Conflict Management Styles And The Gender Project Management: Fill & Download for Free

Good connections with law enforcement and city officials: Without this, to start with, you will have a really hard time running a club anywhere in the world. I am not going to be politically correct here and my experience is that without having good connections, with city and law enforcement officials, your life as a club owner is going to be hell.Location: Now that you have secured that the law and the city won't be giving you any trouble, you need to find a location that:- Is still within city limits but away from the traditional club area: this will allow you to retain customers since they will go there and won't be tempted to leave and go to the club next door.- Has a known architect behind the project- Allows at least for 2 different areas (bar and dance floor)- Has lots of parking space or allows you to build your own (extra profit)- Has a interior design that is appealing (Bonus points if you can get a well known local interior designer to do it for you since that means free press)Staff: Get a good gender mixed team. They have to be nice while being distant and fast.- Get a well known barman/barwoman to be the bar manager. This will attract clients and is one less thing you will have to worry about: instead of you managing 20 people, you will be managing one.- Get a good security team that is discreet but effective.Sound System and Light/Video System: Don't spare any money on this.- Get a good sound engineer to make the acoustic studies for the main dance floor and follow the recommendations.- Make a contract with a supplier that will allow you to have spare equipment for free - against a monthly retainer - if anything gets broken (and it gets, believe me).- Get at least two mixing desks: One for the resident DJs to mix with and another one for guest DJs. Today's standard for international DJs is the Allen&Heath XONE-92 or the XONE-3D.- Make sure that you have your stage prepared for laptops to be plugged in along with midi controllers and external soundcards. If you have everything in place and there is place for everything the DJs will appreciate it and spread the word.Door: Probably the most important part of a Club.- Get someone that knows everyone who is someone in the night scene to be at the door, guarded by two bouncers. The person at door should also have a photographic memory and be abstemious.[1]- The more difficult a door is, the more people want to go there: this is the rule of thumb.- Charge at the door whenever you can but don't over price it.DJs/Live Acts: Get a good team of 3 resident DJs.- Make sure to work with an agency that allows you to have at least one international DJ/Live Act twice a month. The best day to do this is on Thursdays since it is considered a slow night but people will go out to see someone that aren't able to see every day (this doesn't apply to Berlin or Barcelona).VJs: They are talented, creative and will do much for the whole environment of your club. Get them proper conditions to work and try to get some to be your resident VJs.Local DJ/VJ Collectives: Establish contact with local collectives of DJs/Live Acts so that they can organize their own parties at your club. This will guarantee you different people coming to your venue, different music styles and it will also guarantee you extra revenue since you are not paying for DJs on that night and the collectives will only be getting a % of the door.The A-Crowd: Remember the interior designer and the architect? And remember the person at the door? This will be your main source to capture the A-Crowd. Be prepared to give lots of free drinks away. It doesn't really matter, with the overhead you have on drinks (around 400% in a beer).Public Relations: This is the person that works when the club is closed and will find business opportunities that go beyond the basic club night, like renting the club for a birthday party or afternoon drinks for companies (if your space has some kind of open space for example).Technology: Paying cards, sensors, security cameras- The last thing you want is to have people paying directly to the staff. Get someone that you can trust to be at the check out counter and implement a magnetic card system that saves all expenses.- Sensors have been introduced recently in some clubs - along with RFIDs - to track stocks. Depending on the country you live in you will know exactly how much drinks one bottle will serve and what return you will get on it. By implementing this system you will know that the staff is not giving away drinks for free to their buddies and that they are pouring the right amounts of booze.- Security Cameras: Depending on the legislation this is a great tool to stop conflicts before they erupt into full scale violence, something that you want to avoid.Drugs: Be neutral. They are a reality and people will go out of your club never to return on that night just to get them. If you can make an agreement with a local dealer that you trust - quality matters - and give him the exclusive to your club. Have the security team and your contacts at law enforcement deal with the competition. If you make a deal you will probably get a cut of the business but don't declare it to the IRS.[1] Funny fact: Some years ago in Lisbon a very drunk Nick Cave was stopped at the door by a very drunk door man that told Nick Cave «If you are Nick Cave I am Santa Claus». The fact was that it was really Nick Cave that had received an undisclosed amount of money to appear at that same club.Nick Cave spend the rest of his night at another club - drawing a lot of people to it - and the Club owner that had payed Nick Cave to show up almost had an heart attack.

I’ll take a crack at India, and this will be the longest answer I’ve ever written and most effort I’ve ever put into an answer.The year is 1855. A visitor arrives at the port of Madras, with scant belongings but a large briefcase. Seemingly mediocre, no one particularly notices him as he makes his way along the streets of Madras, bustling with activity near the port. He holds on tight to his briefcase as he walks past hustling natives and columns of Redcoat soldiers. He continues walking at a brisk pace, with none of the British soldiers lounging around the area questioning or noticing him, too busy talking about the war raging on in Crimea with the Russians, and the successful landings in Kerch against the Russians. He makes his way to a poor man attending to his horse-cart, slips out a few coins to the cart-driver, and tells him to make way for Hyderabad, an independent princely state situated northwest of Madras.After a while, this visitor found himself in the territory of the Nizam, in Hyderabad. He found a small inn, where he paid to rent a small room for the next two weeks. Once granted permission, he quickly opened up his briefcase in his room, and took out the components. First, he took out a letter from a man named Johann Nicolaus von Dreyse, which seemingly had hundreds of instructions written across it. Then, he took out the gun.It was the Nadalgewehr, the needle gun invented by his friend Johann von Dreyse. It operated with a peculiar manner at the time. Instead of being loaded from the muzzle, it was loaded from the breech, like guns would be decades later. As such, it had an incredibly high fire rate as compared to muskets, and Johann himself hand-made this gun for his friend, the Visitor, to ensure reliability. Through his contacts throughout Prussia, the Visitor had a sizeable stock of ammunition for this weapon stocked with his contacts throughout Hindostan already.The Visitor grabbed his long overcoat, hid the Nadalgewehr under it, and set out, wearing his top cap. Today, after all, was the day that Mir Faqunda Ali Khan, the Nizam of Hyderabad, would be touring the streets of his grand capital, according to the Visitor’s contacts in the city.Accompanied by his soldiers, the Nizam walked through the streets of Hyderabad. As the Nizam galloped on his horse, the visitor pulled back the bolt of his gun. He loaded a bullet into the gun, and pushed the bolt into place. As the Nizam’s horse came in range, the Visitor took a breath. He watched the Nizam carefully from the rooftop he was perched upon, hidden from view, and as soon as the gun settled, he pulled the trigger.The Nizam was almost instantly killed by a shot to the head. His men panicked, and his son around him jumped off the horse to avoid the same fate. Too late. The Visitor had loaded the gun once again within 5 seconds, and pulled the trigger again, shooting Mir Tahniyath Ali Khan in the neck, killing him. The host that was meant to protect the Nizam and his son scattered, confused as to where the bullets were coming from, while officer upon officer was shot down by the Visitor. When the Visitor decided it was too dangerous to keep shooting, he tucked the gun back in his coat, and ran from rooftop to rooftop, hidden from the crowds gathered down, and jumped down from a narrow alley onto the ground. He walked towards the office of one of his acquaintances, but was stopped on the way by one of the Nizam’s soldiers.“What’s your name?” enquired the soldier, as his comrade interrogated another man walking down the street.