A Grave Error



   Fri, 2012-06-22 16:12 | Prasenjit Bose


   The candidature of Finance
Minister Pranab Mukherjee of the Congress for the post of President has
split the Left Front with two parties - the CPI and RSP deciding to
abstain in the Presidential vote, while the CPI(M) and the Forward Bloc
decided to support him. Protesting the decision, the former Convenor of
the Research Unit of the CPI(M) and long time Pragoti contributor,
Prasenjit Bose has sent his resignation letter to his Party. The letter
is published below.

Dear Comrades,
This is to express my shock and dismay over the decision taken by the
Polit Bureau on 21st June to support the candidature of Congress’ and
UPA’s nominee, Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, for the Presidential elections.


Violation of Political Line

The CPI (M) has never viewed Presidential
elections, and rightly so, as something that is ‘apolitical’ or ‘above
party lines’. In 2002, a united Left candidate was put up against Mr.
Kalam, who was backed both by the BJP-led NDA and the Congress, SP etc.
The Congress candidate was supported by the Left parties in 2007 because
 the Left was supporting the UPA government from outside and the
Congress accepted a Left nominee as the Vice-Presidential candidate.
These were political decisions taken on the basis of the overall
political stand of the CPI (M) and the Left vis-à-vis the Congress-led
UPA and the BJP-led NDA.

As on earlier occasions, this time too, major
political realignments are taking place around the Presidential
elections. The political position of the CPI (M) should therefore have
been guided by the overall political line adopted by the Party. The
Political Resolution adopted in the 20th Party Congress held in April
2012 had clearly laid down the following Political Line:


2.137 The CPI (M) has to
politically fight the Congress and the BJP. Both are parties which
represent the big bourgeois landlord order which perpetuates class
exploitation and is responsible for the social oppression of various
sections of the people. They pursue neo-liberal policies and advocate a
pro-US foreign policy. Defeating the Congress and the UPA government is
imperative given the crushing burden of price rise, unemployment,
suffering of the farmers and workers on the one hand and the brazen
corruption and big sops to big business and the wealthy sections.
Isolating the BJP and countering its communal and rightwing agenda is
necessary and important for the advance of the Left, democratic and
secular forces.

2.138 As against the Congress
and the BJP, the CPI (M) puts forth the Left and democratic alternative.
 Only a Left and democratic platform can be the alternative to
bourgeois-landlord rule. This alternative needs to be built up through a
 process of movements and struggles and the emergence of a political
alliance of the Left and democratic forces. In the course of these
efforts, it may be necessary to rally those non-Congress, non-BJP forces
 which can play a role in defence of democracy, national sovereignty,
secularism, federalism and defence of the people’s livelihood and
rights. The emergence of such joint platforms should help the process of
 building the alliance of the Left and democratic forces.

The Polit Bureau’s decision to extend support to
the Congress’ nominee for the 2012 Presidential elections is a clear
violation of the agreed line of politically fighting both the Congress
and the BJP. The disruption of Left unity, following the Polit Bureau’s
decision, also goes counter to the stated objective of strengthening
Left unity and the alliance of Left and democratic forces. What was the
pressing need to extend support to a Congress candidate even at the cost
 of breaking Left unity? Such brazen violation of the political line by
the Party leadership within less than three months of the Party Congress
 is utterly bewildering. There is no explanation as to whether the
political situation has changed since April, and if so how?

Mr. Mukherjee’s Record

The terse statement issued by the Polit Bureau
justifying the decision states that “in the present situation” Mr.
Mukherjee is the candidate who has the “widest acceptance”. This is a
peculiar argument because the present acceptance of Mr. Mukherjee’s
candidature cutting across party lines, from the ruling Congress and
DMK, which are neck deep in corruption and venality, to the
communal-chauvinistic Shiv Sena, has something very sinister about it.
The “widest acceptance” of a candidate among such anti-people forces
should be strong enough reason for the CPI (M) and the Left parties not
to support that candidate.

Mr. Mukherjee has been a senior Cabinet Minister of
 the present and erstwhile UPA governments (2004-2012). In his earlier
stints as Ministers of Defence and External Affairs, Mr. Mukherjee was
instrumental in cementing the Indo-US strategic alliance through the
Defence framework agreement and the nuclear deal, which the Left has
always considered to be against India’s national interests. In his
current tenure as Finance Minister, he has presided over the longest
spell of double-digit food inflation in the post-independence period,
breaking the back of our working people. His muddle-headed handling of
inflation, by choking off demand through interest rate hikes on the one
hand and fuelling cost-push inflation, through subsidy cuts leading to
successive hikes in fuel and fertiliser prices, has precipitated
stagflation in the Indian economy. The illogic of his policy framework
can also be seen in the millions of tons of foodgrains presently rotting
 in the FCI godowns, even as poor women and children go hungry in the
absence of cheap food, thanks to the fraudulent BPL criteria.

