1009 (Part 1/10) Lenin's book "The State and Revolution" needs a RELOOK-INTO.

In the Context of the Centenary Year of the Bolshevik Revolution 1917 (Also called October Revolution 1917) in the Russian History, one short book of just 73 pages, which can be freely downloaded at Marxists.org is worth reading. Here is link: Click here to go to https://www.marxists.org/ebooks/lenin/state-and-revolution.pdf, for downloading the book.. For those Readers who do not have time to look into this 73 page book, can study this Book Review by Reddebrek Jun 24 2017 at his blog. Link: Click here to go to https://libcom.org/blog/whatever-happened-dear-old-lenin-24062017 and study the Review. The Review is titled: "Whatever happened to Dear old Lenin?". The Article has quite a large number of quotes from the "State and the Revolution" by Lenin, and the Essayist's observations, many of which are reasonable when viewed from a 2017 Environment. Of course, we all of us are, lettered and thinking individuals, with individual freedoms to think and express in the way we like.

ybrao-a-donkey's personal views which are not intended to be imposed on others

In my youth, and early middle age, I used to be a great Admirer of Lenin, his being the first person to have tried to 'reproduce in action' the precepts of Karl Marx and Frederic Engels. It is the case of "Great Expectations" which ought not to have been hoped for from Pioneers of Movements.

What has particularly disappointed me, in Lenin's Administration?

I thought that Lenin would implement the Communism / Marxism / Socialism (or whatever Marx and Engels have advocated / dreamed of), in its true spirit, at least substantially. But it did not happen.

Example

I thought that Lenin would completely nationalise Agriculture, and make into a State Enterprise, in which peasants, agricultural workers, landlords (kulaks) of the pre-revolution days will be Employees of Equal Pay and Equal Rank. I expected that both the profits and risks/losses from agriculture would go to the State. But, it didn't seem to have happened. Instead, he had introduced a system of targets of production to peasants, and purchase of their produce at State stipulated prices. That meant, the risks of agriculture, he had asked the farmers to bear. Though theoretically, the peasants could keep with them the production made by them in excess of State-imposed targets, that could never have happened because targets were too steep, and unattainable even in the best of Crop Years.

This system might have helped the Urban Organised Labor, the 'Blue Eyed Boys' of the Soviet Dictators, by providing them cheap agri-products procured from the peasants and supplied by the State, at the cost of peasants.

Can you correlate this to what is happening now (2017) in India, and some other countries, including some European countries?

Ans; Though ostensibly there are some benefits intended to come to rescue of farmers, such as Crop Insurance, Minimum Support Price Mechanism, Construction and Maintenance of Market Yards, Ever-rising prices of Agri-Inputs in spite of Input Subsidy Schemes etc., the most important missing element continues to be RISK MANAGEMENT which the small and marginal farmers are ill-equipped to handle. These risks are of myriad types such as vicissitudes and vagaries of monsoons, pests, excess domestic production, dumped imports at prices less than the domestic costs of production, from overactive exporting countries under the pretext of commitments to WTO-GATT and Free Trade Agreements, to name a few. The problems of small and marginal farmers are compounded by their inability to keep their produce(s) at home till prices change in their favor. Consequently, they are forced to sell their produce at below-cost prices, while hoarders and blackmarketeers who purchase from the peasants pocket super profits arising out of upward price changes.

One major difference we can see between the conditions of the Euro-American-ANZ farmers, and the Indian farmers, is that EurAmANZ farmers do not commit suicides, whereas Indian farmers commit suicides regularly, harassed and abetted by Private money lenders. Another important difference is, in India, we have millions of 'oral-tenant farmers' that is their leases are not rendered into writing by means of lease agreements with land-owners. That means we get three types of farmers:

1) 'On paper-farmers' and 'Real Farmers'. On paper-farmers (Absentee Landlords) collect all the benefits which Governments extend to farmers from States' and Central Exchequer. In this class, we get Government Employees, Private Executives, Professionals, Politicians, et al., apart from genuine Land-Lords who cultivate lands with tractors and machinery.
2) Real farmers (oral tenants who are not recognised by State) are left to their fate.
3) Mixed- farmers: Marginal farmers who own very small pieces of land say less than 2.5 acres which they themselves cultivate, and to support their livelihood, they take on oral leases additional, say 3 or 4 acres o land to supplement their activity.

