Path of Indian Revolution-Present Context’

 

‘Path of Indian Revolution-Present Context’ is a testament that the path of protracted peoples war remains the only viable path for a radical transformation of Society- Harsh Thakor

Booklet ‘Path of Indian Revolution-Present Context’ published by Former Revolutionary Students Forum is a testament that the path of protracted peoples war remains the only viable path for a radical transformation of Society and for extinguishing the semi-feudal ad semi-colonial exploitation executed by feudal and comprador bourgeoisie classes aligning with imperialism.

This book is an intervention of resistance to politically, theoretically and ideologically confront the challenge created by the crisis generated by former leaders through surrender and ideological capitulation. It sharpens revolutionary clarity and the book critically examines revolutionary clarity and rekindles debate.

Engaging in penetrative, lucid and analytical diagnosis, the authors explore the flaws of the surrender line, unfurl the role played by the state in engineering internal dismantling, and give an effective rebuttal to charges that theory of Protracted Peoples war has become obsolete. It astutely and clinically refutes state repression and ideological capitulation, rekindling revolutionary theory and practice. In a most comprehensive and logical manner they defend the path and achievements of Protracted Peoples War path in India.

‘Path of Indian Revolution-Present Context’ is a most creditable and effective rebuttal to reformist or revisionist politics, summing up numerous aspects in a most coherent manner. A balanced and methodical approach in defending theory of people’s war and exposing pitfalls of practice in Maoist movement. Also chronicles historical events most systematically, relevant to the debate. Overall makes a sound testament that the C.P.I(Maoist) and it’s processor groups ushered anew dawn in the history of Indian Maoism., and logically defends essence of Maoist military line.

The book infers

1.Whether Naxalbari has lost it’s relevance.

2.Should the Indian Revolution Rectify it’s course respecting the changes in Indian Society.

3.Whether the Maoist movement was defeated due to disastrous political blunders,

4.Whether Left Sectarian deviations marginalised the Indian Revolutionary Movement

5.Whether there is any concrete alternative for a revolutionary party instead of laying down arms and surrendering.

Venugopal and Vasudeva Rao not only orchestrated the surrender of nearly 250 guerillas along with their arms, but disillusioned ranks by declaring that the movement was on the precipice of crashing and continuing guerilla warfare was meaningless. Acting complicitly with the state apparatus they engineered further surrenders., harbouring capitulation. Such mass surrenders have given a mortal blow to the revolutionary movement.

The merciless Operation Kagar, brutally liquidating Maoist guerillas, had a negative influence in demoralising the Maoist leadership, who relinquished the revolutionary path and called for surrender to the Indian state.

Analysis of Contributors

N Venugopal instils a positive spirit amidst a backdrop of setback, exploring how inspite of facing grave setbacks, movements would be resurrected more expansive in character, drawing lessons from past experiences. He navigates how armed struggle is law of history., not relying on subjective decisions.

Venugopal meticulously examines how a temporary withdrawal from armed struggle can never safeguard a permanent retreat.

Venugopal also makes a through exploration and examination of the relations of production in India making a testament of why India is still semi-feudal and semi-colonial. He touches on the paradigms that define a capitalist or semi-feudal society.

Pani explores how Operation Kagar by itself was unable to extinguish the movement and thus the state manufactured a method of destroying it from within. He critically refuted the arguments defending surrender, introducing concept of ‘Operation Kagar.’ He dwelled on the manner guerilla zones were established and their feasibility of surviving. Pani emphasised that the revolutionary movement had no option but to adopt a military path from it’s very inception.to counter the immense military power and intense repression of the state. He elaborated on not only addressing the people’s needs but studying their cultural and social identities. He touched on the seizure of state power on an area-to-area basis. Even if the guerilla zones underwent serious damage during Operation Kagar, the experience gained in building them is invaluable. Inspite of shortcomings in practice, and inappropriate tactics to changing conditions, the strategic perspective of establishing base areas was correct. Pani summed up the importance of the 1975 self-criticism document of The Andhra Pradesh state committee. He underlined how revolutionary consciousness and forms of practice must be viewed together, taking into consideration the relationship and the contradictions that spring between the two. Pani narrated how protracted peoples war in India crystallised, placing equal importance to people’s war and democratic struggles. He traced how the distinctive features of the Indian revolutionary movement, of fusing open and partial struggles with armed struggle. Pani narrated how individuals were chosen and moulded into political activists, and revolutionary fighters, from the very beginning.

