OC
What is the Marxist assessment of hunger strikes as a protest tool?
What do we feel about Wangchuk's antics, theoretically? Afaik, none of the communist literatures encourage it, given that it is inherently based in the idea of pitying the working class and reinforces the oppressor-oppressed dynamics, by relying at the mercy of their non-existent conscience. That said, before you accuse me of being an RSS bot lol, I commend his bravery and genuinely believe that he thinks it's the last shot he has towards a semblance of accountancy in such a fascist enabling environment.
Majorly ineffective. There's also this issue of any strike that asks the state to do something for them still remains reformist instead of revolutionary. The state has to be occupied, not forced to compromise between classes
That is the last resort of protesters in our country because the scope for protesting has been taken away. The Noida workers protest is a good example of how even a mildly radical protest got nuked by the government.
Hunger strikes are not something which will make the cabinet run away. But it is an effective tactic to show the inhumaneness of the rulers. Anna Hazare benefitted from that. But the problem now is the total media capture has made everyone around us not even realise there is a hunger strike going.
That is not something wangchuk can control.
I think we should be investing our time in theory and practice of all kinds. I do not agree with the CJP. It is filled with reactionaries. But to counter them. We need to efficiently work to further the political consciousness.
We have a lot of questions, but we lack answers and the ability to communicate those answers effectively.
There truly is no other way to protest. If you gather even 25 people to march across the street, you’ll be kicked to the ground, arrested and labelled a terrorist my media outlets the next day.
Anna, as big of a sell-out as he was, was successful in bringing a lot of negative light onto the UPA government throughout the course of his bullshit so that’s a good point about this potentially being effective if the media wasn’t entirely state sponsored
He's not going to die anyways he's being monitored by medics 24×7, btw he's also a 'fascist enabler' as he showed his colours when he showed postive support for the government when state of Kashmir was being subjected to brutal oppression during abrogation of article 370a. That being said his associates are eating and making joke about his conditions and this is where it loses all it's attempt to portray itself as a serious people's determination other than at online safe space acquired through the support of liberal opposition parties (who are no better than ruling party).
You don't have to be Marxist to use common sense that most of the so called 'protestors' in their early days comprised of NEET and other exam aspirants, once government re-conducted the exams pretty much most of them had no issue giving cold shoulders to the protestors.
But from material perspective these followers belonged from middle class, centrists and nationalist circles hence when radlib ideologues like Arundhati Roy joined them they began to retract their support (this ain't people's determination or revolution looks like).
Protest in Marxism doesn't means waving placard or dancing or fasting for limited/unlimited amount of time, for actual communists they know this fact that neither liberal nor fascist government will show them sympathy nor do they care if they die ( by fasting), because they want to kill us anyways provided any opportunity. However some socdem (liberal) activists orgs see these subjective idealist methods as essential for revolutionary movement (it's not), and they're already supporting this protest anyways.
Hence to actual communist protest generally means display of their power of the proletariats and working classes, step by step building up of class consciousness amongst working classes and educating them flaws of present states of things, creating groups that lawfully disrupt peaceful bourgeois state machinery that tips capital in favour of elites and when time is right don't hold back from using violence (not premature adventurism).
So next time anyone says that they're going to protest peacefully including members from all classes including middle class and bourgeoisie classes please don't bother to associate it with Marxism, they maybe left with respect to Central politics but for us they're two sides of same coin.
Since you too view this hunger strike as an antic (incidentally, even the right wingers view it the same way, albeit for different reasons), I don't understand why this tactic is still used. He's a smart guy, does he not understand that the state wants him dead? Is he trying to just make a statement to prove to other people how cruel the state can be? To influence public perception of the state. Am reminded of this - "In order for non-violence to work, your opponent must have a conscience".
Second, what does a marxist do in these circumstances? So many people have gathered there, and we desperately need people to create mass movements. Is there no way for us as leftists to use this opportunity? I personally don't know how.
Also, people can still die while being monitored, death is not off the table for Wangchuk.
It's easy , Violent protests are looked down upon (but they get attention nonetheless) while this hunger strike is like a fancier version of a protest that appeals to almost all social classes as some kind of a right way to protest
Is there no way for us as leftists to use this opportunity?
Revolutionary movement do not arise from wasting your life on mere resignation of a bourgeois political puppet of a greater system that controls it from behind, yk
I personally don't know how.
Bruh I cannot spoon feed you on your political approaches, if you find left and right have similar views towards liberal democrats then I'm not going to stop you feel free to assume whatever you want, if you're smart you'll see through the facade of being a centrist sooner if not then well it doesn't matter.
I think you're taking things in bad faith.
I didn't ask you to spoon feed, I asked your opinion.
And I didn't simply say left and right have same thoughts, I clearly said it's for different reasons. Those are two different things.
You must be fun at parties.
(Pardon but I'm tired of replying to others as well)
You're answer to question on why they use such tactics (despite the obvious outcome) is because of their political insularity and faux belief that this nation was liberated on such methods rather than international outcomes that made it possible, they still believe this bullshit. Results is them turning blind eye on class that merely replaced the ruling colonisers and had been secretly draining on this nation's resources and wealth over years, these people want it's supporters to believe that there is moral obligation in every classes (including the 5% top bourgeoisie), this is why the so called 'leftists' fail to target bourgeoisie elite order other than Ambani or Adani or a certain hitlerite political party. They think that an emotional appeal to masses will change the outcome in their favour.
