Her action demonstrates to others, who claim to oppose the BJP and its sectarian politics, what it takes to carry out meaningful political intervention
Brinda Karat’s actions, though laudable, stem from the armchair politics that communists of all persuasions have been indulging in. The very fact that the communist party (Marxist) is the only political party to have “theoreticians” on board, tells us something about the lenses through which they view politics and indeed; life.
Speaking up for or against an issue is one thing, but the ability to continuously act against fascism or vested interests from an informed and strategic viewpoint, unfortunately, has not been forthcoming from the CPM . Karat took the risk of placing herself strategically in front of the bulldozer, knowing full well that they wouldn’t replicate the act that Deng Xiao Ping performed on the protesters at the Tienanmen square- he ordered the tanks to plough through the protest, killing hundreds of protesters there. The official deaths have not been verified till date. We have not reached that stage in India; yet.
Cut to the present, the problem with agitational politics is that the so called leaders of all parties, including the CPM, absent themselves from it, and prefer the comfort of their well appointed drawing rooms, sipping the occasional scotch once too often. The ground level workers aren’t enthused to come to the front because they aren’t rewarded either by way of tickets for the elections, nor are they empowered to take decisions at the ground levels. The CPM of which Brinda and her husband are a part, was destroyed after Prakash Karat headed it. He has been responsible for vilifying and destroying the careers of more eminent and distinguished fellow communists; notably the late Jyoti Basu’s , who was prevented from casting his candidacy for the post of President of Indian, ostensibly on the the objections of the former’s . In fact, it’s this writer’s contention that when Brinda became a member of the Politburo, there were allegations of nepotism as she was favoured over those who spent long years as ground level members and felt that she was inducted only because of her glam quotient and the fact that she was Prakash’s spouse. It is easy to mouth phrases but difficult to think through strategies and policy prescriptions that help bring change. President Clinton was known for this very ability: he could think through strategies and gauge their effectiveness and then commit them to action, which made him an effective President notwithstanding his moral aberration which are too well known for recounting. The kind of armchair politics and the intellectual verbiage by communists, that often resemble a time and age where political realism was equated with untrammelled political populism, and which are not in sync with contemporary economic and social events, makes the communists in India, the dinosaurs of Indian politics.
Brinda Karat had her moment in the sun. Beyond this single act of tokenism, there is nothing to suggest that she might be the beacon of hope for the country in the future.
Brinda Karat’s actions, though laudable, stem from the armchair politics that communists of all persuasions have been indulging in. The very fact that the communist party (Marxist) is the only political party to have “theoreticians” on board, tells us something about the lenses through which they view politics and indeed; life.
Speaking up for or against an issue is one thing, but the ability to continuously act against fascism or vested interests from an informed and strategic viewpoint, unfortunately, has not been forthcoming from the CPM . Karat took the risk of placing herself strategically in front of the bulldozer, knowing full well that they wouldn’t replicate the act that Deng Xiao Ping performed on the protesters at the Tienanmen square- he ordered the tanks to plough through the protest, killing hundreds of protesters there. The official deaths have not been verified till date. We have not reached that stage in India; yet.
Cut to the present, the problem with agitational politics is that the so called leaders of all parties, including the CPM, absent themselves from it, and prefer the comfort of their well appointed drawing rooms, sipping the occasional scotch once too often. The ground level workers aren’t enthused to come to the front because they aren’t rewarded either by way of tickets for the elections, nor are they empowered to take decisions at the ground levels. The CPM of which Brinda and her husband are a part, was destroyed after Prakash Karat headed it. He has been responsible for vilifying and destroying the careers of more eminent and distinguished fellow communists; notably the late Jyoti Basu’s , who was prevented from casting his candidacy for the post of President of Indian, ostensibly on the the objections of the former’s . In fact, it’s this writer’s contention that when Brinda became a member of the Politburo, there were allegations of nepotism as she was favoured over those who spent long years as ground level members and felt that she was inducted only because of her glam quotient and the fact that she was Prakash’s spouse. It is easy to mouth phrases but difficult to think through strategies and policy prescriptions that help bring change. President Clinton was known for this very ability: he could think through strategies and gauge their effectiveness and then commit them to action, which made him an effective President notwithstanding his moral aberration which are too well known for recounting. The kind of armchair politics and the intellectual verbiage by communists, that often resemble a time and age where political realism was equated with untrammelled political populism, and which are not in sync with contemporary economic and social events, makes the communists in India, the dinosaurs of Indian politics.
Brinda Karat had her moment in the sun. Beyond this single act of tokenism, there is nothing to suggest that she might be the beacon of hope for the country in the future.