1. who are "they"??
2. what does this "anti-national" mean, in your opinion??
3. you are siding with the hindutva reactionaries of the rss and the rest of the sangh parivar... you have said earlier that you support 'dharmic' religions, including i presume the oppressive brahminical system defended and propgated by the sanghis... if you declare openly that you want to overthrow the chinese communist party ( however less socialist it has become ) and replace it with some 'dharmic' system, do you think the chinese government will let you make your propaganda??
no doubt, but that is just a technical fact... i want to know the purpose of
your using "anti-nationals".
would you have liked roc to continue and the cpc to be crushed/suppressed in the manner of what happened to the pki ( the indonesian communist party )??
"history is written by the winners" is quite a ruthless statement... if the bolivarian system in venezuela is overthrown through the continuing cia regime-change program, will you say that the late hugo chavez was a idiot??
marx and engels compiled "the communist manifeso"... they were not fighting soldiers in a armed militia... so??
and if you must say that then you must also be seen visibly supporting the global socialist movement, including calling for china to not stagnate in capitalism but call for re-emergence of proper socialist/marxian/communist system and advance it... one can't be a fence-sitter and keep making sarcastic comments... it is fair, yes??
if i remember correctly it was you who in 2014 made a sarcastic remark to me to arrange for the indian socialist movement to obtain armaments from norinco ( the top chinese weapons manufacturer )... why did you say, pompously if i remember your words correctly, if you yourself are not being seen as a propagator of socialism on pdf?? very few people on pdf visibly make posts and threads in support of socialist systems, and that doesn't include you.
but yes, it is a failing of the subcontinental socialists that it was only in afghanistan that socialism could achieve country-wide power, and the post-1947 indian socialist movement has been divided since the 1960's and some groups are armed while others are, wrongly, participating in the actually anti-democratic system of the british system of so-called parliamentary democracy.
do read my thread 'the comfortable muslims of yesteryears and the pious muslims of now' written by a pakistani progressive that is a world tour of muslim socialists in modern history but i mention this here for you to concentrate on the indian subcontinent part of that long article.
my involvement with socialism is a matter for another thread.