Talk:Socialist Unity Centre of India (Communist): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:24, 27 September 2006

The article on Socialist Unity Centre of India has a number of factual errors and subjective comments of the author. Readers are advised to refer to the official website of the party www.suci.in

An SUCI supporter 19th May 2005

so in such case; exactly which are the so-called "factual errors and subjective comments"? --Soman 15:40, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from the article: "The SUCI militants call themselves the vanguard of people, believing they will once overthrow capitalism and replace it with their aim, pure Communism."

Comment: I have not encountered a single SUCI militant (and I have met quite a few) that calls himself/herself the vanguard of the people. On the contrary what they say is that their party is the vanguard of the proletariat. Further, I have never heard them say that 'once (they) overthrow capitalism they will replace it with their aim, pure Communism'. What I have heard them say is that an anti-capitalist socialist revolution can alone overthrow capitalism and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The SUCI has so many publications, periodicals and books, many of them in english. Why doesn't the writer of the article refer to those instead of making fanciful comments? Sabyashildeb 17:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not in anyway a real depiction of SUCI and its activities. SUCI is the one and only genuine political party in India. Can you mention any other one who tries to defend people's rights in India? Who ever wrote this article has no idea of what SUCI does. And I plead to the gentleman that he better try to know SUCI by not through any hear and say or stuff that he might encounter accidentally, but by being along with it in its activities. Sekhar 22-06-06

Your contributions are valued, but at wiki one needs to try to write from an outside perspective. Claims needs to be backed up by sources. For example, the notion that "only communist party of the Indian soil" is of course something that is bound to be disputed by many other sections of the Indian left. In change, you could write "SUCI considers itself as the only genuine communist party in India". Moreover, the terms 'Comrade' is not a term to be used, as this is used within the party. The same goes for ephitets as 'Shri' (which followers of other Indian parties like to induct in other articles). Thirdly, the language cannot be as bombastic as in the current version (drops of blood, etc.). That is appropriate in a party pamphlet, but not in an encyclopedia. --Soman 10:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listed for deletion

After the counter-revolution in the erstwhile Soviet Union and other East European countries, our party in its endeavour to defend communism and Marxism-Leninism reinvigorated its ideological-philosophical movement, took powerful initiatives to regroup and rejuvenate the world communist movement and, as a first step, undertook the task of developing a mighty, militant anti-imperialist movement throughout the world with the real communist forces combining in its core as its driving force.

The SUCI vows to uphold the banner of socialist revolution and proletarian internationalism with every drop of blood of its leaders and cadres.

The current SUCI general secretary is Nihar Mukherjee. SUCI has a webpage and the party publishes Proletarian Era, where the imperialists and US warmoners are often criticised. The party has excellent contacts with international communist parties as well.

not only NPOV, but complete communist propaganda. --Constanz - Talk 13:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that the article is not well developed, and probably doesn't follow the desired goal of NPOV, however the article infers that there are members of the party that have been and are part of the sitting government, which would seem to estabilish notibility. If POV is the concern, my thought is it should be flagged as such and rewritten by someone with an objective viewpoint, not deleted. There's my two bits on the matter, for what it's worth. --Mr Minchin 22:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"POV"

I don't see any problem with the article now in terms of NPOV/POV. —Sesel 17:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha ha, this shit on Wiki?

SUCI is a closed community of unintelligent cretins. Their leader Ghosh used to speak on podiums that boasted his own blown up photograph clad in red and flowers. The leaders live in debauchery while professing asceticism to the masses and activists.

hi

A party of mural painters?

