Socialist Characteristics, Olympic Pride and Condom Ring tone
Troubled Galaxy Destroyed Dreams: Chapter 49
Palash Biswas
http://troubledgalaxydetroyeddreams.blogspot.com/
News results for India in Beijing Olympic
NDTV.com Wrestler Sushil Kumar wins bronze medal at Beijing Olympics - 1 hour ago
By : ANI Wrestler Sushil Kumar on Wednesday brought further international glory to India by winning the bronze medal at the Beijing Olympics after 56 years. ...
Oneindia - 161 related articles »
The Other Olympics - Aljazeera.net - 298 related articles »
Kumar wins India wrestling medal - BBC News - 145 related articles »
India at Beijing Olympics 2008 at Witty Sparks
India at Beijing Olympics 2008. Some of the performers Indians could watch out for in the Beijing Olympics are :. Rajyavardhan Rathore - Shooting(Double ...
www.wittysparks.com/2008/08/09/india-at-beijing-olympics-2008/ - 104k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
India's Bindra wins gold in the Men's 10m Air Rifle - The Official ...
11 Aug 2008 ... The official website of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games. ... (BEIJING, August 11) -- India's Abhinav Bindra won the gold medal in the Men's ...
en.beijing2008.cn/news/sports/headlines/shooting/n214528114.shtml - 14k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Beijing's Olympics efforts 'inspiration' for India
I am writing today with very complex circumstances at home and abroad. with President Mush departing, Corporate US Imperialism in India and south Asia as well, has to readjust its strategies once again. In Kashmir, the situation continues to worsen as RSS is doing its best to kill whatsoever are the chances of anti Imperialist Movement in India. The Left, disassociated from the UPA is not settled as yet as it is too involved to solve ideological and political situations in Left ruled three sates. India saw a nationwide Industrial strike as well as general strike in Left Ruled states.
The only relief comes from China, the forbidden land for India as yet in these hopeless troubled times of Manusmriti Agenda, Globalisation, Open Market, misinformation and annihilation of Indigenous communities worldwide as Our Mother land patriotic most sports persons belonging to other than the market Spenser oriented cricket have ensured at least three medals in Beijing Olympic!
Perestroika failed miserably in USSR and resulted into untimely demise of Revolution in entire Europe. Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Somalia and Iran are targeted without any resistance. War zone has escalated right into our heart in the divided bleeding geopolitics of south Asia and the Ruling Class has been sold for strategic re alliance of Hindu Zionist White Manusmriti Apartheid forces. Fascism has turned to be the best friend to support War Against Muslims which they call War against terrorism to boost the recession sub prime crisis struck war and weapon economy of united states of America.
India, particularly the caste system fed Hindutva forces cried Foul against Jade Goody when she used apartheid against Shilpa Shetty, an Indian actress just some time ago. Lo! Shilpa Shetty hosts the Reality show big Boss season two and enters Jade Goody, as the most welcome friend of India! her personal tragedy of suffering from Cancer is catered as marketable commodity and Electronic media subverts every issue relevant. Other participants of the Reality show also have enough controversial background to name a few: Rahul Mahajan, the Drug Addict, Monika Bedi,the Mafia Paramour, Sanjay Nirupam, the ex Shivshena Don!
Since morning I have been browsing all Indian Electronic channels full of Laughter shows, musical programmes, Crime reports, Sexual Perversions, Astrology, Sensational superstitions and so on and I could not update my informations on my time, nation and this planet.
This is a Misinformation explosion in full bloom while Big Boss Participants are being made ICONS of Future!
It is quite a relief while I see Beijing Olympic throws up some real Indian Icons in Abhinav Bindra, Saina Nehawal, Akhil, Jitendra, Bijender Kumar and Sushil Kumar!
May we study the success of China with socialist Characteristics and analyse our geopolitics historically scientifically? May we have some time to finalise our strategy to defend our black untouchable indigenous communities, nationalities, identities, mother languages? May we think to create a credible third political alternative to stop NDA as well as UPA to stop further partition of this country?
The demise of communism in the former Soviet Union and the massive political and economic changes in China are the stunning transformations of our century. Two central questions are emerging: Why did different communist systems experience different patterns of transition? Why did partial reforms in the Soviet Union and China turn into revolutions? This unique analytical and empirical study shows that patterns of regime transition in communist states depend on the countries' preexisting social structures and political and economic institutions. Minxin Pei identifies the rapid mobilization of previously excluded social groups during the reform phase as the most powerful explanation for the revolutionary outcome of initially limited political and economic reforms in the Soviet Union and China. Pei uses comparative data to analyze the different routes of transition to democracy and a market economy in the Soviet Union, China, and, to a lesser extent, other former communist states in Eastern Europe and Asia. The,theory is empirically tested in four case studies of changes in China and the Soviet Union - two on the development of the private sector in each country and two on the liberalization of the mass media. The author concludes with provocative statements about regime transition from communism. He rejects the idealistic notion that democratization can, by itself, remove the structural obstacles to economic transformation, and he sees high economic and political costs as unavoidable in transition from communism along either the Soviet or the Chinese path. In comparing Soviet and Chinese transition costs, however, he implicitly endorses the evolutionary changes taking place in China andexpresses strong doubt about the revolutionary changes that have occurred in the former Soviet Union.
Television viewers around the world are tuning into the Beijing Games in record numbers, and it’s likely to fill the coffers of the International Olympic Committee like never before and ease pressure to tinker with the Olympic formula.- Great Britain's newly-crowned 400 metres Olympic champion Christine Ohuruogu's beaming smile lit up the Bird's Nest Stadium on Tuesday and now she plans a repeat triumph on homeground in London in 2012.
The Indo-US nuclear deal observers say that the deal will go through at the Nuclear Suppliers Group meeting in Vienna this Thursday.India's pointmen on the nuclear deal will be briefing three key members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group in Vienna on Wednesday.The three key members are known as the Troika. They are Germany, currently head of the NSG, South Africa and Hungary.
Despite fierce opposition from Moscow, the United States and Poland signed a long-stalled agreement Wednesday to place an American missile defense base on Polish territory.
The recent augmentation in the number of HIV positive people in India has caused concern and different measures have been initiated to curb the disease.There are measures aimed at spreading awareness about the prevention of this deadly disease among people.Likewise,measures have been introduced to dispel the stigma associated with AIDS because of which most HIV infected people opt to shun treatment.
One such measure is the launching of a cell phone ringtone that utters ‘Condom‘, ‘condom‘ repeatedly.This supposedly is part of a two-year project to make condoms socially acceptable via mass media which will result in the practice of safe sex.The acappella ringtone is a repetition of the word ‘condom‘ by a professional singer.It is expected that this will go a long way in making the use of condoms widespread.It is produced by the BBC World Service Trust and funded by a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Reportedly,the ring tone was launched on Aug. 8 and it has been downloaded 60,000 times since then. People are asked to download the original ringtone by SMSing “CONDOM” to 5676787 or from www.condomcondom.org.The initiative emphasises the use of condom as a parameter of sensibility,resposibility and awareness about health and well-being.Any link or association with AIDS is not sought as this disease is looked upon as a stigma in India.The Creative Director of the BBC World Service Trust, Radharani Mitra held that ringtones have become such personal statements that a specially created condom ringtone seemed just the right vehicle to define its user as a sensible person.
Meanwhile, in India, our dearest Homeland, around 50 people were on Wednesday injured in group clashes during an industrial strike called by Left trade unions which brought West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura to a halt and partially hit several eastern states but life in rest of the country remained largely unaffected. With the ruling Left Front governments backing the day- long stir called to protest against surging inflation and the Centre's "anti-people" economic policies, the shut down in West Bengal and Tripura was complete. While life was paralysed in Kerala, air services remained unaffected in the state.
Claiming that officials from Jammu were facing intimidation in Kashmir, the BJP on wednesday demanded that they be temporarily withdrawn from the valley in the wake of the agitation over Amarnath land issue.
Normal life was hit in parts of Assam, Bihar, Orissa, Meghalaya and Manipur with markets, business establishments and banks remaining closed in many areas there.
In Coochbehar in West Bengal, around 50 people were injured in clashes between CPI (M) and Trinamool Congress activists in four places when Left supporters attempted to enforce the shut down, police sources said. A police force has been rushed to the troubled area, they said.
Despite intense lobbying, it is unlikely that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) will approve an India-specific draft waiver to conduct nuclear trade with its members during a two-day meet scheduled to begin tomorrow, a prominent arms-control think-tank opposed to the Indo-US nuclear deal has said.
