The dastardly attack on the eminent writer Paul Zachariah by the DYFI in the CPM fortress of Payyanur in north Kerala on 10 January has been roundly condemned across the political spectrum in Kerala. Zacharia was heckled and abused at a literary seminar organized by a publisher for criticizing the moral policing practiced by the official left in Kerala. He condemned the recent DYFI-PDP joint ‘moral action’ against the Congress leader Rajmohan Unnithan and a Sewa Dal leader which, according to the the DYFI leadership, were ‘provocative’. Zacharia was accosted by a gang of men when he was about to leave Payyanur and openly threatened. He was told that such talk was not permitted in the left bastion of Payyanur; when the threat did not produce the desired reaction, they resorted to physical intimidation, and relented only after the intervention of the organizers who are CPM sympathizers, and other writers present there. The day after, prominent leaders in the CPM, including the Chief Minister and the Minister for Education, condemned the action.
However, the CPM Czar Pinarayi Vijayan sounded quite unrepentant when he declared that ‘provocation’ is likely to produce violent reactions. He compared the outrage felt by the DYFI activists to that felt by Christians and Muslims faced with blasphemous utterances. The lower CPM warlords of north Malabar sound deeply encouraged by Their Master’s Voice, and have been issuing similar statements. Zacharia has denied Vijayan’s accusation that he portrayed the early communist leaders as ‘sexual anarchists’, pointing out that all he had accused them was of a modern, liberal attitude towards interaction between the sexes.
While the ‘liberal’ elements in and around the CPM have been struck dumb by their hero’s performance, many of us remain unsurprised. And not just because the CPM resembles, all the more recently, anti-political and institutionalized religion. In fact, the communist elite in Kerala have always been ardent defenders of what Marxist theory has called ‘bourgeois morality’ from their earliest days (so I am not sure whether I agree with Zachariah on this). One needs only to glance at the debates about literary aesthetics that raged between the leftist ‘progressive writers’and early and later modernists, from the 1940s onwards.Nor have they been strangers to verbal lumpenism — rather, it has been a fine art practiced and perfected by, actually, the most Holy among them, and deployed against even the most venerable figures in the history of modern Malayalam literature like Kesari A. Balakrishna Pillai and Joseph Mundassery. However, the audacity of the present violence is scary indeed. Zacharia is an immensely popular writer respected in Kerala and outside and one of the most formidable public critics of organised religion in Kerala. That he should be physically threatened for voicing his views is new in the history of intellectual intimidation in Kerala.
Perhaps it is important to understand that this new phenomenon is not a chance occurrence, but related to the rise to hegemony of a certain style of anti-politics that is increasingly becoming the hallmark of the CPM in Kerala. In the mid-20th century, the communists were equally powerful in north Kerala — Malabar — and in the south — Travancore and Kochi. The south, however, was hegemonic in communist politics. Deeper social democratization had occurred through powerful lower caste community movements in the south; it was more advanced in literacy and health care; it had a strong, well-organized working class — which was very militant indeed.
In the north, the communist leaders had to combine political work with social reformism and anti-caste activism and hence the idealised image we possess of many communist leaders of the north, which are laden with a moral halo that leaders from the south do not often have. In the extreme north which were strongholds of communist peasant militancy, a violent style of activism far removed from the ‘civil’ style of the communist elite, or the ‘uncivil’ style of the organised working classes of the south remained active, which stressed the (feudal) value of community loyalty above everything else. Communists of the extreme north were too uncritically praised for being ‘down to earth’, ‘simple’, passionately committed — all else was forgiven, especially the ugly undemocratic tendencies that lay in the underside of precisely these ‘virtues’. Thus was born the image that was projected on the prominent CPM leader from the extreme north, the former Chief Minister of Kerala, the late E K Nayanar : of the simple soul,completely committed to the Party, ‘pure’ and unsophisticated in his ways, ‘direct’ and ‘uncomplicated’ in his speech. And this image underplayed the violence of his speech, his contempt, for instance, for women who demanded greater ‘civility’ in public life, evident in the crudity of his ‘jokes’.
It is perhaps important to distinguish between the early militancy of the left working classes and the kind of bullying that we are now witnessing. Indeed, in the earlier phases, militancy was identified with the working classes mobilized by the communist party and not its leadership — as a child I remember my very middle-class and upper caste relatives defend the communists against common elite complaints about their ‘lawlessness’ by pointing out that this was a feature of the ‘lowest orders’ of the party and not its elite — who were praised as the most ‘civil’ in Kerala! Now, the scene appears reversed. The ‘lowest orders’ at present are perhaps a ‘civil-political society’ — welfare beneficiaries in the panchayats, especially the women in the government supported self-help groups’ network — which is utterly and terrifyingly ‘civil’ and docile (and not the organized working class, which is increasingly declared to be ‘problem’). The upper echelons, in contrast, are increasingly being filled with Pinarayi- clones who embrace his chillingly uncivil, openly threatening style. The content of militancy is also striking. The earlier working class militancy involved plenty of ‘ethical illegality’; it strained the very seams of India’s liberal political order; but it was also committed to the breakdown of caste and privilege. The present one, however, is closer to the intolerance perpetuated in the mid-20th century by the middle-class elite left intellectuals against writers who refused to wed their writing to immediate left political interest.It is also deeply elitist in its defense of ‘bourgeois morality’: the earlier working class militancy was much less committed to bourgeois morality and marriage, as the autobiographical accounts of working class mobilizers and activists show. In the 1970s, the left trade union leaders were more likely to support the public protests by working class women left pregnant by factory owners of supervisors, and thus we do have stories of a number of garbhasatyagrahams (pregnancy satyagrahas)in Kollam in the narratives of workers active in struggles of those times.
How did this shift happen? We need to think more, but perhaps this is related to the decline of the style of left politics that was shaped in the pre-independence south Kerala. This period saw the decay of working class clout, and the weakening of traditional industries in which the militant working class was concentrated; at the same time, the rise of the ‘rubber economy’, concentrated in largely non-left interests, and later, the flow of wealth through migration, increased the political clout of the non-left in the south, especially the Congress.While the north caught up with the south in development indices in a few decades after independence, the Gulf Boom ushered in a flow of wealth,which especially benefitted the north, and gradually coalesced into specific economic interests by the end of the 1990s.New flows of wealth strengthened non-left community interests in the north and the south, and this translated into strength for the Congress in the south; in the north, where it is not the Congress but the communists and the Muslim League which have been dominant traditionally, the new economic interests feeding on Gulf-based wealth seemed to have helped to create new centres of power within these two parties. In the same period, after the land reforms, the power of the farmers’ and agricultural workers’ organizations have also become divided and weaker within the left. The idealistic early leadership of the CPM and the genteel and development-and-reform-oriented early leadership of the Muslim League have disappeared.Kunhalikkutty’s rise in the Muslim League and the rise of the extreme north lobby in the CPM may not be entirely coincidental, then.
The new millennium has seen the steady march of this lobby to power within the CPM, and their style is now increasingly copied by the lower ranks of leadership in the CPM. The brashness of the statements made by student and youth leaders of the CPM, often defending the completely indefensible — is quite visible at present.And all of the official left’s entrenched intolerance now come laced with a heady dose of extreme north-Kerala style of violent ‘feudalised’ activism. Interestingly, this style can only bring political disaster to the CPM, given the fact that the increasing horror of all sorts of ‘uncivility’, ‘feudalised’ or ‘ethical, that one finds circulating through the mainstream media and increasingly, in the views of the burgeoning consumerist middle-classes.We need a new term to describe this utter lack of sight, sense, and intuition in the CPM: blindness will not suffice. As for the rest of us, (if the Malabar Special Police was the most feared arm of the colonial oppressor in Malabar in the pre-independence years) here comes the Malabar Moral Police! Quite updated, actually, with considerable ‘civil society’ participation!
KAFILA - COLLECTIVE EXPLORATIONS SINCE 2006 
1. I lived in Kannur in Northern Kerala, a stronghold of the CPIM from 2007 to 2010 January. The functioning of political parties in the North, irrespective of the party affiliations is highly undemocratic. I am not a sociologist to analyse it though I read a connect with the unbrakable flow of a feudalistic tradition in the social leadership in Malabar. It is totally male-centric, even now. Just be with any of the leaders of CPM, Congress, CPI, Muslim League and RSS, one can understand it.
2. The faculty of listening to others’ views is very weak in the political realm in Kannur. We cannot blame only the CPM for it. All are equally living comfortable in their soviets:) Go and see the RSS, Congress, CPM party panchayats and wards, one can understand
3. The society as a whole, especially the forward caste Hindu community in Kannur miserably failed to understand the nuances of modernity and the role of woman in it. Unfortunately, they lead the political movements here. If not, the leaders carry that baggages of history.
LikeLike
I think the below links will be helpful
http://bharatpatrika.blogspot.com/2010/01/kerala-social-critic-and-malayalam.html
http://bharatpatrika.blogspot.com/2009/12/unnithan-episode-and-moralistic.html
regards
ATK
LikeLike
One will expect that a literary function organized by the Leftists might be the choicest place for a distinguished social critic and writer like Paul Zachariah to share his concerns about degradation of the Left, as mentioned.
Alas!
