Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 20 Dec 2014 17:03

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 ... 93  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 24 Oct 2012 07:43 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from the Left

Quote:
India vs China

In an article in the CPM journal People’s Democracy, Left economist Prabhat Patnaik compares India and China’s growth stories and argues that there are fundamental differences between their experiences. He says while the two are often bracketed together as “emerging economic superpowers”, the difference is becoming more apparent as the impact of the economic crisis reaches Asian shores.

“One may be critical of China’s economic policies, notwithstanding their success in ushering in high growth, for a variety of reasons, but it is undeniable that China’s economy is on an altogether different footing today than India’s,” he writes.

He says the first crucial difference is that China’s export success was based on manufacturing, while India’s export success is related to services, especially IT-related services. Per unit value of exports, he says, China creates larger employment than India since the wage rates of those employed in the former are relatively lower than of those employed in the latter.

Another basic difference, he notes, is that China has had a current account surplus on the balance of payments, while India has more or less had a deficit. “China’s surplus has contributed to the building up of its foreign exchange reserves, while India has had to depend upon foreign capital inflows to finance its deficit and its reserves have got built up only because this inflow has exceeded the deficit,” he says.

BY-POLLS VERDICT

CPI’s New Age focuses on the results of last week’s by-polls in two Lok Sabha constituencies — the Congress nominee was defeated in Tehri while its candidate scraped through in Jangipur — saying the writing is on the wall for the UPA. The results are a clear indication of the people’s mood, it argues.

The editorial concentrates on Jangipur, where President Pranab Mukherjee’s son won by a margin of just 2,500. The worrying point in Jangipur result, it claims, is the increase in the BJP’s voteshare.

“It seems that the Trinamool, though it had endorsed the Congress nominee, did not campaign actively and its vote got transferred to the BJP. In the past, the BJP had only once won representation in the West Bengal assembly and that was when Mamata Banerjee had aligned with it. Mamata first became railway minister under Vajpayee. If BJP gets a foothold in the generally secular state of West Bengal, Trinamool Congress will be solely responsible for it,” it says.

The other disturbing feature of the two by-polls, the editorial says, is the role played by newly floated Muslim political outfits. “In both constituencies, these Muslim organisations have cornered a good chunk of the votes. But their campaign has ultimately contributed to further polarisation of masses on communal lines and it has helped the BJP. One brand of communalism breeds the other. The Muslim minority have to ponder whose cause they will serve by communalising politics,” it argues.

DELHI NEXUS

CPI(ML) weekly ML Update discusses the controversy over Robert Vadra’s business ties with real estate major DLF and argues that the Vadra-DLF deal and subsequent Salman Khurshid episode have further damaged an already heavily dented Congress.

It points out that the main opposition party, the BJP, also faces many questions. “One is not talking here of Kejriwal’s findings regarding Nitin Gadkari, showing how the Congress-NCP government favoured him, violating all rules and norms. The revelations have, of course, forced the voluble Gadkari to coin a new euphemism to introduce himself — he now calls himself a ‘social entrepreneur’... It is the BJP’s deafening silence over the Vadra-DLF deal which actually speaks volumes for the party’s anti-corruption credentials,” it says.

“Why? Is it because Vadra is ‘Indian’ enough compared to Sonia Gandhi’s Italian origin? The reason for the BJP’s deliberate silence perhaps has nothing to do with Vadra, it has everything to do with DLF, the `private entity’ at the other end of the deal... DLF doesn’t operate only in Congress-ruled states, it has interests in BJP-ruled states as well, Gujarat included,” it concludes.

Compiled by Manoj C.G.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2012 00:03 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35
Posts: 1150
Four 'hardcore Maoists' arrested in Bihar

Quote:
Police today claimed to have arrested four hardcore Maoists, including a self-styled area commander, in Bihar's Aurangabad district.

"Acting on a tip-off, the police raided a hideout in Seema village and nabbed Maoists, identified as Mritunjaya Mishra (Area Commander of Goh-Rafiganj) and his associates Shambhu Yadav, Dinanath Yadav and Chandrabhushan Sharma," Superintendent of Police (SP) Daljit Singh said.

A country-made rifle, ammunition, mobile SIM cards and memory cards were seized from the ultras, he said.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2012 00:11 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35
Posts: 1150
Maoists script new plan for Chhattisgarh-Odisha border

Quote:
Police officers, particularly those heading anti-Naxal operations, aren’t known to speak of the ‘enemy’ with admiration. So it is with raised eyebrows that you react when you hear senior cops talk of Maoist leader Malla Raja Reddy in glowing terms.

“He is very good, particularly in motivating people and the Maoist cadre. His organisational capability is tremendous, as good as Kishenji. He is a man for long-term missions,” is the overwhelming verdict.

Reddy, who hails from Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh, like most of the top leadership of the Maoist group, has now been appointed the first secretary of the Chhattisgarh-Odisha Border (COB) committee.


COB will be the Indian security forces’ new headache as long as Reddy is at the helm of affairs. The committee will oversee the activities of the CPI (Maoist) in the eastern part of the Sukma-Darbha plateau in Chhattisgarh and the forest areas of Odisha along the border of the two states. The Mahasamund-Bargarh-Bolangir division will work under the COB committee. Much of this seamless territory was always under Maoist control—some sort of a ‘liberated zone’ as it were—but, to the credit of the security forces, the patch has considerably shrunk over the years.

But it is not as if the Maoists willed themselves to take this strategic step. They were in fact forced into it by a couple of developments earlier this year.

The first one was the CRPF raid on Abujmad, the military nerve centre of the Maoists deep inside Dandakaranya in Chhattisgarh in February-March this year. CRPF officers say they have information that the Maoists lost significant cadre in that encounter while there were no casualties on the security forces side. Their assessment is that the attack made the top leadership of the Maoists realise that Abujmad was no longer impregnable and that the top leaders would need to scout for a more safe hideout. For the CRPF, the operation was a morale-booster, one that dispelled the popular notion that Abujmad is out-of-bounds for them.

The second and equally critical reason for the formation of COB was the rebellion of the secretary of the Odisha unit of the CPI (Maoist), Sabyasachi Panda. The assessment of the officers heading the anti-Naxal operations is that Panda’s exit from the Maoist camp is a huge blow. And, therefore, something had to be done about Odisha before the writ of the outlaws started shrinking in the eastern state.

In a sense, the problem in Odisha was of the Maoists’ own making. The domination of Telugu cadre in the Andhra-Odisha Border (AOB) committee, which is headed by Modem Balakrishna, alias Manoj, was instrumental in creating a huge rift with Panda whose foot-soldiers are all Odiya locals. In fact, his resignation letter, which he sent to Ganapathi and two other Maoist leaders in August this year, is now in the public domain. It uses strong language while pointing out the disastrous effects of ‘foreign’ rule in Odisha.

Panda wrote : “Our AOB leaders are always for their superiority and tried to keep Odisha committee as subordinates. Politically they never think about Odisha, its people’s condition and political acceptance … In the name of promotion, one type of feudal democracy, similar to that of fascist RSS organisation, prevailed in this party.”

Pointing out that the AOB committee demanded the release of only Telugu cadre in exchange for the release of Malkangiri collector Vineel Krishna in February 2011, the letter, at other places, focuses on the difference in food habits and the taunts the Odiya committee members had to suffer. The faultlines were exposed and showed that the Maoists in Odisha are a divided and bitter lot.

The mandate of the COB is to box in Panda with AOB’s help and spread the Maoist influence deep into Odisha. Sources in Odisha say over 60 foot-soldiers of the party have now spread into Kandhamal, Ganjam, Gajapati and Rayagada districts—all part of Panda’s territory—to “talk to the locals” and to tell them that they can join the Maoist force and even rise up the ladder to become commanders. The effort is also to take them out of Panda’s influence, by describing him as a ‘renegade’ and accusing him of joining hands with the police. The Maoists realise that the police could even use Panda in their fight to free the state of Red influence. Interestingly, the press releases of the CPI (Maoist) that were earlier being issued in Telugu have now started appearing in Odiya.

The big brother attitude of the Telugus in the organisation is not confined to Odisha alone. Even in Gadchiroli in Maharashtra, which has a Maoist cadre strength of close to 1,800, about 450 of them armed, there are no local tribal commanders. The entire leadership is Telugu and the security forces are now trying to drill a divide, telling the locals that the outsiders are only exploiting them as foot-soldiers.

Police sources also believe COB will be the new alternate location for a hideout for the top leadership to hold conclaves, especially since Abujmad is no longer seen as 100 percent safe. The Maoist plan reportedly is now to increase its strength and presence in the border areas, particularly the tri-junctions of different states, which invariably are grey areas where no one’s writ runs.

What helps the Maoists is that inter-state cooperation is, for all practical purposes, lacklustre or non-existent.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 07 Nov 2012 07:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from the Left

Quote:
Pet project

The real purpose of the recent cabinet reshuffle is to ensure the prime minister’s “pet” neoliberal agenda gets implemented in the government’s remaining tenure, says the editorial in CPM weekly People’s Democracy.