"The US and India are certainly using strong-arms tactics but reports that a decision on the proposal could occur this week don't appear to match with the reality that many states of the 45-member NSG group still have significant concerns," said Daryl Kimball, Executive Director of the Arms Control Association.
The group could even postpone the case for a second or third meeting in September as certain changes would have to be made to the proposed text to get the NSG nod, Kimball claimed.
"The US, Germany and India are privately acknowledging that a second or third meeting will likely be convened sometime in September on the issue and that changes to the US' August 6 proposed text will be necessary to achieve NSG consensus," he said in an e-mail update on the Vienna meet.
"Perhaps in recognition of many difficulties the proposal faces in the NSG, Germany has reportedly invited India to present its case and answer questions from NSG countries at this week's meeting.
"The reports cite unnamed India officials as saying they are hesitant to do so. That (is) not surprising since India's participation in the discussion could force its officials to answer some uncomfortable but essential questions about its bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements with the US, France, and Russia, as well as its interpretation of the India-IAEA safeguards agreement, and other issues," the official said.
Putin laments demise of Soviet Union
Associated Press
Moscow — President Vladimir Putin used a campaign speech Thursday to declare the demise of the Soviet Union a "national tragedy on an enormous scale," in what appeared to be his strongest-ever lament of the collapse of the Soviet empire.
Mr. Putin, a former agent of the Soviet KGB spy agency, has praised aspects of the Soviet Union in the past but never so robustly nor in such an important political setting.
"The breakup of the Soviet Union is a national tragedy on an enormous scale," from which "only the elites and nationalists of the republics gained," Mr. Putin said in a nationally televised speech to about 300 campaign workers gathered at Moscow State University.
The President's language was sure to send a chill through the 14 other former Soviet republics that have been independent from Moscow rule for more than a decade.
In the past and to audiences from the former republics, Mr. Putin has sought to ease fears about Russia having designs on rebuilding the old empire.
In September remarks after a meeting of the Commonwealth of Independent States — the grouping of former Soviet republics — Mr. Putin said:
"The Soviet Union [was] a very complicated page in the history of our people," adding "that train has left."
But on Thursday, he spoke in a much stronger tone, appearing to play to Russian nationalism.
"I think that ordinary citizens of the former Soviet Union and the post-Soviet space gained nothing from this. On the contrary, people have faced a huge number of problems," he said.
"Today we must look at the reality we live in. We cannot only look back and curse about this issue. We must look forward," he said.
Across town, meanwhile, Putin challengers in the election next month refused to debate among themselves in a television program called for that purpose. The candidates said a debate was meaningless without Mr. Putin, who says he doesn't need the free television advertising.
At the taping of what was to be the first debate ahead of the March 14 vote, four of Mr. Putin's six challengers answered questions from the studio audience, but then rejected the host's appeal that they debate each other.
"Bring Vladimir Putin here and we will have a debate," independent liberal candidate Irina Khakamada said, winning applause from the audience.
Calling it pointless to debate with anyone but Mr. Putin, "my main competitor", Communist candidate Nikolai Kharitonov said that by ignoring the debates, "Putin is depriving the population of the right to choose."
Also at the taping were candidates Sergei Glazyev of the populist-nationalist Homeland Party and Oleg Malyshkin of Vladimir Zhirinovsky's ultranationalist Liberal Democratic Party.
Regardless of Mr. Putin's public declarations about campaign advertising, state-controlled television channels already lavish him with extensive coverage — as on Thursday when state-run Rossiya showed his remarks live.
Addressing a packed auditorium at Moscow State University, Mr. Putin said: "The head of state should not engage in self-advertising."
"Nevertheless," he continued, "I am simply obliged before my voters and the entire country to account for what has been done during the past four years, and to tell people what I intend to do during the next four years."
Responding to a question after his state-of-the-nation-style speech, Mr. Putin said that the 1991 Soviet collapse — which most Russians regret — led to few gains and many problems for ordinary citizens.
Turning to global politics, Mr. Putin said that Russia must become a "full-fledged member of the world community" and assailed those in the West who still have a Cold War-era distrust of Russia. They "can't get out of the freezer," he said.
Mr. Putin reiterated his stated opposition to prolonging his time in office, limited to two terms. But he indicated he would choose a preferred successor, saying that the task of any top leader "is to propose to society a person he considers worthy to work further in this position."
Some Putin opponents had considered boycotting the presidential election, saying a fair vote was impossible in Russia today, and the refusal to debate in Thursday's program reflected the candidates' anger at the President's dominance of the campaign.
Some political analysts said, however, the public does not expect Mr. Putin to debate.
"They see the head of state as a monarch who shouldn't participate in discussions with those below him in the hierarchy," said Andrei Ryabov of the Carnegie Institute in Moscow said.
The Organization for the Security and Co-operation in Europe said the state-controlled media's parliamentary campaign coverage was slanted toward pro-Putin forces and accused the government of pressuring news media, to limit opposition views.
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/...BNStory/Front/
Foreign relations of India
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
India
This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of India
Union Government[show]
Constitution of India
Fundamental Rights
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Executive
President
Vice President Prime Minister
The Cabinet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parliament
Rajya Sabha
The Chairman Lok Sabha
The Speaker
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judiciary
Supreme Court of India
Chief Justice of India
High Courts
District Courts
Elections[show]
Election Commission
Chief Election Commissioner
Political Parties[show]
National Parties
State Parties
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Coalitions
Left Front
National Democratic Alliance
United Progressive Alliance
Local & State Govt.[show]
Governor
State Legislature
Vidhan Sabha
Vidhan Parishad
Panchayat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other countries · Politics Portal
Government of India Portal
view • talk • edit
The Republic of India is the world's most-populous democracy and has one of the fastest economic growth rates in the world (8.9 percent GDP increase in 2007; second-fastest in the world after China).[1] With the world's fourth largest armed forces,[2] and fourth largest economy (in PPP terms),[3] it is considered to be a regional power[4][5] and a potential superpower.[6][7][8][9] It is India's growing international influence that increasingly gives it a more prominent voice in global affairs.[10][11][12][13]
India has a long history of collaboration with several countries and is considered as a leader of the developing world.[14][15] India was one of the founding members of several international organizations, most notably the United Nations, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Asian Development Bank and the G20 industrial nations. India has also played an important and influential role in other international organizations like East Asia Summit,[16] World Trade Organization,[17] IMF,[18] G8+5[19] and IBSA Dialogue Forum.[20] Regional organizations India is a part of include SAARC and BIMSTEC.
After India gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1947, it soon joined the Commonwealth of Nations and strongly supported independence movements in other colonies, like the Indonesian National Revolution.[21] During the Cold War, India adopted a foreign policy of not aligning itself with any major power bloc. However, India developed close ties with the Soviet Union and received extensive military support from it. The end of the Cold War significantly affected Indian foreign policy, as it did for much of the world. The country now seeks to strengthen its diplomatic and economic ties with the United States,[22] the People's Republic of China,[23] the European Union,[24] Japan,[25] Israel,[26] Mexico,[27] and Brazil.[28] India has also forged close ties with the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations,[29] the African Union,[30] and the Arab League.[31] Though India continues to have a very strong military relationship with Russia,[32] Israel has emerged as India's second largest military partner[30] while India has built a strong strategic partnership with the United States[22] reflecting India's balanced and soverign foreign policy.
India has taken part in several UN peacekeeping missions and in 2007, it was the second-largest troop contributor to the United Nations.[33] India has also actively participated in UN reforms[34] and is currently seeking a permanent seat in the UNSC, along with the G4 nations.[35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_India
Socialism with Chinese characteristics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Part of the series on
Communism v • d • e
Basic concepts[show]
Marxist philosophy
Class struggle
Proletarian internationalism
Communist party
Ideologies[show]
Marxism
Leninism
Trotskyism
Maoism
Juche
Left communism
Council communism
Titoism
Anarchist communism
Religious communism
Eurocommunism
National communism
Communist internationals[show]
Communist League
First International
Second International
Comintern
Fourth International
Prominent communists[show]
Karl Marx
Friedrich Engels
Vladimir Lenin
Rosa Luxemburg
Joseph Stalin
Leon Trotsky
Mao Zedong
Related subjects[show]
Anarchism
Anti-capitalism
Anti-communism
Communist state
Communist symbolism
Criticisms of communism
Democratic centralism
Dictatorship of the proletariat
History of communism
Left-wing politics
Luxemburgism
New Class
New Left
Post-Communism
Primitive communism
Socialism
Stalinism
Socialist economics
Soviet Union
Communism Portal
This article is about the term itself and its relationships. For its implementation and effects see Economy of the People's Republic of China and Chinese economic reform.
