ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846
-A A +A

Fascism, Democratic Rights and the State

Fascism, Democratic Rights and the State Rohini P Hensman THE debute between Sumanta Banerjee1 and K Balagopalraises important issues of principle and strategy, but the terms of the debate are so confused that we are left wondering what we are expeeted to do in a real concrete situation, and what principles should guide our actions. Sumanta Banerjec's call tor 'coercive measures', against the Sangh parivar and the withdrawal of 'democratic tolerance' from it leaves him open to Balagopal's interpretation that he is arguing lor the use of extra-legal repressive measures, though I mm my reading of the whole article. I understood him to be calling lor pressure to implement the normal laws (not TADA) against the Sangh parivar, instead of allowing a communaliscd executive and judiciary to appease and encourage them at every stage, If Balagopal's argument is that we cannol endorse the use of arbitrary detention, torture or extrajudicial killing against anyone, then he is surely correct: these practices degrade and dehumanise anyone who engages in them, and any society which endorses them. Indeed, I would add 'judicial killing' to the list; to give any person, group or institution the power of life and death over anyone else is to legitimise an inherently authoritarian and dictatorial relationship.

Subscribers please login to access full text of the article.

New 3 Month Subscription
to Digital Archives at

826for India

$50for overseas users

Get instant access to the complete EPW archives

Subscribe now

Comments

(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top