“My name is Hyder Jafar, Janab,” answered the Visitor.The soldier, nodding in approval, kept walking down the street. Meanwhile, the other man being interrogated also answered, telling another soldier his name. The man was named Raja. The Visitor heard the soldier call Raja a “damn low caste Hindoo”, and from his peripheral vision saw the soldier drag Raja into a dark alleyway, where he was undoubtably stabbed. The Visitor kept walking, knowing now was not the time to think about this. He walked to his acquaintance’s home, and handed him a letter. Right away, his acquaintance ordered his workers to make 200 copies of the letter, which was to be plastered all around the city, and they were to shout the message of the letter to people passing by. Once the Visitor saw the copies made, he watched the messengers flock around, plastering them around the city, and he handed a pouch of coins to his acquaintance. After shouting the message they were ordered to shout, the 6 employees started to run away from the Nizam’s forces, who had caught onto the miscreants. As they ran, with full knowledge of the content of those letters, towards the office, the Visitor took aim, and shot all of them down to prevent their capture.Days later, British forces invaded Hyderabad, tipped off by an anonymous source months before that there would be an opportunity for expanding their domains into Hyderabad. As they walked into the city, shooting the Nizam’s forces and civilians by accident, they started to see innocent civilians get gunned down from somewhere they couldn’t see.Once the occupation was complete, at the cost of thousands of death civilians, the soldiers began to notice posters plastered around the city, blaming the British for assassinating the Nizam because they wished to invade Hyderabad, and warned of the murder of civilians if the British invaded.The visitor was now in the Punjab. It had been months since the Hyderabad War, and tensions were running high across India. Armed with multiple Dreyse Needle Guns, the Visitor, who now used the name Fauja Singh, stormed the sacred Sikh gurdwaras alongside his Akali contacts.One by one, the corrupt Udasi Mahants who were the stewards of the Gurudwaras were driven out and executed for the heinous crimes they had committed by abusing their power against women and the faith, and replaced with Akalis, with the support of bribed British officials. The entire power core of the Sikh faith had shifted from the non-Sikh Udasis to the orthodox Akali Order, who were now very close with Fauja Singh, whom they regarded almost as their leader, having led the battles from the front lines.Over the next year, the Visitor travelled across the country, making connections with many dissidents across the nation. Several prominent British officials began to go missing or were found dead.In March of 1857, the wave of dissent began to rage across India. Almost every week, a high-ranking official or native Prince was assassinated. Security had been ramped up in the cities of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, with more and more troops arriving. With more officers than soldiers dying, the East India Company troops were finding that their units were increasingly lacking leaders, and their officers began to cut down on patrols throughout cities due to fears of ambushes. The tight streets of Lucknow had become a death trap for British forces; many times, patrols of 10 troops marching through the alleys would be cut off on both ends by 2 or 3 men, and mercilessly gunned down, with at least half of the unit being killed in the fury of gunfire.In April of 1857, prominent leaders across India travelled, in secret, to Delhi, where they reportedly met in a small tavern near the heart of the town.In May of 1857, the War of Independence began, fuelled by hatred of the British occupiers. On May 10, 1857, the garrisons in Meerut, Cawnpore, Pune, Lucknow, Agra, and Lahore revolted, with the native Sepoys overpowering their officers. Expecting the Sepoys to kill them, the British soldiers and officers were surprised when they were simply tied up on the orders of the Sepoys who seemed to be the leaders, and transported secretly through the forests in the discreet cover of night to the headquarters of the Revolution.Within a week, all across India, the natives were rebelling. Sepoys seldom shot the British, and simply took them hostage. Traffic around the city of Delhi was increasing, which raised alarm bells for the British soldiers in the area. Their fears were confirmed when Bahadur Shah Zafar was proclaimed the Emperor of India by the rebels.The people of Hyderabad, having quelled their hatred against the marauding forces of the British who stormed their city just like the posters said they would, fought off the few soldiers in the area, mainly armed with farm equipment and a few carrying outdated muskets.The East India Company was flabbergasted by the planning of the entire rebellion. It seemed as if everything was coordinated, and the entire garrison system across India began to fall apart. The British appealed for help to the Gurkhas and Sikhs. The Gurkhas came to their aid, marching upon the cities of Awadh, where the idea of Indian nationalism first sprouted during the War. However, the British were shocked by the reaction of the Sikhs, who they expected to support them. All across Punjab, the Akalis were sending messages straight from the Durbar Sahib in Amritsar to all the cities of Punjab, which urged the Sikhs to fight against British. From Lahore, Akalis helped transport the Fatwas of the Muslim clergy all across Punjab, urging Muslims to take up arms against the British. The Hindus too followed suit, fighting for the independence of Hindostan.Within weeks of the outbreak of the rebellion, the garrisons in Bengal were completely overrun by rebels. Calcutta soon fell as well, with thousands of Sepoys rushing into the city through a secret attack, bolstered by the people of Calcutta. The few British soldiers who survived later reported that at the vanguard of the attacks was a very tall man, well over six feet, who mowed down the Redcoats with his seemingly Prussian gun. One British artist who was captured by the forces and was apparently interrogated by this mysterious leader himself before being released by the magnanimous leader drew his experience sitting in front of the leader as such:He was described as wearing armour while leading his men, apparently to instill a sense of power in them. He wielded a scimitar, and was taken by the British to be a Sikh. When questioned about his age, the artist said that this man seemed to be in his early 20s.By this time, most of Northern India was already under the control of the revolutionaries. Such was the rough situation in India by that time:While fragmented EIC controlled areas existed inside the Revolutionary States, the massive offensive into Calcutta cut off their reinforcements and supply, and they slowly either starved or surrendered, having heard stories of how prisoners were not killed by Sepoys usually. Thousands of these prisoners joined their compatriots in Delhi’s jails, who had been rotting there since the start of the conflict.By now, a lull had been reached in the fighting. Very few troops had been sent to India from Britain, since the coordination amongst the rebels was not expected. Pune, and thus a large swathe of land in Bombay Presidency had been recaptured, and troops were being offloaded out onto Madras Presidency in the South and the Sindh in West India.On March 19, 1858, one of the deathblows to the British hold over the subcontinent was dealt. Afghan forces invaded with all their might the North West Frontier, linking up with Punjab, where they were greeted by Punjabi revolutionaries, many of whom were the same Sikh Empire soldiers whom the Afghans had brutally fought a mere decade back. Oh well, decided the Punjabis and Afghans. Better to live in the present than the past, and make to most out of opportunities presented to them. With the few British troops in Balochistan rushing north to try to retake Peshawar, Iranian forces invaded Balochistan, leaving British forces stranded in the mountains between Iran and Hindostan. The now-starving forces decided to travel into the Multan region of Punjab, and all remaining 6000 forces surrendered, making their way to Delhi as prisoners. It was later reported to French diplomats by some Iranian servants to the Qajar Emperor that they had seen turbaned man clad in a lush navy blue tunic talking to the Emperor of Iran and with the Emir of Afghanistan.With a mass mobilization of forces, the revolution also reached the Dacca Area in East Bengal, and was soon overrun by mid-1858, with rebels in South Burma simultaneously declaring independence from the British. The mountain states, cut off from supplies, were also abandoned by the forces of the East India Company, who made their way through Burma, perishing in the jungles.However, the British hold in South India was still strong. With the war dragging on so long, Britain had started sending regular troops. Every week, a convoy carrying a thousand British soldiers arrived in Ceylon, Madras, Calicut, and Surat. Knowing that this fragmented rebellion cannot withstand a united push by the British, and knowing all about the Opium Wars, the Visitor decided that it was the perfect time to declare an independent state of India. Taking inspiration from the USA and France, the Visitor, in the city of Delhi in front of hundreds of the major revolutionary leaders and even regular soldiers and civilians, penned the Delhi Manifesto of independence in English, with multiple scribes copying down the Manifesto in their own languages.We the People of Hindostan hereby do declare the founding of the United Republic of India under the following maxims:All people are created equal at birth, and none shall be superior to another on the basis of caste, creed, gender, or occupation; slavery and bondage shall be abolished.All people must have the freedom to speak as they wish, to worship whomever they wish, and assemble peacefully shall they wish.There shall be no more aristocratic tyranny, and a Republic shall be formed for governing this nation, as elected by the electorate, and office shall be held by the electorate.No foreign nation shall have dominion over this sacred land.We shall consider all men and women innocent until proven guilty.With copies of the short Delhi Manifesto being sent all around the Revolutionary States in taverns by the few educated people that were alive at this time in front of the illiterate masses, a massive propaganda campaign was started to keep the fire of patriotism burning and prevent the factionisation of the movement. Translated copies of the works of Thomas Paine, John Locke, and the such were sent across both Revolutionary and British India, being read secretly in the latter at inns and in public places. People were being inspired by the French and American Revolutions. Support for the Manifesto was unabounding amongst the masses, but was reviled by the upper castes for its republican attitude. As a result, the Visitor caught on to a conspiracy to depose of him and restore aristocracy. It was then that the Visitor, whom all Indians admired for anonymously leading the rebellion, decided he needed to reveal himself to be able to get the masses to crush the coup attempt.Messages were sent in a flurry all around Revolutionary