Re: Re: Re: Why socialism is necessary

["Ulhas Joglekar" <joglekarulhas@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony D'Costa 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.

The number of Western Marxists with adequate knowledge of contemporary India
is rather small. The number of western 'Marxist-Leninist' with a good grip
on India reality is miniscule. It is also amusing to see Marxists unwilling
to whisper a word about Tibet or Xinjiang, displaying sudden enthusiasm for
Kashmiri rights.

Ulhas