The removal of Jaipal Reddy as petroleum minister, it says, is the most significant indicator of this agenda. “In the recent months, Reliance Industries Limited has been demanding an immediate increase in the price of natural gas even though a revision is due only in April 2014. The petroleum minister had refused to yield to this demand, despite the pressure from the prime minister’s office,” says the editorial, claiming that Reddy has had to pay the price for defying the country’s biggest corporate. “With this reshuffle, the process of putting persons in key economic ministries who are committed to corporate interests and the neo-liberal policies that the prime minister is bent upon pursuing has been completed...”

The editorial is also critical of the “elevation” of Salman Khurshid to the external affairs ministry. It argues that Khurshid’s case shows the Congress’s disdain towards “charges of corruption and dubious dealings by ministers”. Shashi Tharoor’s return too is an indicator of this, it says. Claiming that the reshuffle has put the Congress imprimatur on the big business-politician-bureaucrat nexus, People’s Democracy says more concessions to big corporates and foreign capital, “more assaults on the livelihood of the people and more corrupt deals” are in the offing.

Reddy hurdle

The cabinet reshuffle conveys the message that the UPA is only bothered about meeting the demands of the corporate sector, according to the CPI’s New Age: “It is a government of corporate and for corporate,” says its editorial. Jaipal Reddy’s ouster made it clear he had “become a hurdle in the loot of the richest man of the country,” who, the editorial alleges, was demanding that the price of gas from the KG Basin be enhanced by 300 per cent.

It goes on to say this is the second such instance at the petroleum ministry: “Earlier, under American pressure, Mani Shankar Aiyar was divested of the portfolio as he was not ready to heed the American advice of abandoning the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project...”

The CPI seems to view similarly the denial of promotion to Daggubati Purandareshwari, MoS in the HRD ministry, who had told the media the day before the reshuffle that she would be given independent charge of commerce and industry: “The moment it was known, all those involved got active. Biggest argument against Anand Sharma getting divested of the portfolio... is to send a message that government is having second thought on the FDI for which Sharma has reportedly staked everything...”

People’s agenda

The CPI(ML)’s journal ML Update, critiques the two political rallies on Sunday — the JD(U)’s in Bihar and the Congress’s in Delhi. On the Adhikar Rally, ML Update says Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is using the “Special Status” card for electoral gains only. It also goes on to criticise the CM for not taking the issue of Special Status with a larger platform of other states, like UP, Rajasthan, Orissa and Jharkhand, who are also claimants of the same status, to bolster Bihar’s claim.

About the Congress’s rally, ML Update alleges it was the UPA’s “brazen attempt” to defend the fuel price hikes and subsidy cuts. It concludes that it is now time for the people too to assert their agenda for 2014, which is “to punish the corrupt and anti-people rulers, who are denying the people their rights.”

Compiled by Avishek G. Dastidar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 10 Nov 2012 23:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29
Posts: 2043
Debate: Children raped, targeted, inducted

http://www.timesnow.tv/Debate-Children- ... 414285.cms

Quote:
The horrors of the Maoists terror camps have been exposed by one of their own leaders. Times Now is in possession of Maoist leader Kudiam Gujja's confessional video, which reveals how children are raped before being inducted into their terror camps. In the video, Gujaa confessed to the child rapes committed by him and other Maoists. In October, the CRPF rescued two girls who were raped and then recruited into the Maoist Bal Sangh.In a debate moderated by Arnab Goswami, panelists -- Maj Gen (retd) G D Bakshi, Editor - in Chief, Defence & Security and Sudha Ramalingam, Advocate & Vice-Pres, PUCL -- debate whether the Maoist sympathisers can dismiss the accounts of young girls being raped before being recruited as govt propaganda.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 11 Nov 2012 06:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Posts: 2570
Location: -
Wonder what makes the laal jhanda crowd rapist goons womanisers and maniac animals.....got to have some pisko reason;

We can safely expect Thapar , Sunder , Roy, Patkar and other intellectual apologists of the rapist goons crawl back to their rocks and not rush to the defense of the women unlike their enthusiasm to defend scantily clad girls getting drunk in pubs targeted by Hindu fascists..

Needless to say Beijing puppet yellow daily will black out and write yet another article attacking Gadkari


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 13 Nov 2012 09:07 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Posts: 15420
Location: Hindu Enclave, Narrow-Mind Street
Two maoists sent to Mao by AP greyhounds.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 00:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Posts: 15420
Location: Hindu Enclave, Narrow-Mind Street
Five Maos are sent to meet Maoeet Mao in Odisha Police-Maoist encounter

I suspect an intra-Maoist leak. Also suspect that EJs are involved in this.

Quote:
At least five Maoists were killed in a major police-Maoist encounter near Bhaliaguda village at Mohana in the tribal dominated Gajapati district in south Odisha on Wednesday morning.

“The bodies of the five killed Maoists have been recovered. A combing operation is on in the area,” Gajapati district Superintendent of Police (SP), Asis Singh said adding that a jawan of the Special Operation Group (SOG), the elite force of the state police formed to tackle the Maoist menace, has sustained injuries in the battle.

Police sources said the encounter took place when the SOG and the local police of two Maoist infested districts of Gajapati and Ganjam raided a Maoist camp following a tip off.

All the five ultras who have been killed in the gun battle belong to newly floated Odisha Maoists’ Party (OMP), a splinter group of the CPI (Maoists) formed by Sabyasachi Panda after he disassociated himself from the original Maoist organisation. Panda, who was earlier heading the Odisha unit of the CPI (Maoists), was in the news a few months back for kidnapping two Italian nationals in Kandhamal district.

Singh confirmed that it was Panda who was leading the Maoists’ counter attack against the police during the Wednesday’s encounter but managed to give the slip. A large amount of arms and ammunitions and explosives have been recovered from the spot, he added.

Mili Panda, the wife of Sabyasachi Panda and activist Dandapani Mohanty who successfully negotiated with the senior Maoist for the release of two abducted Italians, has strongly condemned the incident. “It was nothing but a conspiracy by a section of the senior state police officials to force him (Panda) to indulge in violence,” she said.

Mohanty described the encounter as a cold blooded murder. “It was not an encounter but cold blooded murder. The Maoists have been killed when they were sleeping in their camp,” the senior activist said adding that Panda was not indulging in violence since the kidnap incident.


Quote:
Panda, Odisha's topmost Maoist leader, came to limelight in March this year when he, as the secretary of Odisha State Organising Committee of CPI (Maoist), ordered the abduction of two Italian tourists.

Few months after the release of the hostages, however, the CPI (Maoist) expelled Panda for openly criticising general secretary and supreme commander Mupala Laxmana Rao alias Ganapathy as “autocratic” and “dictatorial” in a letter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 07:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10
Posts: 3140
Hindu/EJ naxal split seems to be becoming more apparent.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2012 07:31 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36
Posts: 2919
There is also a layer of andhra vs orissa maoist fight going on. Seems like andhra gang is the more powerful one and has deep linkages.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2012 21:53 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Volkogonov, Dmitri (2008-06-18). Lenin Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Quote:
Little is known of Lenin’s private life. This is not only because of the Marxist postulate of the primacy of the social above the personal, but also because of the desire of the revolutionary hierarchs to keep the personal lives of their leaders secret from the masses. While every detail of the life of a minor functionary was regarded as essential information, the life of a Politburo member and his family was seen as a state secret. Their salaries, numbers of servants and automobiles, as well as the size of their houses and dachas—all such information was untouchable in ‘special files’.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 20 Nov 2012 05:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29
Posts: 2043
Top ten perpetrators of terrorist attacks world wide in 2011

Quote:

1.Communist Party of India-Maoists (CPI-M): 371
2.Taliban: 254
3.Al Shabaab: 163
4.Boko Haram: 124
5.Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC): 83
6.Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP): 80
7.Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP): 75


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 20 Nov 2012 06:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Posts: 2570
Location: -
RoyG wrote:
Hindu/EJ naxal split seems to be becoming more apparent.


Gotta happen, it is an alliance of convenience anyway as I said several times, both hoping to make the other a useful idiot. Just as the alliance between leftist fake-intellectuals and yellows and the EJ cabal who rewards them with honorary doctorates, Booker or Magasaysay awards through their bananas and so on.....leftists hate the west, but need their money, publicity and western media mind-share. Same goes for the gun totting lal jhandas

BTW, on the secrecy of the life of top rank in CPM is no different, the rapist goon puppet yellows that write about beer drinking habits of Bal Thackeray repeatedly and in headline highlights, will never talk about the Scotch swilling habits of Jyoti Basu....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2012 06:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from the Left

Quote:
WINTER SESSION

In the upcoming winter session of Parliament, instead of indulging in mudslinging, political parties should engage in discussing the government’s policies and the economic slowdown, says the CPM’s People’s Democracy in an editorial: “The last session was washed out due to the ‘match-fixing’ between the Congress and the BJP, with neither of them wanting a structured discussion on the allocation of coal blocks scam. Similarly, this session is bound to witness an intense mudslinging between the BJP and the Congress given... various scams involving their leaders,” says the editorial, adding, “It would be most unfortunate if this winter session also ends up as a disrupted one.”

