
SURPRISED THAT YOU ARE NOT ASHAMED OF THE FOLLOWING INTERVIEWS APPEARING IN THE SAME BOURGEOIS MEDIA...SHAME SHAME:
'We don't want to be on the same side as Mamata Banerjee'
Rakhi Chakrabarty Jul 4, 2012, 12.00AM IST
Controversially, the CPM chose to support UPA nominee Pranab Mukherjee for president. CPM general secretary Prakash Karat spoke with Rakhi Chakrabarty about why his party did so, an expulsion that followed - and the role the Left could play in upcoming politics:
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-04/edit-page/3252484...
“Not Helping Congress Unless Rahul Discovers Socialism”
CPI(M) general secretary looks at the political possibilities, gives his views on Mulayam and Rahul Gandhi, explains his party’s positions, and convolutions
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?281640
prasenjit bose has been
prasenjit bose has been hatching a conspiracy for the last three years against the CPI(M). he could not succeed anywhere but for in JNU. now that he has left, the proofs have started spilling out. See the following link in Indian Express where Kavita Krishnan from the CPI(ML) Liberation exposes his links with them.http://www.indianexpress.com/news/from-sfi-roots-to-cpms-face-on-tv-until-the-exit/968027/0
good that the party got rid of him in time.
So the party has come down to
So the party has come down to grasping at such flimsy straws to prove its conspiracy theories?
Please read an article by Prasenjit Bose written in EPW in October 2009 titled 'The 2009 Verdict and the Left: An Appraisal of Critiques' at http://www.pragoti.in/node/3604
He writes about the CPI(ML) Liberation: "...The CPI (ML) Liberation for instance, which has been more than keen in politically attacking the CPI (M) at the first available opportunity, experienced a 20% decline in the total votes polled in the 2009 elections compared to 2004. Its predicament can hardly be attributed to the problems associated with the CPI (M) in West Bengal. Doesn’t the challenge faced by the Left, especially in terms of breaking new ground outside the three strongholds of West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, which has remained unmet for several decades now, call for a rethink of the praxis of the Left as a whole? How can it be the case that the entire burden of introspection and rectification following the electoral reverses of the Left, falls only on the CPI (M) in West Bengal?"
if prasenjit was hatching a
if prasenjit was hatching a conspiracy for three years, what was the all India leadership comprising of Prakash Karat, Brinda Karat, Sitaram Yechury and SR Pillai doing for all these years....he was a delegate to all the conferences, he was placed at important organizational responsibilities for all these years.....why?
if the all India leaders of CPI(M) cannot even catch the conspiracy of an individual sitting right under their nose, how will they counter the conspiracy of TMC, imperialism, media etc, which Com. Biman Bose always refers to....in short, if the allegation of conspiracy is correct, then the party has to accept that the leadership is an inefficient one....
There is simply no short-cut..
Prasenjit,
There is simply no short-cut..
Prasenjit,
It is indeed disappointing to read totally one sided analysis of the whole episode of your resignation and developments after that. One thing is very clear that you are not self critical or introspective (but justifying your steps by narrating one-sided story) about the way you took your differences with the party in public and your criticism of party leadership for not entertaining your opinions with some merits and importance.
