Revolution in South Asia

An Internationalist Info Project

Rough Notes on the Indian Communist Movement

Posted by Rosa Harris on March 29, 2008

redindia.jpgThese are notes from a presentation by G.N. Saibaba on the history and current lines of different trends among communists in India. Saibaba is the Deputy Secretary of the Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), an All Indian Federation of Revolutionary People’s Organisations. Thanks to the Fire on the Mountain blog for making these notes available. Feel free to comment or expand on these notes.

1. The communist movement in India today

There are three different main streams in the revolutionary movement:

a. CPI (Maoist) – follows the line of People’s War steadfastly and surging forward.

b. CPI (ML) Naxalbari, CT, PCC (ML) and others like CPCRML who are close to the Maoist party in terms of line to a greater or lesser extent.

Also Red Flag – Communist Revolutionary Platform, CPI (ML) Central Team, and CPM (ML) New Democracy — these are all small, but they have a small mass base. They partake in mass struggles but do not conduct armed struggle at present. They are right deviationist in the understanding of the Maoists.

CPI (ML) Liberation is now fast turning revisionist, a fairly large party mainly in Bihar.

There are no left deviationist groups remaining in India. There used to be some Lin Piao groups, they hardly exist anymore.c. Communist League of India (ML) split from the CPI (ML) originally in the 1970s. They believe that India is a capitalist country. They split into five different groups. They are small and work in urban pockets.

The Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party, Marxist CPM have been in power, and are not considered to be the Communist Parties any longer. The CPM has turned into a social fascist force allied with the reactionary ruling classes and the imperialist forces.

Outside the communist framework are Democratic movements: socialists, Gandhians. Most of the Socialists have joined the ruling classes. But some of them also partake in some peoples struggles. They have shrunk and are small now, but still do some positive work some times.

2. Notes

One of the largest groups in 1972 was formed under the leadership of Chandra Pulla Reddy and others. This group argued for people’s resistance first as a condition. There was another group under the leadership of T N Reddy. They argued also for people’s resistance to exist as a first condition. Both argued for parliamentary participation. The third major group was CPI (ML) Liberation, later led by Vinod Mishra. These were right-deviationist from the beginning. They developed a peasants’ movement in Bihar and continued with armed struggle for a short while. During that time there was also a group led by Ramanatham. He argued that India was not semi-feudal but capitalist. He formed the Communist League of India (ML). The others are those that believed in armed struggle from the beginning: CPI (ML) Peoples War in the south of India, and in the North, (MCC) and the CPI (ML) Party Unity belong to this category. They also started armed struggle in Bihar since 1970s. These three forces formed their parties by the 1980s separately.

There are two more groups formed by the 1980s: Provisional Central Committee (ML), and CPI (ML) Second CC. Both operated in Bengal. This was the situation in the 1980s.

The first party that transformed its nature was CPI (ML) Liberation. Initially they argued for armed struggle. But stopped and took up “people’s resistance” and the parliamentary path. The 1980s is the decade when the parties worked among the people and formed their own mass base in different regions.

There was an attempt already in 1970 to unite the various revolutionary groups into the United Revolutionary Party soon after the revolutionaries came out of CPM. The CPI (ML) that was formed under the leadership of Charu Mazumdar with all genuine revolutionaries. This consolidated CPI (ML) split into many parts after 1972.

The MCC emerged from outside this formation under the leadership of Kanai Chatterjee. The MCC renamed itself as MCCI by 2002.

The disagreements were on the issues of armed struggle, revolutionary situation international situation and participation in parliamentary elections. Some said we have to wait for the people’s resistance to be strengthened before initiating armed resistance. Others argued that armed struggle isn’t possible. The position taken by the MCC, CPI (ML) People’s War and CPI (ML) Party Unity was that of the line of Protracted People’s War by initiating armed struggle from the very beginning.

India is not a democratic country like a European one. In Europe, you have a democratic space because the democratic institutions developed from the struggles of the people, even though they were and are in the hands of the bourgeoisie. In India the parliamentary institutions were imposed by the colonial masters to enhance their colonial rule. They were not created through people’s struggles. In India there is little democratic space. The bourgeois class in India is a deformed reactionary force since its inception. This class hadn’t emerged naturally, but was propped up by the British colonial masters. Therefore, the initial progressive role that was present in the European bourgeoisie was not present in the Indian bourgeois class. It allied itself with the feudal classes from the beginning. Therefore, we must use armed struggle as the democratic space is not intrinsic to our society after the colonial intervention. The illusion of democratic space is there in the form of parliamentary institutions and formal democratic rights but not in reality. The moment one forwards the people’s demands one will face repression from the state. How do you forward and defend the movement of the people without arms?

