Log in

View Full Version : at least 100,000 trade unionists march in new delhi



scarletghoul
24th February 2011, 02:30
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE71M1B820110223?sp=true


By Krittivas Mukherjee

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - At least 100,000 trade unionists marched through the Indian capital on Wednesday in a protest against high food prices and unemployment, piling pressure on an administration under fire over corruption scandals.

The demonstration was the biggest in New Delhi in years and included members of a trade union linked to the ruling Congress party, reflecting disquiet within the party over food inflation which hit a high of over 18 percent last December.

It was also the latest in a wave of protests that have swept the world, ignited by a worldwide spike in food prices. But unlike the protests that have toppled autocratic leaders, there have been no calls to overthrow India's democratic government.

"We have come here so that our voices reverberate inside the house (parliament) and they can see what pain the common man is going through," said Akhil Samantray who had come from the eastern Orissa state to take part in the march.

India, Asia's third-largest economy and home to more than a billion people, has been grappling with double-digit food inflation for much of last year. The country's hundreds of millions of poor have been hit the hardest.

The government has looked increasingly helpless as it tries to introduce policies to rein in food prices which have risen mainly on the back of soaring global prices which the government cannot control.

"Prices will kill the common man," read a banner carried by one of the protesters, one of many in a sea of red flags.

"We get paid 100-125 Rupees (1.36-1.70 pounds) a day. How are we going to survive on this if prices are so high?" said Kailash Sain, who had travelled to the capital from the western state of Rajasthan.

TRADE UNIONS

The protest was a show of strength from the trade unions looking to gain support amid economic pains of Indians who have not benefited from near double-digit growth.

India has more than 9 million trade union members, but their influence has waned after 1991 when the government ushered in economic reforms and began privatising state-run firms.

"The unions have been very weak in the post-reform era, but on this issue they will get widespread sympathy and support. The unions are filling a vacuum not taken up by a political party at the moment," said Mahesh Ranagarajan, political columnist and Delhi University professor.

P.J. Raju, secretary of the Congress' trade union, told Reuters around 100,000 people from his party alone would be joining the protest.
The grassroots protests may also pile pressure on the government ahead of state elections this year and play into the leftist roots of the Congress Party, which often vies for influence against reformers like Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the government.

Concerns about governance and regulatory uncertainty, combined with the global slowdown, have hit foreign direct investment and contributed to the Mumbai stock exchange's recent performance, the worst of the world's major share markets.

India's central bank has raised interest rates seven times in a year to try and tame inflation but has warned fiscal policies would be largely ineffective against rising food prices which stem from bad weather and problems on the supply side.

In one of his strongest warnings over the risk of rising prices, Singh earlier this month said high inflation posed a serious threat to India's growth plans, adding the country's farm supply chains had to be boosted with organised retail chains.

Analysts say this may underline shifting opinion within his government that for years has prioritised growth over inflation worries, despite criticism the government was doing too little, too late to rein in prices.

The protests also come only a day after Singh relented to months of opposition demands for a parliamentary probe into amulti-billion dollar scandal over sales of telecoms licences for kickbacks.

The scandals have piled enormous pressure on the reformist 78-year-old prime minister, seen as a lame duck who plays second fiddle to Congress party head Sonia Gandhi. Some believe further revelations could force him from power early and lead to aninterim leader before a 2014 general election.Seems like most Indians, even those tied to the Congress, are far to the left of Singh and the other criminals running the country. The Indian trade union situation is pretty confusing, there are quite a few and i am not sure what they're like. But this is a good indicator of mass discontent

RED DAVE
24th February 2011, 12:38
This is probably the distant fall-out from the situation in the Middle East.

RED DAVE

red cat
24th February 2011, 12:55
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE71M1B820110223?sp=true

Seems like most Indians, even those tied to the Congress, are far to the left of Singh and the other criminals running the country. The Indian trade union situation is pretty confusing, there are quite a few and i am not sure what they're like. But this is a good indicator of mass discontent

It was a fake march organized by the agents of the Indian state. All of those were trade unions affiliated to bourgeois parties in the central or state governments, trying to ventilate the workers' grievances. They know very well what is likely to happen if those hundred-thousand workers participate in revolutionary violence.

pranabjyoti
24th February 2011, 15:42
This kind of moves are nothing but safety valves. And sorry to say, a part of workers of India have long forgot militant struggle and prefer this kind of "safe" moves. I hope they will wake from their sleep soon.

RED DAVE
24th February 2011, 19:41
This kind of moves are nothing but safety valves. And sorry to say, a part of workers of India have long forgot militant struggle and prefer this kind of "safe" moves. I hope they will wake from their sleep soon.Maoist bullshit.

RED DAVE

pranabjyoti
25th February 2011, 00:59
Maoist bullshit.

RED DAVE
Trot blabbering.

Sir Comradical
25th February 2011, 01:24
Maoist bullshit.

RED DAVE

How?

RED DAVE
25th February 2011, 01:38
How?Workers in India engage in demonstrations and a prominent Maoist on this board refers to it as a "fake march."

This is in line with the fact that the might maoists of India and Nepal couldn't even spare a public word that I know of for the tens of thousands of women industrial workers in Bangladesh, who have been desperately fighting not only the bourgeoisie but the union bureaucracy.

Maoism is not an ideology of the working class. It specifically mandates class collaboration, in the form of the "bloc of four classes" instead of proletarian revolution.

RED DAVE

Sir Comradical
25th February 2011, 01:50
Workers in India engage in demonstrations and a prominent Maoist on this board refers to it as a "fake march."