He has either proved this (though not without paying a price)
or
disproved this ,
in PAYYANUR, the favoured Headquarters for the Malabar Moral Police,
where a ridiculously benign and popular SMS in vogue had been forwarded to his girl student in a parallel college by a (Late) Jagadeesh, a young teacher to his girl student,in 2006-07, which the local SFI enthusiasts judged as immoral and streepeedanam
(again,the most common place word in Malayalam roughly equivalent to an idea of oppression of women; but I believe that it is often invoked to confine women to homes by doing nothing to recognize women’s claims for functional citizenship).
The poor teacher was thrashed black and blue in public by the moral brigade led b SFI-DYFI and he was caused to be expelled from the educational institution. Third day, Jagadeesh committed suicide.
In another incident even earlier, a dalit women’s autorikshaw caused to be set fire and destroyed, following seemingly trivial episodes of altercations with the Edat branch of CITU auto union leadership.
(How a woman and that too a dalit woman dared to question the Party and the Union?..)
The ‘Common Sense’ of many a Payyanur/ Kannur Leftist is either silenced to not expressing at all,
or,
to repeat the kind of question given in brackets above-
How Zakhariah dares in a Left platform to speak such things and expect not being questioned by the gr8 left patrons of Payyanur?
Please see my story posted in mynews.in
http://bit.ly/4v97Cc
LikeLike
whiLe this issue i met one ccpi(M) upper cast leader in train(I CANT DISCLOSE WHO S THAT ONE AGED) i just asked about this issue then he respond Paul zacharia s good man he writing well and all things are very open like our mahdavikutty and added this also who s he? abused our communist for father s like this and hee added at the timee of one police abuse in 1950 at communist struggle one SUBINSPECCTOR abused himm which harijan fucked ur mother blody bastard reasoned of ur birth ””””’
read this issue i fell in trouble hw i
LikeLike
Sure! when Zizek mentioned “revolutionary terror”, he did not have in mind the dyfi of Kerala. Zakaria has experienced it what “revolutionary terror” actually can be. The way by which CPM state secretary has “rationalized” the ”emotions” leading to the provocation and assault, the society of kerala must have definitely must have felt the tremors of this terror.
The assault on writer Zakaria happened in the same day when Zizek declared in Kochi that “Left has to be re-build” while speaking on the topic “whither left”. The intellectuals close to Left and CPM has really seems to have an opportunity at least in “reforming” Left. But the actually “exciting” Left seems have to re-formed in a non-linear progression. (The “reform” need not be understood in a linear, progressive way!)
Zakaria had remarked in his speech at payyanur that the leaders of Left of the early 20 the century had higher-consciousness and broadness of approach towards sexuality and the 21st century Left should be inspired by the modernist temparent of first generation Left leaders.
The day next after the Payyanur event, in almost all newspapers you had intellectuals cutting across parties (affiliations) attesting their signature to the protest statement against the assault. The education minister and CPM central committee member , Sri.M.A.Baby issued a press statement deploring the event.
The protest statement had signatures of activist and small time critics associated with the CPM.
A day passed, but media machine of CPM was unrelenting. It alleged that Zakaria portrayed the “great leaders” of the communist movement as “sexual anarchists”. ( the footage of zakaria’s speech is accesible via youtube. The fact is that there was no mention of a word “sexual anarchy”.)
CPM state secrtary took over from here. Addresing the dyfi state conference concluding rally, Pinarayi Viajayan referred to the event.
I will quote from the Hindu newspaper report of Pinarayi Vijayan’s speech:
Touching upon the alleged assault on writer Paul Zacharia at Payyannur late Saturday evening, Mr. Vijayan said the writer would have observed greater restraint and taken the sensitivities of the local people into account when saying what he had said there. Mr. Zacharia had the freedom to hold his views and the CPI(M) fully respected his right to do so. The CPI(M) also held him in high esteem.
Nobody had raised any objection when he wrote an article in a magazine expressing his ‘peculiar’ views on an incident involving a Congress leader (Mr. Rajmohan Unnithan).
However, when he spoke at Payyannur, he also observed that Communist leaders of the past had indulged in sexual anarchy when they were underground. This was not to the liking of some in the audience and one of them had questioned him then and there itself. What Mr. Zacharia did was to take offence.
“Suppose somebody speaks against Christ before an audience full of those who believe in Christ, will they take kindly to such talk? Would an audience full of those having faith in Allah remain tolerant if somebody speaks against Allah,” the CPI(M) leader asked.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/01/12/stories/2010011250180100.htm.
The two discernible issues in this event are CPM position on 1. public (or private?) morality 2. freedom of expression.
Going by the logic of CPM state secretary’s advise, the Hindutva assault on MF Hussain and attack on MS University arts faculty exhibition will also have a “justification”.
After the state secretary’s clear position, some left leaders who had initially protested has retracted from their position.
Now it seems along with the request for signing petition, an option to withdraw the signature should also be given. In the event of the state secretary’s speech, many would be “radically’ inclined to withdraw their signature and consider their original signature as a ‘caricature” of their sentimentality.
LikeLike
Guess why there was’nt so much of loud protests in Kerala when the entire (neighboring) Southern Karnataka raged with protests against the acts of atrocities against women & moral policing by Sri Ram Sene led by Pramod Muthalik’s hoodlums.
Even the daughter of a CPI (M) MLA had to suffer the trauma of violence for just having travelled with her friend in a bus who ws a Muslim boy…and, of course the Mangalore pub attack !
Mangalore is hardly two hours journey from Payyanur where thousands of girls and women fron all parts of Kerala are studying and working in various fields of employment
It seems as though the leftists’ common sense were in favour of controlling women, politics no matter.
LikeLike
when the weapons are not thrown away.. When comrade vijayan’s initial promise of taking actions against dyfi enthusisasts.still not ‘processed’- every thing related to our kariachan’s( paul zacharia) right or wrong is unwarrented. A contextual connectionist response.on points , but,,must be treated now itself. 1 what version of’sexuall morally/ we expect ofrm political leaders.? Frm both women and men’,2- any politcal gains cpm expects- by ,,the below the belt..moral policing:!( two years back left channel camera peeped into..a struggle platform..and.. Found guilty youngsters..sitting too close thre@ night! The policing then was managed by women comrades… after cleaning the dirty place with brooms .purifying the ambience with cow dung water… They stopped the drama abruptly….a real surprise to many of us!)3- actually existing sexual morality and feminist criticism,4- homosexuality 5 orthodoxy..not only in sexuality! But in political approches too 5-female sexuality- its ‘diffrence’.. The list is not complete…. After the demise of the soviet union..this themes were widely discussed in new left circles in kerala…and several feminist organisations spurted,, i remember the joke by my friend frm bangalore” here every male intellectual has a feminist org too,Now..i am more hopeful.. Block thinking has lost some teeth! So DEVIKA”IS IT not NECESSARY TO HOLD HANDS WITH MORE ? With or without wearing glowse?,, tnjoyi frm musiris still sweating under suffron
LikeLike
payyannure-the safest constituency of kerala left and a stronghold of the working politics led by the cpim.the first martyr (pokkan-a dalit from korom-a red village in the intelligence books of british in 1940s)of the post-independent kerala from this area.still.the party retains that position-the hegemony and its underbelly exposes certain realities.
the party and people is total.
a party from its anti-establishment role to pro-establishment one-
has been reflecting its every day activities.everybody is the victim of this success .this is not a hegemony of a gramcian model but model of a typical conservative political hegemony.JS.mill’s term-right wing party is a stupid party,like wise,if a party is not creative and to be apart of establishment,what will be the balance sheet?
LikeLike
@ Devika:
Please let be corrected the date of the episode mentioned in your post corrected as 9th January, instead of 10 th .
(Best,)
LikeLike
Ah, the discussion is progressing on the predictable lines of CPM bashing.
One of Zachariah’s key arguments seems to be that CPM’s role in the Unnithan incident is indicative of its tendency to engage in moral policing. I completely disagree. CPM’s role (if at all it had any) is just plain political engagement with Unnithan, one of the most right-wing elements in Kerala politics.
Rajmohan Unnithan is notorious among Malayalis for being the voice of soft-hindutva in Kerala. His speeches are full of communal venom and sexual innuendos against left, minority leaders. For those who understand Malayalam and can stand mainstream television, here is a sample of how abusive he can get in public forums.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fepxze7q18Y
It is also undeniable that Unnithan played a pivotal role in creating an atmosphere of communal polarization and foisting trumped up charges against Sufiya Madani and several other minority activists in connection with Kalamassery case.
Rajmohan Unnithan’s arrest in Manjeri happened after local residents called in the police on suspicion of a rented house being used for prostitution. Unnithan himself is on record saying that DYFI, PDP and Congress activists were part of the group who had gathered there and handed him over to the police. To call that moral policing, cultural fascism and equate it with Sri Ram Sene or attacks on MF Hussain is outrageous.
Anti-prostitution stings are common in Kerala, and just because Unnithan is a Congress leader and talks trash about CPM, that doesn’t mean he can avoid an arrest in the light of significant circumstantial evidence. Moreover, he was let off on bail the very next day after due judicial process. Contrast this with several activists who are still languishing in jail under trumped up terror charges, with no shred of evidence (apart from statements extracted under custodial torture and duress).
