Presented on the Occasion of the Centenary of the Great October Revolution
May 5-6, 2017
University of the Philippines, College of Law,
Manila, Philippines
(Paper presented on behalf of Malem by Windel Farag-ey Bolinget of Cordillera Peoples Alliance)
Dear comrades,
The
Russian October Revolution of 1917 was an epoch-making event in the
history of mankind. I am sure most of the comrades who are speaking on
this occasion to commemorate the centennial program touch upon the
significance of the event. I shall not go further into the details.
But
let me quote the international significance of the event as elaborately
stated by J.V. Stalin, in 1927, on the occasion of the Tenth
Anniversary of the October Revolution in 1927. Stalin, in his work
entitled The International Character of the October Revolution
termed the revolution “a revolution of an international character
towards a new world order.” According to him, it was a “source of the
profound sympathy which the oppressed classes in all countries
entertain… as a pledge of their own emancipation… (it) has shaken
imperialism not only in the centres of its domination, not only in the
metropolises. It has also struck at the rear of imperialism, its
periphery, having undermined the rule of imperialism in the colonial and
dependent countries.”
In
the words of the Indian historian Prof Amar Farooqui, “The experience
of the October Revolution in Russia and the excitement over the
revolutionary initiatives of the Bolsheviks, attracted an increasing
number of activists to socialist ideas and communism. … (it) was of
momentous significance for the oppressed peoples of the world. It
inspired new revolutionary movements; radicalized people’s struggles;
and had a profound impact on national liberation movements. Further, it
made Marxism–Leninism a potent ideological force internationally.”
My
focus, today, is to provide with a brief overview of the direct impact
of the October Revolution on the then British India in the first two
decades and the indirect impact, several decades later, on the then
princely state of Manipur. Before going into this, it is worth pointing
out that British India was directly ruled upon by the British. On the
contrary, there were several princely states in the Indian subcontinent
that were indirectly ruled upon through the respective monarchs and
feudal lords. Due to uneven process of development, means of transport,
communication, exchange of ideas of political organization; there was no
uniform standard inflow of information and spread of political ideas
across the subcontinent. The princely states and tribal communities in
what today constitute the Northeast India predominantly lived in the
confines of their respective world. As a result, when seen from a
holistic overview, the direct or indirect impact of the October
Revolution across different regions in the subcontinent differed in
time, space, magnitude and implications.
Let
me now present the overview in two sub-sections; (a) Direct Impact of
October Revolution on British India, and (b) Indirect Impact on Manipur
in different time.
DIRECT IMPACT
OF OCTOBER REVOLUTION
IN BRITISH INDIA
In
the immediate decade after 1917, the Russian Revolution was a major
source of inspiration to many Indian nationalists, in British India who
were spearheading struggles to liberate from the British colonial rule.
The commitment of the Bolsheviks to national self-determination, the
grant of independence to Finland, Declaration of the Rights of People of
Russia (15 November 1917), Lenin’s thesis on National and the Colonial Question 1920,
the call for an end to imperialist war and for peace, and the principle
of national liberation and social emancipations; all these seemed to
have produced an unprecedented model that was coveted by many who had
wanted to establish a social system that would be freed from various
forms of external and internal subjugation, oppression and exploitation.
What was most attractive to the nationalists across different political
strands seemed to be the Soviet attack on imperialism. Many Indian
nationalists hailed the Soviet hostility to imperialism in general and
British rule in particular. It is being said that a vast chunk of
nationalists had become frustrated with both the British rule and the
pre-existing forms of pessimistic resistance and mediocratic appeals
under the leadership of the Indian ‘national’ bourgeoisie. The latter
are being charged for alleged co-option with the colonial rulers. The
disgruntled sections found more appealing to the model of October
revolution, soviet structure revolutionary government or communist
thought. Objectively, however, those who believed in communism were few
in number and they were targeted by the State. They had to work along
with others on the path to people’s democratic revolution. What then
became apparent was a broader course of anti-colonial resistance
comprising various strands of ideological positions and political
stands, which more or less drew inspirations from the October
Revolution. These were reflected in literary expressions, propaganda
works and organization.
In
literary expressions, the Russian Revolution was hailed high by many
prominent poets such as Rabindranath Tagore and Iqbal. Bal Gangadhar
Tilak defended Lenin in his journal Kesari (29 January 1918) and denounced British propaganda. Subramania Bharati composed an ode entitled New Russia as a mark of eulogizing the revolution. Bombay Chronicle and Modern Review
followed the same trend. Several Hindi and English booklets and
biographical accounts were published in praise of Lenin and the Russian
Revolution and communist literatures and circulated. The first communist
weekly in India, entitled, Socialists,
began printed from Bombay in 1922. Political statements and activities
of the Russian communists were carefully followed in literary
expressions.
