PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-54508
.
.. .
·.. .
.
c. r~:;~ :z&t2 .
has squarely blamed CPI(M)'s repression of Singur and Nandigram movements as the reason for its dE1eats in JNUSU etections, claiming.
that these developments have eroded the SFI's support base among the progressive and democratic minded students". Inlhe name of.
'forthright positions', SFI-JNU even tried to sum up the experi~nce of the international Communist movement by claiming that ·ooe of the.
major shortcomings of the socialist experiments of the 20th century was to address the quesUons of democracy, civil liberties, freedom of.
expression and tolerance towards pohtical dissent" -an argument repeated ab nausium by the revisionists and opportunists all over the wei ld.All such asserti0ns leave no one in doubt that SFI-JNU's 'critique' of CPI{M) is entirely based on its calculations for the JNUSU elections. Si 1..
JNU believes that to rev.erse the defeats in JNUSU elections, it has to now distance itself from CPI{M) and its past crimes.Even with this latest 'distancing' and 'dissi<ient', SFI-JNU is nothing but a new avatar of its old self. SFI-JNU is unable and.
unwilling to break th~umbilical chord that ties it w~h the reactionary and social-fascist politics of CPI{M}. Nor SFI-JNU's present anti-CPI(M}.
stance a reflection of any genuine attempt at se1f-reflection and rectification, because its 'dissent' is dictated purely by the considerations of.
victory and defeat in JNUSU elections. It is nothing but crass opportunism to conveniently put the entire blame of SFI's electoral defeat in.
JNUSU elections from 2007 on the 'mistakes' of its parent party, without accepting its own dark history of anti~student politics in the <!ampus..
· The students of this campus will not allow SFI-JNU to conveniently forget its past betrayals. While in JNUSU, SFI-JNU facilffated the entry of .the Nestle outlet mto JNU in 2004 and defended the corporatization of the campus, it sided with NSUI and ABVP if19PP~ing the students ofthe campus who showed black flags to Manmohan Singh when the World Bank-appointed PM visited JNU in 2005. SFI-JNU betrayed theunited struggle of workers and students in 2007 by demanding Proctorial enquiry and punishment for protesting students.JNUSU office.
bearers from SF! submitted apology letters to the VC along with AJSA's office bearers in JNUSU after the registrar was confronted by students.
the united anti-Lyngdoh struggle by surrendering tothe Solicitor Gen~rademanding worker'srights. SFI-JNU betrayed the struggle against the imposition of user charges and electfic meters in 2010. Hbackstabbed.
l in the name of 'negotiations' and helped impose Lyngdoh on JNUSUelections. These are only afew glaring samples of SFI's '.
glorious legacy' within this campus! Can it put the blame for such opportunist andCPI(M) outside. .
anti-student acts on CPI(M)? Students of JNU have rejected SFI as much for its misdeeds in the campus as for the crimes of social-fascistNow that 'SFI-JNU' .
has been summarily dissolved and its four leading members expelled by SFI's all-India committee, 'SFI-.
JNU' .
is crying hoarse against CPI(M) brand of 'authoritarianism'. But this is the method in which CPI(M) and its affiliate organisations.
.
have dealt with political opposition within its ranks and outside all along in its history. Why have SFI-JNU realized onty now that they have.
.
Q I been treateq in an 'authoritarian' and 'un~emoc~atic' manner?.Does it believe that CPI(M)'s actions against the NaxaUtes in the 1960s-70s,against the people bf Marisjhapi, Singur, Nandigram: Chengara,Lalgarh etc. were democratic? What is their position on CPI(M)'s support to ,.
the UPA government in 2004. in IArhich Pranab Mukherjee was a key player and one of the prominent cabinet ministers? Will not now SFI-JNU.
0 .
accept that CPI(M) was willfully complicit in all the anti-people and reactionary policies of the Indian state, be·itthe passing of the notorious.
IS .
SEZ bill or the rampant sell-out of the public sectors in the name of disinvestment, the passing and strengthening of the draconian UAPA and.
AfSPA, witch-hunt of Muslims in the name of 'fighting terrorism', implementing the fascist Operation Green Hunt in West Bengal, and so on? .
}VI .
de. governed states at the cost of the land and lives of peasants and workers? Shouting from rooftops about .
Is SFI-JNU also opposed to CPI(M)'s complete surrender to imperialist capital and its luring of MNCs to make investments in CPI(M)-.
va. 'authoritarian' and 'undemocra1ic'.
QO·< nature of CPt(M) when forced into a corner, but not raising even a whisper of opposrtion against CPI(M)'s sociat-fascist policies from 1960s till.
.