You mentioned in your note that you wrote 6 letters (including 1 note) to party leadership regarding various issues and conveyed your differences on those issues, a simple member of the party knows that the party takes its decision on the basis of collective responsibility and no single person is responsible for success or failures. It is in public domain that party has accepted its wrong decisions in the past and their negative outcomes. The issues raised by you (deeper political, organizational and ideological dimensions, the very class orientation of the Left Front government, diluting the hard won rights of the workers (like the right to strike) and peasants (right to land), pernicious trends within the Left [mainly the CPI (M)] like widespread corruption, cronyism, involvement in land and property related racketeering, high-handedness and stifling of democratic space for criticism and dissent) are not something profound discovered by you alone as you only pointed out and these are shared by many party members and well-wishers (and I am sure this circle is broader than you think and know). This establishes that whatever wrong has happened in WB party and Left front government does not enjoy unanimous party sanction or endorsement but there is a difference in how others (who were unhappy with these developments) reacted and you reacted. When you decided to resign from the party on the recent issue which was a mistake in your views was the end of your association with the CPI(M) and you could not tolerate any more mistakes from the CPI(M) when others even they were unhappy and critical of the earlier decisions and this one decided to continue with the party and expressed their opinions at party forums. It doesn't mean that who did so are less intelligent or less intellectual than you but they showed faith in party's functioning and its programme. They also believed in 'winning back the support of these sections (who abandoned Left), and patient hard work among the masses, raising relevant peoples’ issues and building powerful mass movements both against the reactionary and autocratic TMC led government and the neoliberal Congress led government at the Centre' in WB and in other parts of the country. They didn't take any sort-cut because there is simply no short-cut. Can you say that in your political career (20 years mentioned by you) while working as a member of the CPI(M) at various fronts you have had not made any mistake or had been a fully accepted democratic person or have satisfied or given respect to every opinion which was against yours? or can you now say that you will not make any mistake in rest of your life whatever way you decide to live it? I guess answer will be no because it's not possible and we all make mistakes and learn from them. In your view, 'the largest contingent of the Indian Left, the CPI (M), is suffering from a serious problem regarding its political direction' then why didn't you show patience to correct things and develop which you thought lacking in the party but this time you took short cut and didn't follow what you preach others.
Now, why do you appeal to the party not to treat you as an enemy (am not sure whether the party will do or not)? Why don't you leave it on the party and its mass-organisations to decide on that you did what you thought was right for you. Can you claim that you had no personal political ambitions or agenda? Can you say that whatever happened and happening in Delhi (especially in JNU) was and is purely political and ideological? Can you deny that calls were not made to various people and no efforts were made to influence individuals to break them from party and mass-organisations?
In my personal view I agree with you that it was not an easy decision for you to resign from the party of which you are a member since 1992 but can you say that it was easy for that party to loss one of its member in whom party invested so much and promoted at every front? Can you say that party didn't try to stop you from taking this extreme step? Why are you being so uncritical of yourself? Why are you portraying totally one sided story?
If you think party should not only listen to your opinion but should agree with it and change its decision then I think it's too much to expect and not fair too.
Shamsher Singh
@shamsher
shamshebhai, you seem to be a personal friend of this fellow prasenjit and deeply hurt by his departure from the party. i am sure prasenjit has his share of problems. i do not know him personally but saw him on TV a few times. he seems to be articulate and knowledgeable but also impatient and at times quite arrogant. but personality issues are hardly relevant here. how can you compare prasenjit's problems with that of an entire party, the CPI (M)?
prasenjit may have already made a thousand mistakes already and will perhaps make another thousand. but one mistake by an entire political party assumes a different proportion altogether. for instance in nandigram many people died because of violent conflicts for which both the buddhadeb government and the goons led by laxman seth were responsible. what did the cpim do to rectify that mistake? absolutely nothing. so peoples' anger got directed against the entire party across west bengal and it had to pay a very heavy price. please do not reduce the seriousness of this issue by comparing cpim's mistakes as a party with individual mistakes committed by persons like prasenjit.
the explanations for his resignation are quite thorough. he seems to have tried to raise issues within the party and faced flak for it to the extent that it became unbearable.
Mr. Goswami
Mr. Goswami,
I agree with you that an individual's mistakes can not be treated equal to one party's and I didn't mean to cancel out or justify one's mistakes against the other. I wanted to make this point only that it's unfair to portray party leadership as a villain and portray himself as somebody who is pure and sacred. In our political and social lives we all make mistakes and take wrong decisions but CPI(M) has been a political force which has reviewed its decisions and outcomes critically and democratically so far and accepted its criticism too whenever it was due. So one should be self-critical too when making allegations on others.
Thanks
Mr. Shamser Singh, Your long
Mr. Shamser Singh,
Your long and short posts are devoid of any self-criticism...You have criticized Prasenjit for not being self-critical...So why don't you start the discussion with some self-critical assessments...May be, others will take inspiration from you in the days (or hours) to come....We are waiting earnestly Mr. Shamser....Please start...