This is a 1000 page subject, though even if I write the 1000 pages, nobody will read. This is the first of the 10 parts series, which I intend to write.

To come back and continue adding / deleting / modifying. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

993 Gulags are scars, but they cannot be taken as concomitant inevitable evils of Communism/Marxism/Socialism. Lenin, Stalin and Mao might have failed. Yet Marxism cannot be irretrievably buried without further experimentations

Here is a link to : Click here to go to https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/my-life-in-a-gulag-the-horror-of-stalins-prison-camps/. . The title of the news report is: A survivor on desperate hunger, the fight to survive – and why she fears Russians just want to forget. Author's name is: James Bartholomew. Name of the newspaper, in which it appeared: Spectator.co.uk. The narrator in the Author's interview, Tatiana, clearly depicted the horrendous atrocities that took place during the Stalin's Rule. Tatiana herself was born in the prison. Her twin brother, who was also born in jail died in jail, owing to "Lack of clothes, lack of food, lack of medicine". An allocation of 140 gms. of bread, for the whole family-- consisting of one mother and two children. Her father was serving two ten year terms of sentences. At the end of the second term he was expecting a release. But he was again sentenced to a third ten year term. Hearing about it, her father died out of depression. When Tatiana was six, she and her mother were released. After growing up, Tatiana worked in State Bank of USSR, for 36 years, and retired. She was proud of her service in Bank. Probably, scared, she never shared her past history with anybody.

Related Links

Click here to go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag, and study the history of Gulags in the erstwhile Soviet Union (U.S.S.R.).. The following quotes from Wikipedia.org gives a reasonably good interpretation of what took place in Gulags during the Erstwhile Soviet Regime, particularly that of Stalin.

"...Even more broadly, 'Gulag' has come to mean the Soviet repressive system itself, the set of procedures that prisoners once called the 'meat-grinder': the arrests, the interrogations, the transport in unheated cattle cars, the forced labor, the destruction of families, the years spent in exile, the early and unnecessary deaths.

The word Gulag was not often used in Russian — either officially or colloquially; the predominant terms were the camps (лагеря, lagerya) and the zone (зона, zona), usually singular — for the labor camp system and for the individual camps. The official term, "corrective labor camp", was suggested for official politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union use in the session of July 27, 1929.

ybrao-a-donkey's personal perceptions which are not intended to be imposed on others

Gulags need not result from Rule of Proletariat (Workers' Rule). Unfortunately Workers' Rule, was not experimented in USSR or China, or the East Europe. In the name of 'Dictatorship of Proletariat', they have perpetrated, (and are perpetrating) heinous dictatorships and totalitarian regimes. In Dictatorships and Totalitarian Reigns there will be no Rule of Law. There will be no place for Natural Justice and Equity. Coteries rule the roost. Sycophancy is recognised as Efficiency and Effectiveness. Dictators entertain sycophants because, they cannot survive and feel comfortable amidst knowledge, virtue and wisdom. Ignorance of Workers is a bliss for cunning leaders who get transmogrified into whimsical Tyrants, supported by their coteries.

Vocabulary help for the verb 'transmogrify' and the noun 'transmogrification'

transmogrify (third-person singular simple present transmogrifies, present participle transmogrifying, simple past and past participle transmogrified)

(transitive) To completely alter the form of.

(intransitive) To completely alter one's form. Related Link: Click here to go to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transmogrify

Coteries not only help the first leader to become a tyrant, but also they will / can kill their own creation 'the tyrant' or convert him into a manikin to present him as a figurehead, for the atrocities perpetrated by him. Lenin seems to have been made into a dictator and a tyrant by his successor Stalin. Embalming and Preserving the dead body of lenin in a special mausoleum, naming cities as 'Leningrad', erecting huge statues all over the Empire, all these seem to be strategies and techniques adopted by coteries and sycophants. Stalin's coterie members and successors too seem to have followed the same methods.

Who transmogrified Mao Ze Dong into a Dictator of China?