The sections of the revolutionaries following People’s War also held the view that there is no reason to participate in parliamentary elections. This would create illusions about democratic space, which doesn’t exist in reality.

More than 50 splintered revolutionary groups were formed after 1972.

In the 1990s the unification process started. During the 1980s three parties built vast armed struggle areas, other revolutionary parties organised the peasants, but did not start armed struggle. The MCC, Peoples War and Party Unity had discussions for unity. In the unification process People’s War and Party Unity united along with, and formed CPI (ML) Peoples War in 1998. The process continued until 2004, then CPI (Maoist) was formed when MCCI and CPI (People’s War) merged together.

The other groups: CP Reddy group unified with other groups and formed CPI (ML) Janashakti (people’s power) by 1996. Many other groups joined them. But it split again after a year.

30 years of history proved that those that believed in armed struggle could sustain and develop.

A few smaller groups that believe in People’s War are still outside CPI (Maoist). Like CPI (ML) Naxalbari in Kerala. From the point of view of the Maoist Party that is largest, all other groups that never practised armed struggle are in the right revisionist line. They are not ready for unification.

The CPI (ML) Janashakti reviewed its policies after all the splits and summed up that it was wrong not to have initiated People’s War, and have initiated discussions with the Maoist party at one stage.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Rough Notes on the Indian Communist Movement”

  1. rizwan karim said

    Note: I m coveraging English weekly the Space Times poitically. I want to write an artile on the Naxal Movement. Please send the matter, photographs, brief history and other informations about the movement. Thanks
    Rizwan Karim Pakistan
    0092-346-6210742

  2. Qurbani said

    Here are my observations on your points and organisations mentioned above apart from the C.P.I(Maoist)

    1.Communist Party Re-Organization Centre of India Marxist Leninist-C.P.R.C.I.(M.L)

