In Indian politics, I tend to sympathize most with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). They’re center-right, support small government and free markets, and recognize the true danger of Islamic radicalism. They also support a robust foreign policy and strong defense, which are essential if India is to be a regional counterbalance to China. My affection has always been tempered, however, by the nutty-as-squirrel-poo Hindu militant side of the party. This is the same ideological movement which burned alive an Austrialian missionary and his two children a few years ago.
So I was discouraged to read that such tendencies seem to be on the rise again after a period of dormancy. Narendra Modi, a major player in the 2002 Hindu-Muslim violence which claimed 1,000 lives, was unexpectedly reelected chief minister in Gujarat by a landslide. This raises his prominence nationally. Not a good thing.
The same article mentioning Modi also references violence from the other side of India’s political spectrum. Recently, the Indian Left has split over the violent actions of the Communist-dominated government of West Bengal.
In 2006, the state government announced plans to build a chemical plant in Nandigram. Local villagers protested, driving out Communist Party supporters and resisting the building. Claiming the villagers were Maoist rebels, the government sent in police, killing 14 civilians. Things went downhill from there, “with armed Party cadres patrolled the villages, engaging in rape, assault, and murder. Opposition villagers were forcibly evicted from their homes, and many remain in temporary camps today, still vulnerable to violence. (Much of this is extensively documented in the report of an investigative People’s Commission published last summer.) In the late fall, things heated up, and numerous clashes were reported, again with Party cadres, not the official police, playing the aggressive role.”
The violence has split the Indian Left. To their credit, Dissent Magazine hasn’t hidden the dirty laundry of the Left on this one, but has written up the full story.
fascinating how the (proletarian) villagers opposing a (corporatist commercial) move by the native Communist Party were labelled as Communists from a different country (Maoists), as it’s the same move Stalin and his fellow-travellers made to turn all opponents of Russian Communism (Stalin’s “Communism in one country”) into “fascists” (militant socialists from Germany or Italy). The ideological theme is transgressed by the nationalist motive. Perverse and beautiful.