In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In fact, Communists have suffered reverses from splits in their organization and rise of caste and communal politics. The single Communist party of India is now split in many parties including C.P.I., C.P.I.(M), C.P.I. (Marxist Leninist) C.P.I. (Maoist) and many other groups. Caste politics, communal politics and splits have weakened the Communists. They can gain strength by uniting all Communist groups in a single party and playing more active role in trade unions and peasant organizations. There are differences between these parties but after merger, they can resolve the differences on Leninist principle of democratic centralism which means that there are free and frank discussions but ultimately, opinion of majority becomes opinion of the entire party and there is no further room for dissent.
Moreover, the press, media, state power are ultimately controlled by capitalist class and the Communist have to work against odds. That is why no where, Communist have come to power through ballot. Just getting control of some state govts or municipalities or working as a partner in alliance makes no difference. I don't see the possibilities of Communists coming to power at the center in foreseeable future.

There is no way communists will come to power, as I have analyzed by seeing the trends of successful communist countries such as China, Myanmar and others where they are supporters of majority communities, that does not mean that they demean other communities, but here it is completely different.

There is no way communists will come to power, as I have analyzed by seeing the trends of successful communist countries such as China, Myanmar and others where they are supporters of majority communities, that does not mean that they demean other communities, but here it is completely different.

In India, majority community is divided in castes and regions. BJP could not get and may not get single party majority on this basis. Here caste equations work more. That is why regional parties got success in many places. Congress also like communists suffered from this trend. The caste and mandal politics gave rise to regional caste based parties. There is no likelihood of Congress, BJP and the left having dominant say. The future is of caste and region based parties.

There is no way communists will come to power, as I have analyzed by seeing the trends of successful communist countries such as China, Myanmar and others where they are supporters of majority communities, that does not mean that they demean other communities, but here it is completely different.

In India, majority community is divided in castes and regions. BJP could not get and may not get single party majority on this basis. Here caste equations work more. That is why regional parties got success in many places. Congress also like communists suffered from this trend. The caste and mandal politics gave rise to regional caste based parties. There is no likelihood of Congress, BJP and the left having dominant say. The future is of caste and region based parties.

I could only hope people will vote above cast and religion politics till then the fruits of democracy will be difficulty to be seen.

There is no way communists will come to power, as I have analyzed by seeing the trends of successful communist countries such as China, Myanmar and others where they are supporters of majority communities, that does not mean that they demean other communities, but here it is completely different.

In fact, Communists have nowhere come to power in parliamentary system. In Mynmar, they are not in power. In China, they came to power through armed revolution. Similar was the case in soviet Union. It is creditable that Indian Communists were first to come to power in parliamentary set up in some states. Now let us see what the system in China is. The communist Party of China has a unique position and there are no other parties that can oppose. Secondly, there are no direct elections to center and states. People vote only for local bodies. The members of local bodies elect representatives to provinces. Then provincial representatives elect members to center. Moreover, there are also members of army in their parliament. We cannot compare the Chinese Communists with Indian counterparts who have to work in competitive party system.

In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In fact, Communists have suffered reverses from splits in their organization and rise of caste and communal politics. The single Communist party of India is now split in many parties including C.P.I., C.P.I.(M), C.P.I. (Marxist Leninist) C.P.I. (Maoist) and many other groups. Caste politics, communal politics and splits have weakened the Communists. They can gain strength by uniting all Communist groups in a single party and playing more active role in trade unions and peasant organizations. There are differences between these parties but after merger, they can resolve the differences on Leninist principle of democratic centralism which means that there are free and frank discussions but ultimately, opinion of majority becomes opinion of the entire party and there is no further room for dissent.
Moreover, the press, media, state power are ultimately controlled by capitalist class and the Communist have to work against odds. That is why no where, Communist have come to power through ballot. Just getting control of some state govts or municipalities or working as a partner in alliance makes no difference. I don't see the possibilities of Communists coming to power at the center in foreseeable future.

But then bringing all communist parties together is perhaps as difficult as bringing BSP, SP and BJP on same platform. Besides the Lenin, Marx and Mao never had any relevancy in our country. They are best used by terrorist groups hidden in jungles mineral rich states example WB, Jharkhand, Orrisa, chattisgarh. No one ever gave it a serios thought why their activities are limited to jungles of these states where you find bauxite to iron ore and diamond to Uranium?