Propaganda campaigns made Mao Ze Dong a Hero, and dictator. Landlords were oppressing and repressing Chinese peasants and laborers. Propaganda presented Mao as a God. Poor too started believing that he was a God. They thought that Mao had solutions for their poverty, but Mao had his own set of ambitions. Initial excess obedience to the decrees of dictators can lead to their taking the people for granted, and make them impose more orders, making the lives of people not only more miserable, but also make them subject to detentions without trials, tortures in prisons and labor-camps (gulags).

SO CALLED DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES, INCLUDING THOSE OF EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA, and ANZ, CAN ALSO BREED TYRANTS

Who created Guantanamo Prison Camp? United States of America, with tacit co-operation of Cuba.

Here is a quote from the Wikipedia.org, from which the above image was obtained. Click here to go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp, and study the 21st Century Gulags in our so-called Democratic Iconic countries.

"...At the time of its establishment in January 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said the prison camp was established to detain extraordinarily dangerous people, to interrogate detainees in an optimal setting, and to prosecute detainees for war crimes. In practice, the site has long been used for indefinite detention without trial. ..."

Current and former detainees have reported abuse and torture, which the Bush administration denied. In a 2005 Amnesty International report, the facility was called the "Gulag of our times." In 2006, the United Nations called unsuccessfully for the Guantanamo Bay detention camp to be closed.

Something which fails because of some gross misuse by the pioneers and harbingers, need not be condemned into proverbial Biblical hells. In Biblical hells, there may not be resurrections and retrievals. According to Indian mythologies and scriptures, a person's condemnation to a hell will not be eternal and perennial. As soon as the effects of past evil acts/sins (called 'pApa karma') get exhausted, the suffering souls get cleansed, and will have to face a rebirth. In the same manner, a person's enjoyments in heavens are not intended to be eternal and everlasting. They will only be transient to the extent that as soon as the effects of their virtuous acts (called 'puNya karmAs') get exhausted, they have to move to hell (if not already undergone through), or else will have to be reborn on Earth.

This yb-donkey is not a believer in the concepts of virtues or sins (they are difficult to define), and the existence of heavens and hells. This example is given just to indicate that nothing is condemnable for ever. Re-experimentation is possible, while trying to prevent repetition of past mistakes. Marxism cannot be abandoned because for highly and densely populated countries, Capitalism and Neo Liberalisms cannot provide solutions of EQUALITY.

To come back and continue adding / deleting / modifying. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

979 Should there at all be a need for agricultural pricing in Communism or Marxism or True Total Socialism? Lenin ought not to have gone back to bourgeoisie methods!

Something seems to be wrong with me. Either my expectations are too high, or Socialist Dreams tend to be unrealistic. The deeper and deeper I go into the manner in which Lenin led the organisation of the Communist Society/Governance, in the post Bolshevik Revolution 1917 (Also October Revolution 1917), I am getting more and more disappointed. However, these disappointments do not make me to drift to conclude that Marxism is un-experiment-ible. Nothing can be condemned as unexperimentible as long as such experiments do not lead to grave consequences and catastrophies such as genocides, massacres and extreme misery(ies) to the poorest. We know too well the monstrasities of Capitalism, and the World has been experiencing them for the last several Centuries. True, Communism too has contributed many-a-horror, but we have to keep in mind that, it had never started in any country, in its true form. Only labels were made. Only appearances were made. May be deliberately or intentionally. Or Communism/Marxism were not properly understood by their leaders. They were venerated. Huge Statues of theirs were erected. Cities were named after them (Leningrad, Stalingrad). Whether historic errors were realised or not, contrition took place or not. Statues were destroyed, Severed heads rolled.

Many questions rack our minds. First of all why the statues were erected? And why the statues were rolled down, like packs of card or heaps of bricks?

TRUE, we have to concede that perfection is never attainable

True, we have to concede that perfection is never attainable. But, there cannot be a volte-face in goals. There can be no U-Turn. There can be no flip-flops. Zig-zag paths and road maps may become necessary.

Lenin's New Economic Policy is nothing but a volte-face.