It is not exactly rocket science to figure out why CPM or PDP activists would use this opportunity to expose Unnithan’s brand of “politricks” – even if they had no role in getting him arrested in the first place. Zachariah’s comments and the strong reaction to it from members of the audience has to be understood against this backdrop. To connect a nuanced critique of Kerala left’s perspectives on sexuality, with free-wheeling remarks on deceased leaders and finally, to defend a much-discredited person like Unnithan in front of left sympathizers – as Zachariah did, is provocative to say the least. And provoke, it did.
This is not to deny the relevance of Z’s remarks – hopefully it does set in motion a process of self-inquiry and reflection – but, puhleeze spare us these accusations of cultural fascism and moral policing.
LikeLike
why comrade party secretory still not ready to oust the misguided youth./.he had no qualms to take firm stand against nokku koolii” ( the vulgar habit of taking money without sweating). This is the classical case of ”tailism” timidity to lead consciously. When there is no clear cut laws of sexual morality defined in party documents .. Some actually existing practices excesses.(.raj mohan innithan is not a rarity..) might not cause this much ado? Now ,an injured soul of paul zacharia laments” rss desisted frm attacking me even if they are more than capable”…it hurts! If a lay strategist still claims ..the agitation on spy case, soorynelly.. Now moralist..ugly interventio with unnithan’s sexual freedom..yes.’is making us more . Popular../ This below the belt tactics..smacks of apolitical syptom of.. Sexual ldiscontent- transmitted. If communists are livingthe future dreams as role models today..you have to think thrice before peeping into inviolability of privacy… stalin was in good form when he said ..” today.s morality is tomarows discipline..” suppression raised to value?!?! Horrible.. Now so much for and in this idiom…wanto stop analitics/.whatever messagecomrade pinarai intended to convey..it smacks of little arrogance..marx was the one who in sisted cajolling creative ones.. And defendiing the error , committed ,without taking action against misguided youths seems obscene!
Perhaps you may remember lenin was loved by many women..but lived a happy life with krupskaya.until stalin intervened(lenin’s last lettrs)..withot ANY MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE…loved beethoven, isadora dunkan’ ballets ..was very particular about chianthy wine ..i f i refer to the rich lives of great leders ..their intelligent marxism.”..sorry paul .. Iam wasting all my emotions on un receptive ears… Tnjoyi frm ancient jewish settlement musiris now sweating under suffron
LikeLike
Sorry for another intervention:-
Rajeev, please consider examining the region- specific problems with the Kannur/Payyanur leftist leadership and their notoriously typical attitude even to criticism from within the left.
Here, Zakharia is made out to be someone “abusing the communists”and someone “defending the human rights of Unnithan”, and hence the attack!
You refuse to defend the human rights of possible victims of moral bullying just by flatly denying that Unnithan and the Sevadal leader are not victims here.
If you can’t appreciate the unconditional and absolute necessity of Rule of Law to be operative even in a case like this,
How will you defend the human rights of people people accused of terrorism and anti national activities? Do they not deserve human rights at all?
(my earlier comments relate to the unfortunate track record of Payyanur ‘Leftists’ thanks to which, even non intellectual folks here understand the importance of defending human rights & democracy as opposed to the unabashedly displayed feudal mindset of the local leftist leadership)
Can you suggest any method by which people could democratically engage with this leadership and not as clients to patrons?
LikeLike
@Venugopalan –
I’ll delineate the 3 aspects I think you are bringing up : Unnithan incident, Zacharia incident & observations about Kannur/Payyannur leaders/activists.
I strongly believe that AICC Gen Secy, Unnithan and Sevadal activist, Jayalakshmi are NOT victims of any human rights violations or moral bullying. It is undeniable that both of them were apprehended by the local police under significant circumstantial evidence, based on complaints received from local residents that the house they were occupying was being used for “immoral activities”. They were charged under sections of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956. After due processing and preliminary investigation, both were granted bail by the Manjeri FCJM within 12 hours. If this is not “unconditional and absolute” enforcement of the law, then what is?
I would urge you to contrast it with the manner, Kerala Police under UDF/LDF administrations, behaves in cases like Kalamassery incident or other political protest actions – individuals getting arrested on weekends, charged under non-bailable sections based on no circumstantial evidence other than statements in 168 case diaries, tortured and interrogated over the weekend without access to legal representation. “Moral bullying”? I don’t consider press statements or sloganeering as evidence of moral bullying – if at all anything, it is up to our AICC bully Unnithan to come clean about his own personal values and convictions – especially in the context of his tirade against Sufiya/Pinarayi/Shanimol Usman/Karats.
On Zachariah. Based on what I have seen, I don’t think he had abused any communists at Payyannur- he appears to have made some controversial remarks and commentary. I don’t think he even claimed Unnithan’s rights were being violated, although he certainly seemed to be “defending” him. And no, I don’t think any of this justifies an aggressive/violent response. If at all anything, I have mixed feelings on this front. I appreciate his chutzpah in provoking an introspection and discussion about attitudes on morality, sexuality, etc. & at the same time, I am disappointed that he allowed right wing forces to use this incident to further their own interests.
On Kannur Leaders. I must say I have no expertise, experience or opinion about their personality traits. That said, I find it difficult to believe that there is such a thing like Kannur vs. Alappuzha or Kollam. If at all anything – Pinarayi appears to share more personal traits with VS, than with Nayanar/AKG or a EMS/PKV. Then again, what do I know – I am too much of a vulgar materialist by what appears to be today’s “leftist” standards.
LikeLike
Rajeev,
Moral policing remains moral policing even if the person in question is everything that you allege he or she is. and if the CPM cadre react as Pinarayi Vijayan so eloquently put it, Christians and Muslims would if you abuse Christ or Allah n their presence, then that really speaks of the CPM already turning into a religious order – and what do religious orders do but ‘preserve public morality’?
LikeLike
@Nigam
I do not consider opposing or exposing Unnithan, the politician, for his double-standards, a matter of moral policing/bullying. Nor do I consider the police arresting 2 individuals (him and Ms. Jayalakshmi) on suspicion of prostitution, a miscarriage of justice, for reasons cited elsewhere. Needless to say, I consider your argument abt CPM as a religious order, to be a hasty and inaccurate generalization.
LikeLike
..we must stop analytics.we must try to persuade the party secretory to help the misguided youth ousted.! Till then sophistacated versions of defending our party seems ugly! An independ leftist himself..zacharia said”’ even rss never man handled me.. You know they are capable of it”. Sorry paul..sorry.. Tnjoyi frm musiris sweating still under suffron..
LikeLike
Rajeev,
for the party against the party is the question here.
compulsory hetero-normativity in its purest sense mediated by male centric elements…this norm and its disciplinary mechanism is only the way of a left wing activism…this is the question.
LikeLike
sorry,for the party and against the party is not the question here at all.
LikeLike
Few of the words with CPM intelligentsia which survives are: (cpm) bashing, anarchism etc etc. As per the bashing theory, the knicker wallahs too can accuse any one criticising its political programmes and actions as ‘bashing”!. Anarchsism, anarchist are the other two terms of abuse.
These methods of slotting have been conveniently used by the CPM to present and inflate an image of the party as “victimized”.
Zakaria, as every one in Kerala knows was never an opponent of CPM nor in the CPM terms, a party basher. On the contrary, Zakaria had written an article praising the CPM state secretary, which in fact appeared in the high-times of factional feud within the party. With regard to the potrayal of Ma’dani as an “extermist” by the malayalam media during the election time when CPM had a tactical line with PDP, Zakaria wrote an article in Malayalam sharply criticizing the media potrayal of Ma’dani. Unlike, some other “opportunity” mongering local shadnovians, Zakaria did not endorse all the thuggeries of party sponsored hooligans. But Zakaria was of the firm view that the present leadership of CPM’s position on development in effect will modernize the society.
Zakaria, as I understand, was not white-washing Mr.Unnithan’s right wing politics in anyway. If any one who cannot speak against the feudal morality of Kerala is Unnithan himself. Because, for long he has been attacking all his opponents in his party as well as in the ldf invoking the “conservative morality” codes.
Zakaria point is clear as Mr.rajeev says one cannot deny the relevance of Zakaria’s remarks. when Deviika says: “The new millennium has seen the steady march of this lobby to power within the CPM, and their style is now increasingly copied by the lower ranks of leadership in the CPM. The brashness of the statements made by student and youth leaders of the CPM, often defending the completely indefensible — is quite visible at present.And all of the official left’s entrenched intolerance now come laced with a heady dose of extreme north-Kerala style of violent ‘feudalised’ activism”, she is pointing the current state of condition of the CPM in Kerala.
About the nuanced critique on sexuality, has the official left in Kerala developed any critique of sexuality other than its postures in defending the feudal residual morality in Kerala. Mr. Rajeev surely must read the party daily, Desabhimani to know its position on public morality in the wake of Zakaria’s comment. The day Sevadal woman leader along with mr. Unnithan ( Unnithan always need not always come fist in the order!!) was surrounded by “people” “allegedly” belonging to dyfi and pdp, the new was flased and celebrated mostly in the CPM sponsored TV channel. I don ‘t know whether youtube visuals are available on the way People channel of CPM presented the issue.
Then came the defense of the party secretary. Of course, the secretary can disagree with Zakaria. But the secretary did not stop there. He advised on the method of “delivering” speech. Pls see the Hindu report quote on the same.