Mr. Mukherjee has vigorously pursued the neoliberal
 policies of disinvestment of profitable-PSUs and financial
liberalization. This has led to a massive increase in speculative
capital flowing in and out of the Indian economy, resulting in financial
 volatility and the rupee touching a historic low. His thorough
mishandling of the economic situation has now led to a slowdown in
industrial production, rising joblessness, a yawning current account
deficit and record external indebtedness. He has also showered crores of
 rupees of unjustifiable tax concessions to Indian corporates and MNCs
in the name of “stimulus”, thus worsening the fiscal situation and
constraining development expenditure. He has shamelessly defended scam
after scam perpetrated by the UPA government, from 2G spectrum to KG gas
 pricing, and stonewalled all attempts to retrieve black money stashed
by Indians in offshore havens.

In sum, Mr. Mukherjee is not only a neoliberal
advocate; he has been so since 1991 and he had signed the GATT agreement
 as Commerce Minister in 1994. But in his present tenure, he has also
been one of the worst performing Finance Ministers India has ever had.
There is no way one can tell him apart either from the other key
Ministers of this discredited UPA government or its overall economic
ideology. Each of his policy actions have been explicitly criticized and
 opposed by the CPI (M) and the Left alongside trade unions and other
mass organizations. Millions of people have been mobilized to protest
against these policies over the past three years.

Rather than providing a single argument in favour
of supporting Mr. Mukherjee’s candidature other than mentioning his
“wider acceptance”, the Polit Bureau statement makes an assertion that:
“The CPI (M) will continue to oppose the UPA government and resolutely
fight neo-liberal economic policies being pursued which are against the
interests of the people.” Why has this assertion become necessary while
endorsing the Finance Minister’s candidature? It is clear that the
credibility of the CPI (M)’s opposition to neoliberal policies has been
knocked out by the Polit Bureau’s decision to support a candidate with
such a record. Arguing on the lines that ‘we are opposed to the economic
 policies of government but we have no problems in supporting its
Finance Minister as a Presidential candidate’ is nothing but sheer
hypocrisy and doublespeak.

Vacuous Arguments Expose Erroneous Stand

The argument presented in the Press Conference addressed by the
General Secretary on 21st
 June 2012, justifying support for Mr. Mukherjee, was wholly misleading.
 It was said that the CPI (M) has always supported Congress nominees as
Presidential candidates since 1991, despite being opposed to its
economic policies (2002 was an exception since Mr. Kalam was NDA backed
candidate). What was not mentioned was that never before has a sitting
Finance Minister of a Congress government (or any Union Minister for
that matter) been nominated as a Presidential candidate since 1991. Shri
 Shankar Dayal Sharma or Shri K.R. Narayanan were sitting
Vice-Presidents, when they were nominated as Presidential candidates.
Shrimati Pratibha Patil was a sitting Governor.

Moreover, Shri Shankar Dayal Sharma was supported
as President in 1992 because the joint nominee of the VP Singh led
Janata Dal and the Left parties, Shri K.R. Narayanan, was accepted by
the Congress leadership as the Vice-Presidential candidate. Shri
Narayanan later went on to become President in 1997 with 95% of the
votes in the electoral college defeating T.N. Seshan, who was backed
only by the Shiv Sena (a good example of “widest acceptance”). Shrimati
Pratibha Patil was supported by the Left as the Presidential candidate
alongside the Left nominee Shri Hamid Ansari being supported by the
Congress as the Vice-Presidential candidate. These prior instances
simply do not compare with the current situation.

The CPI (M) and the Left parties are not only in
the opposition today, but their strength in the electoral college is
also at its lowest since 1991. The Left is not in a position to
decisively influence the Presidential election results. The only obvious
 ground for supporting a Congress candidate from the point of view of
secularism – that the communal BJP backed candidate will win if the Left
 does not support Congress – clearly does not exist today. The NDA camp
is in a state of disarray and the BJP has been forced to support a
candidate initially proposed by the BJD and AIADMK. What does the CPI
(M) gain by supporting a Congress Presidential nominee in this backdrop?

In the absence of any explicit and coherent
explanation so far, one can only make two guesses. If the consideration
was that the strength of the CPI (M) and the Left is numerically too
weak to field its own candidate against both the Congress and BJP backed
 candidates, then the natural choice should have been to abstain from
the polls. That is the stand adopted by the CPI and the RSP and it is an
 eminently reasonable, transparent and principled position. While the
electoral outcome would have remained unchanged anyway, the Left as a
whole could have sent a clear message: that the Left is unitedly opposed
 to both the Congress and BJP backed candidates in the present political
 backdrop. For the CPI (M), this would have been in keeping with the
political mandate of the 20th Congress.

