[Reader-list] What the Communists have done to West Bengal in 30 years!

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear Prakash jee

First of all, I didn't get proper time to go through the article and discuss
all the points, but from a gist of what I read, I have the following
queries:

1) The entire article first of all focusses on the agricultural production
of West Bengal. My query is that I have read that agricultural production is
growing at a slower pace after the 1990's, when the effects of the
agricultural land reforms were over. Could you clarify on that?

I know you may say that in the Tenth Five-year plan, it is better than the
national average. But then, there are certain regions in India where
agricultural growth is not that great as well, and so it would be better to
look at West Bengal's ranking among say the 5-10 top agricultural regions of
India. Is that too good?

2) You have said the Left has undertaken reforms in governance. I am all for
it. But my contention is that the Left mas misused it to control even the
panchayats for themselves. And where they don't get elected, they do not
allow financial resources to be allocated properly there, or other
administrative problems crop up more. This is something I state based on the
articles in the EPW issue I referred to in my previous mail.

Is there an answer to that?

3) The Left has actually taken an about-turn on many issues. First of all,
it has been protesting against land acquisition in many states like
Maharashtra, the northern states and even in Andhra Pradesh. Now, it has
done the same in Nandigram and Singur, and this is supported in the article.
This is wrong.

You can't practice double standards in your policies.

4) The Left has accepted certain reforms and not others. They are allowing
industries to come in. Nobody says industries should not be there (except
Gandhians). But you can't allow land to be occupied just without any
permission of the people and any compensation. Even former Left politicians
were disgusted by the events in Singur and Nandigram.

What do you wish to say about that?

5) Finally. Buddhadev has advocated FDI in certain sectors, whereas the Left
opposes them everywhere. Who is the 'real' Left here?

Let me quote here a statement Mr. Gurudas Dasgupta (who belongs to the Left)
had made in an NDTV Big Fight Show (when asked by Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai if
the Left is a monolith) : 'We have one party and one voice. There is no
difference between Buddhadev's words and the Left party's views'.

Now if the same Buddhadev argues for FDI (though within limits) and
Achuthanandan in Kerala is against it, whom should I believe?

@ Anupam jee:

You had long back raised the point that the Left is not doing practically
what it believes in theory. Sitaram Yechury, in the Walk to Talk, had this
to say about Marxism :

*That’s right. Ultimately Marxism is a creative science which is the
concrete analysis of concrete conditions. Conditions change and if your
analysis doesn’t, you are not a Marxist.
*
So, Prakash jee, what I get from that is that Marxism is an ideology which
can be suited depending on what you wish to do. Pretty much what the
Communist Party in China is also doing. And if that is true, then which Left
should I trust? The 'old Left' or the 'new Left'? And why?

Regards

Rakesh