Important issues that need to be discussed include poverty, unemployment, job cuts, rising prices across sectors and the like, says the editorial. Criticising the Centre’s economic policies, People’s Democracy says no amount of increased availability of funds for investments will lead to growth unless people have the necessary purchasing power to buy what is produced. “Clearly, the opposite of this is happening,” says the editorial.

MODI’S RECORD

Despite the Gujarat government’s claims, the state has not had any industrial development under Narendra Modi, claims the CPI in its weekly, New Age. It alleges that the reason Modi has been launching personal attacks and talking about “Gujarat Gaurav” (Gujarat’s pride) is because he wants to avoid discussing developmental issues: “Gujaratis have started realising that the slogan of Gujarat Gaurav is as shallow as ‘India Shining’ of NDA [sic] in 2004.” says the editorial. It cites recent RTI responses which, it claims, “reveal” that no new industry has come up during the decade Modi has been chief minister and that the state’s growth rate has fallen.

“Except the Nano plant of Tatas, no other industrial unit has come to the state in the last one decade. Under the garb of industrialisation, [the] Modi government has displaced [a] large number of farmers... Agricultural lands have been acquired with nominal convention,” it says.

The CPI says Gujarat needs a few dedicated legislators to echo the people’s struggle inside the assembly. “In the coming state elections, the two Communist parties have decided to field about a dozen candidates in selected constituencies. If a few constituencies from these district send Communists to the assembly, it may become harbinger for change in Gujarat politics,” it argues.

WAR IN GAZA

The CPI-ML journal ML Update has condemned Israel’s attack on Gaza, arguing that it could presage an Israeli attack on Iran. It has also said that US and EU support of Israel’s “war crimes” reinforces Israel’s sense of impunity. “By attacking Gaza, it (Israel) seeks to test the Arab waters, to see the impact of the Arab Spring on countries like Egypt. So far, Egypt’s new leadership has behaved much in line with its predecessor,” says the editorial.

As far as India is concerned, the editorial makes the case that the government has betrayed India’s long-term solidarity with Palestine by remaining neutral and calling for peace without condemning Israeli aggression. “The Indian people, however, have responded all over the country with solidarity actions for Gaza, demanding an end to Israel’s war and a principled stand by the Indian government,” it says.

Compiled by Avishek G. Dastidar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2012 08:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Volkogonov, Dmitri Lenin Simon & Schuster, Inc.


Quote:
It would not be worth dwelling on the Ulyanov family tree had the official picture not been so obscured by a mass of unnecessary trivia and painted in the colours of ‘class consciousness’, and had so much not been passed over in silence, distorted and blatantly falsified. A brief account, however, may suffice to show that Lenin’s background reflected the face of the entire empire. He had a general idea about his origins, but, although he was Russian by culture and language, his country was not his highest value—not that he particularly felt himself to be a German, a Swede, a Jew or a Kalmyk. He may have described himself as a Russian when filling in forms, but in his outlook he was an internationalist and cosmopolitan, for whom the revolution, power and the Party were to be immeasurably more precious than Russia itself. It is only important to clarify this matter because the Bolsheviks found it necessary to suppress evidence of the perfectly natural mixture of nationalities in Russia in order to present their leader as ethnically ‘pure’.

Lenin’s antecedents were Russian, Kalmyk, Jewish, German and Swedish, and possibly others, symbolizing Russian history, as it were: a Slavic beginning, Asiatic expansion, a Jewish accretion to the national intellect, and German or West European culture. Genetic selection in history is spontaneous and mysterious. But here a digression is called for. When Lenin died, the Central Committee Secretariat commissioned his elder sister, Anna Yelizarova, to collect all the materials she could find and to write a definitive account of the Ulyanovs. Anna, who was one of the founders of the Lenin Institute, set to work, and soon discovered what I also found: namely, that there was a mass of material in the St Petersburg police department archives about her mother’s descent, as well as other materials which M.S. Olminsky, chairman of the Commission for the Study of the History of the Party (Istpart), helped her locate. Some eight years later she had still not divulged her discoveries to anyone. But in 1932, two years before she died, she suddenly revealed her findings to Stalin, and said she wanted to publish them. She knew that her grandfather, Moishe Itskovich Blank, had been born in Starokonstantinov, that his two sons, Abel and Srul, had converted to Christianity and changed their names to Dmitri and Alexander, and that in 1820 both had been admitted into the St Petersburg Medical-Surgical Academy, from which they graduated in 1824.15

In her letter to Stalin, Anna wrote: ‘It’s probably no secret for you that the research on our grandfather shows that he came from a poor Jewish family, that he was, as his baptismal certificate says, the son of “Zhitomir meshchanin Moishe Blank”.’ She went on to suggest that ‘this fact could serve to help combat anti-semitism’. Paradoxically for a Marxist who believed in the primacy of environmental over inherited factors, she also asserted the dubious proposition that Lenin’s Jewish origins ‘are further confirmation of the exceptional abilities of the Semitic tribe, [confirmation] always shared by Ilyich [Lenin] … Ilyich always valued the Jews highly.’16 Anna’s claim explains, for instance, why Lenin frequently recommended giving foreigners, especially Jews, intellectually demanding tasks, and leaving the elementary work to the ‘Russian fools’.17 According to General A.A. Yepishev, former chief of the army’s main political directorate, who heard it from Stalin’s personal assistant Poskrebyshev, Anna’s sister Maria handed the letter to Stalin and waited while he read it carefully. His response was categorical and fierce: ‘Absolutely not one word about this letter!’ But a little over a year later, Anna approached Stalin again, asserting that ‘in the Lenin Institute, as well as in the Institute of the Brain … they have long recognized the great gifts of this nation and the extremely beneficial effects of its blood on the progeny of mixed marriages. Ilyich himself rated their revolutionary qualities highly, their “tenacity” in the struggle, as he put it, contrasting it with the more sluggish and unstable character of the Russians. He often pointed out that the great [attributes of] organization and the strength of the revolutionary bodies in the south and west [of Russia] arose precisely from the fact that 50 per cent of their members were of that nationality.’18 But Stalin, the Russified Georgian, could not allow it to be known that Lenin had Jewish roots, and his strict prohibition remained firmly in place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2012 08:32 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Posts: 8354
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar
Quote:
“Except the Nano plant of Tatas, no other industrial unit has come to the state in the last one decade. Under the garb of industrialisation, [the] Modi government has displaced [a] large number of farmers... Agricultural lands have been acquired with nominal convention,” it says.

The stellar record in WB is the comparing point!! :rotfl: :rotfl:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 21 Nov 2012 08:36 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
From the book cited above:

Execution of Lenin's brother Alexander

Quote:
Alexander was a gifted youth, as the gold medal he attained on graduating from high school indicated. At school he had shown an interest in zoology and acquired three European languages, and at St Petersburg University, which he entered in 1883, he quickly became one of the top students. A month before his father’s premature death he won the University gold medal for work on annelid worms. Nothing indicated that he had been seized by the forces of social protest.

In his first years at university, Alexander was indifferent, if not sceptical, towards the political circles, but he became more involved when friends introduced him to the writings of Marx, Engels and Plekhanov. For them, Marxism emphasized the need for violence to change the existing conditions. One of the more radical members of the group, P. Shevyrev, declared that only by the removal of tyrants could life be reorganized on just principles. At first Alexander, who was wrapped up in his scientific plans and discoveries, merely listened, but gradually he was won over by the apparent logic of his friends’ radicalism, and came to feel it was morally unacceptable to stand aside from ‘the ideas of progress and revolution’, as they put it.

While Alexander was at university his contacts with Vladimir were sporadic, limited to the occasional letter with greetings to all. And when he came home on vacation, there was no particular intimacy between them. They were a close-knit family, but the children tended to pair off, and Vladimir was closest to his sister Olga, though he deferred to Alexander’s intelligence. Anna, the eldest sister, recalled once talking with Alexander after their father had died, and asking him: ‘How do you like our Volodya?’ Her brother replied: ‘He’s obviously very gifted, but we don’t really get on.’ Anna was intrigued, but Alexander refused to explain.30 This may be the only hint in all the apologist literature that relations between the siblings might not have been entirely flawless.

The 1880s in Russia were a time of harsh reaction against the assassination in 1881 of the ‘tsar-liberator’, Alexander II. Students in particular were more closely watched and harassed by the police than ever before, and Alexander’s entry into a group of conspirators who were planning the assassination of Alexander III is commonly explained by the violent dispersal by the police of a student demonstration in memory of the radical thinker Dobrolyubov on 17 November 1886. The arrest and deportation to Siberia of several student friends confronted Alexander with the moral question of how to behave in such circumstances. According to Shevyrev’s view: ‘When the government takes our closest friends by the throat, it is especially immoral to refuse to struggle, and under the present circumstances real struggle with tsarism can only mean terrorism.’ Of this dilemma Nikolai Valentinov, an early Bolshevik who knew Lenin well during the time of his first period abroad, between 1900 and 1905, and a valuable historical source in himself, wrote: ‘Painfully sensitive to suggestions of immorality, Alexander, after agonizing hesitation, began to share these views, and once he did so, he became an advocate of systematic, frightening terrorism, capable of shaking the autocracy.’31

The group of conspirators under Shevyrev’s leadership grew. Their watch on the tsar’s route from the palace to St Isaac’s Cathedral began on 26 February 1887, but they were utterly inexperienced, and when on 1 March the police intercepted a letter from one of them, the entire group was arrested. The Ulyanov family was devastated, but placed their hope in the emperor’s clemency. Alexander’s mother rushed to St Petersburg and handed in a letter to Alexander III which said, among other things, that she would purge her son’s heart of its criminal schemes and resurrect the healthy human instincts he had always lived by, if only the tsar would show mercy.