Equating abstention with political irrelevance is
logically fallacious, because relevance in the electoral college comes
from the number of MPs and MLAs, which in turn comes from public support
 in general elections. In other words, the relevance of the CPI (M) or
the Left parties is not really contingent upon whether the Left votes
for this or that candidate. The issue is how to leverage the existent
strength to convey the correct political message. And it is here that
the CPI (M)’s stand of supporting the Congress candidate fails
miserably, because neither is it based on any ostensible principle
(secularism, progressive socio-economic policy platform,
anti-imperialism etc.) nor any immediate political gain.

The other argument floating in the corporate media
is that the CPI (M) and the Left is going to gain by supporting the
Congress nominee because the Trinamul Congress (TMC) supremo is opposed
to the former and this will help to “drive a wedge” between the Congress
 and the TMC in West Bengal to the Left’s advantage. Some
overenthusiastic commentators have also opined that the prospects of the
 Congress nominee becoming the first Bengali President of India will
inflict a heavy political cost on his opponents in West Bengal and pay
rich dividends to his supporters. Such arguments, besides taking the
political consciousness of the ordinary people of Bengal entirely for
granted, are also reflective of naiveté and lack of common sense.

Repeated instances, from the 2010 KMC and other
municipality polls to the 2012 municipality polls have shown that the
TMC has been able to defeat the Left Front in most places even without
Congress support. The theory of Congress cutting into TMC’s vote share
by contesting independently is invalid in a majority of constituencies
because the electoral polarization takes place between the Left and
anti-Left forces, with the latter consolidating behind the TMC. Whenever
 Congress has contested independently (except for a handful of pockets),
 the TMC has gained at the expense of the Congress, marginalizing the
latter. Moreover, any effort to stitch up a formal or informal electoral
 alliance with the Congress against the TMC in West Bengal today will be
 a tactical disaster for the Left Front, because that will turn large
sections of traditional voters away from the Left. Such erosion of
support has already happened after the Nandigram/Singur episodes and
will further aggravate if the Left Front is seen to be making
unprincipled deals with the Congress which is perceived by a large
majority of the working people of Bengal as anti-people, corrupt and
opportunistic. The Left’s cozying up to the Congress before the Lok
Sabha elections will hand over the anti-Centre plank to the TMC on a
platter and help in consolidating Mamata Banerjee's reactionary
autocracy in Bengal.

As for MLAs and MPs from Bengal being obligated to
support a Bengali for the Presidential post because of ‘public
sentiment’, this sounds eerily similar to Shiv Sena or Amra Bangali kind
 of politics. Historically, the working people of Bengal have been wise
enough to see through such gimmickries and ask what politics the Bengali
 in question stands for? That is why Mr. Mukherjee could win his first
election from West Bengal only in 2004 though being in active politics
since the late 1960s.

Despite the laments of the bourgeois commentators,
the fact remains that the West Bengal electorate continued to deliver
handsome victories for the CPI (M) and the Left Front in election after
election, even after Jyoti Basu was not made the Prime Minister in 1996.
 They started defeating the Left Front only from 2008 onwards (there
were 3 Loksabha and 2 Assembly elections between 1996 and 2008 which the
 Left Front won convincingly), following Nandigram/Singur, which
triggered the outburst of the accumulated discontent over the failings
of the LF government and the myriad deviations of the Party. The short
point is that class politics, land and livelihood issues and social
justice remain central to the electorate in West Bengal, majority of
whom are workers, small peasants and agricultural workers and a big
section belonging to dalit, adivasi or Muslim backgrounds. Cheap
parochialism and regional chauvinism remains to be a concern of the
politically bankrupt and intellectually challenged.

The lack of any clear public reasoning by the Party
 leadership to explain its decision and widespread reports in the
mainstream media have created the impression that the Party leadership
was divided on regional/linguistic lines on this issue. This has
considerably denigrated the image of the CPI (M) as an all-India Party
with an emancipatory world view.

Why Resignation?

I protest against the decision by the Polit Bureau
to support the candidature of Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, the Congress nominee
 for the Presidential elections. I consider this to be a grave error
which will harm the Party and disturb Left unity. The Party leadership
has committed one mistake after another since 2007 - coercive land
acquisition in West Bengal, the Nandigram police firing, allowing the
UPA government to approach the IAEA with the nuclear deal, giving a call
 for a non-Congress secular government in 2009 - and then accepted them
in a cavalier manner in Party conferences without fixing proper
responsibility and conducting rectification thereon. The same leadership
 is committing yet another costly mistake, refusing to learn anything
from the past. Party members are aghast and exasperated that their
concerns are falling on deaf ears. Therefore, with great pain and agony,
 I tender my resignation from the primary membership of the Party.




-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an 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.

Reply via email to