    This new formation is closer to Comrade Mao’s line than any other organization in India on the theoretical and practical plane. On the International Line and on it’s analysis of the agrarian revolutionary Perspective and military line it has outstanding Marxist Leninist clarity.It has a most complete thesis of the relationship of the mass organization with the proletarian party. It explains the distinct identity and the need to function democratically within the mass organization and not impose party politics on the mass organizations. It also explains why theoretically armed Struggle and active boycott of election cannot be carried out in the present circumstances,as well as why participation in Elections is capitulationist in the present era ,without adequate development of the proletarian party.Only with forming revolutionary alterntive organs of political power and adequate political consiousness can the tactic of ‘active boycott’of elections be implemented Its basic Documents explain that today the co-relation between the revolutionary forces with the enemy has not been sufficiently developed to carry out armed Struggle. It explains the meaning of creating revolutionary base areas and military guerilla Zones .A profound contribution of the unity is not making the issue of whether 1969 formation of the C.P.I.M.L was correct or not.(It would be a matter to be decided only when the party was re-organised. Earlier this was a major controversy amongst revolutionary Groups)It is interesting that one of the components of this organization the C.P.I.M.L(C.T.)earlier insisted that the 1969 formed Organisation led by Charu Mazumdar was the actual party. Quoting the ist Issue of their publication, ‘Thecomrade’, “This Unification brought the Party Question into Sharp Focus.It has not only emphasized the pressing need and crucial significance of the Party Ree-Organisation for bringing about a new high tide in the Revolutionary Movement but also projected the line based approach to party re-organization. This highlighted the other facet of the party question ,namely the impermissibility of diluting the distinct ideological political identity of the political party. The organisation’s insistence on the distinct political identity while seeking to build the party as the leading political core of the revolutionary mass movement of the Indian People,has not only general orientational validity but also particular relevance to the Particular situation.”It has also given significant writing on linking the trade Union movement with the agrarian revolutionary Struggle in the villages.It has a sound thesis on the Workers Front where it explains the need to develop an advanced revolutionary core of workers who could propogate revolutionary politics in the villages. There is also a most sound International line demarcating from the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement and deferring the premature formation of a Communist International from the Russian and Chinese Experience.(Remember Stalin’s Comintern was dissolved in 1943 while Mao never called for a Communist International) The Organisation firmly defends the term ‘Mao Tse Tung Thought’ as against the term’Maoism’.It explains that it is the era of Imperialism which is the era of ‘Leninism’ and that even after the completion of the Chinese Revolution and the Cultural Revolution the term ‘Thought of Mao’ was used and not ‘Maoism’. In West Bengal the organization has guided revolutionary democratic trade Union Struggles and promoted joint front agitations on democratic issues uniting forces of both left and right deviationist trends.They gave emphasis on the linking of trade Union Struggles of all sections of the workers Union Struggles irrespective of the political Group leading them..In Andhra Pradesh similarly it created significant trade Union Solidarity movements. In Rajasthan and Maharashtra. it played an important role in guiding revolutionary mass work. It initiated the formation of revolutionary mass papers and strived to develop the correct practice in the trade Unions as against right opportunist and left sectarian practices.It initiated forming a revolutionary workers solidarity platform to co-ordinate workers struggles..In Punjab today the organization has adopted a mass revolutionary approach and has made the greatest revolutionary progress.(More theoretical and practical progresss than any revolutionary Group since the Naxalbari Struggle in 1969)The most significant aspect is maintaining the correct relationship between the mass organization and the political party.A movement of landless Agricultural labourers as well as that of middle and landed peasants has been built demarcating from deviationist tendencies.A Mass Based revolutionary democratic Organisation has been built to give solidarity and sharpen the anti-feudal Struggle which held ralliesof historic significance especially during the elections..Avenues have been created for militant peasant struggles of landless labourers in pockets in the State and for miltant district or statewide peasant struggles amongst the landed peasantry.A revolutionary alternative has been projected through the Party Organisation and the manner of projection(especially as projected by the Rajjeana Campaign and the Election campaign) displays strong theoretical correctness.A trade Union movement has also been built in the towns and major cities giving solidarity with the agarian struggle which is of great significance.Revolutionary movements of the youth and students are taking place and in many areas village youth have displayed enormous revolutionary enthusiasm. In 1998 and 1999 the Organisation carried out election campaigns in Punjab which created a major impactwhere the tactics of active political campaign in contrast to Active Boycott or Participation were implemented. Other groups could hardly make any effect. The content of the party leaflet encouraged the party ranks and followers to distribute it wide for mass consumption. The wide range of issues were explained in simple language.The immediate practical alternative was projected in the leaflet so that people could easily grasp it’s contents.The focus of the state commitees poster was on building the revolutionary movement ,with the agrarian movement as it’s axis, as an alternative The call by the C.P.I.M.Lparty Unity for boycott got no response while Groups like the Janashakti group that polled candidates got no success. Since the period of the Naxalbari and Srikakulam Armed Struggles there has never been practice so close to Comrade Mao TseTung’s mass line as in Punjab as by this organization, in the light of the overall political factor..In Orissa in the Malkangiri district an outstanding tribal Movement has been built, creating a platform for sustained agrarian revolutionary mass movement,similar to that in the phase before the Chinese Communist Party launched the Armed struggle. Or the launching of the Telengana Armed Struggle.In the light of agrarian revolutionary movement it is the most developed struggle towards attaining the mass line since the Naxalabari and Srikakulam era.

    .