The payyanur incident is perhaps not an isolated event. All social fascist methods of intimidation, threatening and assaulting is employed by the CPM on whoever openly counters or challlenge the official line.
One cannot minimize this. What is pitiful is that the intelligentsia associated with CPM has been slavishly endorsing such primitivist politics all for its own existence.
In Soviet societies, the intelligentsia even fully knowing about the draconian character of the apparatus did was to “share the guilt” of the apparatus than to position against it. By sharing the guilt, there is a redemption from the sin of “not speaking out”… but its an offence to oneself…
Zakaria as far he was supporting the CPM leadership, he was in the “register” of the secretary’s good book although no special page was opened for him as he seems not to be so trust-worthy. But the cadre-based organization are more concerned about the individuals associated with it than its opponents. Any “deviation” from the prescribed norms is taken as an offence. Zakaria remarks about the Sevadal leader incident was then a deviation. Zakaria should’ve also “shared the guilt” and be not the “deviant”!!
LikeLike
@Prasad
I think there is broad agreement that a) Zachariah incident has brought fwd several questions that deserve to be discussed & b) any effort to challenge freedom of speech has to be condemned and perpetrators punished. We disagree about a) whether Zachariah incident is evidence of increasing fascist tendencies in CPM; & b) whether Unnithan has been victimized and bullied. As long as a healthy debate ensues, let us agree to disagree. The eternal optimist in me sees this as a win-win situation for the left in Kerala – a discredited Unnithan brand of conservative politics and a rejuvenated left that is more at ease with contemporary social milieu.
On the face of it, there is a mismatch between Kerala’s arguably post-feudal socio-economic relations of production and relatively antiquated, largely feudal socio-cultural outlook. I suspect this paradox essentially arises out of the lopsided nature of economic development in Kerala. Beyond the initial spurt of social mobility & productivity through land reforms, the excessive reliance on foreign remittance and consumption related growth has characterized Kerala economy through the 80s and 90s – not to speak of the LPG/neo-liberal turn afterwards. A significant proportion of economic surplus, came in not through organic domestic growth – but through the back door of the global economy. Has this created a vacuum in terms of the natural evolution of social relationships, beliefs and values? The tension between a 21st century economy and 20th century social values is bound to surface somehow or other.
If so, what should left-progressive forces do? Recognize capitalist social values as progress and jump right in as the van guard; or linger on and follow the rest of society’s lead? Clearly, this is not a case of a few parties and organizations deciding to be “socially progressive” and marching forward, dragging a reluctant society with them. If so, I suspect that would have happened with or without CPM/CPI. The answers aren’t obvious at all, but the question is definitely worth solving.
LikeLike
>”mr. Unnithan ( Unnithan always need not always come fist in the order!!) ”
Liked the way you put it!
LikeLike
I’m not going to respond to rajeev, but i’m quite amused to see how the cpm defense is proceeding on predictable lines! today, after reading in the mathrubhumi, the cpm central leadership’s take on the issue which claims that it does not want to take forward the criticism against zacharia, but insists that accepted sexual norms should be respected, and that we should not live ‘social relations of the future’, i can’t help laughing! goodness knows where such wonderful insight comes from, certainly not from marxism! in fact if the cpm started getting strict on those lines on its own cadre, especially, the urban, well-educated intellectual types, well, i can’t help giggling!
LikeLike
I am also quite amused to see how people like Devika “believes” the item by special correspondent, in the marthrubhumi dated 140110 and further her arguments. A simple reading of the item will tell you that it has no base.(though some portion of the item has reference to an article by Prakash Karat, most of the lines end in phrases like reported, considered, thought etc etc.) The reporter just says, cpim central leadership thinks so, will do this, will do that..sort of things.
I have a request to Devika. Please base your arguments on facts, not on such “thought-considered-believed phrased reports” which has become the order for the media these days. Media is playing an over smart game. They can include any propaganda item in the news and if some one questions it, they can argue that they have mentioned thought-reported-considered-believed etc. in the item and it should not be taken as REAL facts. At least please ask yourselves who is the central leadership mentioned in the item and cross check it for factual correctness. There is no point in treating a fabricated item as real, then basing your argument on that, then some one else quoting you, some one else agreeing to that quote sort of journalism. At the end of the day as the malayalam saying goes “muhoortham will turn in to moothram.”
LikeLike
My observation about Payyanur style of bullying, I think is supported by citing a couple of exceptionally feudal,’ maadambi’ minded actions against victims largely condemned by people even within the ranks of the Left :
Imagine a person being driven to suicide just for having shared as SMS like this- “Read in papers that showing ten top idiots will get me inaam of Rs 10 lakhs; I will not show you, because You are more precious to me than Rs 10 lakhs”
He was accused of breaking the morality as a teacher.Sending this kind of SMS to his female student was judged as terribly bad,and he was roughed up in full view of his students and people in the town. He was deprived of his job thanks to the intervention of bigwigs in the party. Third day,he ended his life in a hotel room!
The other incident I mentioned was perpetual harassment of a dalit woman at work place by the CITU auto union the culmination of which was burning of the auto rikshaw which was her means of livelihood. The incident that happened in 2005 Dec was widely condemned and is fairly documented. The kind of propaganda the entire Party leadership does to justify and protect the perpetrators of this kind of bullying is well known , and you cannot dismiss truth as just stories created created by media syndicate.
Just look at the very language your radical newspaper uses now a days in response to criticisms: Deshabhimani’s heading about the Zakharia episode report can be translated like this:
“Zakharia Says Catching Hold of Unnithan Was Human Rights Violation; Also (He) Hurled Abuses at Communists”( Deshabhimani, 10-01-2010)
Do you still think it is not meant for promoting and justifying acts of cultural vandalism, and protecting the perpetrators?
You said
> I am too much of a vulgar materialist by what appears to be today’s “leftist” standards.
Yah, that you said and it looks very unfortunate..
Comrade Lenin said something like this, almost a century back:-
Vulgar materialism is even worse than intelligent idealism
( Right now,I’m not able to give the correct reference,but I hope that someone will help me)
LikeLike
Excellent, George. If the Mathrubhumi report is a false representation of the CPM leadership’s position on the issue, I will be glad to see a denial and a clarification from reliable sources and spokespersons. Karat has apparently clarified today (according to the Mathrubhumi) that the corrective decision to keep off religion today applies only to the higher levels of party leadership. Does the same apply in the case of choosing values as well — the leadership should stick to dominant values and others don’t have to? That would be nice.
As a single woman living and raising children in Kerala and working in a field that is full of men, it will tough for me to produce evidence of ‘moral intentions’ to people with ’20th century values’ if i happen to be in a house with just another man in it! As a historian of gender I do know that there is enough archival evidence to show that society was never this rigid in its sexual mores except among the Brahmins and the strictly patrilineal groups in Kerala and never so intolerant of male-female interactions except among the groups mentioned above. I don’t think women working and living alone is a 21st century phenomenon; nor is the practice of women politicians closely interacting closely with or traveling with their male colleagues new (certainly not!). In any case, how can such rigid distinctions be made? If I find marriage constricting (even if it isn’t particularly violent) and decide to make a life outside it, what set of values does that decision belong to — of the 20th century, or the 21st? And if it is judged to be of the 21st, am I going to be denied the support of progressive movements? The left of the 1940s in Kerala was so much ahead of the present generation in such matters — in fact the fulltimers had to be directed into ‘normalcy’ by the leadership in the 50s.
It is amazing how that the easiest way to damage a woman’s political career is by invading into such interactions. A presently prominent woman politician of the CPM did undergo such torture at a time when group wars had hotted up within the CPM — she escaped only because the group she was close to turned out to be the victorious one. I know personally how even her closest women friends in the AIDWA had abandoned her then — only a few of us who are not party members were thinking of organising public protest against such defamation. I don’t see how the left can be rejuvenated through encouraging a culture which condones dragging a woman political worker to the police station because people thought she may be immoral! I fear that this will be repeated! When the Congress gets to power, what prevents their supporters now, from dragging AIDWA activists along with whichever male colleagues they might be traveling or interacting, to the police on grounds of ‘perceived immorality’? It is not the ‘left’ that will be rejuvenated but some Brahmanical-patriarchal demon!
LikeLike
That is mis-quoting me Devika. I was referring to what the reporter wrote about Sakharia issue. The article by Prakash Karat is real and it has appeared in Deshabhimani dated 14 January 2010.
So there is no point asking for a denial on baseless points in a report. I had mentioned in the earlier comment about the article by Prakash Karat. So there should not be any confusion.
Let us be clear Devika. Let us base our arguments on facts, not on something looks like facts.
Hope you get me..