India, proclaiming Raisal Singh Ven as the new Commander of the Revolution, and the author of the Delhi Manifesto. With the support of the religious clergy around the nation, Commander Ven called upon the masses to rise up against the aristocrats who were bandwagoning upon the Revolutionary War. Within weeks, the aristocracy was nearly completely destroyed, with land reforms being initiated within its territory. More battles were fought in British-occupied land, with more rebellions inspired by the campaigns of Ven tipping the tide of the war. Now, by the summer of 1860, the situation in India was such:Peasant uprisings had given the revolutionaries the chances to sweep across British-held territory, and only Madras Presidency, Ceylon, Sindh, and part of Bombay presidency were left under British control. However, by now, European nations had grown increasingly concerned, and had started to take part in this conflict. The French had sent troops alongside the British to desperately hold onto the British Indian territory. There were around 18 000 Franco-British forces in Sindh-Bombay, around 40 000 Franco-British forces in Madras, and close to 20 000 Franco-British forces in Ceylon, for a grand total of 78 000 forces in the Indian Coalition, in addition to tens of thousands of native irregulars. Meanwhile, Raisal Ven had raised close to 220 000 forces, of whom half were patriotic militia and the rest were regulars. The Russian Empire and the Prussians had sent modern arms to India, and the elite forces of the Revolutionary Army were being outfitted with modern artillery and Dreyse Guns as well. He called upon his closest allies for a final offensive.The Maratha leader, Venu Darekar, was assigned 60 000 forces, raising the Sena-e-Bombay. The Bengali intellectual, Satendra Roy, was assigned 60 000 forces as well, raising the Sena-e-Bengal. Finally, Raisal Ven himself took control of 40 000 men from the Punjab, comprising one of the fiercest fighting units who still had experience from the Anglo-Sikh wars, forming the Fauj-e-Punjab.The Grand Coalition and the Sena-e-Hindostan squared off on the borders for a calm few months, until the beginning of the final offensive…On 12 December, 1860, the Fauj-e-Punjab invaded the Sindh-Bombay, utterly crashing through the forces of the Franco-British. 20 000 soldiers entered the Sindh first, driving on deep into the province towards Karachi. Thousands of soldiers from the Grand Coalition fought their hardest, but were overcome by the sheer strength and numbers of the Muslim soldiers of the Fauj-e-Punjab, who fought with intense religious and nationalist fervour. By 4 January, 1860, Raisal Ven was at the gates of Karachi with his remaining 8000 men, with 4000 enemy soldiers starving inside the city. Meanwhile, the other 10 000 predominantly Sikh soldiers, mainly veterans of the Anglo-Sikh Wars, invaded North Bombay a week later, once Raisal Ven arrived.The soldiers cut across the Rann of Kutch, towards Rajkot, whilst Venu Darekar sent a few thousand of his men towards Vadodara, surrounding the region of Surat. The Sikh soldiers had been trained according to French standards and had experiencing fighting against and with the British, and as such mercilessly advanced upon Junagadh, eventually reaching Somnath. The Kathiawar Peninsula, after an immense number of deaths, was finally taken, and revolutionaries in Surat overthrew the British garrison, and completed the takeover of Sindh-Bombay. Raisal Ven was said to have killed at least 200 men himself with his beloved Dreyse gun. Of the original 30 000 troops of the Fauj-e-Punjab, only 12 000 still remained alive, many of whom went south to join the other Armies.General Darekar of the Sena-e-Bombay invaded the western portion of Madras on 18 February.Not much resistence was encountered until Cochin/Kochi was reached. Over there, a predominately French force held out against the forces of Darekar, who was also being bombarded by French warships. At the opportune moment, Russian ships arrived, eager to avenge Crimea, and the French ships quickly picked up their comrade in Cochin and dashed away from the bellicose Russians. The Russian ships continued to support Darekar’s dash down Madras, and Travancore in the very south of the Presidency fell after a particularly bloody battle which saw the utter destruction of half of the Coalition forces. The other half fled for East Madras. Darekar and Raisal Ven prepared in the South, ready to invade the last remaining vestige of Europe on the subcontinent.With a newly raised host of reinforcements thanks to the efforts of religious leaders across India, who declared Holy Wars against the Coalition, Ven’s Grand Army swelled to number 150 000, compared to the 30 000 Coalition forces. They quickly all retreated into Madras to wait out for a month, anticipating the arrival of Franco-British forces numbering 50 000 very soon. Ven pounced at the opportunity. He ordered all his commanders to mass forces around Madras, and, to the shock of the Madras Defense, started bombarding the city with his secretly-acquired Prussian Artillery, which was gifted by Otto von Bismarck to the Revolutionaries. Over the next month, Franco-British forces decreased in number due to disease, starvation, and bombardment. Finally, on March 26, 1860, over a hundred thousand men, led by Ven himself, stormed Madras, fighting street to street. The large British fort still flew the Union Jack. He and his men walked across the street. He saw a Redcoat take aim at him, and quickly shot him with his revolver. Three French soldiers ran at him with their bayonets; Ven’s men shot two, and Ven clubbed the last one with his rifle and shot him too. Within an hour, the fort was captured, the last remaining Franco-British forces surrendered, and Ven, in front of countless artists and dignitaries, raised the new Indian flag upon the fortress:With close to 20 000 British men still rotting in the prisons of Delhi, many of whom were powerful men back in Britain, Raisal Ven met with British diplomats in Athens, where it was decided that the prisoners shall be swapped in return for Ceylon, 10 modern warships, and 50 000 modern Lee Enfield rifles. Within weeks, the Indian Republic was declared in Delhi in front of roaring masses, with elections being held across India. While flawed due to incomplete voter turnout, the result was near unanimous in favour of Raisal Ven as President, and Raisal Ven selected his former General, User-11207606550574183728, as his Vice-President. Soon enough, a fully American style political system was set up, except with a unicameral legislature. 4 Senators are selected per province, for a total of 40 Senators in the Grand Senate in Delhi, the new capital. Diplomats were sent to major European nations to establish relations, and an uneasy peace with Britain was reached, and a full alliance was made between France and India. Taking advantage of the patriotic fervour across India, Raisal Ven issued a corvee, starting multiple projects across the nation and encouraging free labour to improve the nation. Delhi, for the most part, was bulldozed, and wide streets were build with intricate and beautiful buildings built on the side, leading up to the centre of this new city, which was the Grand Senate, build to look like this:Telegraph lines were build all across the nation in addition to roads. Dozens of new railroads were build across the nation, with technical aid from Prussia. Thousands of schools were built in a nation with 2% literacy, with the biggest focus being on how to read. Equality was enforced by law, and it was a common sight to see soldiers bursting through doors armed with guns to prevent forced marriages. This was especially pronounced in the Punjab region, where Akalis, in the name of the Sikh faith, often enforced the Constitution of India, which was almost entirely based upon the US constitution. By 1870, India’s literacy had risen to 20% thanks to the forced education of nearly everyone. Railroads connected nearly every major city, and industrialization was taking place across the nation. Thanks to the good logistical network, the vast coal resources of Eastern India were transported to the Western parts, where steel was constantly being produced in massive factories. Land reforms had resulted in a more productive distribution of land, and a free-market oriented system had resulted in great prosperity. Raisal Ven made sure that the army was constantly modernized, and great relations were built with almost every European nation. Meanwhile, a very special relationship was cultivated with the USA, with the two becoming the closest of allies. Raisal Ven also cultivated a very good relationship with Meiji-era Japan, creating a relationship that would last for decades. By 1900, the Republic had matured, and was one of the largest economies in the world, held together by its Constitution, despite the still-present tribalism. The Iron Fist of the State had managed to stamp out most of the vestiges of the caste system, resulting in a united nation. Literacy was at 70% due to near universal education of the youth and the old dying out. The population seemingly stabilized at around 250 million due to the education of women, who were now even ahead of their counterparts in the West due to universal suffrage and the males of the generation being educated in a liberal fashion. Bombay and Calcutta were quickly catching up to cities such as New York in economic clout due to the sheer size of the nation. In 1905, after the Russian defeat in the Russo-Japanese War, Raisal Ven declared war on the Russian Empire, nearly annexing Central Asia, but letting the Russians keep it in return for governmental reform. In 1914, with the outbreak of war in Europe, India stayed neutral, selling immense amounts of arms and armament to both sides, earning enough to move up the production chain. Cities in the interior, like Lucknow, Lahore, Jullundur, and Patna, quickly became manufacturing hubs, pumping out airplanes and cars. With the declaration of the USSR, India helped the nation set up its industry, with Raisal Ven planning on becoming major creditor to the nation. By 1935, the skylines of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay were starting to look like New York. During World War One, Indian forces were sent en masse to China to defeat the Japanese, and a fortune was earned by selling war equipment. During the wars of decolonization, India helped fight British troops in East Africa and South East Asia under President Ven, setting up states very closely allied with India in the region, in addition to becoming very good allies of the US and China. By 1970, India was, thanks to its massive industry, practically a first world nation, and President Ven stepped down from power, letting the mature Republic continue to traditions.

