• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Imperialism

Ajit Roy, e-mail

Mr Prakash Karat, a CPI(M) politburo member, seems to have been misled by appearance. Unable to divine the reality, he said on September 12, according to a newspaper report, to his audience in Kolkata, that the ``regrettable'' terror strikes in the US we re symptoms of the ``deeper phenomenon of the growing resistance against imperialism''. Whether Osama bin Laden is really responsible for the acts or not, there is no ground at all for doubting that the attacks were the handiwork of some terrorist forces who can generally be termed `Islamist fundamentalists'.

They are bitterly opposed to the US, but have no diplomatic relations with any kind of anti-imperialist. Indeed, they represent a kind of inverted imperialism and are striving to impose on people and countries a brand of barbaric domination. As a reputed dialectician, Mr Karat must be aware of the distinction between contrary and contradictory relations. US and Islamic fundamentalist praxis may be contrary, but never contradictory.

Mr Karat also says that these attacks are ``manifestations'' of the resistance growing out of the increasing isolation of the US imperialists. Here again, he fails to note that these attacks have given the US imperialists new opportunities to overcome th e increasing isolation and renew ties with sections of democratic public opinion in the US and abroad!