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" (traditional Chinese: 具有中國特色的社會主義, simplified Chinese: 具有中国特色的社会主义, Pronunciation (help·info): Jùyǒu Zhōngguó tèsè de shèhuìzhǔyì) is an official term for the economy of the People's Republic of China which as of 2008 consists of the state having ownership of a large fraction of the Chinese economy, while at the same time having all entities participate within a market economy. This is a form of a socialist market economy and differs from market socialism and mixed economy in that while the state retained ownership of large enterprises, it does not use this ownership to intervene to change prices which are set by the market.
John Gittings in The Changing Face of China quotes Deng Xiaoping as stating:
"Planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity." [1]
The PRC government maintains that it has not abandoned Marxism, but has simply developed many of the terms and concepts of Marxist theory to accommodate its new economic system. The ruling Communist Party of China argues that socialism is not incompatible with these economic policies. In current Chinese Communist thinking, the PRC is in the primary stage of socialism, and this redefinition allows the PRC to undertake whatever economic policies are needed to develop into an industrialized nation.
See Chinese economic reform for the history of Socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Contents
[hide]
1 Marxist theory
2 Deng Xiaoping
3 Communist Party of China
4 See also
5 Sources
6 Further reading
[edit] Marxist theory
According to Technological Determinism & Socialism with Chinese Characteristics:
"new economic development strategy based upon decentralization of control over the state owned enterprise sector, expanded market transactions to replace command and control allocation, dismantling of the rural commune system (completed in 1985), increased use of material incentives in workplaces, and ultimately, upon the modernization of the Chinese economic infrastructure (as well as the military infrastructure). This last aspect of their strategy represents more than a mere objective. Modernization represents the mission of the pragmatists. Deng Xiaoping rejected the Maoist tendency to forswear the technological trappings of the so-called West (including soft technology in the form of social relationships) and embraced the idea that modernity required copying many of the traits of the Western capitalist nations." [2]
In Marxist theory, history progresses through a number of stages from slave society to feudal society to capitalist society to socialist society to communist society. According to the interpretation of this by the Communist Party of China, the revolution of 1949 was an irreversible change from capitalism to socialism and that therefore China is still socialist. However, Maoist organizations, such as the Maoist Internationalist Movement and the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, claim that China reverted back to capitalism with the arrest of the Gang of Four, in 1976.
[edit] Deng Xiaoping
According to Necessary Chinese Illusions:
"Chinese professor Han Deqiang in his paper Chinese Cultural Revolution: Failure and Theoretical Originality examined the demise of communism in China. Han detailed how from its very beginning the communist revolutionary government had been infiltrated by a capitalist faction which had established itself within the bureaucracy. Prominent among the bureaucrats was Deng Xiaoping." [3]
Deng Xiaoping on June 30, 1984 said:
"What is socialism and what is Marxism? We were not quite clear about this in the past. Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces. We have said that socialism is the primary stage of communism and that at the advanced stage the principle of from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs will be applied. This calls for highly developed productive forces and an overwhelming abundance of material wealth. Therefore, the fundamental task for the socialist stage is to develop the productive forces. The superiority of the socialist system is demonstrated, in the final analysis, by faster and greater development of those forces than under the capitalist system. As they develop, the people's material and cultural life will constantly improve. One of our shortcomings after the founding of the People's Republic was that we didn't pay enough attention to developing the productive forces. Socialism means eliminating poverty. Pauperism is not socialism, still less communism." [4]
[edit] Communist Party of China
Wang Yu on behalf of the Communist Party of China in January 2004 said:
"production stagnated for a long time. There was little improvement in people’s quality of life, and China’s gap with developed economies widened further. All of this made Chinese Communists ask themselves time and again the following questions: Where on earth was the superiority of socialism? Was socialism rich or poor? What is revolution and what was its purpose? The theory of building socialism with Chinese characteristics, which took the development of the productive forces as its fundamental task, came into being amid and as a result of these reflections and reviews." [5]
Demise of the Soviet Union
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cameron Sawyer sent from Moscow news comments on the death of President Reagan. Randy Black, who lived in Omsk, comments: "Hurray for the positive bits and pieces of Russian opinion about Reagan! I, too, am surprised at the overwhelmingly positive nature of the posts from Russia. I also used to enjoy lunch at the Central House of Writers as the guest of a retired editor at Izvestia. On that note, it is interesting to see the opinion in the article by Bratersky of Izvestia regarding the effect of Star Wars on the Soviet budget/bankruptcy. It seems that many commentators offer an opinion that supports such a position. I support a slightly different position.
The USSR bankrupted itself over many issues, and over many years. Star Wars was only one facet of the equation. The myriad of causes of their demise included a corrupt, inefficient internal mechanism that sold goods to its people at a price that had no relationship to the cost of development, manufacture and distribution. I vividly remember purchasing a finely tooled hammer at a state shop in Omsk in 1993 for the equivalent in rubles price of three US pennies. Its origin was Czech, brought thousands of miles, made from the finest metal and wood and finished beautifully. That’s a lot to say about a simple hammer, I know, but it was typical of the goods I found in Siberia: Imported in many cases from great distances, finely made, yet cheaply packaged, if at all, and sold at ridiculously low prices for the benefit of her peoples who for the most part in those days, earned $15-$20 per month, if that much.
The USSR used hard currency revenues (US dollars) earned from international sales of its natural resources (oil, diamonds, timber and so forth) to subsidize such unprofitable operations and trade over many decades, and thus to keep the proletariat happy. Hard currency dollars from oil sales allowed the government to purchase other goods and materials needed in every facet of their life, goods and foods not available in sufficient numbers from their own factories and fields. When Reagan entered office, oil was trading above $35 per barrel, having been above $40 during the Carter administration. By 1986, it was below $10. Over the next several years, oil hovered in the $10-$20 range, give or take. The USSR was bankrupted soon thereafter as a result. While my Russian friends tell me that there were never enough goods on the shelves of stores in Russia, the problem grew much worse in the 80s. The lack of hard currency from oil exports certainly was a contributory factor. There are those among President Reagan’s entourage who believe that his administration caused the price of oil to dip and stay low over years as another element in the effort to bankrupt the USSR. In fact, Reagan did loosen controls on oil and gas production, thus resulting in a glut and the lower prices. Of course, there are many other reasons for the demise of the USSR, but a system of manufacturing and distribution that has no relationship to the cost of the goods seems like a good place to start".
RH. Randy's story of a hammer means that the problem with communism was not necessarily the quality of goods. The facile charge that the Communist bloc was incapable of manufacturing quality goods was as unfounded as the old dismissal of Japanese industry as being able only to copy Western goods stupidly. That talk faded away- My briefcase has a story comparable to Randy's hammer. At a store in Stanford's Shopping Center I bought an expensive American briefcase which kept falling open. I took it back and complained. The salesman, unperturbed, told me to choose another one. I selected a beautifully tooled leather one, and was surprised to learn that it was cheaper, so I got some money back. It has served me splendidly over the years. It was made in communist Romania.
Christopher Jones writes: "I agree that the Soviet Union collapsed of its own weight. I noticed that when Ronald Reagan died, he suddenly "won the cold war" and "defeated the Soviet Union." This of course is as ridiculous as the Americans winning the Battle of Britain. Communism was overthrown because it lost touch with its power base: the workers. Reagan had nothing at all to do with it. Probably the two men who could be most credited with the downfall of the Communist empire in eastern Europe was Pope John Paul II and Lech Walesa".
http://wais.stanford.edu/Russia/demiseofsovietunion.htm
Glasnost
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Russian term
Гла́сность
Translit: glasnost'
English: openness
Glasnost (help·info) (Russian: Гла́сность, Russian pronunciation: [ˈglasnəsʲtʲ]) is the policy of maximal publicity, openness, and transparency in the activities of all government institutions in the Soviet Union, together with freedom of information, introduced by Mikhail Gorbachev.
The word is a transliteration of the Russian word Гласность and was frequently used by Gorbachev to specify the policies he believed might help reduce the corruption at the top of the Communist Party and the Soviet government, and moderate the abuse of administrative power in the Central Committee.