I used to (not anymore though). And i believe several of the reasons why i used to support it are still valid and relevant today.Disclaimer: This answer is written from the perspective of a Pakistani Leftist. As such, some of my reasons or thinking may not translate for non-Pakistanis so i would request that an open mind be kept.Prologue: The role of Communists in preventing Partition massacres in Punjab during 1947 riotsWhen the subcontinent was partitioned in 1947, it descended into a grim cesspool of killing, rape, abductions and ethnic cleansing. Entire Muslim communities were wiped out in what would become the modern state of India and a similar fate befell many of the Hindu and Sikh communities that found themselves in the new state of Pakistan.While communal leaders and politicians either failed to control the violence or in some cases encouraged it, the Communists of the Subcontinent laid down their lives enmasse to protect religous communities in both India and Pakistan.The following is an Excerpt from “Punjab Peasant in the Freedom Struggle, Vol II” by ‘Master’ Hari Singh that appeared in “Politics, partition, and poetry” by Mahmood Awan on July 23, 2017 The News Sunday Magazine:"Where there were butchers all-over Punjabi streets, there were few people like Shaheed Gehal Singh and Shaheed Saeen Umardeen too. Comrade Gehal Singh was a communist leader from village Chhajjalvaddi in Amritsar district in the Punjab. When there was no elected Government in Punjab and Muslims and Sikhs were slaughtering each other, the Punjabi communists of Sikh, Hindu and Muslim backgrounds were actively involved in peace committees trying to save the lives of innocent people.Comrade Gehal Singh was one of them. As detailed in an interview by his family (Surakh Rekha, October 1983), instigated by some Sikh leaders of Akãl Sena (who were behind the butchering of many Muslims), Gehal Singh was abducted in a jeep one evening while cycling back home. He was tortured in Burj Phoola Singh and later his body was said to have been thrown in the burning furnace in the langgar community kitchen of the Golden Temple.Similarly, Comrade Umardeen of Lyallpur (now Faisalabad) was cut into pieces by Muslim mobs in August 1947 because he was protecting Sikhs from Muslim killers (Bikkar Singh Johal, Jagg Beeti Aap Beeti, Charcha; Sept 2003).There were many other comrades too on the forefront of this struggle against barbarism namely Abdul Aziz Kaasar, his younger brother Bashir Ahmad, Fazaldeen of Budhey Chak, Megh Singh and Ujagar Singh of Kot Dharam Chand, Amritsar, and many other unknown servants of humanity (Punjab Peasant in the Freedom Struggle, Vol II by ‘Master’ Hari Singh)."Source: Politics, partition, and poetryThere was never any Communalism or Hindu-Sikh-Muslim tug of war between the Communists in South Asia. When murderous mobs and lynchers gathered to kill people of the other faith, the Communists protected them all. Sikh and Hindu communists protected Muslim communities in India and Muslim communists protect Sikh and Hindu communities in Pakistan, even at the cost of their own lives.The fact that their commitment to Leftist ideals which rejected ethnic, caste, racial and religious divisions in favour of their common Leftist ideology was remarkable considering how high religious and political tensions were in 1947.When the Pakistani government cracked down on Communists in the country after (and before) the failed coup attempt by General Akbar Khan, it was Nehru, the PM of India who offered sanctuary to his fellow socialists fleeing from Pakistan. Several Communists and Leftists from Pakistan would find refuge in India when the US-aligned Pak governments cracked down on Leftists through out the country.Similarly, the Maoists in India would offer their own support, training and equipment to the short lived 1974 socialists insurrection in North Western Pakistan.Secularism, Redistribution of wealth and public services, population control, political representation for the oppressed, women’s rights and a dramatic re-engineering of society based on rational, scientific thinking were hallmarks of the communist movement, or it’s offshoot in Pakistan atleast.Pakistan has been defined immensely by the struggles of the Cold War and the political activities and ultimate demise of the Communist movement in Pakistan are what defined Pakistan in the modern day in it’s current form. This answer goes over certain aspects of Communism in Pakistan and are intended to enlighten audience as to what reasons i had to sympathize with Communism in my earlier years.MinoritiesThe following is a quote from Rita Manchanda’s brilliant book “States in conflict with their minorities”:“Between 1947 and 1971, some Hindus in Pakistan became part of the non-religous political movement, especially the Left which was political in nature. They were not in any leadership position except for Communist parties.”The communists and other Far-Left factions in Pakistan were probably one of the only, if not truly the only, political groups willing to accept Hindus, Christians, Sikhs or whatever as a leader over other Muslims as long as they proved their mettle on the basis of merit. Your faith, ethnicity and race didn’t matter. What mattered were your commitments to the communist ideology and what you bought to the table. They were largely free of identity politics and communal politics and were a truly secular political organization. Can anyone really imagine Pakistan having a Hindu head of state or a Christian in a position of real power today? The way the Communists in Pakistan empowered Hindus in East Pakistan to top party ranks?Even today, decimated as the Far Left is in Pakistan, the communists are at the forefront of fighting for minority rights on the ground. Rallies have been taken out in Pakistan to protest the forced abductions and conversions of Hindu girls in Sindh and Punjab by the communist party workers, alongside other Leftist allies, and pressure put on state authorities to act through grassroots political campaignsAnother highlight of on the issue of treatment for minorities were the various small scale socialist peasant, labor union and workers bodies who were strictly secular and fought for the rights of all, regardless of faith:The Anjuman Mazarain Punjab (Tenants’ Association of the Punjab) emerged after the military’s attempt to turn peasants from tenanted share-croppers to contracted workers on its farms in South Punjab. As it turned out, the farms were illegally held by the military, having been established by the British Indian Army and then passed to the Pakistan Army after Partition.A million-strong movement emerged to resist the army’s attempts. They took possession of the land and even refused the previous serf-like share-cropping arrangement the army had made with the tenants. The military reacted with extreme violence, but the movement has managed to maintain its control over the land. The association’s success represents a significant departure from the norm. It challenged the military in its stronghold of the Punjab and won, and women were in the forefront of the (often violent) resistance. In addition, around 40 per cent of tenanted farmers in the association are Christian: the movement abandoned the religious divide which is often used by the state to isolate and marginalize religious minorities.Source: The Pakistani Left is re-groupingWomen’s Rights and Gender EqualityThe role of the Far Left, Socialists and Communists across the world in female empowerment is undisputed. Women in the USSR were among the first in their nation’s generation to enjoy access to pre natal care, widespread education and literacy programs, employment opportunities and so on.It’s no secret that Communist ideology has always interpreted their political ideology to imply that the empowerment of women as equal partners and comrades in the class warfare struggle is a priority of any communist revolution. You can read long treatise on this subject by better writers than me. In a nutshell: The political forces and institutions that cut off the laborer from the product of his labor and deny them control over the means of production are the same forces that oppress women and make them subservient machines, relegated only towards the role of reproduction in order to maintain sustainable populations for the oppressor to rule over. Giving women control over their own bodies is an equal struggle for all communists who seek to return control of the means of production, material and wealth to the laborers and workers of the world.The presence of a somewhat strong and significant Leftist movement till the late 70s was strongly connected to the better state of affairs for women in the country, with a largely secular and cultural framework for them to exist in rather than our current religious conservative one.This all lasted till the dark 80s when the General Zia regime took power and implemented it’s Far Right, Islamist regime across the country. The regime decimated the Left in it’s entirety. Unions, Student wings, women’s rights groups, human rights groups, democrats and whatnot were imprisoned, exiled or dispersed and Leftist organizations were either wiped out or severely weakened.Lahore, Feb 12, 1983: Police brutality on the women’s demonstration against the ‘Law of Evidence’ catapulted the nascent women’s movement into the limelight. Photo: Rahat Ali DarThe Islamization policies went hand in hand with the Afghan Jihad policies that spawned conservative madrassahs across the nation, running on Saudi petro dollars and spewing out Jihadists for the war in Afghanistan.The Mujahideen were not a homogeneous group, but all of them had a strong dislike for the socialists and their largely progressive social agenda, which emphasized women’s right to education and employment, redistribution of