Carry on the Struggle Against Modern Revisionism
We shall have to carry on daily the struggle against revisionism, adopting the tactics of area-wise seizure of power. Certain revisionist ideas are firmly rooted inside the party. We shall have to carry on the struggle against them. We are discussing some questions here.
(1) The question that has assumed importance today in the struggle against revisionism is the complete support given by the Soviet leadership to the reactionary ruling class of India. They have announced that they will give India an aid of Rs. 600 crores during the Fourth Five Year Plan. The idea that Soviet aid is strengthening India’s Independence is extremely wrong. For, there is no class analysis behind this. We shall have to place clearly before the people our views against this support. If support is given to the government of India which is following the path of co-operation with imperialism, and feudalism, it is the reactionary class which is strengthened. So Soviet aid is not strengthening the democratic movement of India, but is increasing the strength of the reactionary forces in co-operation with US-led imperialism and the Soviet. It is the Soviet-US. co-operation of modern revisionism that we are observing in India—a satanic association against the people’s liberation struggles in the future. We are seeing from our experience in India that the dominance of the big monopolists exists on the production of the big industries that have grown in the public sector with Soviet aid. So the State will not be able to control the power of the monopolist employers through public sector industries, it is the monopolist employers who are controlling the production of the public sector industries. Our experience is the same in both the cases of steel and petroleum.
(2) The question that has become important to us to-day is bourgeois nationalism. This nationalism is extremely narrow and it is narrow nationalism that is today the biggest weapon of the ruling class. This weapon they are using not only in the case of China, but also on any question like Pakistan, etc. By raising the slogan of national unity and other slogans, they want to preserve the exploitation of monopoly capital. We should remember that the sence of unity of India has arisen as a result of anti-imperialist movement. As the Indian Government is carrying on compromising with imperialism, that sense of unity is being struck at its root. There is only one aim at the root of the slogan of unity given by the present ruling class, and that is unity for the exploitation by monopoly capital. So this slogan of unity is reactionary and Marxists must oppose this slogan. The slogan—”Kashmir is an inalienable part of India”—is given by the ruling class in the interest of plundering. No Marxist can support this slogan. It is an essential duty of the Marxists to accept the right of self-determination by every nationality. On the questions of Kashmir, Nagas, etc., the Marxists should express their support in favour of the fighters. The consciousness of a new unity will come in the course of the very struggle against this government of India of imperialism, feudalism and big monopolists, and it is in the interest of the revolution that it will be necessary to keep India united then. That unity will be a firm unity. It is from this consciousness of nationality that there have been struggles in South India against the imposition of Hindi and 60 people have lost their lives in this year of ’65. So if the significance of this struggle is belittled, the working class will isolate itself from the struggles of the broader masses. It is in the interest of the working class that the efforts for development of these nationalities should be supported.
(3) “Establishing class analysis in the peasants’ movement”. At the present stage of the revolution the entire peasantry is the ally of the working class, and this peasantry is the biggest force of the People’s Democratic Revolution of India and it is by keeping this in mind, we shall have to march forward in the movement of the peasantry. But all peasants do not belong to the same class. There are mainly four classes among the peasants—rich, middle, poor and landless—and there is the rural artisan class. There are differences in their revolutionary consciousness and ability to work according to the conditions. So Marxists must always try to establish the leadership of the poor and landless peasants over the entire peasant movement. The mistake that is often made while analyzing the class of the peasants is to determine it on the basis of the title deeds of land. This is a dangerous mistake. It has to be analyzed on the basis of their earning and level of living. The peasant movement will become militant to the extent we establish the leadership of the poor and landless peasants over the entire peasant movement. It should be remembered that whatever fighting tactics is accepted on the basis of the support of the broad peasantry, it can never be in any sense adventurism.
It should be remembered that all these years, basing ourselves on the support of the non-peasantry we have looked for narrowness of the peasant movement, and whenever repression came we thought that there must have been some adventurism. It should be remembered that no movement of the peasants on basic demands will follow a peaceful path. For a class analysis of the peasant organization and to establish the leadership of the poor and landless peasants, the peasantry should be told in clear terms that no fundamental problem of theirs, can be solved with the help of any law of this reactionary government. But this does not mean that we shall not take advantage of any legal movement. The work of open peasant associations will mainly be to organize movements for gaining legal benefits and for legal changes. So among the peasant masses the most urgent and the main task of the party will be to form party groups and explain the programme of the agrarian revolution and the tactics of area-wise seizure of power. Through this programme, the poor and landless peasants will be established in the leadership of the peasant movement.
(4) From 1959, on every democratic movement of India, the government has been increasingly launching violent attacks. We have not given leadership to any active resistance movement against these violent attacks. We gave the call for passive resistance in the face of these attacks, like the mourning procession after the food movement, among such instances. We shall have to remember Comrade Mao Tsetung’s teaching—”Mere passive resistance against repression drives a wedge in the fighting unity of the masses and invariably leads to the path of surrender.” So, in the present era during any mass movement, active resistance movement will have to be organized. The programme of active resistance has become an absolute necessity before any mass movement. Without this programme, to organize any mass movement today means to plunge the masses in despondency. As a result of the passive resistance of 1959, it was not possible to organize any mass rally on the demand for food in Calcutta in the years 1960-61. This organization of active resistance will arouse a new confidence in the minds of the masses and the tide of struggle will arise. What do we mean by active resistance? First, preservation of cadres. For this preservation of cadres, proper shelters and communication system are necessary. Secondly, teaching the common people the techniques of resistance, like lying down in the face of firings, or taking the help of some strong barrier, forming barricades, etc. Thirdly, efforts to avenge every attack with the help of groups of active cadres, which has been described by Comrade Mao Tsetung as “Tit for tat struggle.” At the initial stage, in proportion to their attacks, we shall be able to avenge a few attacks only. But if even a little success is gained in one case, extensive propaganda will create new enthusiasm among the masses. These active resistance struggles are possible in cities and in the countryside, everywhere. This truth has been tested in the Negro resistance movement of America.
(5) There is no clear-cut idea in the Party about the underground organization. A secret organization does not grow merely if a few leaders stay underground. On the contrary, these very leaders face the danger of getting isolated from the Party ranks. If party leaders go underground and work as leaders of open mass organizations, they will invariably get arrested. So the underground leadership will have to go forward with the work of building a secret Party. So, it is not a fact that the task of forming a secret Party is solely that of the underground leaders; every Party member should work for the secret organization and through those new Party cadres the Party’s links with the masses will be established. Only then the underground leaders will be able to work as leaders. So in this era, the main call before the Party is—every Party member will have to form a Party Activist Group. These Activist Groups will have to be enthused with revolutionary politics. This task of forming Activist Groups will be the main task for all Party members of all fronts. How soon we can raise these activists to Party membership will depend on how many new activists these activists will be able to collect. Only then we can get a large number of Party cadres unknown to the police and all the difficulties of underground leaders in maintaining links with the party ranks will disappear. Some revisionist ideas among us, about political and organizational matters and mass organizations etc. have been pointed out here. Today Party members will have to think anew about every mass movement. In the style of our movement, in our organizational thinking, in other words in almost every sphere of our lives, revisionism has built its nest. As long as we cannot uproot it, the new revolutionary Party cannot be built, India’s revolutionary possibilities will be hindered. History will not forgive us.