The drama caught the attention of society, and received much publicity. Maria Ulyanova’s entreaties failed, however, not only because of the tsar’s intransigence, but because Alexander refused to ask for clemency. Those who found it possible to do so had their death sentences commuted to hard labour. The trial was very short, lasting only from 15 to 19 March. Five unrepentant comrades were sentenced to hang. Even when Alexander was saying goodbye to his mother there was still the chance of salvation, but he told her in a quiet, firm voice, ‘I cannot do it after everything I said in court. It would be insincere.’ Alexander’s lawyer, Knyazev, was present at this meeting, and after the October revolution he recalled that Alexander had explained: ‘Imagine, Mama, two men facing each other at a duel. One of them has already shot at his opponent, the other has yet to do so, when the one who has shot asks him not to. No, I cannot behave like that!’

Alexander had proved himself to be extraordinarily brave. His last wish was that his mother should bring him a volume of Heine to read. On the morning of 8 May 1887 the prisoners were told they were to be hanged in the courtyard of Shlisselburg Fortress in two hours’ time. This was their last chance to appeal for clemency, but even now these young people, misguided as history may judge them to have been, proved themselves morally worthy of the nation’s memory. They were not fanatics, they believed that their country’s future could only be altered by revolutionary acts against tyrants. Alexander’s group seemed then and seems now naive, but it is impossible not to admire their willingness to sacrifice their lives in the name of freedom.





Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 09:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from The Left

Quote:
The Congress’s B-team

The Congress is denying Parliament its right to discuss and vote upon FDI in retail, which has a vital bearing on a fifth of our country’s population, according to the CPM weekly, People’s Democracy.

“Forcing the government to accept such a discussion, under the relevant rules, and deciding to a vote would have decisively frustrated the government’s efforts to allow FDI to prise open our markets and access our resources for its profits at the expense of our people,” says the editorial. The party has criticised the TMC, for bringing in a no-confidence motion against the government.

It argues that no-confidence motions are usually considered when enough members in the Lok Sabha belonging to the opposition support it, so there is the possibility of carrying the motion. If the no-confidence motion is unable to be carried, the government can interpret this as an endorsement of all its policies and its governance. It adds that with the SP and the BSP continuing to support the government from outside, the no-confidence motion would have been a non-starter anyway.

UPA in minority

The government does not want to allow discussion on FDI in retail under Rule 184 in Parliament because division voting would prove that the UPA is in a minority over the issue, says the CPI’s New Age.

“If one goes by the current lineup for the reversal of the decision on FDI in retail, the UPA government is totally in [the] minority. If it persists with the policy, it loses its right to continue in power,” says its editorial. It also claims that the ruling coalition, headed by the Congress, has “mastered the art of using allurement, [the] threat of [the] use of the CBI and other such unscrupulous means” to manage members from the opposition. “The BJP is using the threat to bargain certain concessions from the ruling alliance, particularly in the cases of corruption against its leaders,” it says.

KASAB’S EXECUTION

The CPI-ML journal ML Update says that the Congress executed Ajmal Kasab “secretly”, just before the beginning of the winter session to wriggle out of a possible showdown and defeat on the floor of Parliament on the issue of FDI in retail.

“If the Congress believes it can silence the people by citing the hanging of Kasab, the BJP has already begun to raise a shrill demand for the execution of Afzal Guru,” the article says. According to the article, “Scams are a great leveller — the Congress and the BJP both stand exposed as ‘dukaans’ (shops) doing brisk business in the name of ruling the country or different states”.

Compiled by Avishek G. Dastidar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 15:36 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35
Posts: 1150
Rony wrote:
Top ten perpetrators of terrorist attacks world wide in 2011

Quote:

1.Communist Party of India-Maoists (CPI-M): 371
2.Taliban: 254
3.Al Shabaab: 163
4.Boko Haram: 124
5.Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC): 83
6.Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP): 80
7.Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP): 75


Should put some priorities in perspective for GoI , the paramilitary forces are bravely fighting these pigs in the jungles but is that enough. IMHO , a awful lot more could be done on the force side of things too. More jungle warfare schools are needed to provide army like specialized training in jungle warfare , active use of choppers for enemy camp destruction will be a major boost to the forces too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 16:46 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Posts: 2570
Location: -
Beijing puppet rapist goons seem unable to choose is modi acquiring land for industrialisation from farmers or there is no industrialisation....

Can't be arguing that both are true...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 23:12 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Jan 2011 03:24
Posts: 545
The Dharmapuri Dalit Riots has happened in the heart of the Naxalite movement in TN. In the past some of these ex Naxals have involved in dubious out of court dealings.. Not sure if they have any role in the instigation.


http://www.frontline.in/stories/20121214292404000.htm

Quote:
THE Dalits of Naikkankottai village in Dharmapuri district are not strangers to conflict and violence. They were targeted by the state for some two decades from the 1980s when the naxalite movement was active in the region.

“Being a native of Naikkankottai is a curse. And if you happen to be a Dalit, you are doubly doomed. We suffer collectively for the path we took in the past and are now prevented from leading a dignified life,” said Sasikala, wife of P. Palanisamy, a former naxalite activist and a Dalit resident of Natham colony.

Between the early 1980s and late the 1990s, Naikkankottai was under regular police surveillance. Palanisamy, who is called “POTA” Palanisamy since he served a prison term of five years under the now-defunct Prevention of Terrorism Act, said the police would “knock on our doors at any time and whisk away our youths to an undisclosed destination under the ruse of interrogation. Sustained monitoring, pre-dawn raids and constant intimidation became integral parts of our lives and forced men, especially Dalits, to migrate to far-off places such as Bangalore and Coimbatore to escape harassment and, of course, to earn a livelihood,” he said.

After the police shoot-out at Uthankarai on September 24, 2002, the radical movement was wiped out from Tamil Nadu, particularly from the then composite Dharmapuri district. (Uthankarai is now in Krishnagiri district, which was carved out of Dharmapuri in 2004.)

The state started its intervention programmes with the primary objective of mainstreaming the villagers through a series of confidence-building exercises besides earmarking special funds under socio-economic schemes for their overall development.

The woes of Dalits in the three colonies of Natham, Anna Nagar and Kondampatti in Naikkankottai are, however, far from over. The four-hour arson and looting by rampaging mobs on November 7 left them without any resources to earn a livelihood. The valuables they had accumulated over a decade of hard labour have been destroyed.

The Dalits had enjoyed a sort of immunity to caste-based discrimination until 2000, since naxalite leaders had tuned the poor, mostly Dalits, to the ideology of fighting feudal establishments in the rural pockets. The Natham Dalit colony alone has seven former Marxist-Leninist activists, of whom two, including Palanisamy, served prison terms.

“We faced neither overt nor covert discrimination in those days. Even caste Hindus, who were allegedly behind the recent violence, were with us then. We were able to abolish the pannai adimai system [slaves on farmlands] after a series of struggles,” said Palanisamy. Naxalite sympathisers M. Durai and A. Mathaiyan pointed out that extreme poverty and discrimination had drawn them towards the radical movement though “we were against their gospel of annihilation of class enemies’ to bridge the gap between the landed and the landless”.

In the 1980s, Dharmapuri was a fertile ground for breeding extremists as it was one of the most backward districts in the State. Charu Majumdar, who formed the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) in 1969, held a secret meeting in 1970 in Hogenekkal in the district after making a discreet visit to the nearby Puliampatti village. Appu and Balan, who were killed in police encounters, had worked among the poor working-class people in Naikkankottai and its many surrounding villages.

Seventy-year-old Chinnathambi, a naxalite sympathiser, said Dalits were subjected to hardships and were paid a paltry sum of Rs.40 as monthly wages. The naxalite movement helped them get better wages. Chinnathambi’s wife belongs to the Vanniyar caste.

Their inter-caste marriage, which took place some 30 years ago in Naikkankottai, never created any disturbance, unlike the latest Dalit-Vanniyar marriage. “We are living happily with grandchildren,” he said.

The exit of radical elements, according to social scientists, created a void in the rural society, which has been usurped by the caste-based outfits. Since 2005, the Vanniyar Sangam and other caste organisations have been infiltrating the villages in and around Naikkankottai trying to erase the very concept of working class on which the people remained united and promoting a dangerous form of casteism that is fragmenting society.

The delay on the part of the Left parties such as the Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) to fill the vacuum has further worsened the situation. Admitting that an ideological vacuum had existed in Naikkankottai, the CPI(M)’s State secretary, G. Ramakrishnan, said his party had decided to expand its organisational base to all pockets in order to address the issues.