In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In fact, Communists have suffered reverses from splits in their organization and rise of caste and communal politics. The single Communist party of India is now split in many parties including C.P.I., C.P.I.(M), C.P.I. (Marxist Leninist) C.P.I. (Maoist) and many other groups. Caste politics, communal politics and splits have weakened the Communists. They can gain strength by uniting all Communist groups in a single party and playing more active role in trade unions and peasant organizations. There are differences between these parties but after merger, they can resolve the differences on Leninist principle of democratic centralism which means that there are free and frank discussions but ultimately, opinion of majority becomes opinion of the entire party and there is no further room for dissent.
Moreover, the press, media, state power are ultimately controlled by capitalist class and the Communist have to work against odds. That is why no where, Communist have come to power through ballot. Just getting control of some state govts or municipalities or working as a partner in alliance makes no difference. I don't see the possibilities of Communists coming to power at the center in foreseeable future.

But then bringing all communist parties together is perhaps as difficult as bringing BSP, SP and BJP on same platform. Besides the Lenin, Marx and Mao never had any relevancy in our country. They are best used by terrorist groups hidden in jungles mineral rich states example WB, Jharkhand, Orrisa, chattisgarh. No one ever gave it a serios thought why their activities are limited to jungles of these states where you find bauxite to iron ore and diamond to Uranium?

Some imp. questions raised in the previous post, as most of these naxalites activities are inside the iron rich belt of India, and why these naxalites are dealing there and inside jungle> Are they involved in mining activities and that too illegal mining activities.

In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In fact, Communists have suffered reverses from splits in their organization and rise of caste and communal politics. The single Communist party of India is now split in many parties including C.P.I., C.P.I.(M), C.P.I. (Marxist Leninist) C.P.I. (Maoist) and many other groups. Caste politics, communal politics and splits have weakened the Communists. They can gain strength by uniting all Communist groups in a single party and playing more active role in trade unions and peasant organizations. There are differences between these parties but after merger, they can resolve the differences on Leninist principle of democratic centralism which means that there are free and frank discussions but ultimately, opinion of majority becomes opinion of the entire party and there is no further room for dissent.
Moreover, the press, media, state power are ultimately controlled by capitalist class and the Communist have to work against odds. That is why no where, Communist have come to power through ballot. Just getting control of some state govts or municipalities or working as a partner in alliance makes no difference. I don't see the possibilities of Communists coming to power at the center in foreseeable future.

But then bringing all communist parties together is perhaps as difficult as bringing BSP, SP and BJP on same platform. Besides the Lenin, Marx and Mao never had any relevancy in our country. They are best used by terrorist groups hidden in jungles mineral rich states example WB, Jharkhand, Orrisa, chattisgarh. No one ever gave it a serios thought why their activities are limited to jungles of these states where you find bauxite to iron ore and diamond to Uranium?

Some imp. questions raised in the previous post, as most of these naxalites activities are inside the iron rich belt of India, and why these naxalites are dealing there and inside jungle> Are they involved in mining activities and that too illegal mining activities.

We may not agree with Maoist. But it needs not much thinking to understand that it is easier to indulge in illegal corrupt activity by joning the main stream politics rather than running anti establishment movement. Any one intending to promote his own interests would better join or cooperate with Congress, BJP or other ruling party or main opposition party and not join any anti govt. movement.

In my opinion, the success of communism as a political thought depends upon supporting the majority communities of that state, China, North Korea are example, where as in India, Communists are playing the so called secular politics which is based on minority vote bank, this space has been acquired by right wing parties and for this Communism will never rise in India.

What is important is whether you can achieve what you profess. I feel that in North Korea, there is virtually no Communist Party. There is total personality cult of Kim Ul sung and now his son after former's death. Now even the 'word' communism is not used by them. The right wing parties in India also have made excessive adjustments with their ideology to stay in power. The BJP forgets Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, abolition of separate status for kashmir, uniform personal law and so on to stay in power. The 'secular' parties also create vote banks and indulge in caste politics. Comparatively, Indian Communists are more principled. simply coming to power is not an issue. communists can personal power just by merging with Congress. In U.P., a few C.P.I. leaders joined Samajvadi Party (for example Mitra Sen yadav) and reached position of power.