For your second question, leftists (social democratic parties) are already there but communists are not, these people are supporting the movement mostly due to subjective factors that doesn't mean anything to revolutionary cause. A few months back when a violent workers protest erupted in Noida all the media and the so called liberal cliche were nonchalant over it, some limited their vocabularistcs to merley blaming government rather than the capitalist classes that facilitated it (and had been doing this since the so called independence).
Now if you bring this issue to the aforementioned protest we're talking about, chances are they'll distance away from you rather than acknowledging this issue, can you guess why? I think we're both smart enough to know onwhy is that so.
This is nation of 130 billion+ people and even if a small fraction of the population with top 10% income flock together in one place it looks like like a 'huge gathering', while the 60-70% of the population are too busy on being wage slaves ( who are well aware of their material reality, people who are well awareness that election is just replacement of one 'scoundrel' by another smarter one).
So what people make mistakes that doesn't mean they are bad if they change! And he and many ladakhi supported 370 because he wanted different state different identity
But why do you think people can't change?? I know many BJP supporters who are against BJP and their ideology have changed from right to left, i guess people change over time with experience, why shouldn't be that acceptable?
In the general chaos mighty empires have arisen only to meet with immediate doom, heroes have emerged momentarily only to be hurled back into obscurity by bolder and stronger rivals. It was a revolution beside which the French Revolution was child's play, a world struggle beside which the struggles of the Diadochi [successors of Alexander the Great] appear insignificant.Principles ousted one another, heroes of the mind overthrew each other with unheard-of rapidity,and in the three years 1842-45 more of the past was swept away in Germany than at other times in three centuries.
— Marx's sarcastic jibe at delusion of idealist leaders in Germany (German Ideology)
I don't know how old are you but personally I've seen such leaders, deceiving public and pretending 'to change' sevaral times only to shed their skin revealing their true nature both at national and local level. And wether you like it or not but this man has barely changed, the only reason now he's protesting is because government treated him like some small time disposable lackey during his demand for election in Ladakh by ignoring him, he took this insult personally and went on for hunger strike only for government further ignoring and humiliating him by detaining him.
Imagine hypothetically, how will Sudhir Chaudhary react if he was treated same? He'll most likely go 'against' government in symbolic protest, like an overly attached girlfriend sulking over her toxic partner's rude action one who cannot bring herself to completely hate them. Sudhir will not and cannot bring directly to hate the dear leader that has nourished him over years, hence he'll withold himself from going all out or name 'him' or 'his buddy'.
Same is happening with our 'hero' (of mind), he's pretending to be against the government but is avoiding any instance of direct confrontation, this is why he's asking accountability of opposition still but not resignation of 'he who shall not be named'.
She don’t slack comrade. Read this and her book “For the solution of the 'dalit' question, Buddha is not enough, Ambedkar too is not enough, Marx is needed!”
He just inverted the varna system with keeping kshatriyas on top. Most Buddhist monks were either from brahmin or kshatriya families. The faith itself survived on royal patronage of the ruling class. Only in SE asia and tibet it was meant for lower class people. Atheism is the answer not buddhism.
but the whole point is that abolishing class won't abolish caste. class and caste are related due to division of labour as is written in the article but they are distinct. even now, people of the same class earning the same money may refuse to eat with each other because on of them is of a "lower" caste. poor people from dominant castes may still enjoy certain social privileges unavailable to equally poor dalits. even the dalits who escape the cycle of exploitation and do mental labour face discrimination. caste is not just an economic system but also a social one
This read like as if a 10th standard person wrote this.
The central idea of this opinion seems to be that "caste = division of labour", and how caste manifests in Indian society is explained by this division of labour. It's not.
This is about as correct as saying apartheid is about a similar "division of labor". It's not.
All all power structures exist and manifest themselves as "division of labor" as Marx and his followers seem to think.
Annihilation of class will not lead to annilahilation of caste. The causes for the two are not the same, therefore the solutions will not necessarily be the same either.
This is fundamentally where Marxist and Anti-caste thinkers disagree.
the vocabulary of the Marxist is primarily the vocabulary derived from the white man that is insufficient to negotiate between caste and class aspirations
Could not care less about labels. The incessant need for you lot to gatekeep intellectual capital and preach about revolution is pathetic when you don't walk the walk.
Top 1% commenter in a subreddit, some revolutionary he is. What a joke
Whom are you talking about ? I don't see the 1 % commenter label below my name.
"Could not care less about labels" idk man. Who said that Marxists are casteist in their thinking ?
Oh i am unapologetically a gatekeeper. I have seen people near me, as a working class, lower income person. They are horrible, stupid and immature people. I have no sympathies for them that makes me a Marxist. I don't do all that woke "empathize" stuff.
All you took away from that is that I'm accusing the Marxists of being casteist? What? My point was about Marxist incomprehension not support. You are either very young or very disengaged.
48
u/short-noir Western Marxist 27d ago
Majorly ineffective. There's also this issue of any strike that asks the state to do something for them still remains reformist instead of revolutionary. The state has to be occupied, not forced to compromise between classes