Glasnost can also refer to the specific period in the history of the USSR during the 1980s when there was less censorship and greater freedom of information.
Look up glasnost in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.Contents
[hide]
1 Glasnost in USSR and in Russia
2 Areas of concern
3 Effects
4 See also
5 Notes
6 References
7 External links
[edit] Glasnost in USSR and in Russia
Glasnost poster from 1987. The slogan is "Be Bold, Comrade! Openness is Our Strength!" (Russian: "Смелее, товарищ! Гласность - наша сила!")
This word appeared in 1985-1990 as a part of the program of reforms called perestroika (перестройка), whose goals included combating corruption and the abuse of privilege by the political classes. In the broadest sense, it aimed to liberalize freedom of the press gradually, and to allow for freedom of dissent.[1] The policy met resistance during the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, when authorities hid the true extent of the nuclear accident for several days.
Through his policy of glasnost, Gorbachev pressured conservatives within the Communist Party who opposed perestroika, his programs of economic restructuring. By cultivating a spirit of intellectual and cultural openness which encouraged public debate and participation, Gorbachev hoped to increase the Soviet people's support for and participation in perestroika.
[edit] Areas of concern
While in the West the notion of "glasnost" is associated with freedom of speech, the main goal of this policy was to make the country's management transparent and open to debate, thus circumventing the narrow circle of apparatchiks who previously exercised complete control of the economy. Through reviewing the past or current mistakes being made, it was hoped that the Soviet people would back reforms such as perestroika.
Perestroika and glasnost postage stamp, 1988
Glasnost gave new freedoms to the people, such as a greater freedom of information by opening the secret parts for unallowed literature in the libraries[2][3] and a greater freedom of speech — a radical change, as control of speech and suppression of government criticism had previously been a central part of the Soviet system. There was also a greater degree of freedom within the media. In the late 1980s, the Soviet government came under increased criticism, as did Leninist ideology (which Gorbachev had attempted to preserve as the foundation for reform), and members of the Soviet population were more outspoken in their view that the Soviet government had become a failure. Glasnost did indeed provide freedom of expression, far beyond what Gorbachev had intended, and changed citizens' views towards the government, which played a key role in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
[edit] Effects
Relaxation of censorship resulted in the Communist Party losing its grip on the media. Before long, much to the embarrassment of the authorities, the media began to expose severe social and economic problems which the Soviet government had long denied and covered up. Long-denied problems such as poor housing, food shortages, alcoholism, widespread pollution, creeping mortality rates and the second-rate position of women were now receiving increased attention. Moreover, under glasnost, the people were able to learn significantly more about the horrors committed by the government when Joseph Stalin was in power. Although Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin's personality cult, information about the true proportions of his atrocities was still suppressed. In all, the very positive view of Soviet life which had long been presented to the public by the official media was being rapidly dismantled, and the negative aspects of life in the Soviet Union were brought into the spotlight. This began to undermine the faith of the public in the Soviet system.
Political openness continued to produce unintended consequences. In elections to the regional assemblies of the Soviet Union's constituent republics, nationalists swept the board. As Gorbachev had weakened the system of internal political repression, the ability of the USSR's central Moscow government to impose its will on the USSR's constituent republics had been largely undermined. During the 1980s, calls for greater independence from Moscow's rule grew louder. This was especially marked in the Baltic Republics of Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, which had been annexed into the Soviet Union by Joseph Stalin in 1940. Nationalist feeling also took hold in other Soviet republics such as Ukraine, Georgia and Azerbaijan.
Starting in the mid-1980s, the Baltic states used the reforms provided by glasnost to assert their rights to protect their environment and their historic monuments and, later, their claims to sovereignty and independence. When the Balts withstood outside threats, they exposed an irresolute Kremlin. Bolstering separatism in other Soviet republics, the Balts triggered multiple challenges to the Soviet Union. Supported by Russian leader Boris Yeltsin, the Baltic republics asserted their sovereignty.
The rise of nationalism under glasnost also reawakened simmering ethnic tensions throughout the union. For example, in February 1988, Nagorno-Karabakh, a predominantly ethnic Armenian region in the Azerbaijan SSR, passed a resolution calling for unification with the Armenian SSR. Violence against local Azeris was then reported on Soviet television, which provoked massacres of Armenians in the Azerbaijani city of Sumgait.
The freedoms generated under Glasnost enabled increased contact between Soviet citizens and the western world, particularly with the United States. Restrictions on travel were loosened, allowing increased business and cultural contact. For example, one key meeting location was in the U.S. at the Dakin Building, then owned by American philanthropist Henry Dakin, who had extensive Russian contacts:
During the late 1980s, as glasnost and perestroika led to the liquidation of the Soviet empire, the Dakin building was the location for a series of groups facilitating United States-Russian contacts. They included the Center for U.S.-U.S.S.R. Initiatives, which helped more than 1000 Americans visit the Soviet Union and more than 100 then-Soviet citizens visit the U.S.[4]
While thousands of political prisoners and many dissidents were released in the spirit of glasnost, Gorbachev's original goal of using glasnost and perestroika to reform the Soviet Union was not achieved. In 1991, the Soviet Union was dissolved following a failed coup by conservative elements who were opposed to Gorbachev's reforms.
Perestroika
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the term. For the computer game, see Perestroika (computer game). For the play by Tony Kushner, see Angels in America. For the movement in political science, see Perestroika Movement (political science).
This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2008)
This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality.
Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (May 2008)
Russian term
перестройка
Translit: perestroika
English: restructuring
Perestroika (help·info) (Russian: Перестройка, Russian pronunciation: [pʲɪrʲɪˈstrojkə]) is the Russian term (now used in English) for the economic reforms introduced in June 1987[1] by the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Its literal meaning is "restructuring", referring to the restructuring of the Soviet economy.
Look up perestroika in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.Contents
[hide]
1 The perestroika program
2 Unforeseen results of reform
3 Comparison with China
4 Summary
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References in Pop-Culture
8 References
9 External links
[edit] The perestroika program
Perestroika poster with Mikhail Gorbachev
During the initial period (1985-1987) of Mikhail Gorbachev's time in power, he talked about modifying central planning, but did not make any truly fundamental changes (uskoreniye, acceleration). Gorbachev and his team of economic advisers then introduced more fundamental reforms, which became known as perestroika (economic restructuring).
At the June 1987 plenary session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Gorbachev presented his "basic theses," which laid the political foundation of economic reform for the remainder of the existence of the Soviet Union.
In July 1987, the Supreme Soviet passed the Law on State Enterprise. The law stipulated that state enterprises were free to determine output levels based on demand from consumers and other enterprises. Enterprises had to fulfill state orders, but they could dispose of the remaining output as they saw fit. Enterprises bought inputs from suppliers at negotiated contract prices. Under the law, enterprises became self-financing; that is, they had to cover expenses (wages, taxes, supplies, and debt service) through revenues. No longer was the government to rescue unprofitable enterprises that could face bankruptcy. Finally, the law shifted control over the enterprise operations from ministries to elected workers' collectives. Gosplan's (Russian: Государственный комитет по планированию, State Committee for Planning) responsibilities were to supply general guidelines and national investment priorities, not to formulate detailed production plans.
The Law on Cooperatives, enacted in May 1988, was perhaps the most radical of the economic reforms during the early part of the Gorbachev era. For the first time since Vladimir Lenin's New Economic Policy, the law permitted private ownership of businesses in the services, manufacturing, and foreign-trade sectors. The law initially imposed high taxes and employment restrictions, but it later revised these to avoid discouraging private-sector activity. Under this provision, cooperative restaurants, shops, and manufacturers became part of the Soviet scene.
Perestroika postage stamp, 1988
Gorbachev brought perestroika to the Soviet Union's foreign economic sector with measures that Soviet economists considered bold at that time. His program virtually eliminated the monopoly that the Ministry of Foreign Trade had once held on most trade operations. It permitted the ministries of the various industrial and agricultural branches to conduct foreign trade in sectors under their responsibility rather than having to operate indirectly through the bureaucracy of trade ministry organizations. In addition, regional and local organizations and individual state enterprises were permitted to conduct foreign trade. This change was an attempt to redress a major imperfection in the Soviet foreign trade regime: the lack of contact between Soviet end users and suppliers and their foreign partners.