LikeLike
It is proven that one plotted assault (physical or ‘spiritual’) spreads clear message to keep away from criticizing or opposing ‘left’ unless its depths is exposed and ‘they’ feel that the time of such terror is over and no one fears the colonel any more…
If in Kerala justice is not to be expected in a police complaint even from Zacharia against CPM when CPM is in power that also sends shock waves to common folk…
-George John
LikeLike
once upon time ,late com.S.A.Dange mentioned about the working class women of mumbai textile mills,they were so militant and they had no middle class cultural biases in struggles.(1920’s,30s).they supported their male comrades in struggles very boldly. after getting a slight economic mobility,the militancy is over,they were trying to imbibe the culture of conservative values.Immanuel wallerstien’s classic study of movements-how is a rise and fall of a movement will help us to understand the dynamics of a movement.
after PC.Joshy’s period–cultural issues were being sidelined.really,it was a period of romanticism-we didn’t know much about the politics of stalinist -bolsheviks of soviet russia.
this difference was crucial here too.
the legendary communist leader of this area,late.subramanya shenoy said that in his(in his memories,published by Ehtirdisha publications , payyannur)underground life experiences very clearly.and their respectful attitude of woman-we can get from his underground days.police-congress nexus was so deep.
today,as a part of the ruling party status-in bengal and kerala-the position of the party is more or less same.every day praxis is accommodating more and more conservative cultural and political practices.and they have been in total confusion about basic human rights.an universal-particular philosophical question turns into a hegalian type absolute and the crisis of party in an universal liberal democratic institutional mechanism
today,no body understands-who is class enemy?
i remember here,late pramoda’s gupata’s doubts in emergency period…really,it was apolitical tragedy.that crisis is coming again.
sumantha banerjee wrote about cpim-a party ,born out of insecurity in 1960s.Most of their leaders were arrested.doubts,fears were always there.
LikeLike
It’s shocking and perturbing to about what had happened with a most sensitive and precious writer Paul Zachariah. I know him closely and have worked with him for over a year in Delhi. We have traveled to other countries and did reading together in a couple of programmes. In my opinion Paul is undoubtedly ‘left’ and very clearly ‘modern’. His writings show his concerns, one can see. Even the story which inspired Adoor to make his one of the best films ‘Vidheyan’ tells about his uprightness and courage as a story teller to tell the truth. He’s a one of the India’s most gifted writer with a liberal intelligent soul. I can guess, because I know him, what he would have said there. He certainly would have been lamenting on the passing away of earlier generation of communists who gave us legendary leaders with there views about traditions and changes. This right he holds, as a citizen and as a writer as well. Problem is not with him. We all are facing similar situations. Left in India is no more pro-people or pro-poor, it’s now clearly pro-state and pro-establishments of all sorts. Sometimes, with all my skepticism, I would want to believe what Slavoj Zizek tells about making or creating a new left again from the beginning. More this official governmental left is losing its mass base, more it’s becoming intolerant towards it’s criticism. I know that Paul has all the support and sympathies still with them, like many of us, but should we keep our mouth shut to say what we feel? Is it a time when left has to prove that it’s not a new age obscurantist. Their conservativism has to be remoulded and upgraded in the context of changed realities.
Strange, it’s not only Tasleema Nasreen or Herta Mueller, who faced the wrath of political parties, even an elitist and quite bourgeois author like Shashi Tharoor has become a bone in soup of another political party.
It’s an evidence that Paul Zacharia has remained with the civil society and with the common people. This is the arena where an author should remain, let whatever happened to him.
LikeLike
Perhaps we are with no clue on what was really the (Leftists’/ attackers’) problem with what Zakharia had said.
About cultural and literary stalwarts’ protest statements:
One could also condemn the incident just by saying that it is an attack against freedom of expression. They could resgister protest against unspecified attackers, without offending those who encourage and continue to justify it. Hence,with no attempts to examine the pathology of intolerance spreading within the Left, to which Zacharia referred.
Was the attack an expression of peoples’ legitimate anger against a writer showing the nerve to make sexual innuendos, in their forum against their leaders ?
Was it just a question of someone unjustifiably demanding unlimited freedom of expression?
Then, where is the point in secularists invoking peoples’ voices and state power to halt hate speeches by Takres, Modis and Thogadias?
For whose consumption, Deshabhimani comes up with a grossly distorted account of the episode as opposed to that of a hostile bourgeois ‘media syndicate’?
Unless the pathology of suspicion created in the minds of many Leftists is addressed, we may be reaching nowhere.
I feel the equivocalism in condemning such attacks by the CPI(M) leadership toward its “imagined enemies”needs to be examined in perspective.
LikeLike
In a democracy and more particularly in a democracy threatened by pseudo democratic forces (who never believe in any of the democratic institutions and pretend doing so just as tactics to come into power so that a one party totalitarian state could be established) the primary duty is to uphold each and every democratic right i.e ensuring that justice is being made available to every citizen even when the p.d.f are in the helm of the affairs.It is more primary in the case of an intellectual as he/she who is looked upon as role model by the common folk.
LikeLike
@ Abhilash
I appreciate the bloglink bharatapathrika.blogspot.com you gave here; but please check the original links here and please mention original links/authors before you carry the content.
I believe the blogger bharatapathrika has done cut& paste of my writing without even mentioning the name!
Bad enough though,I like to believe that this is quite an unintentional mistake. Let the blogger keep clear identity about himself and use others blogs in a collaborative way.
If you have any doubt, please check these links:
http://bit.ly/4v97Cc
http://groups.google.co.in/group/keralaexchange/browse_thread/thread/164c1f42a1d33f75
(Lot of regards and thanks).
please
LikeLike
@ Abhilash
Sorry,
I give a more appropriate link to corroborate to my earlier post.
http://www.sacw.net/article1299.html
LikeLike
Regarding the debate over the arrest of Unnithan for ‘immoral trafficking’:
I’d suggest, for clarity, contrast it with the ND Tiwari case. Tiwari, I’d say, WAS guilty of trafficking women (I do not like the word ‘immoral’ trafficking, does it imply that some trafficking in humans is ‘moral’?). In the sense that he got someone to procure women for him from Uttarakhand (where he as former CM knew full well that women, thanks to unemployment, displacement etc are especially vulnerable to trafficking) in exchange for a mining lease. In other words, his relationship with those women was exploitative. Much of the media has focussed instead on the salacious aspect of an old man in bed with 3 women, calling him ‘Tiger’ Tiwari etc. They are deliberately missing the point.
Was Unnithan in a similarly exploitative relation with the Sevadal activist? If so, (if SHE was a victim of HIS trafficking) why was she too booked as GUILTY of ‘immoral trafficking’?!
Sounds as though he and she had a consensual relationship, maybe friendship – and it should be no one’s business to poke their noses into this.
PS: In the case Venu mentions, about the teacher and the sms I am curious: what WAS the content of the sms? I am not defending any public lynching; but it IS possible that a mass sms COULD be sexual harassment in some contexts. I am just a bit suspicious that it was sent by a teacher to a student…
LikeLike
Ugh! Finally, someone has spelt it out. Thanks Kavita for getting to the heart of the matter – the points you raise at such length should have been obvious at the outset to all thinking adults. Amazing isnt it, how successful the media is these days in pickling our minds!!! BTW. the Tiwari scandal was broken in part to help ABN AndhraJyothi to launch itself into the satellite world. And the coy rhetoric about the oldman’s ‘sexual prowess’ ‘lust’ and ‘perversion’ was so shrill that only the most attentive viewers could pick up the barely audible mining lease bit.
LikeLike
Kavita, the content of the sms was – “Read in papers that showing ten top idiots will get me inaam of Rs 10 lakhs; I will not show you, because You are more precious to me than Rs 10 lakhs”
LikeLike
The text by JD with sub national connotations is good enough to impart new insights into the current issue of attack on Z and I agree to it in toto.
I disagree with Prasad when he says that it is a punishment for dissociation. Z has been in the party’s blacklist for the last few years for the stand he had taken in many issues except that on Sufiya.
The attack on Z was premeditated to threaten everyone criticizing party. It is clear from Z’s words that nothing contained in his speech at Payyannur, as concocted by Pinarayi Vijayan, was referred to by the attackers. The timing of the attack and the immediate rebut by DYFI within minutes shows how well planned the whole incident was. But when the ‘party Czar’ came out with his version, the youth brigade must have felt let down.
The only thing still confuses me is why Z did not lodge a police complaint. Not being an astrologer he cannot foresee how the complaint is going to be dealt with. The only rational thing to do was to file it and pursue its course consistently for justice. Can any explanation in this regard be expected in this forum from Z or from anyone else?
LikeLike
There are 3 separate issues in the debate. We need to examine each separately before coming into hasty remarks and “judgments”.
Heckling Incident
There is no justification for heckle or physically abuse someone. Hence, those persons need to be identified and taken action against. Anyway, it is good to see that the state leadership of DYFI and Pinarayi Vijayan has condemned the incident publicly. Now we expect that he witnesses to the incident would help the DYFI and the police to identify those involved.
Can it be termed as moral policing? I don’t think so, it is a one-off incident, no moral policy claims and organizational backing for similar actions.
Was Zachariah the first one who who spoke disagreeing to the CPIM or Left view of the Manjeri incident? Was he the only one? Or, was it the first time in Payyannur when someone spoke on a moral issue disagreeing with the CPIM or Left view? No for all questions above!
From another angle, was everybody except those 2 Manjeri excursionists (and of course, who were traveling alone) been traveling with those permitted by the “moral police”, whoever that may be, in Kerala during Dec. 2009? How many times the squads or patrol party assigned by the “moral police” has checked and ensured it during Dec. 2009/Jan. 2010?
All this denotes that the incident happened at Payyannur was a spontaneous reaction of a small group of 6 people. Apart from allegations we don’t know who they were, but they believed in the wild justice of muscle power. The reasons for dubbing the attackers as DYFI are said to be (i) it included the son of a former CPIM M. P. and (ii) the onlookers told Zachariah that they were DYFI activists. I feel that the first reason was more fitting to relating the incident to CPIM and not to DYFI. Anyway, let us also rely on the judgement of the onlookers and literary figures who were with Zacharia at the time of the incident.