2007 and thereafter, is sheer opportunism and political bankruptcy which both SFI-JNU and Prasenjit Bose are guilty of. Their latest political.
res.
b~ somersault is symptomatic of the bickering and power struggles that have afflicted all ruling-class parliamentary parties in India..
CPI{ML) Uberation-AISA's opportunist and bankrupt politics of fishing in the troubled waters needs to be unmasked. As·if.
l'4r they were vmiting with bated breath for the occasion, Liberation-A!SA 'welcomed' wholeheartedly SFI-JNU's anti-CPl(M) position without.
uttering asingle word of criticism for the 'dissenting' SFI-JNU, much like they welcomed 'Comrade Prasenjit Bose.
' (AISA's poster, 8July)..
.
AlSA probably was hoping that the 'dissrdent' SFI will split from CPI(M} and join the rag-tag NGO-ised 'Left movemenr fabricated by its parent.
Frie party CPI{Ml) LiberatiOnlit was only when SFI-JNU retorted back at AISA.
.
'sholier-than-thou sermonizing on the need for Aaresolute struggle.
krn. for a Left movement'\ CPI(M)'s "nght deviation" and its Herosion of mass base", CPI(M)'s intolerance of political opposition etc. (SFI-JNUpamphlet. 9 July), that AISA-Liberation made au-turn from their earlier position of blindly eulogizing SFI~JNUPal< made some 'cri1rque' 's 'opposition' to CPI(M),andban classes' to the 'of SFI-JNU. AISA thereafter took the responsibility of imparting lessons of 'correct Marxist politics' and 'rectificationindependent' SFl-JNU unit, wh1le declaring tn aself-congratulatory mode thal "thankfully, we [Liberation~AISAJ we do not have r.
Kas to correct any right-wing policy devtation that has crept into our line· (AISA, 10 July)!.
entiJ .
AISA shameJe.ssly peddles such self-serving lies even after its parent party Liberation has opportunistically betrayed the.
political tine of Marxism-Leninism and armed agrarian revolution ushered in·by Naxalbari. This was dooe in order to enter the quagmire ~ .
the of parliamentary politics. Is it not right opportunism-in other words, revisionism-in the garb of Marxism, k.
.
cons 'comrades'?! Has AJSA forgotten ''e.
about Liberation's electoral alliance with the same CPI{M) in Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, etc., whom they are now claiming to be "right-.
deviationists'.
Strir .
? Why have they allied with CPI(M), which is guilty of Singur, Nandigram, "murder of TP Chandrashekhar~. etc.? When AISA.
It WJ accuses of CPI(M)'s aHiance will1 Jayalantha, Chandrabau Naidu, Naveen Patnaik-all former NDA partners-do we needto remind them.
that liberation too had allied with Samala party in 1990s in Bihar headed by Nitish Kumar-presently an important NDA ally? In 'criticising.
Iso .
.
SFI-JNU for the compromises it has made in the campus,does AI SA want the students to forget about their own dark history of betrayals of.
'.
I the students' movement, almost on every occasion in connivance with SF!-JNU? Who doesn't know about AISA-SFI's joint efforts to imposethe draconian Lyngdoh regulations on the JNUSU elections and the betrayal of the JNUSU Constitution? This is just the latest example ofAISA's understanding of left unity'! The shadow-boxing of these two revisionist organisations. AISA and SFI-JNU, first indulging in t .
unrestrained bonhomie and camaraderie while 'critiquing' CPI(M), but soon breaking into an opportunist slanging match to outdo each othur,4fcannot hide AISA-SFI~s shared political basis of ruling-class opportunismand hypocrisy. \S .
It is this degenerate and unscrupulous politics of revisionism and opportunism that allows Liberation-A~SAto remajn.
shrewdly silent on th_edissolution of the 'dissident' SFI-JNU unit and"the expulsion of its four leading mQmbers. y.Jhyhas AI SA notstood with their 'comrades' in SFI~JNU or even 'Comrade' Prasenjit Bose when they were 'penalisedtn\s .
'.
manner. which AI SA had so wholeheartedly welcomed? Is this the sample of Liberalion-AISAfor opposing CPI(M) in a'principled''s much-touted idea of 'Left un~y'? Such.
opportunism of Li~ration-AISA sterns from betraying the caus~ of the oppressed classes to serve ruling-c!as~ interests through par1iamentarypolitics. The truth is that Liberation-AISA i~ j~st another variant of CPI(M~SF.
I in the garb of Marxism-Leninism, mired neck-.
~eep in the par1iamentary quagmire. This brand of reaction~ry 'left' p~itics has to b~ relentlessly a.nd resolutely exposed and ··11nally defeated for the.success of the struggle for a revolutionary sooal transformation. _ _ IIt:1· ·.
.
.