Mr. Singh, The so called
Mr. Singh,
The so called rectification campaign of the CPI-M initiated after the debacle in West bengal was merely an eye wash of making organisational problems responsible for the deterioration of the party. The problem is that the party has failed to realize, while many cadres already have, that the problem lies in the ideological deviation in the party led by the dominant section of the party. While all true communists should carry on the struggle in the party forums, in this case and in many others we have witnessed that the dominant section of the party has been able to mime and stiffle political debate and ideological struggle led by sincere comrades. We have seen howf Rezzak Molla an VS has been called indisciplined and the actions of Buddha or Pinarai Vijayan has not only been overlooked but also been sheltered. I think most comrades have either overlooked these concerns or carried on with the bogey of CPIM defence without answering the political questions raised by bose
Arindam Das Dear Com.
Arindam Das
Dear Com. Shamser,
Your point on self-criticism is well taken...Any serious Party comrade should always critically analyse his/her role and activities in the Party...Criticisms and self-criticisms always lead to improvement in general consciousness of the Party workers and leads to betterment of the Party....Prasenjit is no exception to this....But the same applies to you.... What has been your role for advancing the role and politics of the Party among the masses in Calcutta, Bengal and elsewhere? How much time, on average, you give for Party activities, on a daily basis? for how many hours you leave the sweet comfort of your room to hit the streets of Calcutta for any Party programme over the last 1 month, at least? how many students have you inspired to rally behind your politics? on average, how many students do you talk to on a daily basis so that they at least become Left minded and think for the poor in this country...Try to make a self-critical assessments of all these serious shortcomings...That will raise your level of consciousness, a bit...
Anonymous and Arindam Das
This is the level of your debate. Who are you guys to assess my contribution and level of comfort? I don't owe any self-criticism or assessment in front of you but at my party platform. My comment was addressed to Prasenjit in reference to his account of the whole developments regarding his resignation/expulsion and afterwards. Neither both of you qualify to judge my contribution nor Pragoti is a platform for me to talk about that. In my comment I didn't compare my work or contribution against anybody's nor did I claim that my contribution is superior against somebody else's. Raise your level of consciousness and debate too. Sorry if my reply sounds arrogant to others (one comrade complained about this) but here I left with no choice. I asked Prasenjit to not to present one sided story and be self critical while making appeals to Party. In my view that's fair.
At last some debate
Prasenjit is raising those issues which we as the left supporters talks privately but had not taken any public position. This was not helping the left movement of this country and it is good that someone has started a debate on these long pending issues. Yes we need to debate Nandigram, Singur, and many such related political decisions which are responsible for the present debacle of left. Why we had supported Mr. Pranab Mukerjee is yet not clear to many of us. Why VS is penalized people from Bengal party are always managed to get away even when they circulate CDs' depicting women in very bad image.
What has the All India SFI done in last so many years on the issues of students. We know how the neo-liberal economic policies affected our educations specially the higher education. What has kisan Sabha done on the famers suicide. There is no all india movement, not even a state level movement. CPI (M) like a good think tanks only started organizing, seminars, conventions, symposiums. There are documents after documents but what are the mass organization of the party is doing? This is very big questions. Inflation, corruption, neo-liberal economic policies are making life miserable for the common people in India but our leaders are satisfied with commentaries and documents. These are some of the burning issues and let the left think on its overall politics and what they are doing.
There are number of issues which were never debated in the CPI (M) and as a result today it is loosing its relevance in the national politics. I don't agree with many points of Prasenjit but one things is relevant that some of these issues actually needed a debate. Now many of us who started loosing interest in the left politics became active and started following pragoti. This is good for overall left politics of this country. Prasenjit compelled many of us to take positions on issues. I must say that Mr. Shamsheer is also playing an equally important role in this debate (expect for some time when he becomes personal and appears to be arrogant). There is nothing wrong is posing questions to prasenjit for his writings, but at the same time we should not get personal. I am sure that comrade Shasheer and I have one point in common we both want left to become strong in this country but in this getting obsessed with Prasenjit will not help. Com. Shamsheer should take political postion.