Remember, DYFI was holding their state conference at that time in Trivandrum, and the top and middle level leadership of the organization were participating in the conference. That implies that at least to the block level office bearers could not be present at Payyannur on that day.
But DYFI cannot absolve from the responsibility accrued on it for the actions of all those who are associated with it. DYFI has around 5 lakh members, and they are answerable to the deeds of each one of them. So I hope that they abide by the responsibility and find out if the alleged group does belong to DYFI and take appropriate action.
But it is curious that no journalist/media approached the alleged and get their view. Listening both sides of an issue is primary justice.
Factual Errors
There are some factual errors in the speech made by Zacharia and also in the articles appeared on this site. I like to believe that those are inadvertent, but I don’t know whether it were.
(1) Those who organized watch out of the suspicious activities of a house with no regular residents were people in its neighbourhood. It was not carried out by DYFI-PDP activists. It was warped that way to give a political colour in order to use it to shirk from the issue. The people who surrounded the house were ordinary citizens with and without political affiliations. The area being a stronghold of the Muslim League and Congress, the nature of the crowd was also the same and according to the first reports, the local leaders of these organizations were also present there. All the channels in their reports on the morning of the incident has reported that the people were surprised to find a person like Rajmohan there, and some Congress followers after the first astonishment tried to clear him off the place. Later this fact was purposefully omitted and was replaced by the propaganda of DYFI-PDP for obvious reasons. Parroting that version is not all the way innocent. DYFI and PDP come into picture when they indulged in sloganeering in front of the police station the next morning.
(2) Another distortion of the fact is that the woman along with Rajmohan in the night is a ‘Sevadal activist’. Why mention it if you actually believe that any consented adult can act likewise? Stressing it doesn’t seem to be innocent. She was a Sevadal worker and leader during 1995-96 and hasn’t worked in Sevadal or any other political outfit for the last 13 years. If she still ‘is’ a Sevadal activist, then P. V. Narasimha Rao ‘IS’ the Prime Minister of India.
Misrepresentation of facts in Zachariah’s speech
(1) One of the main issues the first generation communist leaders handled was to put an end to the sexual harassment against the tenants and agricultural workers by the landlords and their henchmen. Asking the husbands to present their wives for the landlords was not uncommon. The communist activists fought vehemently and most landlords were forced to desist from it fearing consequences from progressive movements. The left movement was instrumental in enabling the common man stand against these kinds of atrocities. One can very well understand that, if the communist leaders were also sexual pleasure seekers or “rooted firmly in sexuality” it could not have been happened. Besides, they could not be able to enjoy acceptance from the masses. How could Zachariah state that of all organizations in Kerala, the Communist movement is the most firmly founded in sex? From the bits and pieces from here and there it was not proper to make generalising evaluations. On the contrary, we know that many early workers, not alone leaders refrained from getting married and accepted celibacy because they thought that bringing about revolution was the only purpose in their life. (This forced EMS to write officially in the ’40-s criticizing their attitude towards married life).
(2) Parts of Zachariah’s speech have been telecast by different media. We heard him saying that “Olivinte aa oru sukhathil, athinte oru maravil ithramaathram laimgikathayotu kooti pravarthicha oru prasthanamunto ennu samshayikkanam.” Sorry for those can’t understand Manglish, a rude translation would be “in the pleasure of being underground, in its pretense, I doubt if any other organization has worked with this much sexuality”. When someone wants to indulge in sex, he would declare that he is going underground and then would rejoice! The underground era was just a couple of generations ago. People still have memories of it. Many who were born during 1920-’51 are still alive and have direct experience of it. The communists working underground were subjected to immense hardship, they could be killed anytime, could be tortured anytime. Munayankunnu, where police fired 200 rounds into a camp of underground communists in the dark of the night when they were sleeping killing 6 people, is only 30 kms away from Payyannur.
I believe that such a remark from Zachariah was unintentional during the course of the speech. Zachariah appeared to have understood the impropriety that he didn’t emphasize it in his later responses.
So there is no point in emotionally charged responses. Make sure that who indulged in the violence and those who think likewise understand the folly of such responses.
I haven’t heard anyone asking whether those indulged in the abuse was identified and organizational and/or legal action has been taken against them. Anybody can shed light into that aspect?
LikeLike
@Deepak
Excellent comments! Thanks for grounding the debate in objective facts. After reading your note and Pokker’s article, I was compelled to revisit the degree of relevance I had placed on Z’s original comments at Payyannur.
That said, I would like to propose an addition to the issues you have mentioned – “a critique of Kerala’s dominant social values, especially as it relates to gender relations, morality and sexuality – and what should be a contemporary left perspective about it”. For all we know, this debate is already happening in college campuses and left-progressive forums across Kerala, away from the gaze of mainstream/new/alternative media. Here’s hoping that debate happens and that it translates into broad-based movements and mobilization that can usher in progressive social values and structural change into Kerala society.
LikeLike
I’m told Dr PK Pokkars’ defence of such Left ‘treatment’ meted out to people expressing bad ideas like what Zachariah expressed, is a masterly attempt in whitewashing!
I’m yet to read it, but friends say that it is a must read..! Deshabhimani Weekly (latest issue), carries the article by Dr Pokkar in which the script writer of Paleri Manikyam,T.P.Rajeevan also is judged as deserving the kind of treatment given to Zachariya.
LikeLike
@K.M. Venugopolan
Pokker judged T.P.Rajeevan “as deserving the kind of treatment given to Zachariya” – really, this is the best summary you/your friends could come up with?!
I find it amusing that you found time to pass on slander, before actually reading it. Here is a link to Pokker’s article in Malayalam: http://bit.ly/7sNAs6
I would encourage any one who understands Malayalam to read it & draw your own conclusions.
LikeLike
After the initial hype in electronic media..attack on kariyachan hasfreezesd into weeklies now. But time has not yet come to be impartial! Even after the assurance of comrade party sescretary..barring his own unwanted EXCESS into what and when to speak ..despite m. a. baby.’s intrvention..and netizens, revolt. and endorsement on behalf of paul zacharia..no visible action against the misguided is ther to see. A liile semblance of victory for us moderateswould have been a morale booster !,. Now carrying on our debate- like has some limited scope,..Still iam with you dear fello truth seekers..whoelse is ther to shout against the arrogance of the real powers thatbe!.. So iam trying to arrive and share interim anxieties. 1 the only point to be re stated is the anti dialogic nature of the misguided youth…mis guided in the sense.. they wasted ther muscle power against a much readable. creativity of an anti rss writer. 2..the party srategists must re think on the below the belt tactics when..confronting congress. It wont win an extra vote..it cant be defended on any sophisticated moralisms, either 3 . Some back firing for with good moralistic intentions-? that is what the ” payyannur syndrome( yes some more .. incidents report,, my comrade ..not verified..the victim but talked to me) leaving before us?. May be..but some one is stiil swearing and cursing against more writers. So. I am reserving my analytics and confusions on an ideal sexual morality..against ” actually existing practices…now we must stand in strength with our sad karichan and..tp rajeevanS….TNJOY MUSIRIS NEWS
LikeLike
Grounding in Objective facts!! But Rajeev, the fact is that the comment of Mr. Deepak is not even properly grounded in subjective fiction!!!
for example, he says:
“Can it be termed as moral policing? I don’t think so, it is a one-off incident, no moral policy claims and organizational backing for similar actions.”
no organizational backing? The party czar himself came for the defence. It is an objective fact bcoz even kerala Iskra, Desabhimani and of course, for you to blv it , the Hindu also reported it.
The fact is that and what paul zakaria missed is the point that Communist party neither in Kerala nor in anyparts of India has a vision on progressive sexual relations, what it had was only governmentality at it best, which is known by the name “women empowerement”. Zakaria perhaps to escape from the wrath of the moral majority was trying to explain it in terms of some legitimized fictions about Kerala renaissance.
No Communist leader except the “bits and pieces” than we had in Thopil Basi’s auto-biography wrote openly and critically about their self. The ‘auto” they had was the ‘auto” of the party. .. It was also a kind of ‘defence” of their imagined “de-casting”…
whether DYFI suspends its members from its organization, its their problem. Those desiring to be close to this mammoth organization can bereave about it. Pity them!!
But the fact remains as reported by zakaria himself that the hoologans was led by a son of former CPM MP.
One can argue that the goons who attacked Zakaria are not dyfi. This only makes it more worrying. It simple means how social fascism has deepened in place like Payyanur where every member of an audience can be a “potential” hooligan!
while speaking of the “immense hardship” one can also think for while about the “hardships” lower caste families had to go through while provding UG for upper caste leaders….
The point raised by Zakaria actually needs a nuanced discussion & extension to lower caste lives in times of UG. The perspective of “hardship” resides with the people who provided the ‘shelter”..What we have is the narrative of those who sought shelter. The point Zakaria raises about “pleasure” cannot be brushed aside
What makes CPM controlled Payyanur a horror infected place where social psycos roam freely is evident in the case of Chitralekha.
I will not be surprised to see more support based on “subjective fiction” coming as we all know that even the horrendous nazification had its own cheer leaders and beneficiaries.