In
organization and activity, the Russian Revolution made a militant and
popular impact on the pre-existing anti-colonial struggle. It acted as a
morale booster to the revolutionaries amongst the Indian emigres and
within British India. First, among the emigres there were individuals
who were already influenced by socialist ideas prevalent in Europe and
labour movement. The Russian Revolution added to their courage, hope and
possibilities of building up force. To cite few examples, Naren
Bhattacharji who came into contact with the Bolshevik cadre, joined with
others and founded a Communist Party in Mexico in 1919. He attended the
Second Congress of the Communist International held in Russia in 1920.
On the other hand, M.N. Roy, Abani Mukherji and some muhajirs founded
Communist Party of India in Tashkent in 1920. Many Indians communist
cadres also joined the Communist University in Russia for training in
ideology and organisation. In 1922, a Berlin group of communists headed
by Virendranath Chattopadhyay, Bhupendranath Dutt and Barkatullah formed
Indian Independence Party in Berlin. An important section of Ghadarites
abroad and in India were attracted to communist movement and became
martyrs.
Organizationally,
in British India, a qualitative change became evident in trade union
activism. Many nationalist leaders realized the importance of
politically mobilizing the working people in the organized and
semi-organized sectors. They strengthened trade unionism, worker’s
strike and incorporated socialist ideas, if not communism by the
communist section. It is in this sector that the communists, liberal
socialists and other nationalists had developed a broader understanding
of organizing certain common ‘national’ front. The objective was to
interlink worker’s movement with anti-colonial struggle. They cannot
fully rely on uncoordinated and sectarian approach by different working
peoples. To strengthen the mass base of resistance, as a result, the All
India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) was formed in 1920. This union
became a contested platform where the congress led by the ‘national’
bourgeoisie and the communist would try to exert their maximum influence
along ideological line. Despite the inner struggle along ideological
line, the common platform seemed to have served the respective interest.
Since about 1923 the communists became active in the labour movements
in Bombay, Kanpur and Calcutta. The Labour Kishan Party (of labour and
peasant) was formed in 1923.
Despite
repressions by the authority for their ideology, the communists were
able to organize into better shape along the framework of certain
broader organization structure. By the end of 1922, several communist
groups were able to establish secret links in Bombay, Calcutta, Madras
and Lahore. An open Indian Communist Conference, held in Kanpur in
December 1925, formally founded the Communist Party of India. Article
One of the Constitution of the Communist Party of India, clearly
mentions the objectives of the party. The Article, which fall on the
line of the Bolshevik party, reads, “The
establishment of a workers’ and peasants’ republic based on the
socialisation of the means of production and distribution, by the
liberation of India from British imperialist domination.” This substantiates the direct influence of the October Revolution.
Between
1925 and 1927, the party worked with broader fronts of worker and
peasant parties to serve as legal cover. Their influence grew rapidly
among the Bombay textile workers from 1926 onwards. In the meanwhile,
several peasant and worker fronts/ parties were set up in Bengal,
Punjab, and Bombay. May first began to be celebrated as Labour Day from
1927 onwards in Bombay. It became celebrated widely in other parts of
British India. In due course of time, communist activities expanded from
the workers of Bombay to the jute workers of Bengal and the railway
employees of the Great Indian Peninsula Railway. The communists
temporarily moved away the AITUC to run a parallel radical trade union
christened as All India Red Trade Union Congress, from 1931 onwards.
However, it could not function due to repression and arrest of the
leaders and had to merge with AITUC in 1935.
Mentioned
may also be made of the charismatic Indian Socialist revolutionary
figure such as Bhagat Singh, whose individual heroism and martyrdom at
young age had made him a legendary figure today. He was a member of the
Hindustan Republican Association (HRA) and was instrumental in
establishing Naojawan Bharat Sabha in 1926. The objective of the Sabha
to achieve “a completely independent Republic of Workers and Peasants in
India,” suggested their inclination towards the revolutionary ideals of
the Soviet. The HRA, which was rechristened as Hindustan Socialist
Republican Association (HSRA) in August-September 1928, could not
survive through the 1930s due to heavy repression. It failed to revive
and became extinct forever. But the commitment of the cadres towards
communist revolution expressed in their literary works, their forms of
democratic struggles in the jail, and revolutionary messages noted down
in the prison note books and correspondence letters exemplify the
influences of the October Revolution and Soviet initiatives in 1920s.
INDIRECT IMPACT
ON MANIPUR
IN DIFFERENT TIME
The
impact of the October Revolution in Russia was not immediately felt in
the princely state of Manipur. Manipur, then, was ruled by the combined
forces of British authority and feudal monarchy. Although there had been
sporadic resistances to feudal excesses and colonial oppressions, the
influence of communism manifested in mass democratic movement began to
take organizational shape only after the end of the Second World War.
So, there was a gape in time and the magnitude of impact.
Communism
is believed to be introduced into Manipur by comrade Hijam Irabot.
Originally a destitute orphan, in the later stage of his youth he
enjoyed feudal prerogatives due to matrimonial relation with the ruling
monarch. However, he took to a reformist course directed against
feudalism. He began his political career as a social reformer in 1934.
