HinduPost is the voice of Hindus. Support us. Protect Dharma

Will you help us hit our goal?

HinduPost is the voice of Hindus. Support us. Protect Dharma
26.1 C
Monday, September 26, 2022

Sitaram Yechury’s double-speak on the “Hindu Pakistan” bogey

CPM’s General Secretary Sitaram Yechury recently made a statement in Rajya Sabha warning against Bharat becoming a “Hindu Pakistan”.

This is a classic example of political double-speak. Yechury, or for that matter the Communist Party of India, have never clarified why “Muslim Pakistan” is such a bad role model for Bharat to emulate.

For example, Communists have never acknowledged –

  • Islamist supremacism and hatred as the root cause of the jihadi terror employed against Bharat by Pakistan.
  • The institutionalized persecution of minorities such as Hindus, Sikhs and others within Pakistan.
  • The vice-like grip the Pakistani Army holds over that nation, and the way Pakistan’s Constitution and law has been gradually Islamized starting from Objectives Resolution passed in 1949.

On the contrary, Yechury has been a firm advocate of talks with Pakistan even in the face of repeated Pakistani terror attacks on civil and military targets. In fact, Yechury has been an apologist for Pakistan’s jihad against Bharat by blaming the “pro-US tilt” in Bharat’s foreign policy for attacks by “anti-US terror groups”.

Yechury also found nothing wrong with chants of “Pakistan Zindabad” on JNU campus last year. Even on Kashmir, Yechury and his party have never acknowledged that it was radical Islam which forced the Kashmiri Pandits out of their ancestral land.

From leading all-party delegations to molly-coddle and appease hardline Hurriyat Islamists like Geelani, to rebuking the Army Chief for his stern warning to stone pelters who routinely obstruct Army operations against terrorists – Yechury’s CPM party has made it quite clear that it finds nothing wrong with the Pakistani position on Kashmir.

In a nutshell, Yechury believes that Bharat’s “US-tilt” invites the wrath of “anti-US” terror groups based in Pakistan; he finds nothing objectionable in chants of ‘Pakistan zindabad’ while Pakistan continues to bleed us with a thousand cuts; he believes that Bharat’s “use of force” and “inability to find a political solution” are the real root cause of the Kashmir dispute – so will Sitaram Yechury kindly come clean on what exactly, if anything, he finds wrong with the Pakistani nation that he is warning Bharat against becoming a “Hindu Pakistan.”

History tells us that Indian communists and Muslim communalists have been allies, despite differing worldviews. Given the way history has been distorted by Marxist-Congress academics, many in Bharat do now know that the Communist Party of India supported Muslim League and its demand for creation of Pakistan.

This is what PC Joshi, one of the tallest leaders of the Communist Party of India wrote explaining the communist position in the 1940s:

“We were the first to see and admit a change in its character when the League accepted complete independence as its aim and began to rally the Muslim masses behind its banner. We held a series of discussions within our party and came to the conclusion in 1941-1942 that it had become an anti-imperialist organization expressing the freedom urge of the Muslim people that its demand for Pakistan was a demand for self determination and that for the freedom of India, an immediate joint front between the Congress and the League must be forged as the first step to break imperialist deadlock”

This 2004 paper ‘MUSLIMS AND INDIAN COMMUNISTS – Strange Allies?‘ shows how Communists and Islamists have joined hands in Bharat against their common enemy – the Hindu. Here are some facts & quotes from the above mentioned paper –

