As
the cold winter takes its hold in the capital of India, the annual
toxic smog has enveloped the city once again. Those who were fighting
against the causes behind this have been brutally detained, and
subsequently arrested. It has been nearly two weeks since the arrest of
23 student activists associated with the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist student
organization Bhagat Singh Chatra Ekta Manch (bsCEM) and the radical environmentalist organization, The Himkhand,
under the charges of harming “national unity,” attacking police
officers and various trumped up charges pertaining to “outraging the
modesty of women” police officers. It will also be two weeks since the
entire “left” cohort of Delhi has once again failed to uphold the values
it preaches – despite the open repression on these activists, these
so-called leftists have not even offered any solidarity to the ones
facing police brutality. They failed in July of this year, when 9
activists from Delhi were kept in unlawful custody for over a week and
not a peep was made by the organizations who shared common platforms
with these activists for years. Instead, the organizations which faced
the state repression, such as bsCEM, had to go back and raise a call for
protest demanding the release of these activists which ultimately
forced the hand of the state into releasing the unlawfully detained
activists. Later on, we learned of the brutal torture they went through.
Electrocutions, stripping down of women, threats of rape with rods,
thrusting of rural background activists into toilet bowls, casteist
assaults on dalit background activists, none of these incidents were
enough to stir the soul of the “left” of Delhi into action. Once again,
we are at a juncture where there is either silence or active malice
being thrown around by various organizations among the left. Some
organizations find the identification of the immortal martyr Comrade
Madvi Hidma’s name with the struggle for a better environment as
“sectarian.” Others find fault with the slogans raised, dubbing them
“adventurist.” Disgruntled talks about etiquette within a united front
have also been noted by us. All democratic organizations must uphold the
demand to release Hidma’s 23. We must also actively engage in a search
for the spine of Delhi’s left, which seems to be missing in action since
2014, when the fascist Modi’s claims of a 56-inch chest were taken too
seriously by these forces.
Radio Silence from So-Called Fellow Communist Revolutionaries
Delhi’s
political space is riddled with numerous organizations which hold
fraternal ties with political groups upholding the Naxalite stream of
politics. Many continue to hold their programs with the face of Comrade
Charu Majumdar plastered across their banners. Unfortunately for the
people of the city, that is the extent of Naxalbari politics within most
of these organizations. While they continue to use the tag of communist
revolutionaries for themselves, not on ideological grounds, but rather
solely on ancestral grounds, since many of these aforementioned groups
were revisionists who emerged from within the ranks of the original Communist Party of India (ML)
after the party experienced its first temporary setback with the onset
of Operation Steeple Chase against the Naxalites and their Lal Sena.
Charu Majumdar’s Eight Historic Documents were the historic
turning point for the Indian communist movement and the Naxalbari
uprising, making a clean break with modern revisionism and finally
dragging the movement out from the quagmire of Parliamentarianism into
the heights of strategic military line of protracted people’s war. From
the mode of production in India to the
ideological-political-organizational-military line for the Indian
revolution, Charu Majumdar and the All India Co-ordination Committee for Communist Revolutionaries
set the stage for renewed effort completing the New Democratic
revolution in the country. As we have elaborated in a previous article
on the notion of left unity, the forces which stuck to the general line
established by the Naxalbari uprising all coalesced into what is now
known as the CPI (Maoist). Others, meanwhile, formed various centres
such as the CPI (ML) Red Star and CPI (ML) Liberation
which hold ideological-political-organizational positions which mirror
that of the CPI and CPM, sending things back to the dark days before
Charu Majumdar. Worse still, there exists a cohort of parties and groups
which were not even a part of the original CPI (ML) but continue to
opportunistically use the name, such as the Chandra Pulla Reddy inspired CPI (ML) New Democracy, CPI (ML) Mass Line and CPI (ML) Janashakti and the T Nagi Reddy-DV Rao-K Venkaiah inspired CRRI and UCCRI (ML). Anarcho-syndicalist organizations like the student group Collective too have thrown their hat in the game, claiming the Naxalbari heritage.
What
is questionable is that most of these groups have had nothing to say
about the arresting of Hidma’s 23. Meanwhile, ruling class parties, some
of whom have had their political party members annihilated by the Madvi
Hidma-led PLGA Battalion One, such as the Indian National Congress’
Rahul Gandhi, the Shiv Sena’s Aaditya Thackeray and various ministers
and members of the Aam Aadmi Party have already chipped in statements
condemning the brutal detention and arrest of the protesters. Even the
weaker camp of the comprador bureaucratic bourgeoisie-big landlords is
recognizing that the demand raised by the students is a people’s concern
and that students finding recourse within the politics of
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as a solution to the issues that plague the
people of Delhi and the entire country is a democratic right, not a
matter for persecution. Yet, so-called communists, fellow “communist
revolutionaries” who apparently understand the question of politics from
an even more advanced standpoint than bourgeois democratic rights, have
little to say on the matter. In fact, some are even trying to distance
themselves from the entire affair so as to protect themselves from the
BJP’s IT Cell’s trolls and the hired goons on ground called the Delhi
Police. We hope that these “communists,” who already abandoned the
entire notion of a military line, are not too bothered by allegations of
the Delhi Police that the protestors defended themselves when the
police used force against them. We hope, optimistically.