The guys who prmoted SFI in college campuses were also notorious for imposing all kinds of moral codes in campuses. Moral policing is less a term. Moral NKVD aptly suits the generic culture the “actually existing rural minded”left are promoting.
Even as the urban intellegentia attached with Kerala cpm denies the existence of Party Villages in Malabar, they very well knows these are places where Kerala Lavernty Berias are manufactured.
The kind of liberal democratic arguments like ideas should be met with ideas not hooligamism one may appreciate or not appriciate.
Nevertheless, what is hillarious in the ‘subjective fictions” is that after all all these hooliganism, one wants to speak in the most boring language of “liberal democracy” as like “we need discussion”, “usher progressive social values”…”structural change”.. That said, I would suggest like a liberal democratic homily “charity beging at home”.. “let structural change begin at party gramams (party villages)”
LikeLike
The points about lower caste hardships in providing shelter during UG, sexual pleasure of left activists being in UG – sadly, they don’t meet my criteria to build “a nuanced debate”. I am sure there are several media outlets who would love to get hold of such material. Then when it creates enough of a controversy- it’ll eventually come down to cries of CPM fascism from dissident-left quarters, and may be I’ll get myself to tune in.
OTOH, the mention of CPs lacking a vision on progressive sexual relations, would be interesting – if someone could also point out organizations who they believe have a vision that’s relevant for Kerala or India. I must add a necessary pre-condition that such organizations should have engaged in political mobilization of oppressed sections on a substantial scale over a reasonable period of time in a semi-feudal, semi-capitalist, multi-cultural setting like India. I guess that’ll exclude paper-tiger NGOs and mailing lists- but will leave in a wide range of groups from Maoists & neo-Gandhians to castivists and environmental groups. In other words, need not be quite a “mammoth organization” like SFI or DYFI at all – nevertheless the organized left in India can still take lessons. At least then, there will be an iota of credibility in urging CPM to bring about structural change in the so-called party villages.
LikeLike
@Rajeev
Thanks for the link, though I’d earlier got the print version to check whether I’d been misled to propagate a big slander against an academic, against whom I had no personal scores to settle.
But Rajeev, could you please translate just the concluding sentence of this article to help others understand?
(I’m not doing it for obvious reasons, help me please!)
LikeLike
I meant this statement, Rajeev!
“പയ്യന്നൂരില് മാത്രമല്ല പാലേരിയിലും ചിന്തിക്കുന്ന മനുഷ്യര് അവശേഷിക്കുന്നില്ലേ എന്നത് മാത്രമാണ് ഇപ്പോള് നമ്മെ അലട്ടേണ്ടത്.”
LikeLike
I’d asked whether your statement that Pokker judged T.P. Rajeevan “as deserving the kind of treatment given to Zachariya” was the best summary of his article. And in response, you point out one line and quiz me about the translation in English.
I’d like to believe that you missed my point. Doing a literal translation of a line or a snippet from an article/speech/interview, quoting it outside the context and reporting that as a summary/conclusion/position of that of an individual – these are all the same mistakes that have been committed in analyzing Zachariah’s, Pinarayi’s and Pokker’s statements. Just because in doing so, one gains cognitive consonance because it conforms to our own mental models or even if it gets a self-selected audience’s approval – doesn’t make it any more honorable or scholarly. That’s why I’d pointed out Pokker’s article and asked folks to read it, before drawing conclusions. ‘nough said on this matter.
LikeLike
T NJOY is definitely one among many who are intelligent enough to understand that with the Samkumughom sermon, their party secretary making his stand regarding Payyannur syndrome clear, no action is warranted from the party secretary. But they cant help their lament as they are sweating under the shame of conscience of continuing white washing the fascist acts of their party calling it ‘the anti dialogic nature of the misguided youth’ -nauseatingly under the garb of independent thinkers…
LikeLike
@prasad .Your reference to the hardships the dalit families suffered to give shelter is the most original in the context…
LikeLike
Yet another case of bullying by the CPM:
http://www.petitiononline.com/lekha/petition.html
LikeLike
@Rajeev
But why such conclusion at all, having said
those things against victimizing women, under the alleged pretext of upholding individuals’ autonomy in sexuality? Where is your Marxist approach, though one speaks much about Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton?
Dr Pokker clearly seems to suggest that merely expressing an opinion against the dominant attitude on sexuality would invite a male crowd’s legitimate anger!And is there anything more nonsensical as calling this as revolutionary upsurge?
What else he says is nothing but bla bla in this futile exercise of legitimizing the bullying.
LikeLike
Dear K M V,No media has dared to telecast the the speech delivered by sri Zacaria as it was everyone’s right to interpret according to the perceptions before arriving at any conclusions and misinterpretations.
Only one could acknowledge what the so called literary scholars commented/ witnessed on the matter.Later People T V has come out with Z’s speech.
Generally nobody is denying Mr Z’ s freedom to expression. Remember, shoe were thrown onto Bush and Adwani etc; All are immediate outburst of the audience and cannot be treated as organised ones with a firm ideology behind it (like RamSena in Bglre)
Many of the debators have found categorized the reactions into Leftist political parties and others. Assorting the general reactions into Democratic and Nondemocratic is also apparently true.(conflicts,invasion, wars in broad sense ). We ,ve room for both types here.
Unnithan has every right to stay with a woman and even indulge in any kind of relationship which the civil society in Kerala has not accepted and termed as moral.(If I decided to cremate my friends dead body by pouring diesel and lit instead of making a pyre–imagine the respo of my neighbors?)In short, I ve my own views , whatever progressive it was, must be absorbed by the society.
Culling these reactions on the basis of media reports –I mean Political and Payyannur Lines–often forgetting the very existanceof a male dominant ( with sexually weak mind, olinjunotta peeping–as Sri K Venu and Sara Joseph rightly pointed out)–society here that include all political parties.
sexual abuse and atrocities on woman are to be brought into book , these are not moral policing — think Sooryanelly and Santosh Madhavan….
Many interpretations have made the truth obscure –let the people know what actually Zacaria spoke and also the context of it and decide…the more democratic way than continuing interpretations one after another and getting away from the reality.thank u.
LikeLike
correction —assorting the gen reactions intodemocratic and Nondemocratic is also NOT apparently true.
LikeLike
@
Narayanan
>”Only one could acknowledge what the so called literary scholars commented/ witnessed on the matter”
>”assorting the gen reactions into democratic and Nondemocratic is also NOT apparently true.”
If you miss and can’t abhor the systematic pattern of justifying male/protectionist solutions on the pretext of pre-empting sooryanellis from happening, it is your problem.
Do women have rights over their bodies as full citizens and not as properties of men?
If they do, they must best be encouraged to move about without fear, to resist atrocities with the support of law and good civic sense, and without being unnecessarily implicated just in order to protect the interests of a social morality based on bourgeois and (mainly Christian) monogamy.
Sad that many of our contemporary Marxists are
pre-Engelsian in their outlooks and probably that is why the male crowds everywhere lamenting about sooryanellis and doing precious little in support of ‘their women’ enjoying the freedom of choice in love, sex and marriage!
(Thanks)
LikeLike
Heavens! What a comparison — having a relationship and burning a corpse in one’s backyard! Not only that this is completely unwarranted, it also reflects a certain mindset that will go to any length to argue that what is unacceptable to me SHOULD be unacceptable to all. The reaction to zacharia was far more than immediate anger — in fact that is what is troubling about it. And why can’t communists accept the fact that while underground, several party men did have liaisons with women in homes that shielded them and indeed have children with many? What is so wrong about saying that openly? If they can’t stomach that, then they should stop putting on progressive airs. Yes, it is true that there are rumours all over Kerala about such relations, illegitimate pregnancies, and so on — and Zacharia just stated it openly. He was criticising moral policing by the DYFI and the PDP; he was attacked because of that. These weak attempts — from bad arguments to spurious statements that the ‘internal forums’ of the cpm mass organisations are seriously discussing the possibilities of democratising gender relations (which, sorry won’t work with us living over here) seem to be a result of the current reward-points system initiated for those cpm adherents defending the party on blogs. Reward points can fetch goodies ranging from membership in the Kerala State Planning Board to research positions in CPM-influenced institutions, to humble gains at the panchayat level! So, here we are!
LikeLike
Quote: “And why can’t communists accept the fact that while underground, several party men did have liaisons with women in homes that shielded them and indeed have children with many?” unquote
Have you conducted any study into it? Or do you have any substantial data corroborating this? Then please give details based on facts, quote the instances. Do you think that you can make statements based on rumours? Or everything becomes facts when you write and “what is acceptable to you SHOULD be acceptable to all”?
DEEPAK
LikeLike
BTW, these aren’t merely rumors — there have been several instances in which the party directed the man who caused the harm to own up the child he fathered. But that was before the party became ‘respectable’ and settled!The generation that remembers this is still alive.
LikeLike
Alas ! These reward seekers, pointless or with wrong points;with bad logic or no logic(Zizek or no Zizek) roam in all spheres of public in Keralam seeking a piece of bone everywhere even from a burning pyre…
LikeLike
Sorry Deepak,
I’m afraid that there is no propriety for demanding proof for such statements about private love/ sex lives of communist leaders who have not even been named here. This is especially true when we are in an important debate which itself has originated from sort of defending P Zacharia, who had touched similar theme in a public address.