wealth, and free and mandatory public education.Excerpt from Page 17, Islam After Communism: Religion and Politics in Central Asia By Adeeb Khalid.During this dark era, it was Marxist female leaders like Nighat Said Khan who participated in groups like the Women’s Action Forum that fought against religous legislation like whipping for adultery and 4 witnesses for rapes.My own understanding, based on Marxism, is that it is the sexual control of women and the control of women’s labour that is the seat of patriarchy. Women produce children but they also produce labour: outside the home and within where she fulfils multiple roles of wife and mother, teacher, cook, cleaner, washerwoman.Nighat Said Khan, Interview with Dawn Herald, March 8 2017The sole voice: Women's rights activist, Nighat Said KhanTogether with other socialists, they launched a secular, feminist and social progressive movement that fought against the oppressiveness of the Zia regime and challenged it’s patriarchal legislations.Her struggles have spanned across not only women’s issues in cities but also the problems facing peasent women in rural areas, LGBT rights and economic empowerment of the lower classes.Her pointed criticisms of some of the Marxist movement’s own shortcomings in Pakistan with regards to the Communist ideology’s struggle to empower women are also noteworthy.She notes how several of the Communist and Socialist leaders were often quite willing to support secular, mass public education and support for women’s rights but were often unwilling to share actual power with women. Several of the central political committees and positions of power within the Communist and Socialist groups were not given to women party workers and she describes most Leftist women as either being married to active male party members or quiet, observant and passive during party meetings like “extensions of a tea tray”.She also talks about a Pakistan before the Zia regime where she could go and teach classes on university in her T shirts and Jeans and also shared an apartment with 2 other male colleagues in Islamabad. When she was arrested on suspicions of political subversion, she was never slandered by authorities for any laxes in personal morality but was attacked on her anti-army and anti-state criticisms. This all changed during the Zia regime when the obsession with “Chadors” and “Purdahs” became mainstream. A conservatism slowly engrained itself across Pakistani society.There have always been women’s rights groups active in Pakistan. The Asia Women’s conference of 1931, women married to powerful Pakistani leaders like Ra’na Liaquat Ali Khan (PM LAK’s wife), The Democratic Women’s association, the All Pakistan Women’s Association during Ayub’s era.But the WAF of Marxist Nighat Said Khan was different in how it was composed of professional working women and with strong ties to peasant women, laborer women and cut across socio economic lines as compared to earlier movements that were lead by women from the aristocratic and upper class. The WAF was secular, it was all encompassing and it cut across class lines. There are still WAF chapters that utilize not just Urdu, English etc but even regional languages like Sindhi which emphasis a true Leftist bent. Their struggles during the 80s were a true light for the Feminist struggle and Nighat Said Khan’s leadership and role in that struggle as a communist and a Marxist remains untarnished throughout history.The sad retreat of Communism from Afghanistan and the destruction of most of the Left in Pakistan heralded the dark age of the 90s in Afghanistan and Pakistan when women saw massive reversals in their rights, status and access to education/employment as well as independence.Political representationThe confused garble of vaccilating strategies, half measures and incompetent leadership that defined the Communist struggle in South Asia before 1947 partition is best left for the history books now given its limited relevance to the modern state of Pakistan.Socialism did contribute signifcantly to the political and ideological philosophy of the freedom movement and several key members of Congress, the Muslim league and other indepdence factions were heavily influenced by Socialism. The role of Socialism in galvinating local forces to strive for independence from the Colonial powers will always have it’s laurels in history…should we choose to remmember them.In Pakistan, the Communists faced a grim future from beginning till present day. The ruling party of Muslim League was viewed as something of a party of Elites for most of its life although the struggle close to independence had broadened its scope to include several grass roots level leftists, socialists, the Red Maulanas of KPK and even communists within it’s ranks.The Communists in Pakistan had always viewed the political class leading the Muslim league with some skepticism. To be fair, their view of the ML as complete elitists was somewhat incorrect. Jinnah and others like him were mostly Secular Professionals from the middle, skilled class rather than land owning elites although they did have ties to the upper class. The Communists in Pakistan were hesitant to tie themselves politically to a party which was espousing capitalist beliefs, pursuing foreign policy alignement with the US and not closely following any socialist pattern at all.This was magnified after the Punjabi feudal land lord elite threw their support behind the Muslim league which was a major factor in the Muslim league winning the final elections before partition and sealing the partition of the sub continent.The changed the power composition of the Muslim league almost over night. A Party of secular Muslim nationalists with a significant base of Leftists and socialists among it’s ranks overnight changed into a conservative, Feudal, Right wing party.This would cause a fissure between the Communists, Secular, other Leftists/Socialists and the mainstream Muslim League overnight. It was made worse by Liaquat Ali Khan pandering to US demands and Punjabi feudal elites by cracking down on Leftists, Socialists and Communists within the country.As the Punjabi feudal elite began to dominate discourse over the party’s affairs and national legislation the Communists began to hatch their own plans to retake lost ground. Using the Leninist doctrine of Entryism, which promotes the infiltration of state institutions, labor unions, political parties and student wings by dedicated cadres of Communists, socialists like famous poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz linked up with Army Chief Akbar Khan through the Army Chief's wife (who had connections to the Communist Party) and a deal was struck. The Communist Party would work with the rest of the Left to bring legitimacy to an Akbar Khan government and in return the General would pull off pressure from the Leftists and release their imprisoned cadres. The General’s conversion was made easier by the fact that he was angry at Liaquat Ali Khan for suing too soon for peace during the 1947–48 war with India over Kashmir.The coup conspiracy failed however. And from then onward, the Communists and more far Left socialists had to go underground and remained there for a long time.The communists were also on the right side of history during the 1970 East Pakistan (now Bangladesh crises) issue where they allied themselves with the party of Sheikh Mujib and West Pakistani communists fought side by side with East Pakistani communists to bring political and economic rights to East Pakistan’s impoverished wing that contributed more export earnings than the west but had little share in its revenue, had more population but less political representation.The Pakistani communists also lent similar support to the Baloch people in seeking their rights from the center. This however was not for altruistic reasons. The Communist movement in Balochistan was heavily supported by the USSR and Afghan communists in hopes of creating a separate state for Balochistan that would enable warm water access for the Soviet fleet. The Marxists Baloch were also separatists who in conversations with East German communists and Swedish Leftists described the Pakistani state as a Punjabi-Pakhtun entity who were bent on suppressing the local Baloch. The use of ethnic language in Baloch communist ideology and their separatist desires caused problems with the rest of the Communist narrative in Pakistan. The Pakhtun communists were angered at the Baloch using ethnic slurs despite Northern Balochistan being Pashtun dominated. Similarly, non-Baloch communists questioned why there were supporting Baloch communists when Communist Party of Pakistan’s desire was to turn Pakistan into a fortress of communism, not break it apart with separatism. Other socialists and communists were willing to help Balochistan achieve more political representation and autonomy and fought alongside the Baloch even during the 60s and 70s so they saw the Baloch separatist desire as a betrayal of the blood they had shed together against the right wing, pro-establishment center.This highlights how there were so many fissures within the Communist movement in general as well. The Leninist Communists had supported both East Pakistan and Baluchistan and other provinces and smaller organizations in gaining more autonomy from the federal center. They had done so via electoral alliances, peasant and labor strikes, student activism and even insurgency. But they were unwilling to become anti-nationalists and support the break up of Pakistan as they weren’t traitors: They just wanted a Left oriented, Communist Pakistan in which the Baloch and East Pakistan would have their fair representation.This is actually one of the major bone of contentions among the Left Wing. It comprises all these different ethnicities, faiths and races under one banner and they often fight together for the rights of the minorities, the under represented and the oppressed. Within the Geo-political context of the Cold War, this sometimes meant certain movements turning separatist which posed state loyalists with the problem: How do we assist the minority when it means going against your own country? This problem was illustrated by the Communist Party of United India before 1947 and their confusion regarding the Muslim League and how to define their relation to it. On