I am once again compelled to write this rejoinder to clarify the mystery that surrounds socialism; which is forced down the throats of our Naga people. As we the Nagas have never sanctioned socialism in any form whatsoever. In the historical moment today, it is especially important for us to understand clearly why socialism acts like a band of scoundrels and to expose its villainous nature, so that we the Nagas as a nation can achieve lasting stability and peace, enter an era free of Socialism as soon as possible, and construct a future which we can call it ours, without the shortfall of Socialism and make Nagaland a national splendor.
We need to look at the fruits of socialism to understand it; we all have to make our decision as to which political system we should follow. My Brothers and Sisters, I implore you that, you do not take my words for granted, but search out the truth for yourself.
What ever you decide today, you and your children will have to live under it, so take your time and make the right decision.
Socialism and the followers of Socialism use many different names to win over simple trusting people. Names like spirit of socialism, Christian socialism, and Democratic socialism and Naga socialism. To understand these names we have to understand what each of these names means and socialism is defined as “the theory, principle, or scheme of social organization which places the means of production of wealth and the distribution of that wealth in the hands of the community.”
Socialism places everything in to the hands of the selected community. Would not this imply that those who have the wealth in their hands also have the power to go with it?
We also know that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Democratic or democracy is “a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people collectively, and is administered by them or by officers appointed by them, the common people, a state of society characterized by recognition of equality of rights and privileges for all people; political, social or legal equality;”
To use an American expression, Democracy is “By the people, for the people and of the people.”
Now we can see two different pictures emerging. If we were to put these two together, we are going to make the biggest political blunder which would leash untold wanton destruction on our beloved nation. Hence we can say that Democratic Socialism would become Communism as Democracy and Socialism are on the opposite end of the scale.
There are those who believe in Christian Socialism once again there is no such thing as Christian Socialism. Nor do we find this in the Bible, Christian belief and practice is totally different and alien from any form of socialism. This sounds like strange doctrines of demons. Best left alone to the demons, it is positively not for God fearing Nagas.
Naga socialism! What is Naga socialism? We the Nagas never in our history had socialism in any type and form. Socialism is a 20th century product.
So to simplify all this let us say that if we put the word Christian before another word would that make it Christian? For example if we say that Christian Hinduism, does this make Hinduism same as or equal to, or compatible with Christianity?
Of course we can look at other interpretations of democratic socialism. However what’s the point? As socialism keep changing its face to suit its nature. As we can see whatever is put before the word socialism, it still remains socialism. If this is the case then, whether it is democratic or otherwise still remains socialism.
It always pays to be safe when making a decision regarding any political party.
We have so much to choose from. If you want to learn about democratic society look around and you will find it. Also there can only be one interpretation of any political party. If there were ten interpretations would it not leave us totally confused and dysfunctional and would not that allow someone demented to take advantage of our confusion?
It is safe to stay with the proven interpretation which can be seen first hand rather than to rely on someone’s obscure interpretation.
Some would say that Christian socialism is compatible with the ethics of Christianity or that they follow the spirit of socialism or their belief is founded in Democratic socialism, any belief that changes it stance within weeks can not be claimed to be “founded”, or rooted; the drifting wind of socialism is nothing new. As we can see from the following examples.
“In a democratic nation, sovereignty should lie in the hands of the people, which is in line with the principles of heaven and earth. If a nation claims to be democratic and yet sovereignty does not rest with its people, that is definitely not on the right track and can only be regarded as a deviation, and this nation is not a democratic nation…how could democracy be possible without ending the Party rule and without a popular election? Return people’s rights to people!”
Does the above quotation sound like something from an article written by those who are anti socialist? Intent on slamming the socialist party? In fact, the statement comes from an article in Xinhua Daily, the official Chinese Communist Party (CCP) newspaper, on September 27, 1945.
When Jiang Zemin was asked by the renowned CBS correspondent Mike Wallace in 2000 as to why China had not conducted popular elections, Jiang responded, “The Chinese people are way too low in education.”
However, as early as February 25, 1939, the Socialist Party cried out in its Xinhua Daily: “They (the KMT) think that democratic politics in China are not to be realized today, but some years later. They hope that democratic politics should wait until the knowledge and education levels of the Chinese people reach those of bourgeois democratic countries in Europe and America… but only under the democratic system will it become easier to educate and train the people.”