That private love and sex lives of leaders had never been discussed in the past itself is no justification for preventing someone from raising related questions in the context of desired healthy change in perspectives about love, sex and marriage. I have also heard such stories of Communist leaders in the past having extra marital love, sex and even children. There is even a published account of TN Gopakumar about his own mother’s relationship with a top communist leader(sorry, I forget here the details; the title is Shucheendram Rekhakal- memoirs ) Story about Karl Marx himself is well known who had an extra marital and private love relationship with (Jenny?)out of which he also had a daughter.
Communists or non communists , people have generally accepted such stories about private lives of great leaders with some decency; in those hey days of Christian/Victorian morality, Marx could not have publicly acknowledged his extra marital love. But the founders of Marxism sent shock waves to the same institution of bourgeois family& marriage, by their epistemological rejection of it lock, stock and barrel.
And you ask for proof!
LikeLike
Dear Sri. Venu,
I was not demanding proof. When someone claims that “there have been several instances in which the party directed the man who caused the harm to own up the child he fathered” one should be able to tell who and where. Otherwise it is mere gossip. Zachariah inadvertantly, and Devika madam advertantly were trying to say that the party of 40-50 era supported such happenings. I oppose it and say that there is no base to say so, and there are many to believe otherwise. One more thing: “This is especially true when we are in an important debate which itself has originated from sort of defending P Zacharia” Defending Zacharia is not the aim of this debate; it should not be. It was responses on the behavior of a group of people, I view it as undemocratic but not moral policing, some of you have a different opinion and some others view it as tit-for-tat and see nothing wrong in it. Zachariah happens to be on one side of the incident, thats all. I feel that the third group takes that stand because of their bond to the movement behind it, where as the second group jumped out because they smell the chance of inflicting a blow to CPIM using this, they bury objectivity and engage in slander. There were more serious issues in recent past, the text book strike was an attempt against all left ethos, the slogans were out and out regressive, they attacked a teacher and killed him. How Kafila responded to it? How the charged respondants here, fared on that? Don’t think that everybody around are dumb.
About TN Gopakumar: do you know who his mother is? Thankamma, who was the wife of Com. P Krishnapillai, after his death remarried to TN’s father. So those who are scratching for “communist leaders’ extra-marital relations” would lose their heart going behind it. Marx had a relation with the housekeeper of his apartment, Ms. Lenchen, but they didn’t use it to send shock waves to anyone, and “hey days of Christian/Victorian morality” is nothing to pull back a person like Marx, someone who wrote ‘Holy family’ and who was expelled from 4 countries. On the contrary, Marx was a family man, extremely fond of Jenny and children. There are many vivid memories of Elenor, daughter of Marx to testify that.
DEEPAK
LikeLike
Please be more specific. I am, or many like me are eager to know the real side of it, how widespread was it, what was Communist party’s stand towards such incidents, did the party encouraged such things etc. Our understanding is that the party never supported such things happening, and was very particular on its cadre on it, and if anything noticed, was keen to shun as an aberration. There has been reports about Com. TV Thomas having such a relation, and Com. KR Gowri Amma has publically stated that if it was known to the Party in time, the marriage between them would not have happened. If you can come out with incidents were party acted otherwise, please bring out. We have many records on how the party, its leaders and those who protected behaved. Please see the following link to see some such incidents narrated: http://kaanaamarayathu.blogspot.com/2010/01/blog-post.html
You cannot just continue to make loosely based statements.
Tamaso ma jyotir gamaya.
LikeLike
Just because Marx and Marxists of his times didn’t want a public debate on the special relationship he had with Ms Lunchen (in which, Marx even fathered a son ), I meant to say, the succeeding generations of Marxists and non Marxists should not feel themselves constrained having dispassionate analysis of bourgeois family, patriarchy, sexuality, relations outside marriage,so on and so forth.
BTW, Thanks for correcting me and throwing more light on my refernce to T N Gopakumar’s narrative and I apologize for the errors. Similarly, I also thank Deepak for giving the details I missed about Marx’s case of extra familial sex.
If you say Marx was a family man, I will both agree and disagree. And, that is the whole problem here. Being a family man is not a virtue in itself and being someone exactly not that is not too bad either!
LikeLike
Venu,
I have been reading this thread with curiosity ever since it began. My intervention here is partly as an outsider to Kerala’s sexual and moral economies. I will come to that partly bit in a minute.
As an outsider, it seems to me that there is a strange disconnect here between what is happening on the streets and homes and what is being debated here. First off, it seems to me that the media – whether it is CPIM controlled or otherwise – is creating nothing short of chaos. Each publication and reporter putting his or her own spin on things and people end up debating those spins. Second, it seems to me that somehow the whole debate is centering on the life circumstances and choices and compulsions of individuals to whose lives we have very limited access. And to complicate this, public figures are acting and speaking in an extremely irresponsible manner without a second thought about the consequences of their utterances.
All this is not to suggest that we should therefore avoid debating these things. But that we should exercise utmost caution and restraint in the way we debate these things. The issue at stake is not whether or not the early male communist leaders had legal/illegal/moral/immoral/bourgeois relationships with women. That sort of a debate tends to lead us into witch-hunting. I mean someone wants proof or evidence of whether or not such and such leaders did such and such things or not – the assumption being that it would be self evident as to whether such and such things are already moral or immoral.
My hunch is that you have already sensed this and to avoid that trap, you are deflecting this into a debate about bourgeois ideology and Marx and so on. But that is another kind of trap altogether.
Bourgeois or not, women and men make all sorts of choices and desire and aspire and connect with all kinds of friendships and relationships. Both material conditions and cultural milieus play a role in how those relationships are coded and understood by others.
The question we should be thinking about is: how does one value relationships that nurture creative energies and how do we recognize relationships that are either power laden, destructive and based on indolence and convenience ?
Without some such prior ethical framework, how can we judge any relationships or institutions which preorient people towards certain kinds of exploitative or oppressive relationships ?
At the beginning, I said I say this only partly as an outsider. There are a couple of reasons for that comment is that, I know it from fairly close quarters how codes of sexual conduct become hotly debated in cadre based parties. Parties come up with rules and regulations and enforce them and like all governmental projects, they fail in enforcing them. Yet few parties can afford to acknowledge this. Afterall, can any state acknowledge the fact that there are limits to what it can enforce ? Such things are always implicit. In that sense, I take the CPIM’s anger at these things not only understandable, but also a signal that it is dangerous to push it beyond a point. I mean, if it is actually proven publicly that CPIM leaders have acted in violation of its own codes of conduct, the retribution towards those leaders can be terrible. Why would any of us want it – unless we also somewhere feel that those leaders acted unethically – regardless of the CPIM’s code of conduct ?
Secondly, I also feel that somewhere all this stuff has to do with the tremendous amount of turmoil that our societies have experienced in the last 15 years. I mean that plural word societies in all seriousness. To me, somehow, post 1956, many Indian states based on language unity have developed along highly insular lines. This insularity extends from print media cultures all the way into cultures of family life, property and community. Exposure to expanded economies in the last 15 years has had some bizarre consequences to these cultures. For example, in some places and in some sectors, the entire labor market is highly sexualized – from construction work at one end to glitzy media production units at the other end.
In some instances, a lot of transactions that used to be at one time fairly neutral or at least shaped by a range of other considerations are now hinging entirely on the sexual conduct of powerful individuals. Take the case of ND Tiwari for example.
In this sense, even though I am an outsider to Kerala and do not have a direct proximity with CPIM’s politics in Kerala, many of these discussions resonate with me — simply because the insularity of the social context is not very different from what is happening in Andhra Pradesh.
I can not suggest any better ways to handle these debates, but if you are hearing me saying that we are getting off on the wrong foot… you are right. Thats all for now. :)
LikeLike
Dear Anant,
First,apologies for not being able to respond here at once . I would attribute this partly to my own lack of resources to help pushing the debate to any further extent, and partly my own personal engagements offline.
Nevertheless, I would like to say something in connection with the ‘trap’ you mentioned.
“…you are deflecting this into a debate about bourgeois ideology and Marx and so on. But that is another kind of trap altogether…”
To me at least,discussing the bourgeois mode of family and sexuality it is less sort of deflecting than consciously attempting to touch the raw nerve! I mean: in a way( or rather in many ways) people in their subjective experiences are forced or asked to explore the progressive ideas about society,sex, morals and and family. In this context, we will recall that not just Engels and Marx, but great non Marxist progressives such as Bertrand Russel and people like EV Ramaswamy (Periyar) had raised as early as in 1930s certain questions on gender which even a contemporary Marxist will not perhaps raise! It is such a state of affairs that leads to the virtual unification of all patriarchal forces against women, transgendered and other sections of the sexually marginalized.
Regards,
Venu
LikeLike
@ KM Venugopal
Sorry for the delay in my reply. Thanks for the references.
>BTW, Thanks for correcting me and throwing >more light on my refernce to T N Gopakumar’s >narrative and I apologize for the errors.
No need for you to apologize, you didn’t write anything fictional about it.
Same time, there are people here keeping quite after making incorrrect statements.
>Being a family man is not a virtue in itself and >being someone exactly not that is not too bad >either!
I agree with you. Even then you cannot negate the importance of family. Need is to bring in a change in the concept of the bourgeois mode of family. I will make an attempt to put in my views.
-DEEPAK
LikeLike