[Marxism] A Brief and Tentative Note on Maoist Violence in the Context of Lalgarh (West Bengal, India)

[Sukla Sen <suklasenp@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

While it'd be quite foolhardy to condemn "violence" under every and all 
circumstances, "violence" has its own inherent pernicious dynamic - it almost 
inevitably brutalises and undermines democratic principles.
It is at best a necessary evil, under certain, not all, circumstances.

Having said that, let me propose that Maoist politics - the politics of brute 
violence detached from and, by its very nature, disallowing mass particiaptive 
politics - is morally repugnant and has no future either.
On a global scale they had in recent years four major hubs of insurgency: 
Chile, Nepal, Philippines and India.
Now they stand wiped out in Chile. In Nepal they have changed track and their 
position has become uncertain after some striking success. In Philippines, they 
have apparently suffered decline. 

In India, it is no accident that they are confined to the most backward 
hinterlands inhabited by the poorest - and cruelly exploited - of adivasis - 
the indigenous people. Utter government insensitivity is responsible for that.
Usually it is claimed that Maoists have significant presence in one-fourth of 
India's 600+ districts.
But that is highly misleading. Because that doesn't tell us how much of a 
particular district is under Maoist/insurgent control. Even a corner is 
affected, the whole district is counted in. Info on what fractions of Indian 
villages - around 6,40,000, is affected would have been far more insightful. In 
any case, the whole idea that every fourth district is under insurgent control 
is hugely out of tune with our real life experiences. It is the adivasi 
inhabited most backward regions of northern portion of South India - i.e. 
Andhra Pradesh, parts of eastern India - Orissa, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Bihar 
and parts of central India - Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra, in patches - are 
affected.

One of the most perceptive and sympathetic observer, K Balagopal, had observed 
that the very success of the Maoists - resulting in improvement in living 
conditions - has resulted in their decline in AP.
It also needs be noted that they have now hardly any presence in towns and 
cities. So very different from the heady days of late sixties and seventies..

As regards state terror, there is hardly any controversy.
"Heavy handed and indiscrimante state actions are not only utterly morally 
repugnant but also largely self-defeating as it on the contrary help to augment 
the ranks of the rebels. And debases the whole political order in the process."
That's what I had posted elsewhere just a while ago.
But no blanket justification of "Red Terror" against "White Terror".
Sukla


      
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu