The cry of anti-communalism by leftists is a ploy of socialists to undermine the influence of religion. Our Muslims were never communal and do not deserve to be called communal. It is certain that in free Bangladesh the acts of terrorism began not by Islamists anti-liberation forces but leftists pro-liberation forces.Those who think that present terrorism has no simple explanation of being fomented by Muslim religious fanatics should be taken seriously. Whether or not the tension between denying democracy and forcing socialism on our people has anything to do has to be keenly examined both by us and internationally. We are in the midst of a deep conspiracy within and outside not easy to end by us alone.Democracy was fundamental to his struggle. Bangabandhu is the creation of the people as their leader. He often said with pride : the people love me and I love the people.He was the embodiment of a people’s leader and not a dogmatic leader produced by socialism to serve a dogma.If he was not for the people and their democratic rights then his lifelong assertion for democracy and his suffering for realisation of his people’s democratic rights have to be described most heartlessly as duplicitous.To call him revolutionary leader, it will also be necessary to deny that he was a devoted disciple of Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, the leader known as the living face of democracy practising constitutional poll politics. The influence of his dear Manik Bhai is also to be disowned.Those leaders and workers who, along with him, made sacrifices for their belief in democracy were to be found wrong.Bangabandhu saved Awami League as a leading democratic party in the face of a challenge by the left leaning elements within Awami League. He remained with Suhrawardy accepting his leadership to fight for democracy. Bangabandhu refused to join Moulana Bhashani for the influence of leftists over him. Awami League risked split in 1957 but did not surrender to revolutionary politics of the leftists.The leftist elements in Awami League formed NAP under the leadership of Moulana Bhashani. The leftists who deserted Awami league became lonely and isolated.Bangabandhu refused to listen to leftists not to take part in the election of 1970. He remained true to his faith in people power and his commitment to democracy by taking part in the election announced by President Gen Yahya Khan in 1970. The leftist groups tried hard to dissuade him from participating in the election in favour of revolutionary politics. Bangabandhu believed in the power of the people and not in the revolutionary politics of gun and international conspiracy. Leftist politics is never nationalist, its international connection is too obvious. He knew that by going for the election he would be able to stand out as the supreme leader of the people. He was sure as a democratic leader that Yahya Khan’s legal frame work would fall by the way side once the people’s verdict was pronounced.The man who believed in the power of people and in their support could not be called a revolutionary socialist. Bangabandhu wanted to be known as the people’s leader enjoying the people’s trust. He was not the leader of any dogma calling itself scientific or not.In socialism it is Marxism and not the people that the leaders serve to their convenience.Nowadays Marxism is propagated as scientific socialism for dictating the people and forcing the people to obey. The people are to be treated as animals living in a farm. The socialism will take care of the animals in the Orwellian farm.The socialists do not believe that the people must have some inalienable rights respected by the government. In modern days even the animals have some rights. But under the outdated socialism the people have no rights only obligation.To be blunt, socialism is a cruel formula of modern day slavery for the people by the power hungry few. It denies the people vote because they cannot be trusted in the affairs of the country. Socialism as a form of all-embracing authoritarianism is dying fast and denied in rest of the world.However, in politically unsettled countries like Bangladesh the leftists are still clinging to the ambition of capturing power by prevailing upon the weak and failed democratic leadership. The allurement they offer is to remain in power like monarchs without the need of free and fair election. The living example is Fidel Castro, the revolutionary leader of Cuba, though aged 90, do not feel the necessity of leading ordinary life outside the power.It cannot be denied that in free Bangladesh Bangabandhu being true to his democratic ideology gave one of the best democratic Constitutions in 1972 and went for election to prove his dedication to democratic ways.But soon leftist groups found an opportunity to drive Bangabandhu in the direction of socialism. The time was difficult for Bangabandhu to run the country and the leftist groups resorted to acts of terrorism and looting. They challenged his authority while assuring him of their cooperation if he had accepted the authoritarianism of their socialist politics. There would be no need of people’s election. The unpopularity of the government would be of no consideration as there would be no need to win public support. There would be no free press to write about the government’s failures.In this way the leftists became part of the elected government of Awami League under Bangabandhu in 1975. Bangabandhu justified the one-party BAKSAL government calling the process the second revolution. He could not term the change democratic.But Bangabandhu at heart cannot be the anti-people revolutionary leader the leftists wanted him to be. The leftists used him but did not trust him.But the democratic reality of our people and their faith as moderate Muslims will remain as steadfast as historically expected. The best way to fight extremism will be to allow our people the freedom to choose their politics.We do not want the Indonesia’s experience with communism to be repeated in Bangladesh. The tragedy is like the religious fanatics the socialists do not seek peaceful ways or tolerance of opponents. There will be clashes of violence with no end in sight.Our people need help for sanity to prevail. We must not delay a peaceful and democratic solution. Failing to do so will be to facilitate international terrorism to have their way for more terrorism and more mayhem. Most dangerous is the rending of our social fabric of unity and belief in government.