NEW ECONOMIC POLICY OF LENIN. source: Wikipedia.org>

The New Economic Policy was an economic policy of Soviet Russia proposed by Vladimir Lenin, who described it as a progression towards "state capitalism" within the workers' state of the USSR.[1] Lenin characterized “state capitalism” and his NEP policies in 1922 as an economic system that would include “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control” while socialized state enterprises were to operate on “a profit basis.”[2]

The NEP represented a more capitalism-oriented economic policy, deemed necessary after the Russian Civil War of 1917 to 1922, to foster the economy of the country, which was almost ruined. The complete nationalization of industry, established during the period of War Communism, was partially revoked and a system of mixed economy was introduced, which allowed private individuals to own small enterprises,[3] while the state continued to control banks, foreign trade, and large industries.[4] In addition, the NEP abolished prodrazvyorstka (forced grain requisition)[3] and introduced prodnalog: a tax on farmers, payable in the form of raw agricultural product.[5] The Bolshevik government adopted the NEP in the course of the 10th Congress of the All-Russian Communist Party (March 1921) and promulgated it by a decree on 21 March 1921 "On the Replacement of Prodrazvyorstka by Prodnalog". Further decrees refined the policy.

Other policies included the monetary reform (1922–1924) and the attraction of foreign capital.

The NEP policy created a new category of people called NEPmen (нэпманы), nouveau riches due to NEP.

Joseph Stalin abolished the New Economic Policy in 1928.

More to add. This is a 1000 page subject.

To continue adding / deleting / modifying. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

917 Lenin Stalin Relations- A look from Vol. 45 of Lenin's Collected Works

I know that these particular posts of mine which relate to Communism / Marxism will not be read by anybody / or read by a very few people in this unipolar world, yet I cannot resist writing about these, in spite of knowing pretty well that this 21c. world considers Communism and Marxism as outdated theories, and in India RSS (Rashtria Swayam Sevak Sangh--a cultural organisation, according to themselves) loathes Communists. One can always say that Lenin and Stalin were dead long back, and are a part of a history, with only archaeological / or museum value. But, yet, the fact remains that as long as POVERTY CONTINUES TO HAUNT THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD, the search for an alternative Socio-Economic Theory will have to continue. If Communism / Total Socialism (not fabian-gradualist variety) / Marxism is fraught with grave evils of loss of individual freedoms, initiatives, creativities, then something else must be explored. Till such a time, the third alternative is found out and successfully tried, Leftism will remain as a desirable objective to the monstrous Capitalism.

Why a study of Lenin-Stalin Relations, is important? Telugu language: లెనిన్ స్టాలిన్ సంబంధాల అధ్యయనం ఎందుకు ముఖ్యం?

Ans: While Late Karl Marx dreamt of an ideal World of Equalities, Lenin is to be given credit for trying to introduce Marxian Theories, into the practical arena. In the process, there might have been some teething troubles. There might have taken place some grave errors, causing misery to millions of people. It is necessary to study all / or at least a bulk, of such omissions / commissions / shortcomings, as a sine qua non for a successful retrial or re-experimentation with the CMS (Communism, Marxism, Socialism) Theories, so as to avoid miseries to masses, misuse of authority-and-power by unscrupulous persons, and make CMS acceptable not only to majority, but at least to 99% of the people. Even in CMS, dissent can never be oppressed / suppressed, even if such dissent is only from a 1%. The deciding factor will have to be, whether what the 1% says has any sound reasoning and desirability in what they say. Though absolutely 100% peaceful introduction of change is not possible, as all the people cannot be satisfied at all times, yet we cannot have some barbaric or savageous justice. We cannot replace a cruel system like Capitalism, with another system say Marxism, through equally cruel methods. Methods are, and ought to be as important as the goals.

The Euro-American world views Joseph Stalin as a despicable tyrant, though may not be on par with Adolph Hitler. But, Stalin was used by the same Euro-American World, as a co-warrior against Nazis and Hitler in World War 2. Euro-American World has the audacity of using and condemning anybody at its whims and fancies.

Prima facie, one gets an impression that during the life of Lenin, his words and orders seem to have prevailed, while Trotsky seemed to be Lenin's favorite, and Stalin wanted to be Lenin's successors. Hence, we may need to study Lenin-Stalin relations, and about the contributions made by Stalin, during the reign of Lenin, and also examine whether / why Stalin deviated from the path of Lenin.