“It is unfortunate that caste outfits of Vanniyars and Kongu Vellalars have started campaigning against inter-caste marriages, which is against the tenets of the Constitution. The Dharmapuri incident is the fallout of the hate speech made by Vanniyar Sangam president “Kaduvetti” J. Guru alias Gurunathan in Mammalapuram against inter-caste marriages. It was sad that the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK), a political party born out of the Vanniyar Sangam, failed to rein in the Sangam leadership, he said.

The CPI(M)’s senior leader K. Balakrishnan said the party would organise a felicitation function for inter-caste couples in Dharmapuri soon in order to send the message across to the caste-based outfits that the CPI(M) stood solidly behind these couples. P. Dilli Babu, the party’s Member of the Legislative Assembly representing Harur, said the party had decided to organise youths in Naikkankottai through the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI).

The CPI’s Dharmapuri district joint secretary, J. Prathaban, agreed that the Left parties should actively engage in activities aimed at keeping caste-based outfits at bay.

A. Marx, a Chennai-based rights activist, pointed out that identity and hate politics, especially after the decline of far-Left movements, had gained momentum in the State. “Polarisation on caste lines is complete today. Rebuilding lives from ruins will be an uphill task for the disadvantaged Dalits,” he said.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 30 Nov 2012 04:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29
Posts: 2043
Centre asks West Bengal to amend law granting political prisoner status to Maoists


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 08:15 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from the Left

Quote:
Executive decision?

Contrary to what the government claims, the decision to allow FDI in multi-brand retail is not exactly an executive decision, argues the CPM journal People’s Democracy. The government had been trying to fend off demands for a vote on FDI under Rule 184 in Parliament saying this was an executive decision. “FDI in this sector is expressly prohibited under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) 1999. Any decision now to permit FDI would require an amendment in these FEMA regulations which are made by the RBI,” says the editorial.

Following a writ petition in the Supreme Court, the RBI had issued amendments to the regulation allowing FDI in multi-brand retail two months ago, the write-up says. The editorial argues that according to Section 48 of FEMA, any amendment must be tabled in both Houses of Parliament and voted upon. The point being the decision to allow FDI in retail requires an amendment to an existing law, and laws can be made and amended only by the legislature, not the executive.

Cash transfer ploy

The government’s cash-transfer scheme is completely erroneous, says the CPI in its weekly, New Age. One of the arguments against the scheme is that India’s banking network is not adequate to benefit everyone. “The beneficiary of a particular scheme will have to spend more on transport to reach the bank than the amount he or she is going to receive,” says the editorial.

Regarding the government’s claim that Aadhaar cards could provide everyone with easy access to money through bank accounts, New Age says Parliament has yet to approve the creation of this mechanism; only 210 million people have been issued Aadhaar numbers as yet, and that half of the rural population does not have bank accounts.

“How can government go ahead with a mechanism that is under dispute? What about the allegation that the process adopted for [the] Aadhaar card [is] being used to manipulate the figures of those living below the poverty line?” it asks, adding that this looked like a way to reduce the number of genuine BPL people to show the poverty has been removed.

Globalisation’s underbelly

The fire at a garment factory in Bangladesh that killed more than 100 people exposed the “ugly underbelly” of globalisation, whereby giant clothing brands and retail chains outsource their production to benefit from cheap labour in Asian and South Asian countries, says the editorial in the CPI(ML) journal, ML Update: “Appallingly exploitative conditions of labour, which would no longer be countenanced in the advanced capitalist countries, are the norm in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and India...”

The ML Update goes on to say that global brands amass huge profits by sourcing clothes from countries where workers work for low wages, in exploitative and unsafe conditions: “In the dense web of contractors and sub-contractors, responsibility can be easily shrugged off. The government of Bangladesh colludes in the exploitative conditions, unleashing severe repression on workers’ protests...” From Karachi to Dhaka and Delhi to Colombo, the ghettos and death-traps of globalisation will have to be challenged head-on by united waves of South Asian resistance, says the editorial.

Compiled by Avishek G. Dastidar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 23:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 04 Feb 2008 11:30
Posts: 255
Location: हिमालयम समारभ्य़ यावत हिन्दु सरोवरम, तम देव निर्मितम देशम हिन्दुस्थानम प्रचक्षते
Didn't know where else to post this-

Image

The Russian delegation consists of Communists themselves and have three confirmed public seminars with the Communist leaders of Kerala.

One at Kollam (which concluded today) and the other two at Kochi (tomorrow, Dec 6) and Kannur (Dec 7).

They have experienced spirituality from India, thanks to the Art of Living programmes and would share that experience and philosophy with the Communists from Kerala.

Also a write up by Sri Sri Ravi Shankar on the topic- http://srisriinkerala.org/the-first-communist


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 13:47 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 4141
Location: Undisclosed
ravar wrote:
They have experienced spirituality from India, thanks to the Art of Living programmes and would share that experience and philosophy with the Communists from Kerala.

Did any commie leader worth his salt attended this? I dont think so. There was a report that a commie local level official was chucked out of the party because he conducted an Ayyappan Vilakku (evening ritual devoted to Lord Ayyappa) at his home. Yes the russians may have realised the folly of communism, but I really dont think the Keralite commie goons have risen to that level where they can realise their mistakes. They are still debating about revolutions, Che Guevera etc. etc. Still a long way to go and smell the coffee.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 22:17 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 04 Feb 2008 11:30
Posts: 255
Location: हिमालयम समारभ्य़ यावत हिन्दु सरोवरम, तम देव निर्मितम देशम हिन्दुस्थानम प्रचक्षते
^^Agree.

Today's meeting at Kochi was attended by Sri. V. B. Cherian, IIRC, ex- Party Secretary, who is/was considered by many as an important guy in the party (though it seems he has fallen out with the party honchos for his controversial stance on certain issues).

At one time, the joke in Kerala was that, if it used to rain in FSU, the Kerala Commies would unfold umbrellas in GOC. That was the intellectual slavery that these guys followed.

Today, a bunch of visiting Russian Commies telling these brown-skin comrades to smell coffee, has enough symbolism for all to see. Sometimes, it is best to attempt to remove a thorn using another thorn. Yes, just an attempt, nevertheless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2012 06:16 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55
Posts: 2821
^^ The fishing nets on Kerala coast look very nice and am sure are practical too. They are always referred to as 'chinese nets'. Over the last 6 weeks I had the opportunity to travel to multiple places including Assam and take a couple of boat-rides on the Brahmputra. Very similar nets are deployed in Assam - and the locals just call them, at least the boatman called them 'tangni jaal' (hanging net).

I wonder if the communist background turns or makes anything spectacular chinese - so it is chinese nets and not just 'hanging' nets. These could just be imports from Assam or even indigenous for all I know.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2012 10:02 
Offline
Webmaster BR

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 4141
Location: Undisclosed
viv wrote:
I wonder if the communist background turns or makes anything spectacular chinese - so it is chinese nets and not just 'hanging' nets. These could just be imports from Assam or even indigenous for all I know.

Hmm.. the name Cheena vala (Chinese Net) has been in existence even before the first commie was born in Kerala :). Kerala had an active trade culture thanks to the ports etc. So I dont think commies brought in China here (to prove themselves as More Chinese than the Chinese - MCTC). Secondly I think the commies in Kerala relied too much on the Soviet Union of communism (terrorism). USSR was the favourite. But off course in 1962 etc. the commies favoured China. Even today the best way to irritate a commie is to bring up the topic of communism getting kicked out of USSR and Poland :lol:.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2012 10:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55
Posts: 2821
^^ok..but I found it curious since in Kerala it was always referred to as Cheena net vs. just tangani net in Assam. Maybe not a communist thing for a change :).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 07 Dec 2012 20:36 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 7100
In this country only leftists and Maoists have human rights, those who opposse them are to be slaugtered.

Salwa Judum leader gunned down in Bastar


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 08 Dec 2012 08:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Volkogonov, Dmitri Lenin Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Quote:
Lenin soon realized that ‘victory over the old world’ was impossible ‘without the dictatorship of the proletariat and an iron hand’.1 To this end, labour conscription was introduced, the bourgeoisie were subjected to repeated requisitioning, their apartments were packed out with new tenants, they were ‘purged’ from institutions and put under constant threat of new and worse punishments. A barracks mentality gradually took over in the endless commissariats, offices, Soviets and proletarian bodies.