the one hand, they want to assist the minority with achieving their rights. On the other hand: Partition. The CPI later withdrew its support for the Muslim League and it’s call for partition only to split up itself as Partition became a reality.The Pakistani Maoists on the other hand were remarkably pro-establishment and supported the suppression of East Pakistan using the armed forces, which cut down the already splintered and weak Left Wing of the country.Besides the problems of provincial autonomy and so on, the Socialists also gave voice to peasant organizations, labor unions and people being displaced by industrial, commercial and government interests. Socialists and communists gave them a level of political clout they would have been hard pressed to achieve on their own.Secularism and criticisms of Islamic SocialismI’m going to be upfront of my stance here: I’m pretty critical of the whole idea of Islamic Socialism because it makes zero sense to me.Marxism has always considered organized religious institutions and theocratic power structures as part of the oppressive regime created by the bourgeois to maintain control over the means of production and the common worker. Religious bodies like the Church were seen as hand in hand with the ruling royal families, capitalists and military juntas who all represented the state of oppression. Religion being the element that kept the populace sedated and calm to enable their exploitation.A similar theme was in play in Pakistan as well:When General Ayub Khan’s coup transferred power from the civilian government to the military in 1958, it allowed the industrial elite in the country, now advised by the Harvard Advisory Group on International Development, to pursue an aggressive strategy of development throughout the 1960s. As part of this project, the Americans encouraged the Pakistani establishment to use Islam as a specific kind of ideology to enforce labor discipline and anticommunism. Modern industrialization was intended not to root out tradition but to manage protest, which were growing throughout the 1960s in response to both global political developments and aggressive domestic austerity.Excerpt from: The State of Islam: Culture and Cold War Politics in Pakistan, By Saadia ToorWithin the Pakistani context, this has often played out as an unholy nexus between the Establishment (made up of civil servants, bureaucrats, powerful generals), the religious clergy and capitalist businesses/feudal land lords. Only through the communist party establishing it’s firm control over all could a state based upon Marxist principles arise.Within Muslim countries, the concept of Islamic socialism has gained a major foothold as Islam internal egalatrian theology and commandments for welfare were seen to be largely compatible with Communism….minus the atheism.Islamic socialism attempts to sidestep the issue of atheism by either:1) Adopting secular state policy instead 2) Reinterpreting Communism within the confines of Islamic theological edicts.This presents an obvious problem: How do you reconcile the fact that Marxism rejected the role of religion as a whole in public life and state affairs with the fact that Muslim societies wanted to implement the socialist aspects of Communism in their own countries while maintaining their theocratic state insitutions, religous laws and so on.The obvious answer is: You can’t.Communism is communism. It means a total rejection of religion from every aspect of public and state life except in the privacy of your home. If you want to practise your faith, you dont join the Communist ruling party and you keep your faith at home.But Islam as a religion is defined as a way of life with public and private aspects, with it’s own legal codex and it’s own political philosophy. Even economic and social dictates are present within it. You can certainly pick and choose from socialism what fits within Islam…but it’s impossible for a state to achieve true communism while retaining religious legislation, religious bodies, theocratic organizations and public religious displays (and of course, membership of the communist party by religiously observant people).This is magnified by how religion is interwoven deeply into Pakistan’s DNA, a state that came into existence on the basis of religion. A Communist Pakistan almost becomes an oxymoron: If Communism as an ideology rejected religious teachings as a basis for rational decision making, then how could a state based upon religion come into being?In any case, Communism was a fiercely secular political ideology that opposed the intrusion of religion and religious people into the halls of power and denied them a role in state policy.What this permitted was a political elite to rise in developing nations that planned the economic, social, political and military policies of the state around rational, scientific principles and suppressed the religious and ethnic identities of it’s citizens in favor of a more common, unifying political identity.Make no mistake: The refusal of Islamic Socialists to enforce strict secularism in public life and the government means that they leave the door open for religious organization to conspire with foreign, imperialist powers to subvert the state and it’s socialist program. The history of the Islamic world is filled with religious maulvis and mullah’s colluding with imperialist powers to destroy Muslim nations by subverting Modernizing, Secular Progressive leaders:“Interestingly, forces like Al-Qaeda and numerous Islamic and militant outfits, which claim to benefit the Muslim world by revitalizing the revivalist ideology, have turned out to be the most beneficial elements for Western imperialist forces. Islamic parties in the Middle East and elsewhere have helped the Western forces wipe out secular Arab nationalists and anti-West Muslim progressive leaders who were rapidly anti-Israel and posed a great challenge to Western monopolies or, what are commonly referred to as, multinational companies.These progressive leaders had challenged Western imperialists and hurt their economic interests across the world. Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser startled the mighty imperialist forces by nationalizing the Suez Canal, Iran’s Mohammad Mosaddegh threw out the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and Sukarno in Indonesia put an end to the plundering of his country and vowed to use country’s vast natural resources for the benefit of the people. Even dictator Colonel Qaddafi dashed the hopes of Western companies of looting the natural resources of Libya and used oil wealth to improve literacy, the health system and the housing sector. Hafizul Asad and Saddam Hussain may have been tyrants but, at times, they also launched pro-people programmes and dared to challenge the blue-eyed boy of Western countries: Israel.Saddam’s Iraq housed the second highest number of graduates in the Arab world after Palestine. Although the country had a Shia-Sunni rift, it was never as sharp and brutal as it is today. The dictator had put in place a highly subsidised social welfare system that was, to some extent, a source of relief and succour to those at the bottom layer of the social stratification. Hafizul Asad of Syria extended all forms of support to the oppressed Palestinians in addition to introducing a social welfare system that helped the marginalised sections of society. Najibullah and other progressive leaders in Afghanistan abolished child marriage and the interest system that devastated the life of peasants and ended the monopoly of five percent of landlords and tribal chiefs who held 85 percent of arable land in the country.And what happened to these Muslim leaders (who were definitely anti-West and vehemently opposed to Western imperialism)? The Ikhwanul Muslimeen colluded with the Western powers to weaken Gamal Abdel Nasser. Ayatollah Kashani hatched conspiracies that culminated in the decline of Iran’s prime minister Mosaddegh and helped Western companies reclaim their monopoly over the country’s oil wealth. The Masyumi Party in Indonesia threw its weight behind dictator-general Suharto who toppled Sukarno’s government, opening the doors of the most populous Muslim country for Western powers that ruthlessly exploited its natural resources. Qaddafi was handed over to religious fanatics who killed him in a way that shamed even his critics and political opponents.These progressive and nationalist leaders were not angels. They were not immune to mistakes and blunders. However, they at least believed in a modern definition of citizenship that advocates equal rights for all residents of a state irrespective of their religion, sect and creed. They saw modern education as a tool that could help Muslim states get rid of Western domination. They all held a view – with varying degrees – that the natural resources of a country should be in the hands of its people and be spent on their welfare. They all feared that allowing religion to meddle with the affairs of the state will fragment societies.”Source: Obscurantism in the Muslim worldThis is my main point here: The communist philosophy always understood that theocratic elements have always been a part of the systems of oppression alongside Capitalists, their police and soldiers and their mass propaganda means. Religion has always been used by capitalists as a substitute for the public services that all men are entitled to. They want to replace public education and public health with public faith alone.The long history of Islamists colluding with foreign powers to destroy secular nationalist leaders who attempted to gain control of the nation’s local resources away from exploitative foreign corporations and foreign powers is long and proven. And thus, Islamic socialism will never succeed as it refused to embrace the strict secularism that is needed to fight back against one of the main cronies of imperialist, exploitative powers: The regressive Mullah.No discussion of Islamic socialism can be complete without mentioning Bhutto ofcourse, the self proclaimed pinnacle of Islamic socialism. His use of Islamic socialism as a political ideology demonstrates how fraught with danger it is.It can be argued that the first steps into the dark period of religious bigotry and Islamization of the country began not with General Zia but with Prime Minister