The following letter from vol5 of Collected Works of Lenin, was written on 5th March 1923. Lenin addressed this letter to Stalin, marked it PERSONAL, TOP SECRET, PERSONAL, and endorsed copies to Comrades Kamenev and Zinoviev. This endorsement might have become necessary, because they had already come to know about Stalin's rude talk. Lenin started this letter with "Dear Comrade Stalin", and closed it with " Respectfully yours, ". That means, Lenin was very cordial and courteous, even when he had to handle some subject which is somewhat unpleasant.

Dear Comrade Stalin:

You have been so rude as to summon my wife to the telephone and use bad language. Although she had told you that she was prepared to forget this, the fact nevertheless became known through her to Zinoviev and Kamenev. I have no intention of forgetting so easily what has been done against me, and it goes without saying that what has been done against my wife I consider having been done against me as well. I ask you, therefore, to think it over whether you are prepared to withdraw what you have said and to make your apologies, or whether you prefer that relations between us should be broken off.

Respectfully Yours,

ybdonkey's views not intended to be imposed on others

Lenin passed away on 21st Jan. 1924., i.e. approx. nine months after writing this letter. It is not clear whether the relations between Lenin and Stalin had improved during the intervening period of 5-3-1923 and 21-1-1924, either on personal sphere, or on political sphere. Political sphere is more important. We have to explore.
To continue, adding / deleting /modifying. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

911 Why Lenin and Stalin were callous to the Famines in U.S.S.R., during their Reigns?

Lenin is regarded as the Greatest and the First Leader who had tried to implement the ideas of Marxism / Communism / Socialism, in a very large country of Continental Size like Russia (erstwhile Soviet Union- U.S.S.R. stretching from Riga to Vladivostoc). Stalin, is also regarded very highly in India, in spite of his dictatorial tendencies. Many parents in India, named their children as Stalin. For example, the name of the Leader of Opposition in Tamil Nadu Assembly, India, is 'Stalin'. What stuns me very much is, a study of the History of the Soviet Union of 1917-53, gives me an impression that both Lenin and Stalin were apparently callous to famines, and food shortages in Russia, and millions of people died during their Rule. The same was the position in the so called Communist Ruled 1959 China, of the Mao ze Dong fame. It is strange that in India, there are groups which advocate violent Revolutions and Upheavals in the name of "Maoism", and they call themselves 'Maoists'. Were all those famines, just exaggerations of bourgeoisie media propaganda machinery of Europe and America? It can't be 100%, though some exaggerations might have taken place.

To continue adding / deleting / modifying. This issue of the Failure of Communist Regimes in Russia and China, is a 10,000 page subject. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది. ఇది అంతం కాదు, ఆరంభమే.

880 (Part 5 of 10 Series) Relook at Bolshevik Revolution- Mr. Putin cannot justify his present mistakes by zooming the mistakes of Lenin

A friend of mine, who has great affinity and appreciation towards Indian Nationalism of 2014-17 Brand, and who for reasons known only to him, probably because he loves Indian Nationalism extremely to the extent that Communism/Marxism/Total true Socialism may appear to him as somewhat forget-worthy ghosts, has emailed to me a link, to a news Guardian report titled: "Vladimir Putin accuses Lenin of placing a 'time bomb' under Russia ". This report was dated 25th Jan. 2016. Both video version and the news version are available for the Putin's speech. It is a common characteristic in world history, that present dictators finding fault with past dictators (if my readers do not relish my adventurism of using the word 'dictators' for my reference to Putin, and Lenin, my Readers shall be free to amend and read as "leaders" instead of "dictators", and wherever possible trying to pass on their own guilt(s) and lapses to the past dictators. With due respect to the 1999-2017 ruler of the World's geographically the largest country, I am tempted to say that Mr. Putin Remarks accusing Lenin of placing time bomb under Russia, can also be placed under this 'pass-on-the-buck category.

First: links to the news reports: Guardian Video-- Click to go Guardian, and see the video.

Second: Guardian news, text, with link to video: Click to go to Guardian, and study the text.

