Re: Re: Re: Why socialism is necessary

[miychi <miyachi9@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2002.05.25 01:41 PM, "Anthony D'Costa" <dcosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I don't think it is economic deprivation that is the cause of the Kashmir
> problem per se.  As an Indian citizen I am not allowed to own land in
> Kashmir, meaning the rest of India subsidized Kashmir (and I suppose Jammu)
> so as to placate the Kashmiris, the ruling class and its minions.  Prior
> to the breakout of the Kashmir insurrection in the early 1980s, Kashmir
> was better economically than many other states in India because of huge
> transfers of resources made by the central government at the expense
> of other revenue generating states.
>
> Secessionist movements in India are very common, many die along the way,
> some are coopted, and a few are internationalized and protracted. There is
> much at stake for the Indian union in yielding Kashmir to secessionists.
>
> Cheers, Anthony
>
>
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xx> x
> Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor
> Comparative International Development
> University of Washington            Campus Box 358436
> 1900 Commerce Street
> Tacoma, WA 98402, USA
>
> Phone: (253) 692-4462
> Fax :  (253) 692-5718
>
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xx> x
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2002, Louis Proyect wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 25 May 2002 01:29:24 +0200, Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
>>>
>>> While I am very sympathetic to your point of
>>> view in this regard, I would say there is
>>> - going by past experience -
>>> no guarantee that socialism would necessarily
>>> mean an end to war, unless you mean by
>>> "socialism" an "end to war", in which case we
>>> are dealing with a tautology.
>>
>> I don't get your point. I am talking about World War One, World War
>> Two and the hundreds of imperialist wars that have taken place in the
>> past 100 years either against nationalists, communists,
>> and--now--Islamic radicals in the 3rd World. Whatever drawbacks there
>> were to existing socialism, bellicosity was not one of them. The
>> looming disaster between Indian and Pakistan reminds me of the soccer
>> wars that flare up continuously in Latin America, but with much
>> larger stakes. When poverty-stricken 3rd world countries go to war
>> with each other, it is a function of economic pressure. Their
>> integration in the world capitalist economy makes it impossible for
>> them to maintain social peace. That is the reason there are wars all
>> across Africa. If in Kashmir, there were jobs, health care, education
>> and housing for everybody, the tension would die down immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Louis Proyect, lnp3@xxxxxxxxx on 05/24/2002
>>
>> Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org
>>
>> D'costa

Kashmir problem is historically speaking, First, occupation by India raise
independent struggle, Not as Muslim nor Hindu, rather in Kashmir various
religions existed and people live peacefully and admit other's religion.
But,when Pakistan separated from India, Pakistan muslim activists invaded
kashmir, then kashmir's independence struggle degenerated.
It result in war between India and Pakistan. Original aim vanished.
So if you will participate in Kashmir struggle, please don't forget this
historical fact.

MIYACHI TATSUO
Psychiatric Department
Komaki municipal hosipital
1-20.JOHBUHSHI
KOMAKI CITY
AICHI PREF.
486-0044
TEL:0568-76-4131
FAX 0568-76-4145
miyachi9@xxxxxxxxxx
>