Every society prides itself on the number and the genius of its intellectuals. My country today, I am sorry to admit, is handicapped in this. With the recent upsurge in Naxalite Violence in some parts the country; I came across this short documentary film "India's Maoist Revolution" on Youtube.
The film starts by describing two Indias:
India A: the urban youth, a generation of Indians which is a product of the New India, the one that grew up in the '90s, with liberal values and a modern approach towards the world, a society that now hails consumerism and its brainpower, industrial and free market potential. The kids on the 'economic miracle' wavelength. I shouldn't have to describe this too much, just imagine as a reader you yourself are a part of it.
India B: Where poverty, illiteracy, exploitation of the tiller, the laborer and the women is the order of the day. An India that comes true in all the gory words we used in those long melancholy essays that we rote learned and prepared for our exams.
Does it not exist? I don't say so. For otherwise, there is no reason for Maoists to have atleast some influence in >25% of Indian districts.
Then why am I ashamed of the Indian 'intellectual' who makes a point of it?
I don't know Arundhati Roy, I have heard she won the Booker Prize for a book I have never bothered to read as yet (and wouldn't do so now for sure). The film (and the Indian Media) epitomizes Roy as a champion of the cause of the underprivileged in India, the messiah of the downtrodden who struggles tirelessly for the cause of India B. The film's other stars are Mr. Ajai Sahni from Institute of Conflict Management (think tank -- you who these people are?) and a Human Rights Activist Himanshu Danty.
From the start, you can get the feel the film is for a firang audience. At a point it even taunts that all that the Indian state touts itself for being the world's largest democracy is just in name. Ajai even claims that there is 'not a single' part of India where there is absolute authority of the state in full force. Amazing 'Intellectual'!
The Context:
The film talks bare minimum of the Naxal (Maoist) Revolution, Why is it as it is? Where it happens? And what are these people capable of? Now remind yourself of those 'distressed people who don’t see the state as a welfare state', those who declare war on the State of India, who go about abducting, extorting and intimidating entire populations and their administrations. Those who beheaded Police Officer Francis Induwar, those who hijacked a Rajdhani Express, those whose leaders claim to bring about a Maoist Revolution in India. Put to rest all class and cast distinctions, restart nation building 'as it should be'.
Maoists, Yes! I mean who are we? are we fools? I haven't studied atomic physics and I don't know how to build a thermonuclear weapon. However, I still know that nuclear arms and their effect do no good to mankind. Likewise, I haven't read Mao and I'm sure neither have most of you have, all I know that when Mao's reign ended, China was not today's China. It was in its worst political and socio-economic condition; a China where a Tiananmen Square took place! A police state with a broken economy and a broken spirit. A China which had to open up "Special Economic Zones" with full free-market freedom (entirely opposed to the Communist System) too survive. So much to prove that Maoism is a FAILED ideology, across the globe.
So whatever the Maoists wish to achieve is something that the Indian state, the law of the land shall never agree too or let happen. The soft-sate i.e. our country has to rise (and we already are seeing signs of it) to kill the Maoist virus. Stronger policing and 'power to the people' are tools indeed for the same.
However, the film totally covers these 3 'intellectuals' (and many more like them). These self-appointed know-all pundits of Modern India, who 'see' and 'feel' the pain of these people by dawning Khadi. The single focal point of the entire diatribe was criticism of the 'Salwa Judum' which is an Anti-Naxal tribal people's movement spawning in camps and displaced villages. The Salwa Judum is funded and armed by the state and its ranks fill up as Special Police Officers (SPOs), who know the topography and are directly affected by the Maoist threat.
Ms. Roy's very stately and morally correct claim goes in disregarding the importance of state help to Salwa Judum. These vigilante organizations which are drawn from the people to protect the people are in Ms. Roy's description a complete violation of India's constitutional duty of protecting its citizens and that arming civilians (for their own protection) is against all moral authority of the State.
The film describes the Salwa Judum as a militia; it shows incidents of violence in camps on the people by Salwa Judum and the police. It does not for once show the effectiveness of Salwa Judum in curbing or atleast retaliating to the Naxalites in times and place where the state could not. Mr. Danty addressing a meeting of these camp dwellers allegedly shot dead by the Salwa Judum says 'You can either die saying the truth or a coward... either way here you have to die', well this is a Social Worker and had I been in the camp I was definitely heading out for some fresh air.
Ms. Roy and her accomplices are all shown supporting the argument that the state is at fault. Well, as long as there is freedom of speech and expression guaranteed to Roy et. al. we will have to listen to this crap as well. Ms. Roy at a point even claims that it is some mutation of a ’Genocide’ on the tribal people by the Indian government.
Does Ms. Roy take into account the enormity of the task that the Police in traditionally poor pockets in Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand and parts of West Bengal have to face? The logistical nightmare of having to patrol, safeguard and police thousands of square kilometers of dense jungle and rough terrain? In a sense you see her justifying the cause of the enemy, the Maoist.
Yes, we need police reform but that doesn't come overnight or if it does it would come like Indira Gandhi's Emergency. We don't want that! So what is the problem in arming a civilian force to protect their homes and their properties where the state cannot guarantee the same? There are Village Defense Committees all across terror-ridden J&K, the North-Eastern states. Ask Ms. Roy to go protest that as well.
Fundamentally, what is wrong in the state letting me defend myself when the state cannot (for whatever reasons) guarantee my protection at present?
Ms. Roy is not the only one. She just represents a clan these 'intellectuals', we saw them and said nothing during the Singur crisis in W. Bengal and in the recent Maoist upsurge in Lalgarh.
And that brings extreme shame upon us for having such people as beacons of pride in the civil society.
The Bottom Line:
Criticism of policies when intended to bring police reform, to develop social infrastructure and economic opportunities is agreeable and necessary, but criticism done on false-reporting, biased-opinionated coverage, only to show that 'I am a social activist par-excellence par-state' is the sickest, meanest trick in the book.
If you stoop this low in making a point for a foreign audience, you are no better than India's last reminiscence still smitten by the 'British Raj' looking for a 'Shabaashi' from a 'Gore Saab'.
Down with such 'intellectuals'!
P.s.: If half the stuff I wrote about above was fresh and never heard-off before by you, I'm sorry. India A and India B do exist and the gap is increasing!
You need to sign in with your Google Account to read this its a 22min film and here is the link to the documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O2WwESwJhw&aia=true
