From: narayana@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Kuram T Narayana)
Subject: Re: On our specimen chiefminister Jyothi Basu...
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:56:11 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.201043.22263@ecrc.de> sanjiva@ecrc.de (Sanjiva Prasad) writes:
>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,

First a clarification! A liberal is an umbrella term. Under it come 
a vast category of people of varying hues. Those liberals who represent
traditional liberal values that we know of are respectable, and I do not
have anything but appreciation for their thought processes. However when
I write notes attacking the general banner of liberals, I do so under 
my expressed assumption that sci readers are intelligent and can estimate
the target of attack.

In legal parlance intimidation involving violence against law abiding
citizens is called terrorism. Whether the goal of terrorism is the
violent overthrow of the state is immaterial. Infact the purpose of such
bundhs is bring lawlessness in the state, so that people loose faith
in the lawful democratic institutions. This is the basis upon which
many a marxist construct their theory of the overthrow of the state.
That is whenever a liberal dilutes the role of such bundhs to mere
criminality, they are applying their soggy mind.

>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.
>

Nice to see a condmnation!

>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.
>

There is a fundamental component you have missed. The chiefminister
takes an oath, upon assuming that office, to protect and preserve 
the constitution.  When a chiefminister issues a call for a 
terroristic bundh and conducts the same, it is a criminal offence
against law abiding people and against the constitution. The
central govt can legally dismiss the state govt and jail the
gooda Jyothi Basu! That is what is required. By actively pursueing 
the law of the land, we can eliminate the goonda raj from the face
of the Aryavarta.

>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