Bhutto. The first declarations of Ahmedis as Non-Muslims into national legislation, the first laws banning alcohol and the pandering to religious lobbies.Similarly, his nationalization policies to take over most of Pakistan’s industries were intended more to destroy the power of the 22 Industrial families of Pakistan that had amassed immense power and wealth under the Ayub Khan economic liberalization regime and had begun to threaten the land owning feudal class (of whom Bhutto was a part) rather than any desire to implement Command Economy style policies. With the result that the socialists seem to have been quite selective in their targeting of capitalist entities: Targeting industrialists but leaving feudal landlords and their oppression.Bhutto’s overtures to the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) to lure petro dollars into Pakistan paid off but those petro dollars came with the immense price of increasing conservatism and religious bigotry in Pakistan as the secular fabric of the state eroded under funding for madrassahs and importation of Gulf Wahhabism into Pakistan.This was perhaps Pakistan’s only serious phase of state experimentation with Socialist, Command economy policies and it was marred with a growing influence of religion on state affairs and poor economic management.Bhutto and his PPP political party had their base in Sindh originally so if we do a province wise comparison, it would seem that Sindh and the Khyber Pakhtunwa province always drifted more towards the Left historically than other provinces (Balochistan being a mixed bag).Khyber Pakhtunwa’s Red Maulanas and their Socialist tendencies have influenced the concept of a welfare state into KPK politics for a long time. It could be argued that parties with their base in that province have a common denominator of having welfare-based, egalitarian policies even today. They also have several grassroots based strands of socialism whose influence over mainstream parties is undeniable. For example the Ecosocialists of KPK and their emphasis on the link between ecology and socialist policy heavily influence the Tree Plantation programs of the PTI party of KPK. Similarly, the PTI party’s emphasis on public services and welfare programs are also influenced by KPK’s long political culture of socialism compared to the PML-N’s big business, pro-development approach favored in Punjab. Even the religious parties of KPK somewhat follow this line. The early Red Maulanas of the province were an interesting blend of the secular socialism being mixed with Islamic religion in their own bran of Islamic socialism. And so the religious parties of KPK too, generally tend to follow the socialist, welfare and egalitarian political platforms similar to rest of the KPK political stream.EconomicsThe communists also railed against the economic injustices of that time. A lot of historians look back to Ayub’s period as some kind of golden age for Pakistan’s economy. Leaving aside the arguments that point to how much of the economic growth was based off of western aid, our problems with East Pakistan were magnified under his tenure and our democracy that held our country together gutted. The Ayub Khan tenure was also marred by horrific conditions for the common workers and laborers and our entire economy ended up in the hands of just 22 families who owned the bulk of our business and industrial enterprises.Similar criticisms exist of the Bhutto era who nationalized industries more to break the power of industrial families than any adherence to socialist principles. He considered the industrial families as threats to his rule which is why he left the Feudal land owner families (of whom he was a part) largely intact.We can see the current malaise plaguing our country with an extreme rich poor gap, a ruling elite comprising both feudal land lords and capitalist business owners, large scale corruption and politicized economics. Development projects are used more as trading for favors, vote bank politics and to keep opponents and constituents satisfied rather than be a part of a greater long term economic plan that Communist nations are supposed to follow through 5 and 10 year plans, institutionalized economic policies and rational, scientific economic decision making.Because of this short term thinking among our transaction based, rent seeking capitalist ruling class, i can’t help but wonder what will become of our country once we begin to face long term problems like over population, water crises, drought and greater debt problems.We also need a frank discussion of how our leaders have divested themselves of the responsibility of providing basic public services like health and education to our masses. Which has meant that our youth bulge will soon mostly be comprised of uneducated, unskilled, unhealthy and unemployable workers. The consequences of that on our state stability is something to ponder. Citizens cannot be left at the mercy of private sector, free market forces which are geared only towards maximizing profit. The government has to step in to ensure that adequate policy measures are undertaken that result in an educated, healthy, employed and satisfied populace. Our failure to implement this under a communist style leadership has meant large masses of unemployed, uneducated youth who will instead be a burden and threat to the state rather than an asset.It’s also imperative that we do not forget our workers, peasants and lower classes in the advance towards economic growth. When the British ruled the subcontinent, they perpetrated the most horrific kind of economic and physical violence on the local workers. They destroyed the cotton hand loom industry by cutting the thumbs off of local workers, they stole land violently from tribal communities and enslaved Indians for shipping to other colonies or forced labor on their factories and tea plantations.If we perpetuate the same kind of violence upon our local peasants, villagers and laborers, then how different are we from the British? How exactly did independence mean anything for the common man if instead of the British, our own local actors perpetuate the same extortion of labor?A few noteworthy examples:#1But it is the Left’s work with livelihood struggles that is most significant. ‘We decided that it was important to intervene in worker and peasant movements,’ says Farooq Tariq of the Labour Party of Pakistan. Livelihood struggles organize workers and peasants to fight for their rights and save their land and environment, and provide them with political clout.Sindho Bachao Taralla (Save the Indus), for example, brings together various groups to resist the internationally funded mega-irrigation projects along the Indus River. It has fought for locals’ water rights and resisted a number of state interventions, while using ecological methods of political resistance. The movement emphasizes indigenous modes of activity and decision-making within traditional Sath, or people’s tribunals. It is effectively working outside the state and resisting the state’s drive to marginalize further the peasants.The Pakistani Left is re-grouping#2A more traditional, but equally significant, movement supported by the Left is that of power-loom workers in the industrial city of Faisalabad. Led by the charismatic leader of the Labour Qaumi Movement (LQM), Mian Qayyum, it emerged in the summer of 2010. LQM organized a city-wide strike of 250,000 workers demanding a pay increase and registration for social security cards which would entitle them to healthcare and pensions. The strike was violently resisted. Two LQM leaders were shot dead, others beaten and arrested. Four are still in prison. However, after shutting down the city for 19 days, the strikers won and gained a 13 per-cent raise. Since then, LQM has continued to grow. It now has 19 offices in Faisalabad, with two full-time workers in each, and is spreading to other cities.The Pakistani Left is re-groupingPopulation ControlProbably one of the more uncomfortable topics of discussion in Communism. But perhaps the most important one.The Communist ideology and the Communist parties have always indulged in social and economic re-engineering of their nations. Whether it was the movement of people from rural to urban areas to permit mass industrialization or the violent ouster of pre-existing power system deemed too dangerous to leave alone in the post-revolutionary nation.Population control has always been part of the Communist ideology in a similar fashion. Whether it was control oriented towards boosting the birth rate as in the USSR through adoption of financial benefits, manipulating health care etc. Or the suppression of it in the One-Child policy of China.Friedrich Engels:“There is of course the abstract possibility that the number of people will become so great that the limits will have to be set to their increase. But if at some stage communist society finds itself obliged to regulate the production of human beings, just as it has already to come to regulate the production of things, it will precisely be this society, and this society alone, which can carry this out without difficulty. At any rate, it is for the people in the communist society themselves to decide whether, when and how this is to be done, and what means they wish to employ for the purpose. I do not feel called upon to make proposals or give them advice about it. These people, in any case, will surely not be any less intelligent than we are.”V.I. Lenin too observed how the demographics of a nation impacted their class struggle dynamics (Male-Female ration, youth bulges etc), reflecting the thinking of early communist ideologues and their interest in manipulating the population of nations.Marx also was a critic of Malthus and his population theories (“a shameless sycophant of the ruling classes”) and noted that “special population laws” would be needed for the culmination of any true socialist and communist society. (I’m not familiar with the works of Malthus but i’m unsure of why Marx was critical of him. Malthus seemed to be warning of the effects of mass population growth. Perhaps Malthus spoke too much of natural forces in his works that Marx found akin to “free market” forces?)There is no denying that terrible disruptions to state demographics have emerged from some of the Communist experimentation