Let us take a look closer to home. In the extract below, which is from an interview between S. Bhaumik, BBC correspondent for eastern India, with Mr. Muivah of NSCM-IM, 1996.
While the rebel rank and file learnt the rudiments of guerrilla warfare, the Chinese put Muivah and Thinoselie through an intensive course in “Ideology” and “People’s Warfare” at the College of Diplomacy, Beijing, where dozens of foreign revolutionary leaders underwent ideological orientation at that time.
The instructors at the elite college soon enough recognised which of the two Naga rebel chieftains was more receptive to “Marxism-Leninism and Mao Tse Tung Thought”. More than 20 years later at Oxford, Li Feiyu, a teacher at the College of Diplomacy recalled, “Thinoselie was a soldier. His interest in politics was very limited, while Muivah was very bright.”
Within a year, Thinoselie returned to fight the Indian army in the Naga Hills, where a separatist campaign has raged for more than 40 years now. But Muivah stayed on until he had thoroughly imbibed “Mao Tse Tung Thought”. He now leads the National Socialist Council of Nagaland, or NSCN, the strongest of the Naga rebel factions, while Thinoselie has remained with the nearly-defunct NNC. Speaking to this writer at his rebel base last year, Muivah said, “Mao and Chou En-lai were great leaders. Your Nehru was not. One must follow their revolutionary example.”
So why the sifting wind policy being employed by socialism? History speaks for itself.
If any party that claims to be founded on Democratic socialism and rooted in ethics of Christianity and claims that their country is for Christ, needs to be examined in depth. As once again we can only know them by their fruits. Democratic Party will obey the voice of the people always. For in our definition, and not ours only but of whole of democratic nations of the world, it’s by the people, for the people, of the people; this would mean that the common man has the center voice.
Therefore the Democratic Party and its people are responsible to the people who they claim to represent. As the leaders, they would have been chosen by fair open public election and not by selection by the few under closed meeting or where the meeting is limited to the chosen few. In no way the election is done under the barrel of the AK45.
One does not have to be a Christian to have some idea of what makes up the Christian ethics and we can ask any Muslim or even a Hindu, on how should the Christian behave or live. They will tell us how we should be living. So it would seem that it is easy to proclaim something in principle but without the intention of doing any thing about it.
Christian ethics is the way we as Christians live and behave towards our fellow Christians. I have in my fifty five years never ever read in the Bible where our Lord has told us to kill one another! Under the eyes of God we are brothers and sisters in Christ. Also we are the Children of God. So would a Father be pleased if one son kills other sons because they did not agree with each other? Since when has this become a part of Christian ethics? Also for example – Nagaland for Christ – this does not give any indication that Christ is for Nagaland. One can proclaim something like this. The World for Nagaland, does this mean the world at large knows Nagaland?
Mr. Muivah of NSCM-IM said, “Mao and Chou En-lai were great leaders. Your Nehru was not. One must follow their revolutionary example.”
Some might say that “democratic socialism grants individual freedom, upholding different kinds of rights does not exercise coercion in cultural and religious fields. The individual is free to lead his own way of life, entertain his own views, practice his own religion and resort to any vacation without any intervention from any sources and the state intervenes when it must to suppress anti-social activities.”
So this statement says that an individual can do as he wishes and the state only intervenes when it must to suppress anti-social activities. However we can not be sure if this is applicable to its own members or not. If it is so, I ask that the assailants of Dr. Wati of Civil hospital be handed over to the public at once as your own members have taken part in anti-social activities. This, we all know, would never happen as the Democratic socialist party must protect its own. Let me give you an example of socialist party who have to have thugs in its rank to survive.
Mao Zedong said, “The social scum and hoodlums have always been spurned by the society, but they are actually the bravest, the most thorough and firmest in the revolution in the rural areas.”
Mr. Muivah of NSCM-IM said, “Mao and Chou En-lai were great leaders. Your Nehru was not. One must follow their revolutionary example.”
