Read 19 comments in conversation as:
The Wire publishes an article by an organisation called AILAJ and its General-Secretary Clifton D'Rozario. Who's that you ask? Lawrence Liang's former associate at Alternative Law Forum, who is presently a "Central Committee Member" of a party called the Communist Party of India Marxist-Leninist Liberation. ▮▮▮
@LegallyIndia Mod?

You've to give a proper reasoning for your actions, anything attacking left seems to be trollish at this point.
If this is a thread about liberalisation, great. If it's a thread started / continued merely to bash some political opponents and pick some political bones (for the 100th time about how China is Evil and Lawrence Liang ALF etc), then yes, it's trollish. Asked and answered, we hope :)
No, moderator, on the contrary, you show your pathetic bias. It’s perfectly legitimate to question why an unknown body affiliated to a pro-China political party is suddenly opposing a reform that will help the economy. Just yesterday, Han Dong, a Chinese-Canadian Liberal Party MP in China had to resign after allegations of acting at the behest of China and compromising Canadian interests. So the CPIML and AILAJ must answer if they are in cahoots with China, especially after the Kavitha Krishnan incident.

As for ALF and #MeToo, the AUD report found that interns were sexually harassed by LL with impunity and Clifton was a close and influential member of the ALF inner circle. It is perfectly legitimate to ask questions of him.
Your use of "pathetic bias" strongly confirms as do the original posts, that this was not a bona fide post / thread but one of angry political trolls who have less interest in debating liberalisation than in summoning some bogeyman of an axis of imagined organised communist-India-China conspiracy (which incidentally liberalised its legal market many years ago) and the spectre of a cabal of evil liberal intelligentsia pizzagate something or other (by repeatedly drawing tenuous links between ALF and all NLS alumni or anyone who's ever heard of ALF and not vocally condemned LL, or whatever you are implying).

Please talk about legal arguments and views, and leave your repeated unsubtle attempts to pointlessly / irrelevantly introduce political propaganda and ad hominem at the door, or alternately face the censorship hammer of the liberal-intelligentsia-communist-spectre-of-Winnie-the-Pooh-moderator, thank you very much.
You might've gone too hard on this one 💀

You've got an eye for spotting agenda driven threads, nice!

Although it won't hurt to give the benefit of the doubt to the commentators, For all we know it could turn out to be a healthy debate from both the sides :)
Haha, perhaps a bit too hard but I'm sure they can take it if they're not some over-sensitive snowflake. :)

Benefit of the doubt is the only reason such posts and responses even go up, but once they veer into obvious political propagandising we mark those posts trollish (where they're still visible), but hopefully discourage pointless debate / feeding of the trolls, who don't actually really care about whether some communist party said something or not about Chinese communism years ago or who is condemnig sexual harassment or not...
This is the exact problem with people posing themselves as Communist in India (and globally too, to some extent). This statement clearly reflets lack of understanding of an obvious social reality.

I as a communist see this liberalization of the Indian Legal Sector as a welcome move. This is primarily because Indian Legal Sector is has never really been a free market (if it were, I'd have been opposing such a decision). However, the Indian Legal Sector, regardless of how progressive vibes it may cast upon a newbie, is feudal in nature and virtually the entire Corp-Law sector is cornered by a handful of Lalas. The scope of justice or equity within the Indian Corp Law Sector and is on the mercy of Lalas, existences of whom, obviously would neither allow justice nor equity.

Basically, in Feudalism, Liberalisation makes people's lives remarkably better. This is something that these Tom, Dick & Harry folks from political parties fail to understand.
Thanks for your comment. I wish to say that communist parties like CPIM, CPIML etc have never been communist. They have always been chamcha-ist and done China's bidding.
First part is true and is basically the truth for every single famous political party throughout the world claiming to be Communist. Second statement is also true to some extent. However, Chinese collaboration of Indian Communist Parties is much more complex than what is understood in the common parlance. Different factions at different point of times throughout the course of history have conflicting opinions.

However, communism, unlike any other ideology is internationalist i.e., its struggle transcends geographical as well as national boundaries. Capitalism oppresses every worker (since its a class) in a similar fashion regardless of their nationality, religion etc. Hence, Marx proposed a true international collaboration among worker parties. Basically, this is one of the few ideas of Marx that communist parties have been trying to portray as if they adhere to.
A 5-word comment posted 1 week ago was not published.
A 6-word comment posted 1 week ago was not published.
We (me and a couple of other law firm associate friends) are planning to send a representation to the BCI in support of such move. We have made a good document for this effect and we need your (law students, associates, partners) so that the BCI knows we are all overwhelmingly in support of this move. Let’s put the days of slavery by family owned slave traders behind us forever. Abhi nahi toh kabhi nahi. Link:
Is it an anonymous group that's behind this petition? Just want to clarify, there's no way for us to verify that it's an authentic initiative, so sign at own risk, though the letter seems to be well-argued and well-intentioned.
I would urge all associates and law students to share this with with as many legal associates and law student as possible (by forwarding the link to WhatsApp groups, word or mouth etc.) The headlines because of SILF's letters that "Indian lawyers do not want foreign law firms entry" (Link below).

Let's atleast change that narrative. Please sign this letter (letter attached to the form) -