Hope pragoti will continue to give space to critical viewpoints and
Please join again. CPIM is
Please join again. CPIM is back to square one, the 'right to strike' will be observed on 31st July.
This is the current situation
This is the current situation as far as that strike is concerned -
http://nvonews.com/2012/07/30/citu-calls-off-july-31-transport-strike/
Strange that Prasenjit Bose
Strange that Prasenjit Bose should feel that the programmatic debates of the 1960s and 70s are irrelevant in the context of imperialist and neoliberal assaults, and the character of the Indian state, ruling class, etc. As far as I recall, one crux of the debates was the characterisation of the Indian ruling class: whether it would be seen as progressive, anti-imperialist and anti-feudal or not. This was, in many ways, similar to the 'two tactics'debates which Lenin spoke of in context of the democratic revolution - whether the democratic revolution would be led by workers and peasants (i.e Communist party) or by the 'progressive bourgeoisie.' CPI felt the bourgeoisie was 'national' in character; CPIM differed and called for a 'people's democratic' 'revolution. CPI had illusions that Congress was anti imperialist because it was pro Soviet, and anti feudal because it spoke of land reforms.
Today, however, CPIM too seems to have the same type of illusions about Congress and other bourgeois formations. It amended its programme to claim that in times of globalisation, the contradictions between the Indian bourgeoisie and imperialist/global capital would 'intensify' - and that therefore the communist party/working class should wholeheartedly support these anti imperialist sections of the ruling class in their struggle with imperialism! Surely this explains, in a big way, why CPIM has recently displayed such illusions about Tata and about Pranab Mukherjee and the Congress/UPA! Prasenjit has rightly criticised CPIM's mistakes - but how can we, in Left terms, explain why these mistakes took place? Just corruption of leaders? Why, after all, do right deviations take place in a communist party? is there no room in CPIM's programme for loopholes of which the CPIM leadership is taking advantage?
The programmatic debates are more relevant than ever. To conduct this debate with CPIM or other Left groups without any programmatic perspective can go nowhere. If programmatic perspectives are outdated and irrelevanmt - why do we need a communist party at all! We can have any number of well-meaning groups fighting for secularism and against neoliberalism - without any communist programmatic understanding or perspective. Can these groups be any substitute for a communist party? Can we abandon the quest for a correct communist party in India? Would that not be a liquidationist position at the end of the day? There can be Left unity between communist parties with varying programmatic perspectives, no doubt - but that does not render the fundamental programmatic debates irrelevant in any way.
So whose programmatic
So whose programmatic understanding do you think is the most "correct" in India? CPI, CPI (M) or CPI (ML)?
@Debabrata: Even if one finds
@Debabrata: Even if one finds the programmatic line of existing communist parties not wholly satisfactory, that does not negate the quest for and effort for a communist party with a correct line. It's apparent, (as in the example I quoted) that certain aspects of CPIM's own programmatic line are at odds with our country's reality. In times of the Nuke Deal and blatant strategic partnership of India's ruling class with the USA, isn't it obviously false to claim that contradictions are going to intensify - and to hope that there will be progressive and anti-imperialist sections of the ruling class, whose foreign and economic policies the Communist party must back? Isn't it relevant to bring up these programmatic faults when they impact on CPIM's policies in real life - like championing Tata and supporting Congress-UPA Govts and failure to oppose even the Nuke Deal till too late?
The CPI(ML)'s phrase of 'semi-feudal' appears misleading and out of sync. But while we can debate degrees of feudal influence on Indian capitalism, the persistence of the caste system, feudal atrocities, khap panchayats, and so on do indicate that these remnants are very strong. Here, the CPIM and ML ought to agree that a democratic revolution is called for to end the feudal remnants and fight imperialism. The main contention appears to be about whether or not the communists will tail behind the ruling class (or sections of it) in the course of this revolution. And CPIM is increasingly tailing behind the Congress and other ruling class parties like RJD, AIADMK and so on. Support for Pranab is supreme tailism. Surely these debates and concerns are ever more relevant today? Prasenjit can choose not to endorse the programmatic line of one of the available CPs. But to claim to be fighting right deviation without any programmatic perspective and without any alternative Left platform or plank seem rather grandiose and not so credible.
