On one page of Wikipedia, it says: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) - organisation of which a member assassinated Mahatma Gandhi
Kolkata (capital of Communist ruled West Bengal) based Statesman made the same claim and later apologised when asked for proof in a court of law. http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?date=2003-10-11&usrsess=1&a...
Despite the nonsensical nature of the claim of Communists, Wikipedia seems to support those who espouse the Communist Party of India's views. You may ask me why I don't edit it. Yes, I did so and it gets reverted each time I do so and sometimes articles get locked in a state favoring the allegations of Marxists even though they may be factually inaccurate.
Why is it that Marxists are allowed to post their allegations as a legitimate POV but if there are allegations to the contrary, they are either not allowed or they have to be worded such that they are weak? Even facts against the Communists are watered down into allegations (as in the case of VR Krishna Iyer being a Marxist).
When there is something negative against Hindus/Indians, Wikipedia has it as an assertion (even if it is unproven), but if there is something positive, it is posted in terms which obfuscate the issue.
For the record, I have no sympathy for RSS and I am against a lot of their lunatic ideas, but I want FACTS to be represented. Opposing RSS doesn't mean I have to support the Communist Party of India.
Full text of the apology:
An apology
In an editorial entitled �Double Standard � Not Illegal but Stupid� (The Statesman, 29-30 May 2000), we had described the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh as �the organisation that killed Gandhi�. This was incorrect, and unsupported by both facts and the record. We express regrets for the publication and apologise unconditionally for the anguish and mental torture caused to members of the organisation. This apology follows in the case �Darshan Lal Jain vs CR Irani and others� in the court of Mr Atul Marya, Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Jagadhri (Haryana) in which the complainant was being represented by Mr Pardeep Garg, Advocate. ----
-libertarian
_______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com
At 12:25 PM 11/8/03 -0500, libertarian wrote:
On one page of Wikipedia, it says: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) - organisation of which a member assassinated Mahatma Gandhi
Kolkata (capital of Communist ruled West Bengal) based Statesman made the same claim and later apologised when asked for proof in a court of law. http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?date=2003-10-11&usrsess=1&a...
<snip>
Full text of the apology:
An apology
In an editorial entitled Double Standard Not Illegal but Stupid (The Statesman, 29-30 May 2000), we had described the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh as the organisation that killed Gandhi. This was incorrect, and unsupported by both facts and the record. We express regrets for the publication and apologise unconditionally for the anguish and mental torture caused to members of the organisation. This apology follows in the case Darshan Lal Jain vs CR Irani and others in the court of Mr Atul Marya, Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Jagadhri (Haryana) in which the complainant was being represented by Mr Pardeep Garg, Advocate.
In other words, they either lost a lawsuit or decided they couldn't afford to defend against it. No legal system is perfect, and I don't know anything about Indian libel laws, but at most what we have here is a statement that this newspaper could not convince a court that it was correct. Not that the opposite is correct.
Other than that, (a) this is probably still the wrong place for this discussion, and (b) you'll get much further offering factual evidence than calling your opponents communists. Even if they are communists, that doesn't mean they're wrong about these facts.
libertarian wrote:
On one page of Wikipedia, it says: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) - organisation of which a member assassinated Mahatma Gandhi
Kolkata (capital of Communist ruled West Bengal) based Statesman made the same claim and later apologised when asked for proof in a court of law. http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?date=2003-10-11&usrsess=1&a...
Full text of the apology:
An apology
In an editorial entitled Double Standard Not Illegal but Stupid (The Statesman, 29-30 May 2000), we had described the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh as the organisation that killed Gandhi. This was incorrect, and unsupported by both facts and the record. We express regrets for the publication and apologise unconditionally for the anguish and mental torture caused to members of the organisation. This apology follows in the case Darshan Lal Jain vs CR Irani and others in the court of Mr Atul Marya, Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Jagadhri (Haryana) in which the complainant was being represented by Mr Pardeep Garg, Advocate.
Sometimes a small variation in wording can make all the difference in meaning.
Thus
organisation of which a member assassinated Mahatma Gandhi
and
the organisation that killed Gandhi
do not say the same thing. The apology by "The Statesman" was for the later phrase which the original text of the apology put in quotation marks. The former puts the blame squarely on one individual who happened to be a member of the organization; the latter suggests a direct responsibility on the part of the organization. In the context of the United States one cannot validly discredit the legacy of Abraham Lincoln solely on the basis of his membership in the same party as George W. Bush.
I do not have adequate background in the matter to take a position about which is correct, but I can be sensitive to the wording change.
The gratuitous references to communists and Marxists do not help anyone to understand the complex and highly distressing events in Gujarat. The Communists of India are not a unified group. Communist has become a collective term for several splinter parties... so which of them is relevant here? When you mention "communist" in relation to Indian events to people who are totally unfamiliar with Indian politics, you will find yourself appealing to prejudices that have more to do with communism as it has developed in other countries.
The reference to communists is a straw man argument. It is based on the presumption that others will see anything associated with communists as necessarily bad. If the reader can be made to associate the views of one Gujarati faction with the communists, then it will imply the conclusion that anything associated with that faction is also bad. This is a very dishonest way of debating.
Those of us outside of India who take the trouble to somewhat inform ourselves about India, will feel cheated if we need to plough through endless streams of biased propaganda from either side. Let statements be evaluated on the basis of what is said rather than who said it. The senseless violence in Gujarat needs to be explained in terms of Gujarati events, and not by reference to a newspaper from West Bengal or a politician from Kerala.
Ec