India: The Largest Democracy?

Trond Øverland, Global Research

Arundhati Roy is an unusual Indian woman. Instead of acting the graceful upholder of traditional values, she goes on challenging the hard core of establishment thinking. Roy is India’s leading commentator on such evils as militaristic imperialist capitalism, Hindu-supported genocide of Muslims, and dam disasters. In her latest book, Listening to Grasshoppers; Field Notes on Democracy, she hammers at perhaps the most central of all contemporary sacred pillars, i.e. that of democracy, which in her words “have metastasized into something dangerous”.

Grasshoppers is a collection of essays on such recent events as the 2008 terrorist attack on Mumbai, the 2006 visit to India by “the war criminal” U.S. President George W. Bush, the 2002 Gujarat carnage (between 2000-4000 Muslims slaughtered), the 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament by "so-called" Pakistan-based terrorists, and the growing inequality in India (“the old society has curdled and separated into a thin layer of thick cream – and a lot of water...”).

A radical analysis of democracy runs through the book’s fiery chapters, like a river running from its mountainous source towards the ocean. Roy’s conclusion is disquieting: she is forced by the rationale of her facts and arguments to approve of violence as a means of people’s resistance to injustice. She observes with understanding that many of the poor are “crossing over... to another side; the side of armed struggle.”

While reviewers across India are busy assuring their readership of their being in wonderful agreement with the greater part of Roy’s information and reflections, they uniformly disagree with her basic take on the rising violence amongst India’s poor. The world-wide success of Roy’s novel The God of Small Things would not be the only reason why they have to agree at least somewhat. The documented material is just too true and persuasive. As readers we are forcefully moved to wish that things would be very different – and this reviewer is left to ponder how such a critique of the world’s largest democracy may produce such a fundamental clash between the radical author and her educated audience, the newspapers columnists, the upholders of status quo.

The key appears to be capitalism and communal unrest, or communal fascism as Roy calls it. She eloquently argues that democracy in India is not for, by and of the people but for, by and of capitalism – “designed to uphold the consensus of the elite for market growth”. Here are two quotes from the book:

“Dangerous levels of malnutrition and permanent hunger are the preferred model these days. Forty-seven per cent of India’s children below three suffer from malnutrition, 46 per cent are stunted... Today an average rural family eats about hundred kilograms less food in a year than it did in the early 1990s. But in urban India, wherever you go – shops, restaurants, railway stations, airports, gymnasiums, hospitals – you have TV monitors in which election promises have already become true. India’s Shining, Feeling Good. You only have to close your ears to the sickening crunch of the policeman’s boot on someone’s ribs, you only have to raise your eyes from the squalor, the slums, the ragged broken people on the streets and seek a friendly TV monitor and you will be in that other beautiful world. The singing-dancing world of Bollywood’s permanent pelvic thrusts, of permanently privileged, permanently happy Indians waving the tricolor flag and Feeling Good. It’s becoming harder and harder to tell which one’s the real world and which one’s the virtual.”

“Personally I don’t believe that entering the electoral fray is a path to alternative politics ... because I believe that strategically battles must be waged from positions of strength, not weakness. The target of the dual assault of neo-liberalism and communal fascism are the poor and the minority communities. As liberalism drives its wedge between the rich and the poor, between India Shining and India, it becomes increasingly absurd for any mainstream political party to pretend to represent the interests of both the rich and the poor, because the interests of one can only be represented at the cost of the other... A political party that represents the poor will be a poor party. A party with very meagre funds. Today it isn’t possible to fight an election without funds. Putting a couple of well-known social activists into Parliament is interesting, but not really politically meaningful. Individual charisma, personality politics, cannot effect radical change.”

Hardly the stuff that middle-class democratic daydreaming is made of. More like a real nightmare, actually.

So, by providing a proper perspective on the role of the world’s largest democracy as a mechanism and mouthpiece for market forces, Roy stimulates debate on a question of global importance: Democracy for, by and of what? It seems that democracy can never be for democracy’s sake, it has to serve some purpose. In other words, what kind of values and fundamental mentality are needed for democracy to be really successful and well functioning?

P.R. Sarkar, the founder of Prout, the Progressive Utilization Theory, opined that democracy can never be successful unless the majority of the population are moralists. In other words, there needs to be a leading trend that supports humanistic values and spiritual growth. Capitalism on the contrary serves to break down whatever remains of those very values. In its relentless quest for individual material acquisitions and selfish comfort it makes us all insensitive to the suffering of others and prone to divisive tendencies. It is in this contemporary reality, in the late phase of mature capitalism, that Roy keeps haunting the lazy, unimaginative and selfish middle class with her vision of a capitalistic system headed for hell.

Grasshoppers may not provide all or any answers at all to Roy's ongoing inquiry. Also, Roy is not God and there may be more complex causes as to Muslim genocides and other of her pet themes than what she chooses to emphasize. However, her writing most definitely raises some very important questions -- and reactions. Roy's concrete, bold way of measuring the pulse and temperature of the sick body of democracy leaves no one undisturbed it seems. We would not be surprised if irrational, defensive reactions continue to hound her noble inquiry into contemporary leadership and official thinking.