in population control.But is it truly any less terrible than what we see in nations, absent Communism? The incoming mass extinction of the Japanese state whose government seems completely unconcerned with their replacement demographics or lack the political control afforded by the Communist One Party Authoritarian structure to address their crises?Or worse: Overpopulation. Upon independence in 1947, South Asian nations were relatively Ok in terms of populations. There was good balance between genders, a good mix of urban and rural populations, a manageable population. You could go back in time and see the black and white photos of Pakistani cities and see how clean, open and spacious they were. No choked up traffic, no teething swarms of human beings overwhelming limited urban infrastructure.But we had no proper population control strategy. Once the agriculture boom across the planet hit in the 60s with new and better agricultural seeds, farming techniques and fertilizers combined with better disease control across the planet our population grew by leaps and bounds. And this was made worse by our low literacy rates for women, their low empowerment and the religious political parties that resisted all birth control plans as un-Islamic.The absence of a political ideology that stressed strong control by the government over population and demographics, the lack of a strong central authority capable of implementing that control through the one-party authoritarianism afforded by communist ideology, the lack of a strong political counter to religious parties that opposed population control, the lack of empowerment of women in a backwards country like Pakistan that would permit women more control over their reproductive capabilities…all of this has meant we are now a nation of almost 200 million packed into an increasingly confined space, running out of agricultural land and water, too poor to educate and provide jobs for our people and increasingly losing control of our people to outside ideologies like ISIS.Too many of our problems like climate change, environmental degradation, radicalization, resource shortages and mass poverty are linked to over population.The Communist political beliefs that proposed strong control over national population and demographics through the strong centralized authority of the Communist state has been proven correct multiple times in Pakistan at least. Or any over populated African and Asian country. The Capitalist West has managed to control population more through the wealth and independence afforded to their citizens (particularly women). But a few of them are now faced with an increasingly grim challenge of under population in some countries. Which begs the question: If the government doesn't have the authority, the belief or the will to impose controls over national population and demographics through state intervention, how will state ever be able to deal with the problem of over or under population?Side notes: Relations with the USSR-China and the split between Pakistani Leninists and Maoists.The initial core of the Communist movement in Pakistan were mostly composed of Leninists. This meant a troubled relation with the Stalin lead USSR at the time of Pakistan’s creation. Obviously this wasn’t an ideal situation where the Communists in Pakistan had a testy relationship with their primary patron. Already the Left in Pakistan was under siege and harassed constantly by the US-allied regime.After the USSR-PRC split, the situation worsened with the Communist camp splitting between Maoists and original Leninists. Which meant that when the 1971 War rolled around, the Maoist camp supported the West Pakistan government while the Leninists sided with the Bangladeshis (Even before the war, the Communists had largely backed Sheikh Mujib movement for more autonomy in the east).After the 1971 war, the Bhutto government took over and began it’s alignment with the USSR. Moscow instructed the Leninist, USSR aligned Communist workers and all other socialists to throw their support behind Bhutto in order to ensure Pakistan would enter the cold war on the USSR side and leave behind the US camp.Problem was, up til now, the Leninist Communists in Pakistan had opposed Bhutto because they had supported Sheikh Mujib’s emancipation demand in Bangladesh. They had opposed him because of his alliance with the religious parties, his feudal lord status and his own autocratic tendencies against other Leftists. Bhutto’s attempts to stifle dissent in Balochistan, his creation of the FSF and his hounding of political opponents, plus creation of a constitution in 73 that concentrated power in the hands of an established elite were also other bones of contention the communists had to pick with him.Moscow’s pressure for all Leninists to support Bhutto in order to facilitate Bhutto bringing Pakistan into the USSR’s side caused a rift between communists in Moscow and the Communists in Pakistan. This was amplified by the USSR-Afghanistan attempt to create a separate Baloch state which would allow the USSR warm water access for it’s fleet by supporting a Marxist separatist insurgency in Balochistan. Communists who wanted a socialist Pakistan but did not support a breaking up of Pakistan opposed this move and it caused further tensions between the Communist ranks as well as the relationship between Moscow and local Communist party workers.The 80s saw the Left wing decimated under the oppression of Zia and just as his reign ended, they were dealt the massive blow of the USSR’s collapse which further hastened their demise. Most Leftists and Socialists became a part of mainstream political parties like the PPP etc or became inactive. Even the Maoists in the country were left rudderless after China implemented reforms in her own nation that moved past Maoists principles and entered the Deng Xiaoping era.Currently, the only news I've heard of interest regarding the relationship of local communists with the current Marxist regimes is the opposition of KPK Eco socialists to China’s CPEC project because they believe some of it’s projects like coal plants etc harm the environment and Ecosocialism emphasizes that a communist society must remain at harmony with the natural environment around them. They are a fringe political group with little to no clout in mainstream politics however so this is of passing interest to students of philosophy than any real impact on our current politics.ConclusionIt’s a bit of teeth-grinder to hear people in the West tell us South Asians about the evils of Communism and how Colonialism actually was a good thing for South Asia. Trains, civil service and political unions and all that.The lies Brits tell themselves about how they left behind a better IndiaLong story short: It wasn’t. South Asians suffered immensely under colonialism from the Bengal Famine, inflammation of communal tensions, Jallianwala Bagh massacre, the destruction of the local economy, mass looting of artifacts and wealth and so on.Speaking for myself, i tend to take a dim look at the institutions of capitalism and exploitative insitutions thanks to this bitter experience of colonization.However, There’s no doubt Communism had it’s own failings. They had their own political and economic blunders to speak of. Yet despite all their failings, when the referendum to dissolve the USSR came about, most of the Socialist republics chose to remain in the USSR. The USSR had to be forcibly destroyed by traitors to the revolution from within in order to finally kill it.And the results of that were before you: Millions thrown into poverty, women forced into prostitution and sex slavery in Eastern Europe, people who had access to free public health care and education now prone to exploitation. While capitalist cronies within the government captured state organizations and became billionaires overnight.Pakistan as a nation, has been defined a lot by the Cold War and the struggle between Capitalist and Communist forces. The failure of Communism in Pakistan is what gave it it’s modern shape today, both the good and the bad elements of it.As a Pakistani, there are several problems within our state that could have been dealt with to a large degree had a strong, communist government been able to rule Pakistan for a large portion of it’s existence. If we had been a communist state with a faithful adherence to Marxist principles, we could have gone a long way towards addressing our current problems with economic mismanagement, political corruption, debt, women’s rights, religious intolerance, separatism, government dysfunction and oppression of minorities. Even relations with India might have been better as both nations would have been lead by socialist governments with a common ally in the USSR.But communism failed. And so this is the reality we must live with.My own political beliefs have moved past communism as I've aged and the world around me has changed. I don’t have as much faith in the command economy model anymore for one. But a lot of my current beliefs are still influenced by Communist political beliefs because of my experience as a Pakistani and how i view my nation’s history and the problems we face today.I think a lot of our government’s policies could take a leaf from Communist philosophy and our country would be served better by it. Whether it’s implementing strict secularism, pushing back against regressive religious organizations, emphasizing population control or enforcing women’s rights and mass, free access to public services for the people.Our political structure too could take a leaf from the One, Party Authoritarian structure found in the remaining, officially Communist countries on the planet:Usama Ahmad's answer to Which is more likely to happen in the next century: China becoming a democracy or China's current political system spreading to more countries?Further recommended readings and source links:Left Unity in Pakistan: Foundation of Awami Workers PartyObscurantism in the Muslim worldPakistan, Population Programmes and Progresshttp://www.aei.org/publication/population-aspects-of-communist-countries/The Pakistani Left is re-groupingThe sole voice: Women's rights activist, Nighat Said KhanNighat Said Khan Remembers A Bygone Liberal Pakistan and An Energetic Women’s Rights MovementIslam and struggle in PakistanState and communists in Pakistan