Historically,
our issue with the feeble response from the cohort of “communist
revolutionaries” have actually been a long term complaint of various
revolutionary and democratic organizations working in Delhi. One need
only look at the last two times when the reactionary media brew up a
storm about “Urban Naxal” conspiracies in the city. The first occurred
in 2010, when the Forum Against War on People, a joint front of
various student and labour organizations held a program in Jawaharlal
Nehru University a day after the Tadmetla action where the PLGA
annihilated 76 troops of the CRPF. The media uproar turned the whole
affair into a circus, with the ABVP goons claiming that the FAWP event
was a celebration of the deaths of the CRPF, even though the event had
already been planned and declared much before the news of the action by
the PLGA. Back then too, a large cohort of communist organizations (many
of whom were constituent members of the FAWP) did not take any action
against the backlash the FAWP was receiving, apart from the
Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Democratic Students Union-JNU. DSU-JNU, which
later expelled a sexual opportunist-liquidationist clique led by Umar
Khalid, still ended up being the only organization to demand the JNU
Student Union into action in 2016 when the controversy erupted around
the JNU event where slogans in support of the political prisoner Afzal
Guru were raised. It was DSU which rallied the students of the
university out of their frozen terror from the media and state backlash
into action again, even with ideological-political differences with the
Khalid clique. Over the last two years alone, bsCEM, the torchbearer of
DSU-JNU’s legacy, has continuously faced gossip-based slander for its
militant approach and minimal support from among the “communist
revolutionaries” for continuing to uphold Naxalbari path in its wall
writings. All of this brings us back to the present, where we are seeing
an even more feeble response. It is important to point out that the
combativeness and firmness of political action of these forces is
inversely proportional to the strength of brahmanical Hindutva fascism
and its sweep of saffron terror and repression.
All
of this makes us question the political will of these organizations,
which have reduced Naxalbari uprising into hollow platitudes to win over
a sizeable chunk of genuine Maoist-leaning workers, peasants, students
and youth within their ranks, under the false pretensions of being
united with the cause of the Maoists. There was a time when these forces
were bold enough to stand in common ground with the Maoists, the best
example of which was seen in the Lalgarh people’s struggle, but with the
sharpening contradictions of imperialism, fascist repression is only
intensifying. In light of this, we understand that the distinction
between those who wish to fight and those who wish to bend to its will
is once again become more and more distinct. The same occurred in Nazi
Germany, where the Parliamentarian and social-fascist Social Democratic Party (SPD) near-liquidated itself all in the name of surviving in the times while the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) employed all means available to them to combat fascism. While the KPD formed the Roten Frontkämpferbund,
a paramilitary organization of its own, in preparation of seizure of
state power after numerous street fighting encounters between the
fascists, and communist and democratic youth, the SPD condemned the
street fighting as a whole, thus inadvertently siding the with Nazis
over the Communists. Where the SPD could not at all recognize the
intensifying contradictions between the people and fascism, the KPD was
organizing these militant elements of the masses into a disciplined
armed force to better prepare for what was to come. This is why the
banned and underground KPD survived brutal fascist repression while the
SPD degenerated into a meaningless amorphous political body [KPD, due to
its incorrect ideological-political foundations returned to
Parliamentary revisionism after the defeat of fascism, which led to its
eventual demise]. Perhaps these modern iterations of the SPD would also
call the KPD left adventurists?
On Charges of “Left Adventurism/Sectarianism”
Some forces, such as the co-organizers of the protest Scientists for Society
have dubbed the sloganeering and self defense of the protestors as
adventurist acts. Others like the AIRSO, which was at least the first
organization to lodge a statement in support of the protestors, have
made vague hints towards sectarianism being a problem at the protest.