A party of mural painters across India? Interesting! Kuntan 04:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current Page

This page is officially being edited by SUCI and we assure that the information posted here will be according to Wiki style. However, at the moment, what ever has been posted is directly from the party website and needs editing. It will take time for us to edit it. In the mean time we request you not to change the content and we shall ourselves refine it. The only necessity is time. If edited by some one and not acceptable to SUCI, it will be changed. This is a party decision and will be executed. Regards SUCIIndia

A party of nitwits, must you be then. Your totalitarian attitude has no use here. Aren't you ashamed of what you just said? Your party's decision, you say? Why should others bother about it? Wikipedia is an encylopedia. Neutrality is one of its pillars. Do you check and oakay every published material that mentions your party? Maybe, you are not used to being mentioned? Kuntan 17:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kuntan, Don't be angry! It is of no use here as well. It will not help you in any way. It is a party decision and it will be executed. If you try to be constructive with us, we can maintain this page well, else you will spend all your time trying to revert it and we will definitely revert it to one that we feel like. So put in your comments here and we shall see what is acceptable to us and what is not. We are not worried of what press writes about us. If you need to know SUCI work for it, know it from inside and then try to creatively criticize. Anger is of now use, I must say! We are not ashamed of our stand as we are convienced of what we are doing. Neutrality is not carrying the propoganda of the capitalist media. Regards SUCI India

Interesting, really. So, your party decided to make Wikipedia its party organ? You are very optismistic about the execution plan, that sounds really wonderful. Who is this "WE" that you are talking about? The other editors also will be curious to know, I am sure. You didn't say at which level your party made that decision. Kuntan 19:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Self-identification of SUCI

User:Kuntan tries, for reasons difficult to understand, to remove a passage that specifies that SUCI considers itself as the only communist party in India. To understand the character of SUCI as a political party the thesis of SUCI that they are the sole communist party in India is highly relevant, since it conditions the relations of SUCI towards the rest of the Indian left. --Soman 14:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you care to put such theses in, you will also have put in the antitheses from its counterparts to gain balance. Both would better be done without. Kuntan 15:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...isn't obvious that other communist groups in India would not agree to that thesis...? --Soman 15:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is obvious or not is a matter of opinion. I mentioned a very relevant (obviously so) point earlier that this party has had no place in any major polemics in leftist movement.You chose to axe it for reasons that you didn't care to mention. Kuntan 15:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten the description of how the party positions itself and its ideology, with some extra details and a specific source citation. All of this is seems relevant to me; what good is an article about a political party that doesn't describe its political positions? Wikipedia doesn't need to rebut every claim described in an article, though if there are reliable sources describing a notable response to the party's platform, then including that might make sense. CDC (talk) 21:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that none of these says anything that can place this party. It is more like a cult group than a political party. The personality cult fostered around their leader should have been mentioned before anything else. But Soman won't allow it to be included, which is bad. Kuntan 21:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SUCI India writes: We (our party) is interested in as well keeping up with the spirit of Wikipedia. But we will not be accomodating capitalist propoganda about us being highlighted as facts. Secondly we will as well want our political stand clear to public. Mr. Kuntan says that we are a cult group which simply not the fact. If you count the shear number of districts that SUCI has activities in, it will already prove to you that we are larger than many so called communist parties in power. And we are not at all worried of numbers, as our interest is in quality and not quantity. Mr. Kuntan may post the so called 'anti-thesis' on 'WHY SUCI' to our email address. We will clarify ourselves to you, if you are really interested. Thanks to Mr. Soman for understanding that we dont intent to use Wiki as a means of promulgation. Those who have observed us closely will know that the capitalist media does not write about us and it is only our publications through which you can know about our activities. For this we suggest you refer to PEra which is freely available in our website. Regards SUCI India.

Attention Soman

Hey Soman, Since you don't pay heed to message put on your user page I choose to talk here. You are trying to accommodate the interests of some unscrupulous editors who repeatedly vandalised and removed tags at random, it seems. You have not even bothered to correct the murals, which I explained to you were irrelevant here. although you reverted my edits unminduflly. Your reaction or lack of it looks monopolistic. Kuntan 15:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't see any reason to change the term 'mural' in the text. At least not to 'graffiti'. 'Graffiti' generally refers to something quite different, implying that it is a form of vandalism. Usually, 'wall-paintings' is the general term in Indian politics, but for me 'mural' is more or less synomynous to that. --Soman 15:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you find that graffiti implied vandalism? Wall-writing is the term, not wall painting. And if you think it is synonymous with mural, you are wrong. You could check a dictionary before you are positive about that. Kuntan 15:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may read the article mural, and find out that it refers to the exact same phenomenon. --Soman 10:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The neutrality aspect. At the given moment what we have posted is a very brief description about SUCI. We have also not put in our party website material straight away. The flag will be repalced with a static one soon. SUCI India