The most significant of Gorbachev's reforms in the foreign economic sector allowed foreigners to invest in the Soviet Union in the form of joint ventures with Soviet ministries, state enterprises, and cooperatives. The original version of the Soviet Joint Venture Law, which went into effect in June 1987, limited foreign shares of a Soviet venture to 49 percent and required that Soviet citizens occupy the positions of chairman and general manager. After potential Western partners complained, the government revised the regulations to allow majority foreign ownership and control. Under the terms of the Joint Venture Law, the Soviet partner supplied labor, infrastructure, and a potentially large domestic market. The foreign partner supplied capital, technology, entrepreneurial expertise, and, in many cases, products and services of world competitive quality.
Gorbachev's economic changes did not do much to restart the country's sluggish economy in the late 1980s. The reforms decentralized things to some extent, although price controls remained, as did the ruble's inconvertibility and most government controls over the means of production.
By 1990 the government had virtually lost control over economic conditions. Government spending increased sharply as an increasing number of unprofitable enterprises required state support and consumer price subsidies continued. Tax revenues declined because republic and local governments withheld tax revenues from the central government under the growing spirit of regional autonomy. The elimination of central control over production decisions, especially in the consumer goods sector, led to the breakdown in traditional supply-demand relationships without contributing to the formation of new ones. Thus, instead of streamlining the system, Gorbachev's decentralization caused new production bottlenecks.
[edit] Unforeseen results of reform
The new system bore the characteristics of neither central planning nor a market economy. Instead, the Soviet economy went from stagnation to deterioration. At the end of 1991, when the union officially dissolved, the national economy was in a virtual tailspin. In 1991 Soviet GDP had declined by 17 percent and was declining at an accelerating rate.[citation needed] Overinflation was becoming a major problem. Between 1990 and 1991, retail prices in the Soviet Union increased 140 percent.
Under these conditions, the general quality of life for the Soviet people deteriorated. The public traditionally faced shortages of durable goods, but under Gorbachev, food, clothes, and other basic necessities were in short supply. Fueled by the liberalized atmosphere of Gorbachev's glasnost and by the general improvement in information access in the late 1980s, public dissatisfaction with economic conditions was becoming much more overt than ever before in the Soviet period. The foreign-trade sector of the Soviet economy also showed signs of deterioration. The total Soviet hard-currency debt increased appreciably, and the Soviet Union, which had established an impeccable record for debt repayment in earlier decades, had accumulated sizable arrears by 1990. It did free up the arts and social sciences in the region and enabled formerly banned literature and films to be reconstructed to a degree, with filmmakers like Sergei Parajanov now out of prison.
In sum, the Soviet Union left a legacy of economic inefficiency and deterioration to the fifteen constituent republics after its breakup in December 1991. Arguably, the shortcomings of the Gorbachev reforms had contributed to the economic decline and eventual destruction of the Soviet Union. At the same time, the Gorbachev programs did start Russia on the precarious road to full-scale economic reform.
The failures of perestroika have led Alexander Zinovyev to coin the word catastroika (Russian катастройка), a blend of катастрофа - "catastrophe" and perestroika. Zinovyev wrote: "the effect of explanatory work has appeared the return desirable. All they wished to avoid, has occurred with double the force... Queues lengthened. Prices in the markets have jumped. At home, in queues, in transport, on work, at assemblies people have openly worn the perestroyka. .... Someone has learned, that the word "perestroyka" is translated on the Greek language by a word "accident". On this basis a new word "katastroyka" has appeared. Pensioners and older Party members saw in perestroika the counterrevolution and betrayal of Lenin's cause".[2]
[edit] Comparison with China
Perestroika and Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms have similar origins but very different effects on their respective countries' economies. Both efforts occurred in large communist countries attempting to modernize their economies, but while China's GDP has grown consistently since the late 1980s (albeit from a much lower level), national GDP in the USSR and in many of its successor states fell precipitously throughout the 1990s.[3][citation needed] Gorbachev's reforms were largely a top-down attempt at reform, and maintained many of the macroeconomic aspects of the command economy (including price controls, inconvertibility of the ruble, exclusion of private property ownership, and the government monopoly over most means of production). Reform was largely focused on industry and on cooperatives, and a limited role was given to the development of foreign investment and international trade. Factory managers were expected to meet state demands for goods, but to find their own funding. Perestroika reforms went far enough to create new bottlenecks in the Soviet economy, but arguably did not go far enough to effectively streamline it. Chinese economic reform was, by contrast, a bottom-up attempt at reform, focusing on light industry and agriculture (namely allowing peasants to sell produce grown on private holdings at market prices). Economic reforms were fostered through the development of "Special Economic Zones", designed for export and to attract foreign investment, municipally-managed Township and Village Enterprises and a "dual pricing" system leading to the steady phasing out of state-dictated prices. Greater latitude was given to managers of state-owned factories, while capital was made available to them through a reformed banking system and through fiscal policies (in contrast to the fiscal anarchy and fall in revenue experienced by the Soviet government during perestroika).
[edit] Summary
The perestroika reforms began the process leading to the dismantling of the Soviet-era command economy and its replacement with a market economy. However, the process arguably exacerbated already existing social and economic tensions within the Soviet Union, and no doubt helped to further nationalism among the constituent republics, as well as social fragmentation. The economic chaos that began with perestroika helped both to empower organized crime and allowed businessmen with the right connections to amass great personal fortunes as Russia's oligarchs. The economic freedoms instituted by Gorbachev under perestroika and the problems caused by these reforms arguably helped to begin the unraveling of Soviet society and hastened the end of the Soviet Union.
IngentaConnect Indian Geopolitics, the United States and Evolving ...
Indian Geopolitics, the United States and Evolving Correlates of Power in Asia. Author: VAUGHN, BRUCE1. Source: Geopolitics, Volume 9, Number 2, ...
www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/geo/2004/00000009/00000002/art00008 - Similar pages - Note this
by B VAUGHN - Cited by 1 - All 2 versions
Indian Geopolitics, the United States and Evolving Correlates of ...
India has been poorly understood and often neglected by the United States. Its emerging role and geopolitical importance in the evolving correlates of...
www.informaworld.com/smpp/97904970-10987394/content~content=a714596963~db=all~order=page - Similar pages - Note this
India not party to US-China geopolitics: Foreign Secretary Saran ...
India not party to US-China geopolitics: Foreign Secretary Saran. India not party to US-China geopolitics: Foreign Secretary Saran Daily News & Updates ...
www.india-defence.com/reports/2422 - 15k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Geopolitics of South Asia and the Threat of War
The only reason that can be given is that India is a partner in these conflicts. India’s geopolitics is to keep South Asia divided, become the most ...
www.geocities.com/aipsg/proc21-geo.html - 22k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Political Votemonger Rodents ravage Entire Indian Geopolitics!
Political Votemonger Rodents ravage Entire Indian Geopolitics!Seeking the abolition of the wage board, the Indian Newspaper Society on Wednesday accused the ...
palashspeaks.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/political_votemonger_rodents_ravage_enti~3007323 - Similar pages - Note this
International Relations in India - Google Books Result
by Kanti P. Bajpai, Siddharth Mallavarapu - 2005 - Political Science - 546 pages
EIGHT Indian Geopolitics: 'Nation-State' and the Colonial Legacy SANJAY CHATURVEDI If geopolitics can be critically conceptualised as a 'way of seeing' ...
books.google.co.in/books?isbn=8125026401...
India should consider the geopolitics and precedents when debating ...
The world certainly has changed the 1960s and even from 1990 but India should consider the geopolitics of the nuclear agreement dispassionately ...
kalyanaramgurumurthy.wordpress.com/.../ - 14k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Oil, Geopolitics, and the Coming War with Iran
11 Apr 2005 ... Oil, Geopolitics, and the Coming War with Iran .... "We have communicated to the Indian government our concerns about the gas pipeline ...
www.commondreams.org/views05/0411-21.htm - 28k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
INDIA AND GEOPOLITICS
Geopolitics of India Power India Asia theater Super geopolitics.
www.scribd.com/doc/4812906/INDIA-AND-GEOPOLITICS- - 95k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
India In Geopolitics - The Monthly Review
India In Geopolitics - The Monthly Review. Allister Maunk, AIA Indian section. The historical first visit of the Indian President to Russia (the previous ...
www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=132 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Unheralded Sushil Kumar rose from obscurity to find his rightful place in the history of Indian sports when he won the bronze medal in men's 66kg freestyle category at the Beijing Olympics here today.Sushil's campaign seemed nearly over when he lost his first round battle against eventual silver medallist Andriy Stadnik but repechage provided him a ray of hope and the Indian proved simply irresistible as he beat three grapplers on the trot to win the bronze.Down in the dumps after his opening round defeat, Sushil came up with an incredible show, beating Doug Schwab (USA), Albert Batyrov (Belarus) and finally the losing semifinalist Leonid Spiridonov (Kazakhstan) in the repechage rounds to earn his slice of history.Sushil thus became the second Indian wrestler after K D Jadhav who won a bronze in the 1952 Helsinki Games to win an Olympic medal.