Trotsky recalled that when Shteinberg, the Left SR Commissar of Justice, protested against the use of violence and repression as a means of settling social problems, Lenin exclaimed: ‘Surely you don’t think we’ll come out as the winners if we don’t use the harshest revolutionary terror?’ Lenin took every opportunity to ram home the message that terror was inevitable. A dozen times a day he would fire off tirades against anyone suspected of pacifism: ‘If we can’t shoot a White Guard saboteur, what sort of great revolution is it? Haven’t you seen what the bourgeois garbage are writing about us in the press? What sort of dictatorship is this? All talk and no action.’2

With typical persistence, Lenin hammered home the need to toughen the dictatorship ‘to save the revolution’, until gradually his regulations for using the iron hand became standard Bolshevik practice. To be sure, he was often pushed into adopting harsh measures by the disasters which threatened, above all the famine, caused by the dislocation of Russia’s supply system as a result of three years of war, together with reduced production. In effect, Lenin believed that terror would save the country from starvation. The food ‘must be taken from the rich’. Black marketeers must be shot. He also urged the masses to act independently, by which he meant they should carry out their own searches and confiscate food: ‘As long we do not use terror—i.e. shooting black marketeers on the spot—we’ll get nowhere.’ Looters should be similarly dealt with, while ‘the better-off should be left without food for three days, as they have stocks’.3

There would seem to be three elements which explain why a man with Lenin’s understanding of humanitarian principles could embrace violent methods. First, he simply lost his head when confronted by an avalanche of problems. Nothing more than an émigré intellectual a few months earlier, with no practical experience beyond controlling a Party faction, he had been cut off from the grim realities of life in Russia. As his first acts show, he had no idea how to deploy his time and responsibilities: personally authorizing an apartment for an old Bolshevik, or sending aid to a village outside Moscow, setting up the management of the Sovnarkom canteen and making endless propaganda speeches. The levers of the state machine, such as it was, were in harsh but inexperienced hands. Many of Lenin’s telegrams portray his loss of control, even if only temporary. For instance, he cabled Antonov-Ovseenko and Dzerzhinsky in Kharkov: ‘For God’s sake, take the most energetic and revolutionary measures to send grain, grain and grain!!! Otherwise [Petrograd] could expire. [Use] special trains and troops. Collect and load. Escort the trains. Inform us daily. For God’s sake!’4 This was a cry of desperation, loss of control and panic, the partners of coercion.

The second element is that the Bolsheviks observed their own scale of moral values. Lack of pity, class hatred and Machiavellianism were to them the highest revolutionary virtues. Lenin even stooped to hostage-taking, decreeing that ‘in every grain-growing district, 25-30 rich hostages should be taken who will answer with their lives for the collection and loading of all surpluses’.5 The effect on the middle classes was utterly demoralizing.

The third element was that Lenin intended to use fear as a weapon. Terror would break the will to resist of millions. When V. Volodarsky, the People’s Commissar for Press, Propaganda and Agitation, was assassinated by a Socialist Revolutionary in Petrograd in 1918, Lenin cabled Zinoviev: ‘This is im-poss-ible! The terrorists will think we’re milksops. We have an extreme war situation. We must encourage energy and wide-scale terror against the counter-revolutionaries, especially in [Petrograd] as a decisive example.’6

Lenin cannot be accused of personal cruelty. His was more the social, philosophical cruelty of a leader. His main argument for the use of terror was that it was in the interests of the proletariat. In an article entitled ‘Plekhanov on Terror’, he wrote with seeming frankness about the difference between bourgeois and Bolshevik terror: The bourgeoisie ‘practised terror against the workers, soldiers and peasants in the interests of a small group of landowners and bankers, whereas the Soviet regime applies decisive measures against landowners, plunderers and their accomplices in the interests of the workers, soldiers and peasants’.7 Such an argument could be used to justify any crime perpetrated by the state. The leaders of the revolution had become priests of terror.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 12 Dec 2012 06:52 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Views from the Left

Quote:
Babri, after 20 years

The CPM’s People’s Democracy carries a series of articles on the 20th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition. The lead editorial laments that those responsible for the demolition have not been punished yet: “A full twenty years later, justice has been denied to our Republic as those responsible for such an attack on the secular foundations of our country have not been brought to book... The legal proceedings continue to remain before the judiciary.”

The editorial refers to senior BJP leader L.K. Advani’s call for a national debate on secularism soon after the Babri demolition in a set of two articles in The Indian Express (December 27 and 28, 1992). It refers to the three covenants — rejection of theocracy, equality of all citizens irrespective of faith and full freedom of faith and worship — put forward by Advani then and asks whether the BJP repudiates the RSS philosophy of Hindu nation and Golwalkar’s view that non-Hindus “have no place in national life, unless they abandon their differences, adopt the religion, culture and language of the nation, and completely merge themselves in the national race.” It adds, “The BJP’s call for a national debate on secularism, which it periodically keeps reiterating, is nothing but a ruse to mask its real intentions of functioning as the political arm of the RSS and working for the realisation of the RSS agenda of transforming the secular democratic Indian Republic into their vision of a rabidly intolerant fascistic ‘Hindu Rashtra’...”

In retail

THE latest issues of the CPI and CPI(ML) journals keep their resistance against FDI in retail alive despite the opposition losing the vote in Parliament. While the CPI has accused the government of manipulating Parliament, the CPI(ML) calls it a “concocted majority”. The Left parties have targeted the SP and the BSP for helping the government.

“The claim by the SP and BSP that they did not vote against FDI in retail so as not to benefit the communal BJP is laughable; the BSP is known to have shared power with the BJP in Uttar Pradesh, while the SP is known to have done business with Kalyan Singh, the man who as chief minister of UP from the BJP, had presided over the demolition of the Babri Masjid,” an editorial in ML Update says.

New Age was equally critical. It says the SP’s and BSP’s argument they didn’t want to vote with a communal party was bogus: “The debate was not on the question of communalism and secularism. You cannot say that the brightly lit day is not day but night because your adversary is saying that it is day...”

ML Update calls the government’s arguments for retail FDI “unconvincing and false”. It also talks about the lobbying disclosure report filed by retail giant Walmart: “How exactly was the money spent on ‘lobbying’ for entry into India? Who are the alleged recipients of bribes...? These unanswered questions indicate that the process by which the FDI in retail policy has been adopted is murky,” it says.

Where’s the party?

A NEW AGE article raises questions about Arvind Kejriwal’s political party. It observes that despite Kejriwal’s announcement his party would ensure prominence for youth and women, only two women could find place in its executive committee. It also mentions the lack of representation from southern India.

Besides, CPI leader Binoy Viswam argues that it is easy to speak against corruption or launch a party, but the serious task would be to find out the class origin of corruption: “It is much more difficult to wage a battle against corruption and win that battle... The socio-political evil of corruption can be uprooted only through uprooting [the] capitalist system itself. Have the leaders of Aam Aadmi Party ever thought of this fundamental truth... Do they believe that they alone would be able to... win such a complex battle... If not, whom do they see as their allies in such a struggle...”

Compiled by Manoj C.G.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 13 Dec 2012 08:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Volkogonov, Dmitri Lenin Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Quote:
The decree on mass terror was the foundation upon which the system was built and developed by Lenin’s successors and by those who followed Dzerzhinsky and Unshlikht. It is difficult to fathom how a man who loved Beethoven and Spinoza, who had read Kant and who liked to tell Gorky and Lunacharsky how much the Bolsheviks valued the intelligentsia, could reconcile himself to a system permeated with police rule. How could Lenin, who claimed to be the leader of a new world, personally write the orders to hang, to shoot, to take hostages, to imprison in concentration camps, knowing that these would not remain mere words?

When the Bolsheviks first used terror, they justified it by citing ‘revolutionary conscience’ and the hasty decrees of the Sovnarkom which encouraged it. When, however, terror became an everyday, common and at times mass occurrence, Lenin felt the need to give it a theoretical foundation. There are many articles in which he developed his explanations. In November 1920 the journal Kommunisticheskii Internatsional published ‘On the History of the Question of the Dictatorship’. Opening with his customary ‘Whoever does not understand the need for dictatorship of any revolutionary class to secure its victory, understands nothing of the history of revolution,’165 Lenin proceeded to list a number of propositions to justify and whitewash revolutionary terror. ‘The dictatorship means—take note of this once and for all—unrestrained power based on force and not on law.’166 Several times Lenin repeated Gorky’s phrase, ‘the logic of the axe’, and he seemed to enjoy his own discovery that: ‘Unrestrained, lawless power, based on force in the simplest sense of the word, is precisely what the dictatorship is about.’167 He then produced a definition: ‘The dictatorship means nothing other than power totally unlimited by any laws, absolutely unrestrained by regulations and based directly on the use of force.’ The ‘revolutionary people creates its own court and punishment, applies force, creates new revolutionary law’.168 According to Lenin, violence meted out in the name of the dictatorship of the proletariat is ‘revolutionary justice’.

...

None of this distracted Lenin from the task of putting the repressive apparatus on a legal basis, even though his notion of what was legal bore little relation to justice. In 1922, Kursky set about formulating the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. With the formation of the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) in 1922, each constituent republic composed its own criminal code, in theory independent but in practice in conformity with rules laid down by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Lenin took an active part in formulating the model criminal code, that of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR). He wrote to Kursky: ‘In my opinion, we should widen the use of execution (commuted to deportation abroad).’172 Two days later he wrote again: ‘The law should not abolish terror; to promise that would be self-delusion or deception; it should be substantiated and legalized in principle, clearly, without evasion or embellishment.’173 He could hardly have been more frank: terror must be legalized as a matter of principle, and its sphere of application be as broad as possible. Moreover, he added two possible variants showing how the ‘use of execution could be broadened’, only one of which we cite, since the differences between them are insignificant: ‘Propaganda, agitation or participation or collaboration with organizations helping that part of the international bourgeoisie which does not recognize the right of the Communist system of ownership to replace capitalism and attempts its overthrow by force, by intervention, blockade, espionage or financing the press and similar methods, shall be sentenced to [death], commuted in mitigating circumstances to deprivation of liberty or deportation abroad.’174 This became in all respects the basis of the notorious Article 58 of the Soviet Criminal Code,175 as was recognized in Volume 45 of Lenin’s works, published in 1970: ‘Lenin’s suggestions were taken into account in the Criminal Code … in the section on counter-revolutionary crimes.’176

It was to Lenin that Soviet society owed the credit for having established and created a special rôle for its ‘punitive organs’. In this he owed nothing to Marx and Engels, who had left no instructions about how such bodies should be created or how they were to function. Lenin himself was the patron saint of the Cheka. Established in December 1917, it was soon accorded extra-judicial status at Lenin’s behest. The omnipotent Cheka had the power to arrest, investigate, pass sentences and carry them out. Tens of thousands of people were shot without trial in the cellars of the Cheka. As if this was not enough, on 14 May 1921 the Politburo, chaired by Lenin, passed a motion ‘broadening the rights of the [Cheka] in relation to the use of the [death penalty]’.177




Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Dec 2012 09:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Stalin killed many close associates of Lenin even when they grovelled before him. Their stories are depressing. Here is an example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Bukharin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Dec 2012 10:03 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28
Posts: 1179
This was the worst of all. As Bukharin was the best suited to succeed Lenin, more so than Trotsky.