Nowadays we don't say "we" to mean I. Kuntan 09:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are we as though it is an individual who is editing the text at the moment, it is as a collective decission. So Mr. Kuntan don't worry about the grammer. SUCI India

I have put the NPOV back. User:SUCIIndia deleted it without any discussion. After the edit of User:SUCIIndia it is a clear POV article. Statements like "This led him to organize SUCI strictly following the Marxist methodology with a handful of compatriots", "These preconditions being fulfilled in the course of a relentless ideological, philosophical, political and cultural struggle over several years, the SUCI emerged through a founding convention on the 24th April, 1948" , "As the continuer of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Zedong, Shibdas Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement; a fact asserted by the international collaborations that SUCI has with other communist parties world wide.", "As with every revolutionary party, innumerable SUCI cadres and leaders have been victims, are still being victims of state terror, brutal repression, imprisonment, and assassination. "etc. are not only POV but not verified as well. You can say SUCI claims so and so, but this is different. Please revert this to an earlier acceptable version and remove the tag. Clt13 10:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does not make a POV article because that it is posted by activists of SUCI. The paragraph that you have mentioned is very factual and any one who needs to verify can do so by going detailed into our website. A claim is to be varified by the reader and not you. Well you read E=MC^2 and it is upto you to verify it, not upto Einstein to prove it to you every time you ask for a proof. SUCI India.

You are right when you say "It does not make a POV article because that it is posted by activists of SUCI." But one cannot verify the claim that "SUCI strictly following the Marxist methodology " or " Shibdas Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement" or the claim that "SUCI is a revolutionary party" by looking at SUCI website. You very well know that many political parties in India claim to be communist or revolutionary but you may not accept it by visiting their website. Please do not present your claims as facts. As you mentioned, whether a party is revolutionary or not is to be decided by the reader; not by me nor by you. It is not decided by publishing a research paper as well. SO there is no comparison with E=MC^2 nor is it appropriate to put such claims in an encyclopedia. Please also understand that, in a discussion you should listen to others. If you remove the POV tag, immediately after adding some comments, it might appear that you are not willing to listen to others and you are merely interested in an edit war. Keep the tag until a consensus is evolved. It means that there is a debate going on this dispute Clt13 12:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a percpective difference here. You don't consider science as part of marxist ideology; whereas for us Marxism is the science of all sciences and thus it has direct relationships to E=MC^2. The existance of a communist party as a communist party can be varified as objectively as any scientific principles. If not, then it is not a communist part and thus we say that there are preconditions for even forming a real communist party. So one can verify whether SUCI strictly follows Marxist methodology and whether Com. Ghosh contributed to the growth and development of the world communist movement. His analysis of world wide political situation during his time of existance and the continuence of his idiology and philosophy but his followers and how they are appreciated world over is enough as varifications for such claims. SUCI is a revolutionary party and this is more than a claim. Our cader strenght proves and the fact that we are not ready to accept the registration as a formal party in India by signing up to defend Indian constitution is already well enough for any one to suggest that we are for revolution and we don't believe in this so called 'democracy' which is more of hipocracy. A reader has no choice of deciding whether the party is revolutionary or not, unless he/she gets to see an organization from inside. So we say that if you need to know us more come to us, work with us and then critically assess. Else don't be a carrier of the capitalist media. If some one is determined to propogate about us, things that are not facts, we will not let it happen just like that. As being new to this, we were not sure of what this POV tag was about. As now we are clear, we will keep it there till a consensus is evolved. But for sure, till then we will maintain what has been decided by us collectively. So I suggest please dont try to alter the present shape as we dont think that it is propoganda material. The statments are factual and as concise as possible. We as well don't intent to fight with any one including CPI (M). If any deaths have occured due to some issues, irrespective of which side has been killed we value the human life involved. So we are not trading charges with CPI (M) for any claims to the number that they killed or what ever. These are minor issues which diviates the attention from what we want to really communicate to the masses. We are no more a minor party. You must understand that our trade union is already India's 4th or 5th largest and in cader strenght we are far bigger than many so called communist parties in India. We are not interested to be a registered party and thus you may not see us listed with membership numbers. SUCI India