Pani differentiated the conditions existing 50 years ago in India and from the Chinees formulation of Peoples War. In his view to interpret peoples War purely through the lens of Mao or on basis of Chinese conditions would be sterile dogmatism. In his view, to advance it is imperative to make a rupture from the past or earlier eras and how path of protracted peoples war has evolved within the Indian revolutionary movement. Progressively, Pani diagnosed that the specifities of China in Mao’s era , of India from 1969-74and international conditions in those eras are now redundant. He mentioned past features that have eclipsed today, like USSR existing as a Socialist Country, during the Chinese Revolution, Chinese Cultural Revolution during Naxalbari and shaping of a Third World War in the 1970’s.

Earlier Pani examined whether the Indian Maoist line was mechanical transposition from China. In detail he explored the genesis and crystallisation of the military strategy of protracted peoples war in China. He navigated all the important events that engineered it’s derivation, particularly the intensive period between 1927-30 which was a turning point in the Chinees Revolution and the essence of the theory. He pointed out how China did not have a centralised state, lacking modern systems of administration, which gave rise to Mao formulating PPW military theory, to confront a more powerful adversary.

Pani also explored the low Intensity Conflict features, the aftermath of the Surajkhand plan, the manner the Maoist movement remained afloat

N.Ravi scrutinizes the ‘temporary’ withdrawal of armed struggle, asserting that it paves the way for a permanent surrender. He diagnoses the dialectical link between modes of production and revolutionary strategy. and why penetration of capitalist relations is not a perquisite for negating path of protracted peoples war in the Indian context.

N.Ravi explores how and why the movement is submerged in a deep crisis., making a transition into a state of stagnation. Analytically, he distinguished the features imperative for undertaking Insurrection strategy or Peoples War strategy .He penetrated the sphere of mechanical application of peoples war theory and the evolution of the massline concept through the self-criticism initiated by the CPI(ML).Ravi noted that unlike the Chinese experience, the Indian movement had no standing army, ,and only after two decades of revolutionary struggle was a peoples guerilla army formed in year 200,whih in 2004 turned into the Peoples Liberation Guerilla army. Thus, he formulated that as even now it had not evolved into a peoples liberation army like in China, it is incorrect to conclude that the CPI(Maoist) has blindly followed the Chinees path, not having followed Moa’s military tactics as outlined.

He also elaborated on the debate over India’s mode of production, the rise of the comprador big bourgeoisie, the relation between production relations and revolutionary strategy, impact of Imperialist domination, distortion of democracy in India, Limits of legal struggles and state backed activity, learning lessons from last few decades, making rupture from mechanical lineage, the revolutionary path for India, mobilising basic classes and preserving forces versus preserving revolution.

Ravi diagnoses the flaws of practice of the Maoist movement but still in balanced manner defends the tactics of protracted peoples war in India. He necessitates reviewing errors in tactics in military line and political line, with lack of alignment with sporadic changes. He stressed on creatively developing work in urban areas and plain regions .Logically, Ravi explained why protracted peoples war is imperative with the existence of an authoritarian state, and geographical and social condition conducive for peoples war .He sums up the transition of distorted capitalist relations .Ravi explains how surveillance is far more intensive in urban areas He diagnosed it was a mechanical view that protracted peoples war must be abandoned if capitalist relations sprouted up., semi-feudal, semi-colonial relations automatically imply protracted peoples war path.

Ravi concluded that the CPI(Maoist), which stick by the line of Peoples Protracted War, is the only one that built a strong movement. He contrasted the betrayal of the present leaders through surrender with that of Kondapalli Seetharamiah in 1977, when he called only for temporary withdrawal., and no moral abandonment of armed struggle.

Ajith lucidly and convincingly refuted that that the principal contradiction has now turned from feudalism versus the masses to the comprador bourgeoise versus the masses. Drawing ample examples from revolutionary experiences in China and Vietnam, he made a testament of ruptures in principal contradiction do not make peoples war theory irrelevant. Illustratively he examines how semi-feudal relations are continuing in new forms, referring to penetration of feudal hegemony in the economic, political social structures and superstructure and how during the globalisation period the old and new feudal forces of dominant castes were the social prop in every step.

Vimal navigates and explores the shortcomings in Venugopal’s 22-page letter. philosophically and politically and unfolds Venugopal’s complicity with the state in the months prior to the surrender. Chronicling and exploring events in meticulous detail he traces the genesis of the peace talks, massacres during peace negotiations, Venugopal’s countdown to capitulation, Venugopal’s analysis of principle contradiction changing and PPW being no longer valid, Venugopal’s objection to ceasefire, Peace pal, juxtaposing all his propositions to that of Maoist ideology and positions of the CPI(Maoist).A most penetrative and analytical diagnosis of the fallacies of the surrendered leader ,with most appropriatalks and disarmament and Philosophical confusion. Vimal strikingly dissects the bankruptcy of Venugote and relevant analogies with other historical periods in China