~· .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-54508
.
.. .
·.. .
.
c. r~:;~ :z&t2 .
has squarely blamed CPI(M)'s repression of Singur and Nandigram movements as the reason for its dE1eats in JNUSU etections, claiming.
that these developments have eroded the SFI's support base among the progressive and democratic minded students". Inlhe name of.
'forthright positions', SFI-JNU even tried to sum up the experi~nce of the international Communist movement by claiming that ·ooe of the.
major shortcomings of the socialist experiments of the 20th century was to address the quesUons of democracy, civil liberties, freedom of.
expression and tolerance towards pohtical dissent" -an argument repeated ab nausium by the revisionists and opportunists all over the wei ld.All such asserti0ns leave no one in doubt that SFI-JNU's 'critique' of CPI{M) is entirely based on its calculations for the JNUSU elections. Si 1..
JNU believes that to rev.erse the defeats in JNUSU elections, it has to now distance itself from CPI{M) and its past crimes.Even with this latest 'distancing' and 'dissi<ient', SFI-JNU is nothing but a new avatar of its old self. SFI-JNU is unable and.
unwilling to break th~umbilical chord that ties it w~h the reactionary and social-fascist politics of CPI{M}. Nor SFI-JNU's present anti-CPI(M}.
stance a reflection of any genuine attempt at se1f-reflection and rectification, because its 'dissent' is dictated purely by the considerations of.
victory and defeat in JNUSU elections. It is nothing but crass opportunism to conveniently put the entire blame of SFI's electoral defeat in.
JNUSU elections from 2007 on the 'mistakes' of its parent party, without accepting its own dark history of anti~student politics in the <!ampus..
· The students of this campus will not allow SFI-JNU to conveniently forget its past betrayals. While in JNUSU, SFI-JNU facilffated the entry of .the Nestle outlet mto JNU in 2004 and defended the corporatization of the campus, it sided with NSUI and ABVP if19PP~ing the students ofthe campus who showed black flags to Manmohan Singh when the World Bank-appointed PM visited JNU in 2005. SFI-JNU betrayed theunited struggle of workers and students in 2007 by demanding Proctorial enquiry and punishment for protesting students.JNUSU office.
bearers from SF! submitted apology letters to the VC along with AJSA's office bearers in JNUSU after the registrar was confronted by students.
the united anti-Lyngdoh struggle by surrendering tothe Solicitor Gen~rademanding worker'srights. SFI-JNU betrayed the struggle against the imposition of user charges and electfic meters in 2010. Hbackstabbed.
l in the name of 'negotiations' and helped impose Lyngdoh on JNUSUelections. These are only afew glaring samples of SFI's '.
glorious legacy' within this campus! Can it put the blame for such opportunist andCPI(M) outside. .
anti-student acts on CPI(M)? Students of JNU have rejected SFI as much for its misdeeds in the campus as for the crimes of social-fascistNow that 'SFI-JNU' .
has been summarily dissolved and its four leading members expelled by SFI's all-India committee, 'SFI-.
JNU' .
is crying hoarse against CPI(M) brand of 'authoritarianism'. But this is the method in which CPI(M) and its affiliate organisations.
.
have dealt with political opposition within its ranks and outside all along in its history. Why have SFI-JNU realized onty now that they have.
.
Q I been treateq in an 'authoritarian' and 'un~emoc~atic' manner?.Does it believe that CPI(M)'s actions against the NaxaUtes in the 1960s-70s,against the people bf Marisjhapi, Singur, Nandigram: Chengara,Lalgarh etc. were democratic? What is their position on CPI(M)'s support to ,.
the UPA government in 2004. in IArhich Pranab Mukherjee was a key player and one of the prominent cabinet ministers? Will not now SFI-JNU.
0 .
accept that CPI(M) was willfully complicit in all the anti-people and reactionary policies of the Indian state, be·itthe passing of the notorious.
IS .
SEZ bill or the rampant sell-out of the public sectors in the name of disinvestment, the passing and strengthening of the draconian UAPA and.
AfSPA, witch-hunt of Muslims in the name of 'fighting terrorism', implementing the fascist Operation Green Hunt in West Bengal, and so on? .
}VI .
de. governed states at the cost of the land and lives of peasants and workers? Shouting from rooftops about .
Is SFI-JNU also opposed to CPI(M)'s complete surrender to imperialist capital and its luring of MNCs to make investments in CPI(M)-.
va. 'authoritarian' and 'undemocra1ic'.
QO·< nature of CPt(M) when forced into a corner, but not raising even a whisper of opposrtion against CPI(M)'s sociat-fascist policies from 1960s till.
.
