Two New Traitors to the World Proletarian Revolution – Vishwavijay and Seema
Two more names have today been added among the traitors to the world’s revolutionary communist movement – Vishwavijay and Seema. These are not merely two more individuals who have damaged the revolutionary party and the people; they are representatives of the opportunist–liquidationist–revisionist line within the revolutionary movement. Today our movement is in a deep crisis, and one of the principal causes of this is the growing influence of ruling-class ideology within the revolutionary communist ranks. Comrade Mao had said that the ruling class wages war on the people in two ways – one by using weapons, and the other by using the pen. The war of the pen is the more lethal, because it is not visible, and because it betrays the revolution and the proletariat while in the guise of a revolutionary. In our own time this war of the pen is being represented – passing from Balraj, Venugopal, Rupesh and Devji – by Vishwavijay and Seema. It has therefore become imperative that we too wage war against them.
The names of Vishwavijay and Seema belong among those very people who “revised” Marx and Engels’s theory of the dictatorship of the proletariat and of socialist revolution and thereby worked in the interests of the bourgeoisie; those very people who conspired against the dictatorship of the proletariat in socialist Soviet Russia and socialist China – which had shown the road to emancipation to the proletariat of the whole world – and who, by overturning it, betrayed the proletariat of the entire world. These people are carrying on that same old idea of betrayal in a new guise. Here it is also necessary to understand: who, after all, is called a traitor?
A traitor is one who works against the objective interests of the proletariat. If we look within India’s revolutionary party (the Maoist Party), then whoever works against the line laid down at the Party’s Ninth Congress, and goes against the Party to propagate a separate political line of their own, and does not abide by Party discipline, and damages the Party organisation – such a person is certainly a traitor to the Party, to the revolution and to the people. In Lenin’s book The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky it is explained that Kautsky is a traitor because he carried out a liberal distortion of Marxism, because he is against the use of armed struggle by the proletariat, and because he is against establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat. This corresponds entirely to Vishwavijay and Seema. They have negated the dictatorship of the proletariat both theoretically and practically. They are terrified of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and so they altered it and declared it wrong. In practical terms too, trying to build an open legal party and working against underground (UG) party building is precisely to obstruct the dictatorship of the proletariat. They are also against armed struggle – which is why they levelled the baseless charge that the military line dominates the Party; why they never paid attention to military work; and why, in the mass organisation too, instead of raising the level of militancy they only discouraged it.
I. The History of Betrayal in the World and in India
Let us see how Vishwavijay and Seema are carrying forward the legacy of two hundred years of the history of anti-Marxists – a legacy against which our great teachers (Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao) and the party of the proletariat have fought.
When Com. Marx and Engels first put forward the theory of proletarian revolution, they fought resolutely against the reformists and the anarchists of their time. In the First International they fought all these currents and established the current of socialist revolution. After this, Marxism became the theory of the emancipation of the proletariat throughout Europe and the whole world. Ruling-class ideology therefore cloaked itself in the very garb of Marxism and began to work against the dictatorship of the proletariat and socialist revolution. The first and a major example of this is Bernstein. Citing quotations from the writings of Marx and Engels, Bernstein said that socialism could arrive through peaceful development within the existing system, and that revolution was not necessary for it. At the time of the Russian Revolution, Karl Kautsky proved himself Bernstein’s true heir by saying that there was no need to overthrow the state by violent means – that is, that proletarian revolution was possible without armed struggle. After this, Khrushchev implemented the revisionist line in socialist Russia and laid the foundations of modern revisionism, which Deng carried forward in China.
Later, in Nepal, when the revolutionary movement was at its high tide, the General Secretary of the party, Prachanda, committed betrayal. Prachanda said that economic, social and political changes had come about in Nepal, and that therefore neither the Russian road nor the Chinese road would be adopted in Nepal; rather, by combining the two, a new road – the Nepali road – would be built. According to this theory, it was necessary to fuse together the line of insurrection and the line of protracted people’s war. This theory was fabricated precisely so that the line of protracted people’s war and armed struggle could be attacked and the party pushed into the mire of parliamentary politics. This was Bernstein in a new form – the same Bernstein who had abandoned armed struggle and advocated peaceful change.