Incidentally, in the 2006 Doha Asian Games also, Sushil had beaten Leonid to win the bronze.Against Leonid, Sushil grabbed early initiative by scoring two technical points that proved decisive in the end.
Though the Kazakh grappler scored one in the second period and managed to thwart Sushil, the Indian proved his superiority again in the third period and eventually prevailed 3-2 to trigger frenzied celebration among the Indians present at the Chinese Agricultural University here.
India's fledgling Olympic campaign on Wednesday received a sensational boost with unheralded grappler Sushil Kumar clinching a bronze medal and boxer Vijender Kumar assuring himself of at least a bronze to give the country a record three medals for the first time ever.
After Abhinav Bindra's gold-winning feat during the first week of the sporting extravaganza, the 25-year-old Sushil Kumar shot into fame by winning a bronze medal in the wrestling arena while Vijender has put himself on course for a silver or gold medal on a historic day for Indian sports.
Sushil and Vijender's heroics not only provided the late sparks to an otherwise dismal campaign but has created a record of sorts as India had never returned with three medals from the Olympics.
India had won two Olympic medals in the 1952 Helsinki Games when the hockey team had won the gold medal and wrestler KD Jadhav had won a bronze medal, a record which had stood for 56 long years.
While Sushil and Vijender did the country proud, there was some heartbreak for the Indians with another medal contender pugilist Jitender Kumar losing his quarter-final bout despite a valiant effort in the ring.
After days of disappointments, it turned out to be a day to cherish for the Indians as Sushil found his way to the record books by becoming only the second wrestler in India's Olympic history to win a bronze medal in the men's 66 kg freestyle category.
Vijender then brought more cheers for the contingent by beating Ecuador's Carlos Gongora in the quarter finals of the 75 kg category with a 9-4 verdict.
Sushil's campaign seemed nearly over when he lost his first round battle against eventual silver medallist Andriy Stadnik but repechage provided him a ray of hope and the Indian proved simply irresistible as he beat three grapplers on the trot to win the bronze.
Down in the dumps after his opening round defeat, Sushil came up with an incredible show, beating Doug Schwab (USA), Albert Batyrov (Belarus) and finally the losing semifinalist Leonid Spiridonov (Kazakhstan) in the repechage rounds to earn his slice of history.
Incidentally, in the 2006 Doha Asian Games also, Sushil had beaten Leonid to win the bronze.
Indian challenge ended in the table tennis event of Olympics after Achantha Sharath Kamal meekly surrendered 1-4 to Austria's Chen Weixing in the second round clash of the men's singles event in Beijing on Wednesday.
India's Jitender Kumar lost against Russia's Georgy Balakshin in the flyweight (51kg) quarterfinals at Beijing. It was a well-fought contest but the Russian definitely had an upperhand and trounced Jitender 15-11.
With two Olympic medals already in India's kitty, more hopes were rested on boxers Jitender Kumar and Vijender Kumar. With Jitender out of the medal race, Vijender remains the last ray of hope for the first boxing medal.
Round 1: 2-1
Balakshin took the lead with the first on spot punch. Jitender levelled him soon but he could take his score beyond that and the Russian took the lead right away.
Round 2: 5-5
The second round was an evenly fought and the two pugilists ended 5-5, though Balashin was leading 7-6.
Round 3: 6-3
With two rounds very closely fought, Balakshin became a bit more aggressive and succeeded in penetrating Jitender's defense. He was sharp and aggressive and ended up with a score of 6-3. This took his total lead to 13-9
Round 4: 2-2
With a lead that almost promised a victory, Balakshin became defensive. Jitender still managed to grab two points but it came too late. All last minute fight came out to be futile as the Russian emerged victorious.
NDTV reports:
Left-sponsored strike against inflation and government policies has hit normal life and the effect is being felt in several parts of the country but Left-ruled West Bengal has come to a complete standstill.
Everything is shut-- shops, schools, colleges, offices and even the IT sector companies. There are no taxis or buses on the roads. The streets of Kolkata are completely deserted.
The strike has been called by eight major trade unions including the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) and Centre for Industrial Trade Union (CITU).
Its also backed by 40 employees associations across sectors like public sector banks and airport ground handling staff.
All Delhi flights to Kolkata have been cancelled. Delhi flights to Kochi and Thiruvanthapuram in Kerala have also been affected.
Two flights from Delhi to Port Blair and Mumbai have also been cancelled.
Airports Authority of India's 22,000 employees are on strike between 7 am and 7 pm affecting ground handling at airports.
The Kolkata airport was the worst affected due to the strike. It wore a completely deserted look. Not a single flight landed at the airport since the morning.
Indian Airlines has been able to operate only two flights out of Kolkata since the morning whereas Kingfisher three and Jet Airways just one flight.
The streets of Kolkata are empty. The entire state of West Bengal has come to a standstill. No long distance train have left Howrah and Sealdah since Wednesday morning. Some passenger trains left Howrah and Sealdah but were blocked soon after.
And the flights to Kolkata which were supposed to depart from Delhi before 9.00 am and now stand cancelled are JetLite flight number S2 319, Kingfisher flight number IT 601, Indian Airlines flight number IC 401, Air India flight number AI 9401.
The effect of the strike is being felt more in the Left-ruled states of West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura.
Flights on passenger heavy routes like Kolkata, Trivandrum and Cochin have been affected.
Airport employees are protesting against privatisation of airports and rationalisation of employees' pay-scales. 250 Indian Air Force personnel have been deployed at 21 airfields across the country to ensure smooth air travel.
Not a single long distance train left from Howrah or Sealdah since morning. Some passenger trains did leave in the morning but were blocked soon after they left the station.
Many long distance trains coming to Howrah from different parts of the country are still stranded as trade union activists have blocked the railway tracks.
Banking transactions across the country will also be hit with employees' associations at all Public sector banks joining the strike, except for State Bank of India which was on strike on Monday.
The bank employees are protesting against the new economic policies of the government, especially with regards to mergers which have lead to job cuts.
Monika deserved more than SAI duplicity
BY JB LAMA
MANIPURIS were shocked beyond belief when Leishram Monika Devi — silver medallist in the 2006 Melbourne Commonwealth Games, who was the lone woman weightlifter scheduled to represent India in Beijing — was dropped from the Indian Olympic squad. More than this, what has most hurt Manipuriri sentiment was the manner in which she was shunted out — just a few hours before the team was to take off on the night of 5 August. The official reason: she reportedly tested positive for an anabolic steroid. If so, then why the 11th hour decision?
Not unexpectedly, Manipuris vented their anger by organising an impromptu 24-hour bandh and staged rallies and demonstations in Imphal and Delhi. A public meeting described the decision as “injustice and a discriminatory act towards players in Manipur” and demanded an apology from the Centre within a week, failing which it threatened to organise more bandhs and demonstrations.
It has asked the Manipur Olympic Committee to seek recognition of Manipur as a separate entity in international and sporting events and all government and non-government sports organisations have been told to boycott any zonal, national and international competitions. The meeting also revealed some past injustices to sportspersons from Manipur, citing cases like the non-inclusion of the Sepak Takraw team and non-selection of pugilist Dingku from Manipur in the first trial for the last Bangkok Asian Games. And this was the same Dingku who won a gold for India.
Two days after the opening of the Olympic Games came the report of Monika having been absolved of the dope charge. But according to Indian Olympic Association president Suresh Kalmadi, his request to allow her participation was turned down by the International Weightlifing Federation. Now for the pertinent question: How did the test conducted by an Indian laboratory suddenly turn out to be negative? The end result lends credence to Indian Weightlifting Federation general secretary BT Gulati’s suspicion that there was some “malafide intentions” behind it all. He had argued as much that “the tests had no validity because the Indian lab is not accredited by the World Anti-dope Agency, it does not follow procedure... its report was given internally and we have not been given a copy”.
