====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
There's no problem with self-defense against the formal, or informal, armed gangs of the state. The execution, however, of rank and file supporters of the CPI-M based solely on their support of the CPI-M is something quite different. I subscribe to the EPW, and I remember reading the 2001 article back in the day. Given the still largely agricultural nature of India's economy and the declining productivity in agriculture, a rural organization of the poor and the landless with a plan for utilization of the land that's more developed than the customary "land to the tillers" land reform program is essential to the advance of revolutionary struggle. No doubt the CPI-M as trustee for the interests of landowners is an obstacle to such development. That's not an issue either. Overcoming the obstacle is the critical issue. If the rural resistance is not distinct, has not distinguished itself, from the rightist elements in its selection both of tactics and targets, then that rural resistance cannot and will not overcome the obstacle. I don't know how we, or some, can rationalize or justify, "blocs of 4 [or 5] classes," dalliances with some mythical "progressive" "national capitalists," "third world exceptionalism" and then be so shocked, so appalled when the results of that exceptionalism are so "unprogressive," so backward. ----- Original Message ----- From: <sobuadha...@hushmail.com> <sartes...@earthlink.net> ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