  • Communists are known for speaking in many voices if it suits their interest. Contrary to the Marxian dictum -‘religion is the opium of people’ their softness towards the religious obscurantism of the Muslims exposed their intellectual hypocrisy.. 
  • Both the Communists and the Muslim communalists are internationalists in character. The Communists attempt to ‘ape Russia and China’ for everything. It is said, if there is rain in Moscow or China, Indian Communists open their umbrellas. The Muslim Communalists on the other hand are emotionally attached to Perso-Arabic socio-culture with Saudi Arabia as their international centre
  • For Communists Indian nationalism is bourgeois nationalism but Russian/Chinese nationalism for them is proletarian nationalism.  “Once the Marxist bug bites a person, he dumps nationalism and cuts himself off from his civilisational heritage” (Dina Nath Mishra in Pioneer dated August 22, 2004.) For Muslim communalists Indian nationalism denotes religious nationalism of Hindus but Arab nationalism is Islamic nationalism for them. The Communists called the nationalist leaders of freedom movement as Hindu bourgeois whereas the Muslims called them Hindu leaders.
  • Theoretically both of them believe in social equality but in practice they purge their opponents once they are in political power. Both believe in social equality but consider their own concept on this issue perfect…Both claim themselves to be democratic in character but do not allow freedom of thought…Both of them justify use of violence to propagate their doctrine
  • The CPI leaders supported Pakistan movement by organising processions and demonstrations in its favour. “In mid forties E.M.S. Namboodaripad led processions of Muslims along with A.K.Gopalan (both of them were leaders of the CPI) shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ and ‘Mophlastan Zindabad’
  • Marxist historians, who maintained their hegemony in authoring the school textbooks during long period of Congress rule, masked the barbaric role of Muslim invaders in India and were reticent to portray their bigotry against the Hindus. They preferred to paint destruction of Hindu temples more for economic motivation than iconoclasm. Portraying the exclusivist and totalitarian ideology of communalist Muslims as ideology for social equality they feel proud in tarnishing the cultural tradition of this country.  It became a ritual for them to denounce Hindu nationalists as major cause behind any communal riot. They however, closed their eyes when there was a nation level war cry against Supreme Court verdict in Shahbano case
  • In post-colonial India too the aspiration of the Muslim communalists for distinct and sovereign political identity remained intact. Both the CPI and the CPIM supported such mindset of Muslim communalists by giving substantial share of political power to Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), the post-partition incarnation of AIML in coalition Government in Kerala. They also “worked together with IUML to create a new Muslim majority district in Malabar and named it Malapuram”
  • The secret of Marxist Government in West Bengal lies with the electoral support of the Muslims, who constitute about twentyfive percent of the electorate.  It recommended deletion of certain discussions about medieval period…. Communist regime in West Bengal and Tripura allowed infiltration of Muslims from Bangladesh.
  • The cozy relation of Communists with Muslim/Christians shows their preference to the authoritarian concept of religious exclusivism than the democratic concept of Hinduism that believes in the concept of religious inclusivism.

This alliance between Communists and Islamists is a global phenomenon, touted as a form of anti-imperialism. In many ways Communism can be considered the latest version of the Abrahamic doctrines, where a prophet (Marx/Mao) is worshipped as a cult figure and utopia is promised to adherents once the particular belief system is universally followed – hence the push to ‘convert’ non-believers by any means possible.

A few years back, Yechury had dwelt on the parallels between Christianity and Marxism, comparing Marxism to Liberation Theology, a pro-poor Christian movement born in Latin America. He quoted from the Gospel of Luke to underline how “Lord Jesus” too had come “to send off the crushed into liberty.” He had also found similarities between Communism and Islam – “The Quran states the achievement of jannat (paradise). What is jannat but a classless society?” Yechury had said.

Given past utterances & actions, it would appear that Yehcury and his fellow comrades’ real issue is with any trace of Hindu in Bharat – the “Hindu Pakistan” bogey is just an attempt to keep Hindu masses confused and prevent the rise of Hindu civilizational consciousness.

Did you like this article? We’re a non-profit. Make a donation and help pay for our journalism.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram &  YouTube. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook

Related Articles


  1. We need to expose these double faced and double tongued so called leaders like Yechurys, Ram of The Hindu and other sicularists. In some death, they see the colour of religion and in other they dont see. Their thoughts and actions are completely opposite. They need to be exposed , sooner the better for this country.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest Articles

Sign up to receive HinduPost content in your inbox
Select list(s):

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.