While seeking a CBI probe, Manipur chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh said “the entire episode appears to be a big manipulative game played by the Sports Authority of India, the national dope testing laboratory and the Indian Olympic Association against a sportsperson whose dream for the Olympics has been shattered”. It is only to be expected that the SAI and the IOA, apart from telling the truth, will also clear themselves of the “manipulating game” charges. Until then, the two organisations will stand condemned by Manipuris.
In the spirit of justice and sporting competition, we feel the SAI and IOA have not only cheated Monika but the country too. Who knows that she might have realised her Olympic dream by winning a medal for India!
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=14&theme=&usrsess=1&id=218814
RIL may be allowed to sell diesel in domestic market
Ramesh Sharma
Dealing with diesel demand: Mr Murli Deora, Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas; Mr R. S. Sharma, Chairman and Managing Director, ONGC; Mr U. D. Choubey, Chairman and Managing Director, GAIL; and Mr Sarthak Behuria, Chairman, IOC, at a meeting in the Capital on Tuesday. -
Our Bureau
New Delhi, Aug. 19 With the diesel demand showing an 18-per cent growth and oil companies depending on imports to bridge the gap, the Government is considering changes in tax norms to allow refineries in export-oriented units such as Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) to feed the domestic market.
It is also mulling a differential pricing for power and other industrial consumers of the fuel.
After a review meeting with the chiefs of PSU oil companies here on Tuesday, the Petroleum Minister, Mr Murli Deora, said that a consistent, long-term pricing policy for diesel is required – one which would balance social concerns with business realities. The Ministry was seeking changes in tax rules to allow EOU refineries to supply petroleum products to PSU refiners.
Mr Sarthak Behuria, Chairman, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd, told news persons that “We have written to Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) and the Commerce Ministry in this regard, and if the Finance Ministry also approves it, we will be able to buy diesel from Reliance as is the case with LPG.”
An EOU refinery will have to pay both customs and excise duty for selling the products in the domestic market. The excise duty comprises two components - ad valorem and specific. Currently, the EOU will have to face double taxation in specific.
In addition, the company will have to pay income-tax on its profits when it sells fuel in the domestic tariff area (DTA). “It is being examined if domestic sales by Reliance in the DTA can be given a ‘deemed export status’ and it continues to get income-tax waiver,” he said. RIL already enjoys a deemed export status for selling LPG to the PSUs.
Surge in demand
Mr Behuria said that industrial use of subsidised diesel was pushing up demand and forcing the refiners to increase imports. The output by Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation together in 2008-09 was estimated at 39.49 million tonne, with the demand being at 54.79 m.t.
While transport and agriculture demand for diesel had grown by 10-12 per cent, consumption by power producers and other industries had risen 30 per cent.
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2008/08/20/stories/2008082052160100.htm
Business and bandh mix
- Govt to talk industrialisation, union to shut workplaces
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
Nirupam Sen
Calcutta, Aug. 19: The right hand will try to unlock a factory tomorrow and the left will shut down almost every other such facility in Bengal. But unlike in the adage, the two hands of the CPM know exactly what they are doing.
By the time the state sli-thers into another bandh- induced slumber tomorrow, Writers’ Buildings will stir to life to talk about the future of the Tata car factory with representatives of the Trinamul Congress.
Bengal industries minister Nirupam Sen today washed the government’s hands of tomorrow’s all-India general strike, saying the CPM had nothing to do with the shutdown call given by Citu.
He said the talks with Trinamul chief Mamata Banerjee over the contentious 400 acres in Singur would be held as scheduled.
“The question of justifying tomorrow’s strike does not arise since we have not called it. It is up to those who have called the strike to make it a success. If people respond to the strike, it would be successful,” he said.
The Citu would not see the irony, despite having forced the shutdown.
“Our strike is not anti-industry but to protest the Centre’s anti-labour, anti-economic policies, including moves to amend labour laws, divestment, unemployment and price rise,” Bengal Citu secretary Kali Ghosh said. “Above all, it is against the Indo-US nuclear deal that would compromise our national sovereignty.”
If anyone is doubting Citu’s “pro-industry” credentials, here’s proof: the union wants work at the Tata factory in Singur to “progress”.
“We have called the general strike but workers of Tata Motors will decide whether to work tomorrow or not. We are not going to stop them forcibly. In fact, we want progress in Tata Motors’ work in Singur,” Ghosh said.
State Citu president and CPM leader Shyamal Chakraborty said the strike would not hamper the industrialisation talks. “There will be no problem for ministers to attend office at Writers’ Buildings tomorrow. It will be the same with Partha Chatterjee, who enjoys cabinet rank as leader of the Opposition in the Assembly,” he said.
Chakraborty did not clarify whether he was saying that in the Citu’s scheme of things, only ministers, not ordinary people, had the right to free movement and work.
But Trinamul’s Chatterjee, whose party knows a trick or two about enforcing bandhs, said: “I will not ask for security from the state government for travelling to Writers’. If bandh supporters prevent me, I shall return home straight.”
For Mamata, the shutdown has thrown up a bargaining chip. “I am urging industrialists present here to persuade the government to resolve the Singur issue. In return, I will consider solving the bandh problem,” she told an interactive session at the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
Sources in her party later said it was a tongue-in-cheek remark.
“The ruling party has called a bandh tomorrow…. Is this democracy? Bandh should be a tool to be used by the Opposition,” she said.
Careful not to send “wrong” signals to the audience made of industrialists, she added: “It is not that we favour bandhs and gheraos. But it’s a tool of protest that we use as a last resort.”
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080820/jsp/bengal/story_9717178.jsp
Centre seeks extension of stay on Simi tribunal order
NEW DELHI, Aug. 19: The Centre today urged the Supreme Court to extend its stay on a tribunal's order lifting the ban imposed on Students Islamic Movement of India (Simi) charged with indulging in terrorist activities, including the recent Ahmedabad and Bangalore blasts.
Additional solicitor-general Mr Gopal Subramaniam who made an impromptu mention of the issue before a Bench of Justices Mr BN Aggrawal, Mr GS Singhvi and Mr JM Panchal, submitted that the matter which was scheduled to be heard on 22 August was not listed in the cause list (which carries details of cases scheduled to be taken up by a court on a particular day).
The ASG submitted that the “matter was of great importance” and the stay, if not extended, would adversely affect the country's interests. However, the air was cleared after the registry officials told the Bench that the matter was listed for hearing on 25 August. On 6 August, a Bench headed by Chief Justice Mr KG Balakrishnan stayed a special tribunal order that had earlier ordered lifting restrictions on its activities and also issued a notice to Simi. n SNS & PTI
If Musharraf couldn’t do it, who could?
Pakistan and its humongous problems won’t go away. In fact they are spilling into neighbouring countries and beyond.
In its six decades of bloody history, one of the country’s prime ministers Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was hanged like a thug and two others, Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, were unceremoniously booted out from power and forced into exile. When under the pressure of “friendly persuasion” by outside powers, the two political rivals, with no love lost between them, were allowed to return to Pakistan, Mrs Bhutto, a darling of the West, was killed in an election melee and the other returnee, Mr Sharif, has been plotting revenge against the (ex)General who humiliated him in a 1999 putsch.
Since the 1980s when General Zia-ul-Haq seized power, Pakistan has been gradually turned into a nation with a fundamentalist mindset. In varying degrees, every institution, including the Pakistan armed forces and the ISI, has been infused with the fundamentalist virus that spread from Saudi-financed Wahabbi schools. Islamic fundamentalists and the US-financed Afghanistan armed resistance ultimately drove the Soviets out and also factored into the final collapse of the Soviet Union.
When the United States withdrew its presence from Afghanistan leaving well-armed guerrillas behind, the ISI in collusion with Al-Qaida and its financial resources raised the Taliban that overran the country, imposing brutal order on the war-ravaged nation.
By any historical standard the ISI-Taliban control of Afghanistan was a remarkable achievement of the Pakistan armed forces. No less significant has been the development of nuclear weapons, which made Pakistan a nation that could not be ignored in the light of proliferation threats and Islamic militancy.
On Christmas Day in 2003 when suicide bombers hit Mr Musharraf’s motorcade ~ certainly not the last attempt to kill him~ many analysts wondered what good was the mighty General to the United States in its global mission of fighting terrorism if he could not protect himself. Against all odds, Mr Musharraf put up a face of being a steadfast ally of the United States in its fight against Al- Qaida terrorism. He cautiously responded to peace overtures from India. But many in the West began to be impatient with him. Some wondered whether Mr Musharraf was fully committed to fighting Al-Qaida; or had another agenda.
