The book has two readers on the site where I found it, as of now, and the other one is in hiding. But even apart from this there are ironies in the situation when one considers it as a title on shelf on a site based in US, what with the title with its first three words.
Two largest democracies of the world, US and India - both nations relatively large in sizes, relative to, say, any of the democratic European nations, and the latter making up in numbers (over a billion and counting) what it lacks in development and prosperity as measured by western standards - differ in may ways and contrast in much, but never in any as much as in this - that when you enter US you must declare if you have ever entertained any leftist sympathies, which is supposed to indicate you might be attempting a communist takeover of the country you are trying to enter; while anyone in India not overtly paying lip service to leftist thought and latest fads of whatever is dictated thereby is fraudulently accused of not only being "right wing" but of running around with knives, never mind the facts about any of it (the last time a major massacre happened one way with knives was in Calcutta in '46 in order to twist Gandhi's elbow to give in to demands of dividing the then united nation along religious lines with a truculent party with a fundamentalist inability to live with others of different views and faiths winning their separate piece to throw out others out of) - and hence the absurd title of "anti-communists" epithet here does not convey how much hatred is inherent in the two words, however undeserved.
A very militant Tamil once told a secure gathering how she hated Thackeray, and went on to repeat it for a few minutes with no explanations - she thought none were needed, since Thackeray has consistently opposed any politics and policies that go against local people in his state.
I did not wish to bring forth a diatribe of muck which I was quite certain she was capable of unleashing, and so forebore from pointing out what everyone - at least those that remember the beginning of Thackeray in his home state - know so well; which is, he is but a pale mirror image of those that rule her own home state, which allows no tolerance for anyone from outside the state, none for anyone who is of a different linguistic origin, and generally makes life hell for any dissidents; no jobs for outsiders however superior in qualifications of every sort, goes without saying, while Tamilians on the other hand not only enjoy jobs at every level including highest in most other states - especially in Mumbai and other economically prosperious cities of India - but promote one another without question and set up cry if locals are given a preference of any sort.
The state of Tamilnadu which was carved out with a major portion of Madras state pre independence enjoyed preferential treatment given by British due to help they gave in defeating 1857, especially compared to neighbouring states of Karnataka (then Mysore) and Kerala (then Travancore and so on), and still clamour to keep the status quo. If now one of the states is given a much needed railway connection, up goes the furore in Madras to claim more or most of the pie as per tradition - and let us not even get started with the ridiculous wars over water.
All this might seem irrelevant, except that left or right in India is mostly a matter of who calls names louder and gets established with his lies.
One person visiting a state across to east gets s promptly arrested and thrown out on charge of being a right wing trouble maker since he was for a particular temple with a popular support, while another one from the said eastern state threatens to arrive in a western metropolis to conduct a ceremony of worship for reproductive purposes publicly (the latter ceremony is normally a private affair) in order to establish that millions of his home state people have a right to live in the said one metropolis never mind how much bursting at seams. This latter one threatening to conduct the reproductive worship publicly is counted as a left wing non religious politician. He gets to call names, while those with more culture and civilisation conduct themselves on their dignity.
So the title really begins with a name calling, whether so understood in US or otherwise. And fact is, while for example Shourie might not love or hate communists per say, he would expose them for their frauds as he would anyone - he was a journalist par excellence and integrity with fearlessness was the forte of his newspaper as long as he was there. For this, lack of blind following of orders from the correct brand of "foreigners", he gets to be called anti communist here.
The rest? Chakravaty Rajagopalachari was a very respected man in Congress who was less than appreciated in his own home state of then Madras, due to his realistic and benefic views rather than pandering to populist vocalisation resulting in half baked economic results. He is branded as anti communist due to his policies which might actually might have benefited his people and his nation far better without keeping conservative past necessarily brought into future. But politics was more important than people to his opponents, who are branded leftist.
As for Mamata Banerjee, it is inexcusable to call her any names - she is, simply put, the sister of the poor and disfranchised in her state, which due to leftist (read obedient to marxist-maoist) policies is now one of the poorest states of India for several decades, down from the days of pride of being the capital of the British before the formality of empire and crowning (for which they chose the historical capital of India, Delhi). If she is anti communist it merely points strongly to communists being not only wrong but total jackasses. And so they have been in the state they have had a free hand to rule for quite a few decades, imposing the party rule rather than going with what is good for people, what people wish or feel or need, thus following the usual line of a totalitarian rule by whatever the name of creed. Mamata Banerjee is the much beloved Didi (sister) of her people, which is why she has any clout at all - she works for them, unlike the communists of India.
Thus the politics of India, with words separated from meanings, never mind the Divine status of Word and Meaning expounded on by an ancient poet - fortunately the ancient tradition was not of burial, else they would all be turning in pain.
These are some of the books I read during last half a century or so, and some of the thoughts, questions, reactions and insights, emotions - and so forth -, evoked on reading them, either then or later sometime during the interim years and decades, or even thinking over now, that are summed up here while trying to record my impressions about what I read.
Serene, Reflecting
Life Recedes