In the news, ruling party in Kerala has been accused of giving away land (including those which were declared ecologically fragile) to the real state developers. The video of the channel showed the natives resenting against the decisions. The news was reminiscent of what had happened earlier in Singur.
The commonality in both the incidences is that the ruling party was none other than our very own CPI. So is the party going for an image makeover or what. Isn't the poor supposed to be the beneficiary in a communist rule. But what has happened in both these states is ironical. The Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government justified their step on the grounds of industrializing the resourceful state. But in the process, the money was flowing from poor to the rich. The land at Singur which is just 50 km from Kolkata was been given to Tatas at very petty prices at the cost of poor people's livelihood. And the most ironical fact is that the site has been proposed for the manufacturing of the NANO- India's cheapest car.
So the question which arises in my naive mind is what exactly are the ideologies of the CPI. Is this is what communism really is? The sight of Communists fighting with their Communist propaganda at the centre but at the same time being indifferent to the plight of the poor in their own state is very frustrating. And what baffles me most is the adamance with which the party has stuck to their resolution of opposing the Nuclear Deal with US just beacause it is a capitalist economy.
The CPI, as it looks has gone all the way to distort the Communist dogma, as much as possible to suit them but at the same time reviving it at times and again to make grounds for their otherwise baseless oppositions. I feel its time that the party should incorporate some changes in their otherwise obsolete ideologies so as to justiy the need for some form of capitalism and also to play some meaningful role in the national politics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Nice article..
I believe that it is not just a problem of Communist party, but most political parties have left behind their core ideologies and accepted the rule of money and power. Due to this attitude of the parties, India herself doesn't seem to have any vision for the future development.
In this example, instead of giving away cultivable land to TATA's, the state government could have given non-cultivable land at low price, but in return should have asked for the infrastructure cost for connecting the company's land to main cities. In this way, public would have also got infrastructure and non-cultivable land would have been utilized.
And from the company's point of view, they are getting land at low cost!
Hey Kala. ... keep posting ... :)
hmm.. nice article. But what you have mentioned about the communists is the case with every other party. The one thing they try to get is power and maybe to uphold their principles they do need to stay in power(at the cost of those principles?).
the above comment was a 'forced' one.. but still independent..
Post a Comment