SAHMAT has called the vandalism reprehensible, while an analyst was amazed that sensible folks were shedding tears over it
GN Bureau | March 6, 2018
There is a social media storm over Lenin’s statue that was pulled down in Tripura’s Belonia town, soon after the BJP-IPFT won a huge victory in the assembly polls and ended 25 years of CPI (M) rule.
Russian leader Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known as Lenin, died in 1924. He served as head of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1924. Under his administration, the country became a one-party communist state. He developed political theories known as Leninism.
Belonia town is located near the Bangladesh border and is home to about 20,000 people.
Tripura governor Tathagata Roy tweeted: “What one democratically elected government can do another democratically elected government can undo. And vice-versa.”
What one democratically elected government can do another democratically elected government can undo. And vice versa https://t.co/Og8S1wjrJs— Tathagata Roy (@tathagata2) March 5, 2018
Political analyst Kanchan Gupta tweeted:
Three questions for those outraging over Lenin's statue being pulled down by masses after the Communist regime's fall in #Tripura:— Kanchan Gupta (@KanchanGupta) March 6, 2018
1. Have you lived under Communist rule?
2. Have you any idea how Communists rule?
3. Do you know anybody who fled Communist rule?
Then shuddup. pic.twitter.com/sZYfvMhHMd
Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, who later came to be glorified as 'Lenin', had little time and lesser respect for law. His worshippers in India, including useful idiots in the Commentariat, are no better. That otherwise sensible folks are shedding tears over a Lenin statue is amazing.— Kanchan Gupta (@KanchanGupta) March 6, 2018
However, SAHMAT, which has promoted the secular and pluralist culture of the country, said in a statement that the vandalism against Lenin's statue “by power-drunk Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) workers is most reprehensible”. “
Apart from his own epic role, Lenin was a friend of India's national movement, had his own preferred line on national movements in colonial countries, which was a source of strength to the Indian national movement,” it added.
The statement was supported by intellectuals including historian Irfan Habib, professor R P Bahuguna, economist Prabhat Patnaik and historian Mushirul Hasan.