But the United States saw no alternative to the man who seemed to control both the military and civilian life.
In the beginning, Mr Musharraf had an aura of “exceptionalism” about him, as if he were a man of destiny. He led a bloodless coup in 1999, promising to end political corruption and take Pakistan into a new direction. He conjured the vision of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk as to how he had liberated Turkey from Islamic orthodoxy and made it a modern country. But Mr Mushrraf’s dream died too soon.
When the events of 9/11 forced him to reluctantly break away from the Taliban (whose control over Afghanistan had created an illusion of strategic depth for Pakistan) and join the US war against Al-Qaida, Mr Musharraf invoked the Prophet Muhammad’s political alliances and strategies (even with the enemies) and the Prophet’s final triumph.
Unfortunately, Mr Musharraf’s opportunistic alliance with Islamic parties to build a political base to keep his secular rivals, Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and Mr Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N), out of power backfired; he unwittingly allowed extremism to grow.
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=4&theme=&usrsess=1&id=218858
AN UNSETTLING END
- The UPA’s Pakistan policy is disastrously confused
Diplomacy - K.P. Nayar
Pervez Musharraf took the inevitable decision to step down as Pakistan’s president on the very day that his brother-officer-turned-president, General Zia-ul- Haq, was killed 20 years ago in a mysterious plane crash, which ended one of the darkest chapters in the short political history of Pakistan. Musharraf announced his decision the following day to his nation, which has been waiting for this denouement for months. Musharraf made up his mind to quit — in the face of declarations to the contrary throughout last weekend by his aides and his dwindling band of supporters — hours after the American secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, told a Sunday television talk show that asylum for the United States of America’s ally of almost seven years “is an issue that is not on the table”.
Musharraf is a smart man. He correctly calculated that with eroding support from the Bush administration in its twilight months, his options were rapidly closing. George W. Bush and Rice have stood by Musharraf through thick and thin while Rice’s predecessor, Colin Powell, another army general, had nothing but praise for this Pakistani in uniform after he tossed the Taliban out of his backyard a month after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on September 11, 2001. For the wily former president of Pakistan, the proverbial tail that managed to wag the dog during much of the last six years when it came to Pakistan’s engagement with Bush, matters could only have got worse under a new American president from January 20 next year, whether that president is Barack Obama or John McCain. Neither of them trusted Musharraf the way Bush and his aides did even if the trust of the latter was at a diminishing rate in the last several years.
Notwithstanding Rice’s assertion immediately after Musharraf’s farewell to his nation that “we strongly support the democratically elected civilian government” in Islamabad, officials who deal with Pakistan in key government agencies in Washington say privately that they would have preferred the army chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, to have taken over. When Musharraf nominated Kayani last November to succeed him as chief of army staff, there was jubilation at the Pentagon: Kayani is a graduate of the US Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas. Its other distinguished alumni include Dwight D. Eisenhower, General George C. Marshall and General George S. Patton.
Pl read Complete story:
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080820/jsp/opinion/story_9716598.jsp
Tata OK but 400 bye-bye: Mamata
Subtle shift before talks
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
Calcutta, Aug. 19: Mamata Banerjee today announced her party would attend a meeting on Singur at Writers’ Buildings tomorrow with the one-point agenda that 400 acres be returned to unwilling farmers, but behind the bluster was a subtle shift in stand.
“Let the Tatas build their factory on 600-650 acres and let ancillary units be relocated somewhere nearby,” she told industry leaders at the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
This is the first time the Trinamul leader has said the 400 acres need not cover land on which the Tata Motors’ small car plant is coming up. Trinamul leaders described this as a “softening of her position”. So far, her stand was that land taken from unwilling farmers would have to be returned no matter where it fell.
“I don’t want the Tatas to leave, I don’t believe in Tata bye-bye, but simultaneously want the government to be fair to the farmers,” Mamata said.
The Trinamul leader also revealed that she had received a letter from Tata Motors on their Singur project, the first time the company has got in touch with her directly, but refused to divulge its contents saying it was marked “confidential’’.
“I would not be unethical by disclosing contents of the Tata Motors letter. However, on the basis of what they have written, I can say that they need 650 acres for the small car plant and not 1,000 acres.
“Moreover, the ancillary units coming up in Singur would not only supply materials to Tata Motors but also other companies across the globe. So, why did the government issue the notification that 1,000 acres would be required for the Tata project?” she asked.
It is learnt that the letter was written by Tata Motors MD Ravi Kant.
She was also unhappy that industries minister Nirupam Sen, and not chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, would be meeting her party’s representatives tomorrow.
“The chief minister should have realised that acceptance or rejection of our demand for the return of 400 acres at Singur would be a policy decision and his presence at tomorrow’s meeting was a must….
“Actually, his intention is to drag the issue and persuade us to defer our agitation so that the Tatas can roll out their small car by October. So, tomorrow’s meeting would be a meeting without results,” Mamata said.
She appealed to the chambers to persuade the government that “the Tata small car project does not need these 400 acres”. Unless the land was returned, her party’s August 24 agitation at Singur would “start and continue”, she warned.
CPM state secretary Biman Bose iterated the government line that land already acquired could not be returned for “practical and legal” reasons, and asked her to offer a “realistic solution”.
Mamata, who said she was “happy to get a letter from the chief minister inviting us for talks on Singur”, holds that the return of 400 acres “is the only solution we can offer”.
After Bhattacharjee invited her for talks yesterday, Mamata wrote back this morning to say her representatives would attend the meeting. The chief minister sent another letter today praising her for agreeing to hold a dialogue and confirming that Sen would meet Trinamul leaders at 4.30pm.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080820/jsp/frontpage/story_9717337.jsp
PDF]
SYNOPSIS India, US Imperialism and Anti-imperialist Movement In India
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
The present phase of anti-imperialist movement in India started with Calcutta. Convention in 1995 under the leadership of All India anti-imperialist Forum. ...
www.peoplejudgebush.org/files/ManikMukherjee.pdf - Similar pages - Note this
Marxism and Anti-Imperialism in India
The work focuses upon a specific chapter and aspect of India’s Freedom Movement — its complex and evolving relationship with Marxism in terms of the genesis ...
www.marxists.org/subject/india/index.htm - 16k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Anti-Imperialist Struggle in India
They systematically sabotaged the movement, and finally succeeded in throwing it into ..... MN Roy Internet Archive | Marxism and Anti-Imperialism in India ...
www.marxists.org/archive/roy/1923/x01/x01.htm - 29k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
The Ghadar Movement
Many Sikhs and Hindu Punjabis who tasted freeddom outside colonial India in USA started Ghadr movement to free India from British rule in early 1900's. ...
www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/events/ghadr.html - 17k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
IMC India - Anti Imperialist Convention in Calicut
In the following years State level Committees were formed in 20 States of India and under their leadership people’s movements on various anti-imperialist ...
india.indymedia.org/en/2003/10/8158.shtml - 27k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
importance of dutt-bradley thesis
It points out that the first great anti-imperialist movement in India was the first non-cooperation movement of 1919-22, which it states "ended in the ...
www.cpim.org/marxist/199601_marxist_duttbrdly_hks.htm - 22k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
JSTOR: American Anti-Imperialists and the Pro-India Movement, 1900 ...
Like the Anti-Imperialist League from which it grew, the pro- India movement during the prewar years stressed the democratic political principle of ...
links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8684(197402)43%3A1%3C83%3AAAATPM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W - Similar pages - Note this
by A Raucher - 1974 - Cited by 1
Revolutionary Anti-Imperialist Movement- Denver
This DVD is put out by this RAIMD group – revolutionary anti-imperialist movement Denver — … It’s all verified, they even admit all this, they are telling ...
raimd.wordpress.com/ - 162k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Specters of Mother India: The Global Restructuring of an Empire - Google Books Result
by Mrinalini Sinha - 2006 - Social Science - 366 pages
The League against Imperialism, formed in February 1927, ... 50 To a considerable extent, of course, the small pro-India movement in the United States ...
books.google.co.in/books?isbn=0822337959...
[L-I] All Success to the Anti-Imperialist Conventi: msg#00017
The All India Anti-Imperialist Forum (AIAIF) is going to hold an ... aggressors vacate Iraq immediately and to strengthen the anti-imperialist movement. ...
osdir.com/ml/politics.leninism.international/2003-11/msg00017.html - 31k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this
Memories of Another day
While my Parents Pulin babu and Basanti devi were living
No comments:
Post a Comment