—
By: Soonya
In a meeting convened to commemorate the late Shri P Sundarayya, CPI(M) politburo member, Shri Yechuri Sitaram seems to have made comments that formation of small states pose a threat to national ‘integrity’.
He also seems to have commented that states should be formed on the basis of language. And he also seems to have opined that only language-based states can keep up with the integrity of the nation.
Additionally he seems to have opined that the communists were not able to grow because of the division of the country into smaller states!
He seems to have lamented that the middle-class abandoned the class struggle post land reforms, however this particular comment was a little confusing.
Mr. Yechuri is known for his eloquence but to use his eloquence to distort reality demonstrates the ideological ‘mess’ CPI(M) has found itself in.
Let us look at each of them and I am sure one can conclude that the CPI-M lives in a world of fantasies and instead of blaming externalities should take up a deep and honest self-critique to find the answers for their lack of growth and also losing their prominence in places where they had significant influence.
Language based states
By the same logic enunciated by Shri Yechuri, does he recommend that the Hindi speaking regions of UP, Bihar and Rajasthan and Madhyapradesh and Chattisgarh – all be merged to make a large state to keep the ‘integrity’ of the nation?
And what would he recommend about the border districts which speak two languages – for example Belgaum? Or Tada in AP or regions that abut Karnataka where they speak both the languages?
What are his formulations and solutions when a sub-region (according to him) finds discriminated? Discrimination and exploitation and lack of equity are the basis of Telangana movement if he cares to listen.
Do the people of a discriminated ‘sub-region’ have rights to demand justice? And where and when did CPI(M) in a merged language based state like AP stand by the people of Telangana for their just rights?
I have never heard Mr. Raghavulu et al., including some leaders from Telangana like Messrs. J Ranga Reddy, S Veeraiah comment on GO 610, or other issues raised by Telangana activists . I have also not heard about their reaction to Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme or Polavaram or Pulichintala. What is their stand on the gross injustice meted out to the people of Telangana region?
In a democratic set up the number of MLA’s that represent a region’s interests are in a minority and are further split on the basis of parties how does he propose that justice is done?
Since Telangana people are a part of a merged state of AP they cannot go to court for justice which is the tragedy that Telangana people are caught in.
If it were a separate state it could have taken the issue to either courts or other national arbitration bodies and ‘issues’ become justiciable. Does he not understand this basic ‘construct’ of our democracy, which systemically becomes an obstacle for equity?
What is his solution in a democratic framework where the majority MLA’s represent only their own region’s interests at the cost of another minority region like Telangana?
After finding solution to the injustices raised by Telangana people should he pontificate on national integrity.
And how come a new state formed becomes a challenge to national integrity? Has Chattisgarh lead to disintengration of India? An Uttaraakhand break the country? Instead you find the Human Development Indices improve. It’s nobody’s case that there is no corruption or other ills of a developing country like India. But hard facts of development and progress can’t be seen?
Telangana people are not demanding a country status, but are asking an administrative re-mapping through a de-merger under the constitution of India and the Indian flag.
Blaming sub-regional movements or subaltern movements for the weakening of the communist movement is like ‘aadaranamma maddela voti annatlu’.
The weakening of the communist movement is in the ‘class character’ of the leadership. If you go to a claimed communist bastion like Khammam, all the red flags fly on pakka houses and other colour flags fly on poor or kacha houses! The phenomenon has been there since early 80’s! Would Mr. Yechuri try to analyze it please?
Middleclasses
The core of the leadership came from educated middle-class for a party like CPI-M.
It is not just land reforms sir, but also the opportunities the opened economy threw at the middle-class who obviously embraced the ‘capitalist’ culture and abandoned you!
Many voices of sanity since 80’s had requested the communists to fight for the rights of the Dalits and other lower castes as caste and class were co-terminus in India. In a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude the party pooh-poohed such exhortations as ‘casteist’ and instead stuck to its ‘classical class’ formulations. So you lost a historical opportunity to lead the down-trodden in their quest for justice and voice in the political space.
Meanwhile, the Dalits found and built their own leadership and also their own political formation. A Kanshiram created the political space and mobilized the Dalits and other Bahujans.
So, sir a humble request is to stop taking a ‘sour-grapes’ attitude. And have the courage to own up the historical blunders that your party is prone to at every juncture of history.
Another historical blunder
In your hallowed circles, what do you think is the character of the class of rulers currently ruling in AP?
Some hints – crony capitalists, rentalists, semi-feudal banana republic type miners.
Who is able to mobilize the masses against this class? Another hint – TJAC, TRS, New Democracy. Who are participating in this movement? Middle-classes alone? Upper castes alone? Or a large swathe of the populace? What is the nature of this movement – democratic or violent? What are the issues being raised? Are they just? Are they democratic aspirations?
So the answer to your questions is here – when a large swathe of population aggrieved against the injustices meted out to them are up against a class that you also apparently and avowedly dislike – should you be on their side or side the same class representation against whom the population is apparently revolting?
As your party’s wont and your warped ideological prismatic lenses do not allow you to ‘see’ this popular movement in its true character. Or its just aspirations. And democratically expressed.
Oops here goes another historical opportunity sir!
And why do you blame the popular movement for your decline?
In Leninist tactics – enemy’s enemy is my friend right? So if the Telangana movement is fighting a popular battle against the ‘crony capitalist…’ class who is your enemy, then the Telangana movement should be your friend right? Friends fight together against a common enemy right? According to the gospel of the high and mighty polit-buro it is not right, right?
Now you see why you feel ‘Left’. Or abandoned.
Some of us sympathizers and admirers of great leaders like the late P Sundarayya and many others are confounded by your party’s behavior and stands.
And there are other ‘sexy’ stands against ‘nuclearization of the world’ which attract your time and attention. Not that they are not important. But my Warangal friends have a saying ‘kootla rai teeyaraanodu, yeatla rai teestananntlu’!
So more you pontificate and theorize and blame the ‘separatist’ movements which in Telangana’s case is a just cause and a just movement, the more you alienate yourselves from people.
And I also wonder about the dreams that Monsieur Karat and the rest have about a Third Front. Who are the members envisaged in the Front? A Yadav dominated, caste-basis mobilized party like SP who left Lohia-ite thoughts long ago your friend? By the same logic that you enunciate you should be away from such caste-based parties and also parties like the BSP. And who would you be left with?
Unless your party tries to understand India on Indian constructs you would always wonder why you are Left alone! Good people, bad formulations, historically irrelevant stands. Ahistorical, asocial perspectives leave you stranded at the cross-roads of history, as ever.
And you may as your wont, have another plenary to self-criticize a decade after and pass some resolutions – like many of us pass ‘new year resolutions’!