The charge of left adventurism has been lodged upon Charu Majumdar by
followers of the petite bourgeois capitulationist Ram Nath, who at the
first sight of state repression during Operation Steeple Chase began
murmuring about the mode of production being changed in India and
therefore, the path to revolution to Ram Nath suddenly appeared in his
dreams: an insurrection a la Russia in 1917. Ram Nath, in many ways, was
one of the first among the Naxalites to begin the tradition of thinking
the mode of production has changed anytime the movement goes through an
ebb. He first started out as a member of the Dakshin Desh magazine team led by Com. Kanhai Chatterjee which later became the Maoist Communist Centre of India
(MCCI). After the formation of the CPI (ML), he jumped ship to the new
party instead, finding its line to be the most advanced. Eventually, he
charged Charu Majumdar, KC and the
ideological-political-organizational-military line of the Naxalbari
uprising as left adventurist and then promulgated the same line that is
held by the likes of the grand old revisionist CPI and CPM formations.
Ram Nath is the pioneer of the Sonu (Mallojula Venugopal Rao) model of
surrender. Ram Nath’s political tradition, crystallized in the CLI (ML)
seems to have found its way in the current critique of this protest as
left adventurist. How does Comrade Mao explain “leftist” sloganeering? “We
are also opposed to ‘Left’ phrase-mongering. The thinking of ‘Leftists’
outstrips a given stage of development of the objective process; some
regard their fantasies as truth, while others strain to realize in the
present an ideal which can only be realized in the future. They alienate
themselves from the current practice of the majority of the people and
from the realities of the day, and show themselves adventurist in their
actions.”
Was
hailing Madvi Hidma and by extension, the Bastar model of people’s
development and the Janathana Sarkars as a solution to the environmental
issues of the people, over-estimating the given stage of development?
It is a fact that since people’s dual power exists in the country in
various parts, the principle task of all communists is the slogan “All Power to the Revolutionary People’s Committees.” Upon
the formation of the Soviets, comrade Lenin did not advocate for
participation in elections but pushed for a boycott (both in 1905 and in
1917) and any concessions to the reactionary ruling class state is
nothing but class compromise in such a situation. This is what he
precisely said of such traitorous and cowardly forces: “They are
trying to get away with empty phrases, evasions, subterfuges; they
congratulate each other a thousand times upon the revolution, but refuse to consider what the Soviets of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies are . They refuse to recognise the obvious truth that in as much as these Soviets exist, in as much as they are a power, we have in Russia a state of the type
of the Paris Commune. I have emphasised the words “in as much as”, for
it is only an incipient power. By direct agreement with the bourgeois
Provisional Government and by a series of actual concessions, it has
itself surrendered and is surrendering its positions to the bourgeoisie.” (Lenin, Dual Power,
1917) It is not adventurist to uphold the call for the defense and
expansion of people’s power; it is reactionary, right opportunist and
downright surrender to ignore this objective truth and side with the
ruling class. It is also not surprising that one of the 23 arrested is a
member of their own organization but their entire efforts have been
concentrated on saving their own skin, appeasing the liberal-minded
petite bourgeoisie and becoming a crutch for the ruling class to isolate
the students who rallied the correct political call.
Let us also deal with the definition of sectarianism as “having
and promoting ideas which prevent or obstruct a political group or
party from connecting up with the masses and the mass movement, and from
transforming existing reformist mass struggle into revolutionary mass
struggle.” (Dictionary of Revolutionary Marxism, massline.org)
Having a mass perspective would therefore be the resolution to sectarianism. “A mass perspective
is a point of view regarding the masses which recognizes: 1) That the
masses are the makers of history, and that revolution can only be made
by the masses themselves; 2) That the masses must come to see through
their own experience and struggle that revolution is necessary; and 3)
That the communist must join up with the masses in their existing
struggles, bring revolutionary consciousness into these struggles, and
lead them in a way which brings the masses ever closer to revolution. A
mass perspective is based on the fundamental Marxist notion that a
revolution must be made by a revolutionary people, that a revolutionary
people must develop from a non-revolutionary people, and that the people
change from the one to the other through their own revolutionizing
practice.” (Dictionary of Revolutionary Marxism,
massline.org) Both charges of adventurism and sectarianism are resolved
with the upholding of a mass perspective and we hold that this is
exactly what the protestors held. Instead of aimlessly waiting for the
masses to magically conjure up theories of revolution, instead of
undergoing numerous stages (T. Nagi Reddy line) or phases (Chandra Pulla
Reddy line), these students promoted revolutionary consciousness into a
reformist struggle, not only raising incremental reformatory demands
but exposing the root cause of the problem and the only solution by
which this problem can be solved: New Democratic Revolution waged
against imperialism, feudalism and comprador bureaucratic capitalism.
While the scions of Ram Nath stuck to reform, deliberately ignoring the
responsibility of raising the consciousness and the combativeness of the
masses amidst struggle, some fulfilled their responsibilities as
communist revolutionaries.