This man had the right economic ideas and could have saved the soviet union.

With his execution in those early years, the soviet state basically sealed its fate. Although it came apart much later. But Bukharin was really the last good man they had.

His debate with Preobrazhensky on the future of Kulaks is a famous chapter in Soviet history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeni_Preobrazhensky

Preobrazhensky was also executed by Stalin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 16 Dec 2012 10:37 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
Some information about the fate of Lenin's close associates after his death. This is from the book cited above:

Quote:
In the internecine conflict that flared when Lenin died, both Kamenev and Zinoviev made poor political judgements. At first they helped Stalin to isolate Trotsky, and then themselves fell under the wheels of Stalin’s chariot. The destruction of the Bolshevik ‘old guard’ cannot be explained solely in terms of different policies, the contest of ‘deviations’ or platforms. Lenin had created a system which could tolerate only one leader at its summit. In the beginning, however, there was a host of claimants. When Stalin came out on top, they served to remind him that Lenin had tried to avoid having favourites, and had kept all his entourage in roughly the same position. Nor could Stalin come to terms with the fact that in many respects Zinoviev, Kamenev and the other ‘October leaders’ had had closer relations with Lenin than he. He saw them as potential rivals, and this decided their fate. The absurd invention of conspiracies and secret centres was merely the outward form of a process that finally confirmed Stalin’s monopoly on Lenin and his heritage.

At first, the ‘twins’, especially Zinoviev, believed they would return to favour. When on 6 November 1929 the Communist cell of the Central Union of Consumers’ Societies was interviewing Zinoviev for membership, he declared: ‘I think that in time (and I hope it will not be far off), the Central Committee will give me the opportunity to apply my efforts in a wider arena.’122 He had obviously failed to study the methods of Lenin’s best pupil. Stalin could not overlook the fact that Zinoviev had been praised far more than he during Lenin’s life. In September 1918 Trotsky had concluded a speech at the Petrograd Soviet: ‘We are pupils of Lenin, we strive, however minimally, to be like this flaming tribune of international Communism, like the greatest prophet and apostle of the socialist revolution.’ He sat down to ‘stormy applause’. But then the chairman of the meeting, a certain Zorin, exclaimed: ‘Long live the best pupil of Comrade Lenin, Comrade Zinoviev!’, and the minutes show that the meeting erupted into a ‘stormy ovation’.123 Not even Trotsky could praise Lenin as Zinoviev could. When the leader died, Zinoviev declared: ‘Lenin is Lenin. As mighty as the ocean; as stern and inaccessible as Mont Blanc; as tender as the southern sun; as great as the world; as humane as a child.’124 It was intolerable to Stalin that others should try to commandeer the dead Lenin and his ‘Leninism’.

As Zinoviev felt Stalin’s grip tightening, he ceased to fantasize about regaining his former glory, concentrating instead on finding ways merely to survive. His (and Kamenev’s) requests for an audience with Stalin were ignored, and he felt he had little choice but to join in the chorus of adoration for the new leader, a rôle for which he had proven talent. On the tenth anniversary of Lenin’s death, in January 1934, Zinoviev wrote an article on the subject which he could not get published. He had cited Lenin and added: ‘Comrade Stalin, the continuer of Lenin’s cause, could in early 1933 reinforce this quotation with the facts of the victoriously completed First Five-year Plan.’ He had then inserted the word ‘great’ before ‘continuer’.125 When Stalin’s book Marxism and the National-Colonial Question was published, Zinoviev at once wrote an article entitled, ‘From the Gold Reserve of Marxism-Leninism’. It began on a high note: ‘There are in the treasury of Marxism-Leninism a number of books which no Marxist can do without, and which constitute the gold reserve of World Communism. Such books are few in number. Indeed, quantity is here unimportant. Few though they may be, these books represent the most valuable possession of the world labour movement. Among this “mighty pile” one of Comrade Stalin’s works has for long—and rightly so—occupied a leading place. We are of course referring to The Foundations of Leninism. Now a new book will with equal merit take its place among the most outstanding works of Marxism-Leninism…’126 This piece also failed to find a publisher.

...

Zinoviev meanwhile tearfully begged for mercy in letters to Stalin, Yagoda and Agranov. In one letter to Stalin, he wrote: ‘I have no illusions. Already at the beginning of January 1935 in the Leningrad holding prison, Central Committee Secretary Yezhov, who was present during one of my interrogations, said to me, “Politically you’ve already been executed.”…I beg you to believe this: I did not know, I absolutely did not know anything, nor did I hear anything, nor could I have heard anything about the existence of any anti-Party group or organization in Leningrad.’ He declined to say anything about Kamenev.128 Whether or not this last fact affected the court’s decision, on 16 January 1935 Ulrikh read out the verdict: ‘As a result of the counter-revolutionary activity of the “Moscow Centre” in various branches of the Zinovievite counter-revolutionary underground, purely fascist methods of struggle have made their appearance, and a terroristic mood aimed against the Party leadership and the government has grown stronger, leading to the murder of Comrade S.M. Kirov.’

...

Ten days later Zinoviev was sent to Verkhne-Uralsk camp, and Kamenev to Chelyabinsk. This, however, was not the end of their odyssey, and they were soon to be brought back for the next phase of their torment. Stalin was determined that there should be no witnesses to the movements of Lenin’s former comrades, and as a result various instructions were cabled to their keepers.

...

At their second trial in August 1936, the ‘Bolshevik twins’ were more compliant. In exchange for Stalin’s promise to spare their lives, they had agreed to confess to all the fantastic charges.

Under interrogation on 28 July 1936, Zinoviev was asked: ‘It has been established by investigation of your case that the organization’s centre carefully worked out a plan of the conspiracy. What evidence can you give us about this?’ He replied: ‘The political aim of the plot was to overthrow the Central Committee and the Soviet government and to create our own central committee and our own government, which would have consisted of Trotskyites, Zinovievites and Rightists. In concrete terms the plan for the coup was the following: we calculated that the murder of Stalin (and other Party and governmental leaders) would cause confusion in the Party leadership. We intended that Kamenev, Zinoviev, I.N. Smirnov, Rykov, Sokolnikov, Tomsky, Yevdokimov, Smilga, Mrachkovsky and others would in these circumstances return to leading Party and governmental posts…According to the plan, Trotsky, I and Kamenev were to have concentrated in our hands the entire leadership of the Party and state…’132, and so on in the same vein.

In his letters to Stalin from prison, Zinoviev sank to the lowest depths of humiliation: ‘I am at the point where I sit for long periods and stare at your portrait in the newspapers and those of other members of the Politburo thinking: my dear ones, look into my heart and surely you will see that I’m no longer your enemy, that I am yours, body and soul …’ He signed his letters, ‘With all my soul, I am now yours, G. Zinoviev.’

Leninist was eating Leninist, the system was remorselessly consuming its creators. Who would be left to be told in June 1988 of the decision to ‘set the case aside in the absence of corpus delicti’? While no trace of Zinoviev’s relatives has been discovered, a grandson of Kamenev and also his younger son have been found to have survived.




Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 17 Dec 2012 08:51 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9296
From the book cited above:

Quote:
After the dramatic Twentieth Congress, when Khrushchev courageously stripped the cloak of secrecy off the crimes of the special services, there came a new era in the life of the ‘Leninist’ Politburo. Its tactics changed: only Stalin, Beria and the NKVD had been guilty of ‘violating revolutionary legality’, while the Party, and still more the Politburo, were blameless. Any attempt to examine the origins of the terroristic regime was severely curtailed.

Khrushchev himself felt the effects. When he was removed from power in a palace coup in 1964, he was, perhaps without realizing it, a beneficiary of his courage in 1956, for he was not arrested, shot or exiled, but was left to live out his days in peaceful retirement. But once the former First Secretary of the Central Committee—the post of General Secretary was renamed in 1953 and revived again in 1966—had drawn a bracing breath of freedom, he abandoned any intention he may have had of fading out gracefully. Like many old men who have led a stormy life, he decided to write his memoirs. With little schooling or culture, but much native wit and no little courage, he set about dictating his reminiscences.