2007 and thereafter, is sheer opportunism and political bankruptcy which both SFI-JNU and Prasenjit Bose are guilty of. Their latest political.
res.
b~ somersault is symptomatic of the bickering and power struggles that have afflicted all ruling-class parliamentary parties in India..
CPI{ML) Uberation-AISA's opportunist and bankrupt politics of fishing in the troubled waters needs to be unmasked. As·if.
l'4r they were vmiting with bated breath for the occasion, Liberation-A!SA 'welcomed' wholeheartedly SFI-JNU's anti-CPl(M) position without.
uttering asingle word of criticism for the 'dissenting' SFI-JNU, much like they welcomed 'Comrade Prasenjit Bose.
' (AISA's poster, 8July)..
.
AlSA probably was hoping that the 'dissrdent' SFI will split from CPI(M} and join the rag-tag NGO-ised 'Left movemenr fabricated by its parent.
Frie party CPI{Ml) LiberatiOnlit was only when SFI-JNU retorted back at AISA.
.
'sholier-than-thou sermonizing on the need for Aaresolute struggle.
krn. for a Left movement'\ CPI(M)'s "nght deviation" and its Herosion of mass base", CPI(M)'s intolerance of political opposition etc. (SFI-JNUpamphlet. 9 July), that AISA-Liberation made au-turn from their earlier position of blindly eulogizing SFI~JNUPal< made some 'cri1rque' 's 'opposition' to CPI(M),andban classes' to the 'of SFI-JNU. AISA thereafter took the responsibility of imparting lessons of 'correct Marxist politics' and 'rectificationindependent' SFl-JNU unit, wh1le declaring tn aself-congratulatory mode thal "thankfully, we [Liberation~AISAJ we do not have r.
Kas to correct any right-wing policy devtation that has crept into our line· (AISA, 10 July)!.
entiJ .
AISA shameJe.ssly peddles such self-serving lies even after its parent party Liberation has opportunistically betrayed the.
political tine of Marxism-Leninism and armed agrarian revolution ushered in·by Naxalbari. This was dooe in order to enter the quagmire ~ .
the of parliamentary politics. Is it not right opportunism-in other words, revisionism-in the garb of Marxism, k.
.
cons 'comrades'?! Has AJSA forgotten ''e.
about Liberation's electoral alliance with the same CPI{M) in Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, etc., whom they are now claiming to be "right-.
deviationists'.
Strir .
? Why have they allied with CPI(M), which is guilty of Singur, Nandigram, "murder of TP Chandrashekhar~. etc.? When AISA.
It WJ accuses of CPI(M)'s aHiance will1 Jayalantha, Chandrabau Naidu, Naveen Patnaik-all former NDA partners-do we needto remind them.
that liberation too had allied with Samala party in 1990s in Bihar headed by Nitish Kumar-presently an important NDA ally? In 'criticising.
Iso .
.
SFI-JNU for the compromises it has made in the campus,does AI SA want the students to forget about their own dark history of betrayals of.
'.
I the students' movement, almost on every occasion in connivance with SF!-JNU? Who doesn't know about AISA-SFI's joint efforts to imposethe draconian Lyngdoh regulations on the JNUSU elections and the betrayal of the JNUSU Constitution? This is just the latest example ofAISA's understanding of left unity'! The shadow-boxing of these two revisionist organisations. AISA and SFI-JNU, first indulging in t .
unrestrained bonhomie and camaraderie while 'critiquing' CPI(M), but soon breaking into an opportunist slanging match to outdo each othur,4fcannot hide AISA-SFI~s shared political basis of ruling-class opportunismand hypocrisy. \S .
It is this degenerate and unscrupulous politics of revisionism and opportunism that allows Liberation-A~SAto remajn.
shrewdly silent on th_edissolution of the 'dissident' SFI-JNU unit and"the expulsion of its four leading mQmbers. y.Jhyhas AI SA notstood with their 'comrades' in SFI~JNU or even 'Comrade' Prasenjit Bose when they were 'penalisedtn\s .
'.
manner. which AI SA had so wholeheartedly welcomed? Is this the sample of Liberalion-AISAfor opposing CPI(M) in a'principled''s much-touted idea of 'Left un~y'? Such.
opportunism of Li~ration-AISA sterns from betraying the caus~ of the oppressed classes to serve ruling-c!as~ interests through par1iamentarypolitics. The truth is that Liberation-AISA i~ j~st another variant of CPI(M~SF.
I in the garb of Marxism-Leninism, mired neck-.
~eep in the par1iamentary quagmire. This brand of reaction~ry 'left' p~itics has to b~ relentlessly a.nd resolutely exposed and ··11nally defeated for the.success of the struggle for a revolutionary sooal transformation. _ _ IIt:1· ·.
.
.
~· .
.