Listening to Grasshoppers; Field Notes on Democracy, Arundhati Roy, Hamish Hamilton, Penguin, India 2009, 240 pages, 499 rupees.

Trond Øverland writes on progressive socio-economics. He is currently based in Copenhagen, Denmark

Israel, India, US nexus plans to break-up Pakistan

by Faisal Muqadam

“It is essential that we strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans,” – David Ben Gurion, the first prime minister of the Zionist entity.

“The Indian spy agency RAW and the Israeli spy agency MOSSAD have created four new agencies to infiltrate Pakistan to target important religious and military personalities, journalists, judges, lawyers, and bureaucrats. In addition, bombs would be exploded in trains, railway stations, bridges, bus stations, cimemas, hotels and mosques of rival Islamic sects to incite sectarianism,” – Jane Information reported in July 2001.

Israeli scholar, professor Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, in his controversial book, The Israeli Connection, wrote about Zionists’ hatred toward the Muslim World and their support for anti-Muslim insugencies and covert military and intelligence operations to destablize Muslim countries, especially which don’t recognize Jewish settler colonization of Arab lands. Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi cites Israeli involvement in Iran-Contra affair, helping French colonists during Algerian War of Independence, aiding Idi Amin’s military coup in Uganda, aiding Kurdish and Shia rebellions against Saddam Hussein regime, support for Marcos’ fascism against Moro Muslim resistance, support for Burmese and Chinese genocide of Muslim minorities, and many others.

In 1968, Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi gave birth to country’s first foreign ’espionage and terrorist’ organization known as the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). Indira Gandhi adised RAW’s chief, R.N. Kao, to establish freindly relations with its Israeli counter-part, MOSSAD.

Charles Ferndale in his February 2009 article, titled The Great Game revisited, wrote: “In order to maintain its dominence in the region, Israel has for years set about destablising any Muslim country that poses threat to its dominance. Pakistan is the only Muslim country with nuclear weapons and Israel is within range. So Pakistan must be weakened to the point at which it ceases to operate militarily as a nation. Pakistan is supposed to be West’s foremost ally to fight against Islamic militancy, so Israel cannot attack Pakistan directly, and, if Israel did, she certaily would be defeated. So what to do? Well, two stages come to mind; one use America to attack Pakistan for you; and two, train and send into the border regions of Pakistan gangs of thugs willing to commit atrocities that then will be blamed on ‘barbaric Muslim militants’ – suggesting that Pakistan has lost control of its territory to dangerous extremists and so may lose control of its nuclear weapons.” The insurgency in Swat being the latest example of that Israeli strategy.

Former Chief of Pakistani intelligent agency, Inter-Services-Intelligence (ISI), Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul (1987-89), was recently interviewed by Jeremy R. Hammond, the editor of Foreign Policy Journal (a pro-Israeli propaganda outlet). Jeremy repeated the same out-dated Zionist propaganda rhetorics – 9/11, terrorism, anti-Americanism within Muslim World, Pakistan’s internal problems and its bad relations with its neighboring India and Afghanistan. Jeremy showed his cunningness by asking Hamid Gul about his views on 9/11 – knowing that Hamid Gul had stated his views in an interview just two weeks after 9/11 – on September 26, 2001 – In which he blamed Israeli MOSSAD and the pro-Israeli American officials for pulling 9/11. He repeated his claims during an interview with Alex Jones last year.

The General told Jeremy that he has not been in contact with Taliban or Al-Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden since he retired from Pakistan Army in 1992. He told Jeremy that 9/11 was an inside job, which gave Washington an excuse to attack Muslim countries to exploit their natural resources. He also told Jeremy that it was Indian RAW and Israeli MOSSAD, who were not only behind Mumbai terrorist attacks last year – but with the help of American are trying to destablize Pakistan for being the only Muslim nuclear power and the lucrative Afghan drug trade – which according to UNDOC World Drug Report 2009 is more than US$400 billion annual business.

Calling the 9/11 commission as a cover-up, Hamid Gul said: “I think the American people have been made fool of. I have my sympathies with them. I like Amercans. I like America. I appreciate them. I have gone there several times.” Hamid Gul is banned from entering both Britain and the US.

“The invasion of Afghanistan was never meant to capture Osama Bib Laden – as stated by George Bush, General Tommy Franks, and the Chairman of Joint Chief of Staff, Richard Myers. The purpose was to reach the oil fields of Caspian Sea. The invasion was to control increasing Chinese influence in the region and provide a wider security shield for Israel (from Islamic regime’s increasing influence in the Middle East). They were drawing the new Middle East map for the domination of Israel.”

Pakistan’s nuclear capability is under Zionist threat. That’s the reason Washington signed the strategic deal with India which was brokered by Israel. So there is a nexus now between Washington, Tel Aviv and New Delhi. However, there are many things which are still left undone because they are not winning on the battlefield. And no matter what maps you draw in mind, if you cannot win on battlefield, then it comes to naught. And that’s what is happening to America……”

http://www.daily.pk/israel-india-us-nexus-plans-to-break-up-pakistan-9157/