How do you propose to achieve
How do you propose to achieve the noble object of uniting Left groups on a radical agenda - while remaining within the confines of JNU, essentially, and failing to provide any wider national platform, perspective or communist alternative? Why would those parties take you seriously unless you remain in Left praxis? Can we have any serious praxis at a university level alone - or as a single intellectual, however well-meaning? Debate for debates' sake cannot appeal much - and if debates within CPIM did not change CPIM, how can the debates of a small grouo outside CPIM which will refuse to form a communist party or platform, change CPIM?
don't get impatient...wait
don't get impatient...wait and watch.
One is bookish & theoretical
One is bookish & theoretical knowledge and other is practical knowledge. The present CPM leadership does not have any practical knowledge. Most of them are from elite class, including top PB leaders like Prakash Karat, Vrinda Karat, Sitaram Yechuri, Buddhadev Bhattacharya etc., and was never a part of long mass movements. Bulk of these leaders came up from JNU, and have very good in-depth knowledge on Marxist theory. But very few of them have experience in working in ground level mass of people below poverty level, and hence also lacks knowledge about mass movement. Even though late Comrade Jyoti Basu was from a elite-class of the society, he struggled in India with mass and trade union movements, keeping aside his inherited wealth. Similar thing applies to late PB Member Comrade Binoy Krishna Choudhury, who was also from a effluent farmer family. Comrade Choudhury worked in mines near Asansol for building up trade union movement, and also in paddy fields for building up Kishan Sabha. CPM first needs leaders who will come-up working in mass level, and not only with bookish knowledge and theoretical knowledge from JNU.
Persenjit belongs to which class?
Which class persenjit belongs to? He belongs to class of opportunists, individualistic and back stabing type of people. I know him from the days when he entered in Delhi. If i start writing about him, he will have to hide his face. He do not have any experiance of any mass movement. He distroyed whatever we made from last 30 years in Delhi as fas student movement is concern. Because of his opportunistic alliances and cotrie, he defamed SFI....we cant forget this...and moreover do not make it as if you guys debating politically here. It is hate campaing against CPM and its LEADERSHIP. But will resist all the attacks and come out more stronger.
to prasenjit
comrade,
khati bangla'tei jabab dicchi. 60-er dashake 'prague-er basanta' dekhe piking theke chotto ekta barta prakash kora hoyechilo, 'samrajyabadi samajtantra'!
seta ke phike hoye jaoya itihaas bole uriye dite chan anekei. ta se ditei paren. abadh ganatantra'er desh amader, aar eto'o jani ganatantra kokhono birodhi kanthaswar'ke swikar koreni!
puro solota bachar eek mon'e cpi(m) party whole-timer chilam. anek abakhay dekhechi, ekdin aar sahya holo na. jehad ghosana kore beriye elam 2010'e. jantam kichu ekta hote choleche. tai holo.
tomake dekhechi ganashakti'te. okhane kaaj kortam. parichay chilo na bole katha bolini. tabe lekhagulo portam, aaj'o pari.
larai to chaltei thake. cholo na, annya kichu ekta korar chesta kori. biplop karur khas-taluk noi. aar bampantha cpi(m)'er monopoly noi. badal hobei. badal aasbei. cholo egoi.
indranil.
To the Pragoti Editorial team
Kindly refrain from uploading comments that are in regional languages. And if you think they are extremely important for the ongoing debate, then kindly also put an English translation alongwith it. I presume the Pragoti editorial policy has some norms with respect to uploading comments made in regional languages.
Avoiding comments in the regional language
Yes. You are right. We normally do not publish comments made in the regional language (or its transliterations). This was inadvertent. Thanks for pointing out.