Let us examine the case of Bareilly riot thru established norms and canons of social science which states, “External conditions creates the condition of change, internal conditions become the basis of change, internal conditions becomes operative thru external conditions”. This is world famous norm, developed by Karl Marx who defined the remnants of class struggle in the society. The emergence of Communist party and its growth was the result of this norm as it was the job of Communist parties to accentuate this struggle in order to capture the political power. Historically, this struggle was noticed, recorded and underlined by the social scientists even before the emergence of Marxian science and it will remain in force without the presence of Communist parties as well.
Every Riot in India carry’s a significant amount of class struggle but since it has so many factors, involvement of roles of different social forces has made it a complex sociological phenomenon. It could be termed a distorted form of class struggle. Communal Riots is India is actually a vast sociological subject and it has been changing its face from time to time. It had a different face Pre-Independent India, it was different in nature and character in 1970s post independent India and now what we see here and there, different part of India as also different which could be termed post Ayodhya carnage India.
We have already seen Aditya Kohli’s factual report on Bareilly riots and what we have seen now by Mr M S R Khan is an attempt to define Bareilly riot thru some sociological spectrums. To my mind, there is an internal struggle between Bareillvi and Deobandi school of thoughts (NAI has already reported some communal strife took place in the eastern UP/Bihar town over the control of a Mosque last year) which is clearly visible after 9/11. There have been a divide amongst Muslim but it never led to any communal riots in any city of India in general unlike notorious Shia-Sunni divide in Muslim society. Second internal struggle within society is amongst Muslims and Hindu who try to establish their authority on the cost of competitor community. Khan’s whole emphasis in his analysis is that Tauqeer’s repeated insistence to take the procession thru Non-Muslim’s locality which, according to him became the cause of flash point. But, how it could be justified the prior presence of bricks which came like a saucers and injured several peaceful processionist? It means, facts are different from the theory and they speak otherwise.
Bareilly riots are the yet another form of distorted class struggle, ‘State’ is ready to curb it in the name of law and order and they are comfortable to name it Communal Riot. State is ruthless to show its power once there is any open threat to its system (like Maoist) as they are busy in ‘Operation Green Hunt’ these days. Indian bourgeoisie system has contributed thru its different shades of political leaders and ideologies to distort this simplest form of social struggle. Laws of social science are in force everywhere in the society whether the revolutionary forces are there to shape them or to provide the leadership. In their absence, somebody has to take the advantage so we find reactionary forces at work, be it Muslim or Hindu fundamentalist, their nature and characteristics are same, both are anti-people, anti-working class and both are blood suckers of poorest of the poor. So we have their ideologue also, sitting at their respective places (media, Learning Institutes, Govt machinery etc), trying to form or deform the opinion of the masses.
What could be a biggest issue of shame for India that they are still fighting in the name of medieval mind set religion and their so-called intelligentsia is prescribing theories to pacify their wrong doing? ‘Aam Aadmi’ is still an innocent pawn in the hands of politico-sociological criminals. Is that the game plan to keep aloof millions of masses from basic need of the life like water, education, medical, transport or electricity etc? Tauqeer and Gangwar are the two sides of same coin who are marshalled to deform class struggle. They are the one who defuse the anger of common men to force them to fight each other and always creates stumbling blocks to UNITE them and fight for total.....!!! (Revolution)
Every Riot in India carry’s a significant amount of class struggle but since it has so many factors, involvement of roles of different social forces has made it a complex sociological phenomenon. It could be termed a distorted form of class struggle. Communal Riots is India is actually a vast sociological subject and it has been changing its face from time to time. It had a different face Pre-Independent India, it was different in nature and character in 1970s post independent India and now what we see here and there, different part of India as also different which could be termed post Ayodhya carnage India.
We have already seen Aditya Kohli’s factual report on Bareilly riots and what we have seen now by Mr M S R Khan is an attempt to define Bareilly riot thru some sociological spectrums. To my mind, there is an internal struggle between Bareillvi and Deobandi school of thoughts (NAI has already reported some communal strife took place in the eastern UP/Bihar town over the control of a Mosque last year) which is clearly visible after 9/11. There have been a divide amongst Muslim but it never led to any communal riots in any city of India in general unlike notorious Shia-Sunni divide in Muslim society. Second internal struggle within society is amongst Muslims and Hindu who try to establish their authority on the cost of competitor community. Khan’s whole emphasis in his analysis is that Tauqeer’s repeated insistence to take the procession thru Non-Muslim’s locality which, according to him became the cause of flash point. But, how it could be justified the prior presence of bricks which came like a saucers and injured several peaceful processionist? It means, facts are different from the theory and they speak otherwise.
Bareilly riots are the yet another form of distorted class struggle, ‘State’ is ready to curb it in the name of law and order and they are comfortable to name it Communal Riot. State is ruthless to show its power once there is any open threat to its system (like Maoist) as they are busy in ‘Operation Green Hunt’ these days. Indian bourgeoisie system has contributed thru its different shades of political leaders and ideologies to distort this simplest form of social struggle. Laws of social science are in force everywhere in the society whether the revolutionary forces are there to shape them or to provide the leadership. In their absence, somebody has to take the advantage so we find reactionary forces at work, be it Muslim or Hindu fundamentalist, their nature and characteristics are same, both are anti-people, anti-working class and both are blood suckers of poorest of the poor. So we have their ideologue also, sitting at their respective places (media, Learning Institutes, Govt machinery etc), trying to form or deform the opinion of the masses.
What could be a biggest issue of shame for India that they are still fighting in the name of medieval mind set religion and their so-called intelligentsia is prescribing theories to pacify their wrong doing? ‘Aam Aadmi’ is still an innocent pawn in the hands of politico-sociological criminals. Is that the game plan to keep aloof millions of masses from basic need of the life like water, education, medical, transport or electricity etc? Tauqeer and Gangwar are the two sides of same coin who are marshalled to deform class struggle. They are the one who defuse the anger of common men to force them to fight each other and always creates stumbling blocks to UNITE them and fight for total.....!!! (Revolution)