Your arguments are false, naive and not worth replying. Your party has been registered with the State Election Commission in West Bengal, isn't it? Your party swore that it wanted to overhrow the Indian State to get registered thus? Do your MLAs swear by your Ghosh when they are elected to Legislatvie Bodies? So, when you say "we are not ready to accept the registration as a formal party in India by signing up to defend Indian constitution" it is either falsity or remarkable ignorance. No one in his right sense would consider science to be part of an ideology, however great it is. Statements like "Marxism is the science of all sciences" smack of extreme naivety and intellectual cretinism. You seem to have no idea of a very famous letter one Mr. Frederich Engels wrote, in which he said ideology was necessarily false. Kuntan 17:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infact it is you who does not deserve any comments. We visited your page and found how much you are worth of replying. And thus sorry we dont entertain comments from you any more. SUCI India

First of all, stop talking like a feudal lord, with your "we". Secondly, answer my points, if you can and stop commenting on matters (on my user page) that are none of your concern. Thirdly, get somebody who can write better English to edit this article (if you are implementing your party decision). You have made it poorer not only in content but also in language. Kuntan 18:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formation of SUCI

User:Suciindia has claimed in his/her last series of edits that SUCI was not formed out of a split from RSP, which is in contradiction to my own understanding of the history of the party. It would be interesting if User:Suciindia could share more details about the pre-history of the party, since it could not have emerged out of a political vacuum. --Soman 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it is wise that you don't write what you are not aware of? You should have written an email to us earlier and asked what we are before you started off writing this about us. However, we are happy that you started a string on us and invited so much attention about the party. You will receive a formal clarification from our side on these issues in a short time. SUCI India

Minor party?

User:Suciindia has objected to the description of the party as a 'minor party'. I think that such an assertion should be looked at the backdrop of a comparison between major parties in Indian politics (BJP, Congress, CPI(M), BSP, etc.) and minor ones. However, the intention of my wording was to point that although SUCI is not a part of the political mainstream (it lacks MPs at the moment, has MLAs only in one state), it is highly active in a variety of states. --Soman 15:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well having MPs and MLAs if is the consideration then we must ask how many of the parties other than those mentioned by you can stand alone and win any election? For example CPI, RSP, Forward Block and so on. The real strength of a communist party is in how many cader full time professional organizers it has. And in that sense SUCI is far ahead of those and you must also take into account the amount of activity that we have through out India and the simple number of states and even districts that we are present in and able to undertake activities. So to compare it with the so called big parties of India is not fair to be accepted. This is why we say that to know us you need to work with us. Our count of strength is not in MPs and MLA but in the integration that we have an organization and the ability to function as a single organ throughout the country. So we are not accepting the fact that we are minor and as we already mentioned our trade union strength is more than an indication to this: SUCI India.

Joynagar

see [1]. --Soman 15:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is your point here? That there is mutual killing? Well then why don't you place it in the CPI(M) page? Our point is that we are not interested in any blood shed and that it is not our main agenda to embarge upon killing every one who criticizes us. And we are not interested to state that we are being killed by CPI (M). We restrain ourselves by stating that as every revolutionary party in the world is subjected to state terror we are as well. Whether it is CPI (M) government or x or y or z we are not bothered. For us they are all bulls tagged to the same cart and those who are favouring capitalism. We don't want to divert our attention or a reader's attention to such issues. For us it is all part of our struggle. SUCI India

@@ Line 95: / Line 95: @@
 Infact it is you who does not deserve any comments. We visited your page and found how much you are worth of replying. And thus sorry we dont entertain comments from you any more. SUCI India
+:::First of all, stop talking like a feudal lord, with your "we". Secondly, answer my points, if you can and stop commenting on matters (on my user page) that are none of your concern. Thirdly, get somebody who can write better English to edit this article (if you are implementing your party decision). You have made it poorer not only in content but also in language. [[User:Kuntan|<font color="#0000FF">'''K'''</font><font color="#000000">'''un'''</font><font color="#FF0000">'''tan'''</font>]] 18:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 == Formation of SUCI ==