BJP is not Marxist, and in 1999, it is not BJP, but NDA comes to power, BJP has never ever comes to power on their own in the center, and that is why they have not able to implement their core agendas. From all these, they have declared temple if it is agreed by all communities, and what is wrong with abolitions of separate status to J&K, it will make India's case stronger in world front as the same state such as other 30 states of India. With uniform civil code, all Indian irrespective of religion will have to abide by Indian constitutional laws again it is not bad as in India, the Hindus have Hindus marriage act, Muslim have Muslim personal law board and Parsis have similar boards, and all these makes a complicated situation and this is bad for a healthy and mature democracy (67 years of republic) of India. But I still feel Communists in India, which have most scholars and they are very good in orative are doing wrong politics, they should have seen the trends of successful Marxists countries such as China and others to learn the tricks of majority, other wise they could have come to power much earlier.

That is difference between C.P.I. (M) and BJP. CPI (M) gave only outside support and refused even Prime minister post just because they did not have sufficient number to force their agenda. Could BJP also not give outside support as they could not carry out their agenda? This shows that Left is more principled in India. The Left never sought ministerial berths whereas even parties of two or three members got ministerial jobs. The Indian communists also could have taken easy route as suggested and got majority but then they would be making so many compromises that they would be Communist in name only.

Also, we need to appreciate that Communists in Russia, China and elsewhere came to power only through armed revolution. Indian Communists were first to come to power through parliamentary elections in Kerala. Later they got power in West Bengal and Tripura also. They have not developed personality cult, dynastic politics, corrupt practices like major parties, Congress and BJP.

CPIM in its one session declared that it was their grave mistake of nor allowing Jwoti Basu in 1990s when VP singh become PM with outside support of BJP. They called it as their monumental mistakes. They lose the chance to grab the power.

CPI(M) never considered this a mistake. But Jyoti Basu considered this as a mistake . However he did not disobey the party line. It is said that Jyoti Basu as well as Har Kishan singh Surjit then General secretary favored joining govt. but the majority in central council and politburo decided against joining government. It is policy of CPI(M) that unless they get sufficient numbers to get dominant rrole, they will not join government. This appears correct policy. Had Jyoti Basu been the P.M., his fate would be same as that of Deve gauda and Inder Kumar Gujaral.

Does that mean that CPI (M) will never come to power on national level because they are limited to WB and Kerala only?

In fact, Communists have suffered reverses from splits in their organization and rise of caste and communal politics. The single Communist party of India is now split in many parties including C.P.I., C.P.I.(M), C.P.I. (Marxist Leninist) C.P.I. (Maoist) and many other groups. Caste politics, communal politics and splits have weakened the Communists. They can gain strength by uniting all Communist groups in a single party and playing more active role in trade unions and peasant organizations. There are differences between these parties but after merger, they can resolve the differences on Leninist principle of democratic centralism which means that there are free and frank discussions but ultimately, opinion of majority becomes opinion of the entire party and there is no further room for dissent.
Moreover, the press, media, state power are ultimately controlled by capitalist class and the Communist have to work against odds. That is why no where, Communist have come to power through ballot. Just getting control of some state govts or municipalities or working as a partner in alliance makes no difference. I don't see the possibilities of Communists coming to power at the center in foreseeable future.

But then bringing all communist parties together is perhaps as difficult as bringing BSP, SP and BJP on same platform. Besides the Lenin, Marx and Mao never had any relevancy in our country. They are best used by terrorist groups hidden in jungles mineral rich states example WB, Jharkhand, Orrisa, chattisgarh. No one ever gave it a serios thought why their activities are limited to jungles of these states where you find bauxite to iron ore and diamond to Uranium?

Some imp. questions raised in the previous post, as most of these naxalites activities are inside the iron rich belt of India, and why these naxalites are dealing there and inside jungle> Are they involved in mining activities and that too illegal mining activities.

We may not agree with Maoist. But it needs not much thinking to understand that it is easier to indulge in illegal corrupt activity by joning the main stream politics rather than running anti establishment movement. Any one intending to promote his own interests would better join or cooperate with Congress, BJP or other ruling party or main opposition party and not join any anti govt. movement.

No, I did not say that but I have always thought that forces trying to disestablish this country are using these movements in the name of fake fight against government. We can always find Chines made rifles with terrorists in thse areas. I did not want to mention it but I have met a few of these people who were indulged in smuggling of Kaththa, uranium and illegal trading of coal. I would not want to go in detail as that is not desired of me on public forums but that is the reality of these terrorists who are supported by local and big politicians.