The lumpen proletariat enhanced the violent nature of the CCP and established the early political power of the communist party in rural areas. The word “revolution” in Chinese literally means “taking lives,” which sounds horrific and disastrous to all good people. However, the party managed to imbue “revolution” with positive meaning. Similarly, in a debate over the term “lumpen proletariat” during the Cultural Revolution, the CCP felt that “lumpen” did not sound good, and so the CCP replaced it with “proletariat”. After all democratic socialist parties need someone to do their dirty work.
It is stated that democratic socialism “puts emphasis on social interests and co-operation instead of individual interests” and further it is stated that democratic socialism “grants individual freedom, upholding ‘different kinds of rights’.”
On one hand it is the social interests, which overrides the interests of the individual. However on the other hand we read that democratic socialism grants “individual freedom.” Do these two statements conflict with each other? Unless democratic socialism means that “we are all equal, however some are more equal than the rest.” Would this be the Democratic socialism taken out of George Orwell’s Animal Farm?
Mr. Muivah of NSCM-IM said, “One must follow their revolutionary example.” As for the freedom of expression let’s look at the Constitution of socialist China.
Article 35 of China’s Constitution stipulates that citizens of the People’s Republic of China have the freedoms of expression, publication, assembly, association, protest, and demonstration. The CCP is simply playing word games.
Under the SP’s rule, countless people have been deprived of their rights to belief, speech, publication, assembly and legal defense. The SP even ordered that the appeal of certain groups be considered illegal. On more than one occasion in 2004, some civilian groups applied to demonstrate in Beijing. Instead of granting approval, the government arrested the applicants.
In 1956, a group of Hungarian intellectuals formed the Petofi Circle, which held forums and debates critical of the Hungarian government. The group sparked a nationwide revolution in Hungary, which was crushed by Soviet soldiers. Mao Zedong took this “Hungarian Event” as a lesson. In 1957, Mao called upon the Chinese intellectuals and other people to “help the CCP rectify itself.” This movement, known as the “Hundred Flowers Movement” for short, followed the slogan of “letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend.” Mao’s purpose was to lure out the “anti-Party elements” among the people. In his letter to provincial Party chiefs in 1957, Mao Zedong spoke his intention of “luring the snakes out of their holes” by letting them air their views freely in the name of freedom of thought and rectifying the CCP.
Imagine that a licentious criminal broke into a home and raped a girl. At the trial, this criminal defends himself by arguing that he did not kill the victim; he only raped her. Because killing is worse than raping, he argues that he is innocent and should be released immediately. He says that people should also praise him for only raping but not killing.
This logic sounds ridiculous. However, the SP’s logic in defense of its Tiananmen Massacre on June 4th in 1989 is exactly the same as that of the criminal. The SP has argued that the “suppression of students” avoided a potential “internal disorder” in China. In order to prevent “internal disorder,” the suppression of students was thus justified.
“Raping or killing, which one is better”? For a criminal to ask a judge in court such a question indicates how shameless the criminal is. Similarly, in the issue of the Tiananmen Massacre, the Chinese Socialist party and its cohorts did not reflect on whether it was guilty of killing. Instead, they asked society which one is better—“Suppression of students or internal disorder that may lead to civil war?”
Mr. Muivah of NSCM-IM said, “Mao and Chou En-lai were great leaders. Your Nehru was not. One must follow their revolutionary example.”
My dear Naga brothers and sisters, I ask you; when a head of a party makes one statement and the members of the party make a different statement, what conclusion can one draw from that?
Either the head of the party is not telling the truth or the party members are not telling the truth. Who can we trust? Know this that any agreement made by a party with a foreign government will not be held in high regard with any other party in that land. They will call it something in the line of Shillong Accord. Any constitution that may be arrived at without the peoples consent will be invalid. For any party claiming to be democratic must seek the say of the people, by the means of election, which must be held in every district and villages, an open forum with the people at large and not with just the selected few in closed doors.
I ask that you don’t keep silent regarding our land. Let your voice be heard, let your feeling be felt; please do not say “I am the only voice and who will listen to me?” You are not alone there are many like you, however they also want to live in peace. So their voice remains silent and socialism wins. Your voice added to my voice makes us two. I pray to God that you will find the strength to stand with me to make the change for our children. What we leave for our children’s children is the only legacy that will last their lifetime. God Bless you my brothers and sisters.
John Sumi, 5th Mile