He played important roles in resisting feudal oppressions and colonial
exploitations. He was arrested several times and exiled for political
dissent and democratic stands. While his frustration with the system was
growing, in 1942 he became attracted to communism while he lived with
Bengalese communists in Sylhet Jail (now in Bangladesh). After that he
spent several years in Assam, Bengal and Sylhet, where he took part in
communist activities among peasants, youths and students. He was
introduced to the Communist Party of India. He attended the party’s
first and second congresses in 1943 and 1948 and became a member of the
party. He fought election to the Assam Provincial Legislatures Assembly
in 1946 and the Manipur General Assembly in 1948.
The
political conditions prevalent in Manipur was not favorable to him. He
was regarded a threat to the bourgeoise democratic system that was
established after the independence in 1947. He was also a suspect in the
eyes of the rulers of the Dominion of India who had planned to annex
Manipur and other Northeast regions for geo-strategic regions. When
popular resistance to the Couplan plan of creating a Purbanchal State
turned into a violent scuffle, he was falsely implicated and arrest
warrant was issued against him. To escape arrest, he went into
underground and later on constituted an underground communist front on
29 October 1948. The party adopted the BT Ranadive (CPI) line of armed
insurrection and began sporadic guerilla armed insurrection. In Burma,
he established contacts with different communist armed groups towards
constituting a common united front. However, he died on the way to
Manipur, in the jungle, due to tropical fever and infection on 26th
September, 1951. In the meanwhile, all other leaders were arrested and
the important ones were jailed for several years in the jails outside
Manipur. When a general amnesty was announced, the rest became over
ground, joined parliamentary lines and became renegades. The first phase
of communist insurrection, thus, came to an abrupt end.
In
the adjoining Naga Hills and Tuensang Areas there were Nagas under the
leadership of AZ Phizo, under the banner of Naga National Council,
fighting for independence from India. They were somewhat inspired by
Chinese communism but soon, due to their full adherence to Christianity
and because of their close connection with churches in Europe, they
adopted Christian Democracy as the guiding principle of advocating
ethno-nationalism. There was a long gape in the growth of a second
generation of youth who would adhere to socialism in Manipur. But in
1964 a new generation of youth who believed in proposed national
democratic revolution of Manipur was formed. But they devoted more in
organizing socialist study circle and mass organization among the
educated youths. While they remained inactive politically and militarily
for some years, in the late 1970s, different groups of youths who
believed in armed ‘national democratic revolution’ formed three
different parties. They subscribed to Marxists Leninist Maoist thought
and began to advocate national liberation and social emancipation. Many
of them were reportedly influenced by the principle of New Democracy,
national liberation movement in Vietnam, armed resistance movements in
Burma and elsewhere.
To
what extent these claims of ideological stand along New Democracy are
true can be discussed seriously. Their achievements, weakness, defeats
and failures can be discussed separately. Instead of going further, it
may be summed up with the observation that the October Revolution did
not have immediate impact on Manipur in its historical time of the first
two decades. However, after several decades, there were trickled down
inspirations that came indirectly in different periods of time that came
through inspirations generated as a result of information about
revolutionary movements and people’s democracy in various Asian
countries that were more or less a continuation of the revolutionary
legacy of the October Revolution.
FINALLY
The
contemporary era of domination and plunder by imperialism that
functions through collaboration of the monopoly finance capital with
subordinate regional bourgeoisie and local reactions who are dependent
on the share of imperialist loots is marked by subjugation, oppression,
instabilities, insecurities, unrests and destructions in various forms
across the globe. The historical context of 1910s that necessitated
revolutionary initiatives towards achieving world peace vis-à-vis
imperialist wars, social equality and justice, national liberation and
social emancipation remained unchanged in the first two decades of the
21st
century. The struggle to achieve People’s Democratic Revolution is
still relevant in the advanced countries, underdeveloped countries and
oppressed regions. Stalin rightly pointed out, “Capitalism may become
partly stabilized, it may rationalize its production, turn over the
administration of the country to fascism, temporarily hold down the
working class; but it will never recover the “tranquility,” the
“assurance,” the “equilibrium” and the “stability” that it flaunted
before; for the crisis of world capitalism has reached the stage of
development when the flames of revolution must inevitably break out, now
in the centers of imperialism, now in the periphery, reducing to naught
the capitalist patch-work and daily bringing nearer the fall of
capitalism.” It is high time that we celebrate the centennial of the
October Revolution not merely for the symbolic triumph of the Soviet in
1917 but for paving the way to building a united front of the
revolutionary forces to defeat imperialism, its fascist variations and
local reactions.
Long live the national democratic struggle of the Filipino peoples against imperialist plunders and local reactions
Long live people’s democratic movement
Dr. Malem Ningthouja
Chairperson, Campaign for Peace and Democracy (Manipur)
6th May 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment