From: sanjiva@ecrc.de (Sanjiva Prasad)
Subject: Re: On our specimen chiefminister Jyothi Basu...
Reply-To: sanjiva@ecrc.de (Sanjiva Prasad)
Organization: European Computer-Industry Research Centre, Munich
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 20:10:43 GMT

In article <Bvv0Hu.B4I@cs.psu.edu> narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana) writes:
>When a news item (thanks to Bala) on a statewide bundh
>sponsored by the govt of Jyothi Basu to protest the center's
>liberalization policies appeared on this group, the item of
>such importance did not receive further commentary from our
>beloved macho liberals of sci. Since a bundh is an instrument
>of terrorism against law abiding citizens, I offer this 
>postscript on this specific event.

KT, as you well know, I call myself a liberal (don't know about the
macho or beloved part, though) -- and I have consistently maintained
that bandhs cause (or at least are accompanied by) widespread violations
of human rights.  I wouldn't most of these actions "terrorism" though,
since they do not in general aim to attain political ends by causing 
panic in the general populace via violent actions.  However, they do
use intimidation against the non-compliant and use the general public
as hostages.  And in any bandh, relatively minor but quite illegal
infractions of civil liberties are widespread -- curtailment of freedom
of movement, of privacy, of expression etc.  Let me, rhetorically, ask
anyone who believes in the legitimacy of bandhs whether they would care
to deal with a medical emergency/crisis on the day of a bandh.
So here is "further commentary" from a practising liberal.

I agree with you that several people calling themselves "liberal"
willingly put on the blinkers, and delude themselves about the
importance of the rights violations suffered by third parties during
strikes.  I have encountered several human rights activists who
*define* "human rights violations" as those committed by the government
(yes, now they've belatedly tacked on a phrase about other forces
wielding authority)  Paraphrasing Orwell: Governmental Bad, 
Non-governmental Good.  Quite forgetting that the Shining Path, the
IRA, the Brownshirts etc aren't exactly governmental.

But then, these people are not really liberal but are radicals. They 
aren't liberal quite simply because they hold their cause so overarchingly
important that any means they adopt are justified, and the interests
and well-being of all others must yield to theirs.  It is inconceivable
to them that someone who is not a fascist may not concur with them.
Any self-respecting liberal would militate against "political correctness".

[	Stuff deleted ... about "the winter of discontent", Jim Callaghan,
	Maggie T, sorry Lady Thatcher, and secondary picketing		]

Yes, most secondary picketing cannot be justified on the grounds of a fair
deal to labour, freedom of association etc.  The Labour party has faced
such an erosion of its base because of its incestuous relations with unions.

And state-sponsored bandhs take the cake.  Who are they hurting but the common
people?  The same applies to bandhs sponsored by political parties. 
Shopkeepers are threatened and have to pull their shutters down, the poor
woman lemon-seller who earns a few rupees a day has to starve her children...

>We should look at our Jyothi Basu's terrorism in this light. The
>action sponsored by the state govt of Jyothi Basu is in the 
>typical tradition of CPM gooda raj. The workers who participated
>in this terroristic act were not conducting any industrial action
>per se as definable under the industrial and labour relations act.
>It was primarily a secondary action where no single union is at
>a dispute with its employer. Thus the employers have to swallow 
>hefty losses to sustain the goonda raj of Jyothi Basu.

It's amazing how the CPM goonda raj gets defended by "progressive
intellectuals".  A few weeks before Safdar Hashmi and a colleague
were brutally clubbed near Delhi (succumbing to their injuries),
a newspaper vendor in Siliguri was hacked to death by members of
the CPM and allied trade unions.  His "crime" was to hawk a paper
that carried an expose about the corruption of a local CPM MLA.
Was there even a word raised about it by the "progressive intellectuals"?
A couple I talked to in Delhi even dismissed it as "probably a family 
feud". [ Could it be that because the poor guy wasn't from St Stephen's? ]
This does not mean, of course, that other parties are any better...

>What can be done! The best way is to criminalize such activity
>and make it possible for ordinary law abiding citizens to sue
>the unions for hefty sums. To provide further teeth, the burden
>of proof that the said secondary action infringed upon the
>rights of the citizen should be laid at the door of the unions
>and their goonda sponsors. This way we can ensure that ordinary
>citizens have their rights protected, while at the same time
>permitting legitimate industrial action.

I now live next to a country called France where this past summer,
the truckers blockaded the roads, the farmers blocked the railroad
tracks to protest that their veggies were rotting 'cause the truckers
hadn't carted them away, and this was followed by a strike by ....

These unions have quite simply become mafias, and hold the whole
community to ransom.  And what have those  much admired French
intellectuals to say?  I note with sadness that this is a new kind
of caste system. 
--
--
Sanjiva Prasad,  Guest Magician				E-mail: sanjiva@ecrc.de
European Computer Industry Research Centre		Off: +49 89 92 69 91 58
Arabellastrasse 17					Fax: +49 89 92 69 91 70
8000 Muenchen 81, Germany				Res: +49 89 16 33 59