On United Front Politics and “Hijacking”
We
have also learned that some organizations who are also constituents of
the joint platform Delhi Coordination Committee for Clean Air are miffed
that the principles of a united front were not properly held as some
organizations took a political line which they differed from and
therefore, “hijacked” the affair. One must expect these sorts of
arguments from those who have no ideological stand on the question of
united fronts in their revolutionary program. Comrade Mao Tse-tung has
pointed out that every organization must maintain its independence and
initiative within a united front. While a common minimum is agreed,
recognizing that political forces within the united front will
creatively, without contravening that common minimum propagate the
demands with their own various political understandings is not an
unknown principle to digest. Hypothetically, in a united front focused
on the issue of opposing caste atrocities, will an Ambedkarite
organization and a communist organization have the same political line
on the common minimum? They will raise the same agreed upon demands, but
the political understanding they have on the issue will both differ and
they will continue to uphold the same in front of the people. The
communist organization would not be “hijacking” the joint platform’s
activities by way of pointing out that the basis of caste in Indian
society remains in its semi-colonial semi-feudal base and the
brahmanical ideology that stems from it. Similarly, bsCEM’s propagation
of the demands always came with the line that they only see the
formation and preservation of Janathana Sarkars as the only real
resolution to the problem of environmental degradation, which they
elaborated in their Indian Express article publicly, after the November 9
protest.
What
is a gross violation of joint platform ethics is the shameless throwing
under the bus undertaken by the Scientists for Society who had no spine
to deal with the online trolling and BJP IT cell goons and caved in to
the pressure to save their own skin from the matter by pointing out how
they abandoned the site where protestors were being brutalized by the
Delhi Police because of the slogans they were raising, much like the
coward Ram Nath. We condemn such public acceptance of cowardice, where
an organizer left their fellow joint organizing groups (as well as a
member of their own organization!) in the hands of the state and left
their allies hanging. The unorganized masses, many of whom have been
arrested, showed much more spine and courage than Scientists for
Society. We also condemn this public airing of dirty laundry within a
joint front, condemning your arrested co-organizers, as a way of saving
one’s skin from fascist backlash. You cannot offer solidarity with those
whose democratic rights were violated at a protest you were a joint
organizer of but you have all the time in the world to go on about
ethics within a united front? We hope that Scientists for Society
matures with our criticism, abandons the bourgeois surrenderist line of
Ram Nath and learns to be real scientists who stand with the most
advanced calls of the people and not in class compromise with fascism.
An Appeal to Those Who Really Wish to Smash Brahmanical Hindutva Fascism
Comrade
Karl Marx has said that one is truly free when one grasps the meaning
of necessity. To know the meaning of necessity, is to know that without
liberating the productive forces from the backward relations of
production, freedom can never be achieved. Today, those who recognize
the need to smash brahmanical Hindutva fascism, whether they be in the
ranks of those political forces we mentioned above or in any other, the
first step towards actual freedom is the courage and discipline to not
concede ground to the ruling class. The people have fought hard to win
over some basic demands, which are now continuously being flipped over.
The new Labour Codes are alarm bell reminding us once again of what the
working class has lost, when it already had so little. During these last
15 years of the rise of fascism in this very city, we went from
hundreds congregating in halls to mark the extra judicial killing of
Comrade Azad, the erstwhile spokesperson of the CPI (Maoist), to today
where people have to combat the Police for clean air and recognizing
Comrade Madvi Hidma’s name. Saffron terror has swept across the city,
sinking its claws into the minds of already revisionist and class
compromising “communists.”
At
this juncture, we appeal to those whose backs have been broken by
brahmanical Hindutva fascism to find courage to stand once again by
looking at the example of those who keep fighting, those in their
teenage who are in front of the police and the ABVP goons on the streets
every week, again and again, eradicating the word “fear” itself from
their dictionaries. This is only possible with ideological strength, for
it is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism which gives people the consciousness to
keep at it with the attitude of a proletarian scientist because they
understand that fear is merely an emotion that stems from idealist
philosophy, leading one to make unscientific analysis in and about a
given condition. This is why we once again re-iterate our demand for the
release of Hidma’s 23! Read Nazariya Magazine and sharpen the edge of
your ideological blade!
And remember the words of Comrade Lenin, “let
the liberals and terrified intellectuals lose heart after the first
genuinely mass battle for freedom, let them repeat like cowards: don’t
go where you have been beaten before, don’t tread that fatal path again.
The class conscious proletariat will answer them: the great wars in
history, the great revolutionary problems were solved only by the
advanced classes returning to the attack again and again; and they
achieved victory after having learned the lessons of defeat. Defeated
armies learn well.”
Submitted by Vedika Singh
No comments:
Post a Comment