This soon became known to the Politburo, of course. On 25 March 1970, KGB Chairman Yuri Andropov reported to the Central Committee in a top secret note:

N.S. Khrushchev has recently started work on memoirs of the period of his life when he occupied senior Party and state posts. These dictated memoirs contain detailed information constituting exclusive Party and state secrets on such specific questions as the defence capability of the Soviet state, the development of industry, agriculture, the economy in general, scientific and technical achievements, the security organs, foreign policy, relations between the CPSU and the fraternal parties of socialist and capitalist countries, and so on. He reveals discussions at closed meetings of the Politburo … Under these circumstances, it is imperative that urgent operational measures be taken to permit the monitoring of Khrushchev’s work on his memoirs, and to prevent the entirely likely leak of Party and state secrets abroad. With this aim in view, it seems sensible to establish operational secret surveillance of Khrushchev and his son, Sergei … We also think it would be desirable to summon N.S. Khrushchev to the Central Committee again and to warn him of his responsibility for the publication and leak of Party and state secrets and to demand that he draw the necessary conclusions.212

The Politburo was worried. Khrushchev had presented them with an unprecedented situation. On 27 March I.V. Kapitonov and Andropov were deputed to inform Khrushchev about the ‘exchange of opinions at the Politburo’.213 This had little effect, except to make Khrushchev and his son Sergei act with greater caution. Nevertheless, the KGB managed to get hold of more than 2000 pages of transcribed dictation. It was, however, only a copy, the original having been spirited out to the West by Sergei and another relation, without even Khrushchev himself realizing it. When it became clear that it was going to be impossible to prevent publication, it was decided to put pressure on the old ‘Leninist’ publicly to denounce the material as a forgery.

This time the Chairman of the Party Control Commission, A.Y. Pelshe, and two other members, S.O. Postovalov and R.E. Melnikov, confronted their recalcitrant ex-comrade. The hour-long conversation, scrupulously taken down by two stenographers, reads like a film script, and although it is far too long to reproduce in full here, it is worth quoting extensively as evidence of Communist morality, the climate of political investigation cultivated by the Politburo, and Khrushchev’s independent and bold behaviour.

PELSHE: According to Ambassador Comrade Dobrynin, on 6 November [1970] representatives of the American Time publishing house officially announced that they were in possession of the ‘memoirs of N.S. Khrushchev’. Perhaps you would tell us straight to whom this material was handed over for publication abroad.

KHRUSHCHEV: I protest, Comrade Pelshe. I have my human dignity and I protest. I gave material to no one. I am no less a Communist than you.

PELSHE: I have to tell you that the material is there.

KHRUSHCHEV: You tell me how it got there. I don’t think it has. I think it’s a provocation.

PELSHE: You are in a Party building …

KHRUSHCHEV: I have never given any memoirs to anyone and would never have permitted it. As for what I dictated, I regard it as the right of every citizen and Party member.

PELSHE: We already said in a conversation with you that this method, this writing of memoirs which a wide circle of people are attracted to do, is not appropriate …

KHRUSHCHEV: Go ahead, arrest me, shoot me. I’m fed up with life. When people ask me, I say that I’m not happy to be alive. I heard today on the radio that de Gaulle died. I envy him …

PELSHE: Tell us how we can get out of the situation.

KHRUSHCHEV: I don’t know. It’s your fault, not yours personally, but the whole leadership’s … I know that before I was summoned, they despatched agents …

PELSHE: A lot of people in Moscow know you’re dictating.

KHRUSHCHEV: I’m seventy-seven. I still think clearly and I answer for all my words and actions …

PELSHE: How are we going to get out of this?

KHRUSHCHEV: I don’t know. I’m totally isolated, virtually under house arrest. Both gates are watched. It’s very shaming. I’m fed up. Relieve my suffering.

PELSHE: No one is trying to hurt you.

KHRUSHCHEV: Moral torture is the worst kind.

PELSHE: You said when you had finished you’d hand it over to the Central Committee.

KHRUSHCHEV: I didn’t say that. Comrade Kirilenko suggested I stop writing. I said I couldn’t do that, it was my right.

PELSHE: We don’t want you to die.

KHRUSHCHEV: I want death.

MELNIKOV: Maybe someone has let you down?

KHRUSHCHEV: Dear comrade, I answer for my words and I’m not mad.I gave no one any material, nor could I have.

MELNIKOV: Your son wasn’t the only one to handle the material, there was also the typist, whom you don’t know, and the writer, who isn’t a Party member, and whom you also don’t know, and others.

KHRUSHCHEV: These are all Soviet people, trusted people.

MELNIKOV: No need to stamp and shout. You’re in the CPC [Party Control Commission] now and you should behave accordingly …

KHRUSHCHEV: It’s my nerves, I’m not shouting. I’m in a different situation and a different age.

PELSHE: Never mind about age and nerves, every Party member has to answer for his actions.

KHRUSHCHEV: You’re absolutely right, Comrade Pelshe, and I do. I’m ready to take my punishment, even the death sentence.

PELSHE: The CPC doesn’t sentence to death.

KHRUSHCHEV: It used to be the practice. How many thousands of people perished? How many were shot? And now they’re putting up monuments to ‘enemies of the people’…

PELSHE: On 23 November, that’s in thirteen days, [the memoirs] will be published, they’re with the printer now …

KHRUSHCHEV: I’m willing to declare that I have given no memoirs either to any Soviet or Western publisher and have no such intention. Please write that down.

POSTOVALOV: We have to think, and you above all, of what kind of announcement you should make, and to make them …

KHRUSHCHEV: I will say only one thing, and that is that everything I dictated is the truth. Nothing made-up, nothing amplified, if anything the opposite, it’s rather toned down. I expected to be asked to write. They published Zhukov’s memoirs, after all. His wife rang me and said: ‘[Zhukov] is ill and can’t talk to you himself, but he wants to know your opinion of his book …’ I told her I hadn’t read it, but people had told me about it. I said what he had written about Stalin was disgusting and I wouldn’t read it. Zhukov is an honest man, a military man, but he’s a hothead …

POSTOVALOV: But you said you hadn’t read his book.

KHRUSHCHEV: People told me about it.

POSTOVALOV: We’re not talking about Zhukov.

KHRUSHCHEV: Comrade Pelshe didn’t let me finish what I was saying It’s Stalinist style to interrupt.

PELSHE: That’s your habit.

KHRUSHCHEV: I was also infected by Stalin, but I liberated myself, whereas you …

MELNIKOV: Comrade Khrushchev, you may make a protest if you’re offended.

KHRUSHCHEV: I’m telling you, don’t push me into lying in my old age.

PELSHE: We heard today that the American Time publishing house has the memoirs of Khrushchev which will be published there. That’s a fact. We would like you to define your attitude to this affair, without talking about the substance of the memoirs, by saying you’re indignant and that you gave nothing to anyone …

KHRUSHCHEV: Let the stenographer take down my statement. From reports in the foreign press, chiefly in the United States of America and other bourgeois countries, it has become known that the memoirs or reminiscences of Khrushchev are to be published. I am indignant at this fabrication because I have given no memoirs to anyone, neither Time nor any other publisher, not even Soviet publishers. Therefore I regard this as lies, a forgery which the bourgeois press is capable of publishing…214

To his credit, Khrushchev would only admit, despite the arm-twisting, that he had not given his memoirs to anyone. He did not disavow the contents of the memoirs. The long dialogue between the disgraced ‘Leninist’ and the Party inquisitors highlights the way Party morality had been intensively cultivated by the Politburo. Since the time of Lenin, falsehood had become one of the Party’s chief political assets. Khrushchev’s words, ‘don’t push me into lying in my old age’, reflect on the individual level the rule of untruth, falsification and lying that were the Communist Party’s stock-in-trade. It has to be said, however, that the vast majority of the people believed the lies, and helped to spread them.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 17 Dec 2012 08:58 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Posts: 2570
Location: -
What a sordid tale !!!

It is the worshippers and slaves of these scum that go around calling themselves "humanist" in India despite their admission of engaging in mafia style executions as political tactics


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 17 Dec 2012 20:06 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 01 Mar 2008 15:30
Posts: 5
Journalist Shubhranshu Choudhary’s new book quotes a Maoist courier ‘revealing’ that Binayak Sen acted as a courier for a Maoist leader
http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/ ... 5.twitteru

Quote:
This ‘revelation’ has left many angry, and on social media, Choudhary has been accused of “playing a pawn” in the hands of the State. Maoist ideologue Varavara Rao, scheduled to be among the panelists at the launch event, has withdrawn his name. At the time of going to press, Binayak Sen had not responded to Open’s questions to him on the allegations in the book.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Red Menace
PostPosted: 17 Dec 2012 20:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Posts: 2570
Location: -
I don't know if this would surprise anyone other than complete idiots that believed their lies

Interestingly even as Nandigram rapist goons want us to believe that they are in ideological battle with the son of soil Maoists their yellow agents are running a shared services centre for all laal jhandas and ran a campaign for Sen


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3720 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 ... 93  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anindya, atamjeetsingh, Parikshit, rohitv and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group