MORNING STAR उदय तारा వేగు చుక్క

One heartening quality of the speech of Mr. Putin is, low-voice, whispering manner and style, unlike the SHOUTING HOARSE, DRAMATIC, SARCASTIC STYLES OF INDIAN POLITICIANS.

ybrao-a-donkey's observations which are not intended to be imposed on others

If as pointed out by Mr. Putin, in case Lenin had supported Federalism, with a right to Constituents secede , and Stalin had supported a 'Unitary State', then it only shows a democratic and liberal philosophical outlook of Lenin, as against a sterner dictatorial style of Stalin. Even if we assume that Lenin error-ed in his decision of un-restricting the freedoms of the Constituent States of the erstwhile Soviet Union, yet, that error , does not deserve a comment of placing a Nation under a 'time bomb'. Lenin might have made an indiscretion in drawing the boundaries of parts of U.S.S.R. at that time. Yet, he does not deserve the comment of being 'whimsical', and "delirious". The comment for the information of our readers:

"...Lenin’s government had whimsically drawn borders between parts of the USSR, placing Donbass under the Ukrainian jurisdiction in order to increase the percentage of proletariat in a move Putin called “delirious..."

yb-a-donkey's view:

There is no need for anybody to be 'delirious' or 'whimsical' to classify a particular place as 'proletariat'. Every sq.meter under the sky, not a forest, is proletariat. We can find proletariat everywhere. Even Buckingham Palace will have proletariat; the Queen's guards and servants can be classified as proletariat, in spite of their being paid sizable wages. Of course, the Queen's guards and servants may not accept it, because they may be too proud of their jobs, to such an extent, that they may feel superior to the guards of car factory or a ketchup factory or a soda ash factory. Such mis-perceptions are natural concomitants of Capitalist Systems, sets-up and structures.

MISPERCEPTIONS OF SELF-UPGRADED UPPER-PROLETARIAT

It is like this: A pet with a gold-belt and bound with a gold-chain in British Royal Palace, may feel superior to a dog wearing a silver-belt and bound with a silver-chain in a business-magnet's flat. The silver-bound dog, in turn, may feel superior to an unbound belt-less, chain-less, stray-street dog in London or Delhi.

SOFTWARE ENGINEERS WHO HAVE STUDIED M.TECH, AND MIDDLE AND SENIOR MANAGERS, WHETHER MBA, OR NOT, AND HOWSOEVER POMPOUS THEIR DESIGNATIONS MAY BE, ALSO FALL UNDER PROLETARIAT.

Though they may not admit, but it is still a fact that, the software engineers of India may also be classified as proletariat. Working full time for a wage/salary can be one ingredient, to get admitted to proletariat, inter alia , there are other basic requirements to belong to the genre of proletariat.

Every Nation, and every Province-state-prefectures forming parts of Nature, are also proletariats. There is no need to place 'red vermilion' on the face of each province-state-prefecture-district-county and call it 'proletariat'.

SOME LIP-SYMPATHY PONTIFICATIONS OF MR. PUTIN, WHICH LACK SINCERITY

"...My attitude to Communist ideas have never wavered. To this day I keep my party membership ticket at home. ..."

"...You know that I, like millions of Soviet citizens, over 20 million, was a member of the Communist Party of the USSR and not only was I a member of the party but I worked for almost 20 years for an organization called the Committee for State Security (KGB) ..."

"...I was not, as you know, a party member by necessity, I liked Communist and socialist ideas very much and I like them still”.

"...I was never just a 'functionary' when it came to party matters. 'The Moral Code of the Builder of Communism—a set of rules to be followed by all party members— ', resembles the Bible a lot. ..."

"...The code revolved around key concepts such as brotherhood, equality and happiness. ..."

"...These ideas were not implemented fully in the USSR. The Soviet Union began with repressions—something the Communists accused the tsar of...".

yb-a-donkey's view:

Mr. Putin is just canny, and worldly wise. If he does not reiterate and confirm that he still holds the Communist Party's membership Ticket, he may lose some votes, some crowds. Why take risk? Accept that "I support Communism/Marxism", and do the opposite! A true Communist-Marxist-Socialist Leader cannot rule a State for 16 long years. People are bound to get dissatisfied, and throw long-standing rulers. Reason: Communist/Marxist/truly Socialist Nations are yet to evolve solutions for hundreds of problems which a newly-Socialist State is likely to face.

This is a thousand page subject. To continue. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.