This is in line with the fact that the might maoists of India and Nepal couldn't even spare a public word that I know of for the tens of thousands of women industrial workers in Bangladesh, who have been desperately fighting not only the bourgeoisie but the union bureaucracy.

Maoism is not an ideology of the working class. It specifically mandates class collaboration, in the form of the "bloc of four classes" instead of proletarian revolution.

RED DAVE

I'd like to see how pranabjyoti responds to this charge? I'm kind of on the fence here and don't know too much about the issue at hand.

red cat
25th February 2011, 04:23
Workers in India engage in demonstrations and a prominent Maoist on this board refers to it as a "fake march."

This is in line with the fact that the might maoists of India and Nepal couldn't even spare a public word that I know of for the tens of thousands of women industrial workers in Bangladesh, who have been desperately fighting not only the bourgeoisie but the union bureaucracy.

Maoism is not an ideology of the working class. It specifically mandates class collaboration, in the form of the "bloc of four classes" instead of proletarian revolution.

RED DAVE

Okay... apparently you are supportive of the bourgeoisie liquidating the revolutionary potential of a portion of the working class by limiting their movements to peaceful, reformist ones. And you accuse those who expose these tricks of the ruling class to be class collaborationists. It is very clear that pacifying workers with reformism is your ultimate goal, and you attack Maoists really because they advocate revolutionary action of workers to overthrow the bourgeois state.

Tommy4ever
25th February 2011, 08:54
Is there any part of this forum so sectarian as the Situation in South Asia section? I don't think I've seen a single page that doesn't have some bickering between ideologues.

RED DAVE
25th February 2011, 14:22
Is there any part of this forum so sectarian as the Situation in South Asia section? I don't think I've seen a single page that doesn't have some bickering between ideologues.But it's not bickering. It is a serious conflict over the meaning of revolution. The differences are probably irreconcilable.

RED DAVE

Tommy4ever
25th February 2011, 20:54
But it's not bickering. It is a serious conflict over the meaning of revolution. The differences are probably irreconcilable.

RED DAVE

I know you do not agree with the Maoists' methods or their aims. However atleast they are doing something. In a perfect world it would be the workers who would be spearheading the communist movement in India, in a perfect world the left would be united and enjoy the influence over the working class that it once held. However we don't live in a perfect world so we should work with what exists. In India the Maoists are actually struggling for something communistic, we should therefore support them. That's my view anyway. I'm prepared to get screamed at by the workerists and Maoists alike. :p

resurgence
1st March 2011, 01:06
Workers in India engage in demonstrations and a prominent Maoist on this board refers to it as a "fake march."


You dont seem to understand the role of (most at least) Trade Unions within this period of capitalism.

resurgence
1st March 2011, 01:09
But it's not bickering. It is a serious conflict over the meaning of revolution. The differences are probably irreconcilable.

RED DAVE

Okay Red Dave answer me this, the Maoist afflitated women's organization is the largest one in the country, women also play key roles in the party and even in combat, you might believe that the Maoists are evil capitalists but at least you recognize and support their active struggle to empower women in a country that is often viciously patriarchal, but you dont, why?

Blackscare
1st March 2011, 01:13
So, if I understand this correctly, the mobilization of 100,000 workers is not in reality a sign of growing class consciousness and dissatisfaction... it is an orchestrated plot by the government to publicly emphasize it's own impotence in the face of growing food prices? This makes no sense to me.


It does seem, in this thread, that maoists are a bit slanted against the urban proletariat. Either that or Red Cat is extremely naive and thinks that people spring right from the status quo to full on insurrection, with no intermediary phase.

Blackscare
1st March 2011, 01:14
Okay Red Dave answer me this, the Maoist afflitated women's organization is the largest one in the country, women also play key roles in the party and even in combat, you might believe that the Maoists are evil capitalists but at least you recognize and support their active struggle to empower women in a country that is often viciously patriarchal, but you dont, why?

This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, however true it is.

resurgence
1st March 2011, 01:19
This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, however true it is.

Okay fair enough, but it was kneejerk reaction to Red Dave's obessesive behaviour on threads to do with the Naxalites.

red cat
1st March 2011, 12:34
So, if I understand this correctly, the mobilization of 100,000 workers is not in reality a sign of growing class consciousness and dissatisfaction... it is an orchestrated plot by the government to publicly emphasize it's own impotence in the face of growing food prices? This makes no sense to me.


It does seem, in this thread, that maoists are a bit slanted against the urban proletariat. Either that or Red Cat is extremely naive and thinks that people spring right from the status quo to full on insurrection, with no intermediary phase.

Read my first post in this thread once again. Very carefully. Then read the history of Gandhism in India.

pranabjyoti
1st March 2011, 16:58
So, if I understand this correctly, the mobilization of 100,000 workers is not in reality a sign of growing class consciousness and dissatisfaction... it is an orchestrated plot by the government to publicly emphasize it's own impotence in the face of growing food prices? This makes no sense to me.


It does seem, in this thread, that maoists are a bit slanted against the urban proletariat. Either that or Red Cat is extremely naive and thinks that people spring right from the status quo to full on insurrection, with no intermediary phase.
Kindly read also read my first posts. Those mobilizations are like mobilizations by Democrats or Republicans. Do you think such kind of mobilizations will end into something fruitful.
They may be, the mobilizers have some good history. I think you and others like you don't have the slightest idea about the mobilizers.

bricolage
1st March 2011, 20:47
However atleast they are doing something.

`Do something' is an agitated reflex to stimuli, a theorisation of turning yourself into a bridge, there is a perceived urgency and a presupposition that the doer is doing something important but `do something' also suggests `do anything', a desperate injunction to press every button to save the world.
.