There is an unquestioned acceptance that there are some 'basic realities' that give birth to extreme violent movements, even from people who are otherwise opposed to the ideologies and methodologies of these movements. However, the so called 'basic realities' are very different, not the ones sought to be projected by the apologists. Here is a perspective on this by Dr Ajai Sahni. This is some what longish, but worth reading.
http://satp.org/satporgtp/publication/faultlines/volume5/Fault5-7asahni.htm Excerpt: 'Revolutionary' violence that persists for decades, as has Left extremism in India, must be evaluated by criteria other than the general 'causal' approach that seeks to justify it in terms of historical wrongs and contemporary inequalities, or the presumption of its intrinsic beneficence. As one commentator observes, "Since this movement has had a controversial and turbulent existence on India's political stage for close to six decades, its leaders must attempt a socio-political audit of their efforts - from the point of view of their own objectives and its impact on the people they are fighting for." [11] Another perspective on the 'basic realities' that are often ignored, notes that the causal link between absolute, or even relative, deprivation and 'revolutionary violence' is, at best, tenuous. Extreme Left movements have found justification for random and indiscriminate violence in the most affluent and among the most equitable societies of Western Europe, as also in modern Japan. Within India, it has been observed that the districts in central Bihar that were most affected by Naxalite violence - Patna, Nalanda, Gaya, Jehanabad, Aurangabad, Nawadah and Bhojpur - were characterised by "farm prosperity and literacy... higher than in the rest of the State... Thus in some ways the violence in central Bihar is not the offshoot of stagnation and poverty, but is instead a reflection of development and growth, however stunted." The choice of violence, moreover, is in most cases made, not by the deprived, impoverished or victim communities, but by better educated and relatively affluent 'ideologues' and mobilisers, who purport to speak on their behalf. This is natural, of course. But, given the extreme complexity of the patterns of violence, of both voluntary and coercive mobilisation, and the overlap of a range of purely criminal and 'revolutionary' activities undertaken by various extreme Left groupings, it is important to understand that the claims of such 'representation' have, in all these movements, never been tested or seriously questioned --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