    I cannot still award the Communist Party Reorganisation Centre of India (Marxist Leninist) or it’s earlier constituent organisations) with the title of upholder of the “proletarian mass line”.This is because although in their major mass struggles they have the correct concept of the relationship of the party and the mass organization(how a party must democratically function within mass organizations and not impose politics and implemented the mass line in certain struggles),they have still not developed a mass revolutionary military line in practice.No doubt their mass fronts have led struggles representing the mass line,but only on the launching of actual mass protracted revolutionary armed Struggle can the verdict be properly resolved whether an organsiation is truly upholding ‘the mass line. In the author’s view the C.P.R.C.I(M.L) has to create a alternative revolutionary movement at an All India level to decisively claim it’s upholding the mass line’In it’s major states it has done commendable work in the preparatory stages but only when the final red Army is built as in China ,Nepal or Phillipines and Peoples War is launched implementing Mao’s line can the verdict be given.The most important criteria is at what stage can you define or uphold apeoples revolutionary movement as implementing the mass line.We may have to differentiate between the’ mass line’ and the ‘mass revolutionary approach.’Many of their mass organization struggles like in Punjab and particularly in Orissa in the agrarian revolutionary Front are creating the grounds for peasant’s eventual armed struggle or uprising or people.However mass peasant revolutionary struggles have not been led which could lead to the formation of a peoples Guerilla Army. This was the stage at which mass armed struggle was built up in Telanagana and for a short period in Srikakulam and Naxalbari.(before left adventurism came in. In the author’s opinion the organisation in certain states has made major inroads and is basically correct in it’s view on elections(opposes active boycott and participation as a legal form of struggle) and that the launching of armed struggle is premature.in the majority of areas.It is also correct that in Punjab and Orissa it is still premature to carry out armed struggle. The correct preparatory mass line application is a necessary perquisite for launching a revolutionary armed struggle .The armed struggle must be linked to the agarian revolutionary struggle and based on it. A mass revolutionary peasant uprising may not have taken place but there have been demonstrations of peasants in Orissa and Punjab defending their rights or offering mass resistance against enemy forces carrying traditional armed weapons..The party election programmes in 1998 and 1999 were striking examples of creating a base for a mass revolutionary political movement,particularly the peasantry.Significantly teams of workers headed the propaganda campaignsOne other significant trend is the self –defence and aggression displayed by the Punjab peasantry in asserting their right to stage conferences or mass protests.In Jethuke by the landed peasantry in 2000, in Chandigarh by the landed peasantry and in Balahr Vinju in 1994 by landless peasants the peasantry displayed heroic defiance against the police forces who attempted to thwart their efforts to organize..One significant factor as though democratic revolutionary struggles have been launched by the peasantry in Punjab,a stage has not yet been reached when land re-distribution seizures are taking place or land re-distributed. )In Orissa however peasant seizures of captured land have already started taking place and laying base foe armed peasnt struggle. Mao advanced the theory of inseperable link between the agrarian revolution and the guerilla war to establish base areas.A thorough going agrarian revolution which includes the distributoin of landlords land to the poor peasants and agricultural labourers,to develop and consolidate base areas –Mao implemented such a programme,in the period of agrarian revolutionary war.The Red army led by the C.P.C implemented it. However the most important historical question is that if one studies the history of revolution no country has taken so long a period to develop revolutionary armed struggle In 1927 after the Nanchang Uprising. China launched it’s struggle only 9 years after formation of their their party(in 1921) and six years of preparatory stage.Columbia,Phillipines,Nepal , Peru,or our very own Telengana Armed Struggle may have taken longer time.(Even Peru launched it in 1980 after 16 years of party-re-organsation) but in a far shorter period accomplished the task.- than the prest Indian revolutionary movement has taken to do. The various splits and wrong trends in the period of Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India(Marxsit Leninist) from the 1970’s to mid –1980’s as well as the splits and inactivity of the Central Team of the C.P.I.M.L delayed the road.It is arguable that today there may have been areas in India where mass armed struggle could have been carried out in certain areas if the mass line was correctly implemented., particularly in Bihar and Andhra Pradesh which had strong revolutionary peasant movements.In West Bengal it has been unable to develop an alternative revolutionary Movement on the problems of price rise, closure of factories, unemployment and most important, on the agrarian front.

    The most important criteria is at what stage can you define or uphold a peoples revolutionary movement as implementing the mass line.We may have to differentiate between the ‘ mass line’ and the ‘mass revolutionary approach.To the author toady an ideal mass line is in which armed struggle can be waged in certain areas while in other areas of setback Parliamentary and legal forms of struggle can be utilised.There is also need to study whether there is scope for launching peasant armed struggle in certain areas ofcourse refuting the adventurist line of annihilation of the Class enemy.’It has yet to be theoretically analysed whether it is not the situation to launch armed struggle in totality.In the current period true the Maoist are often commiting acts of Individual annihialtion of the class Enemy but cannot a mass arevolutionary armed struggle be implemented in light of the revolutionary peasant Movements or land which took place in Andhra Pradesh,Dandakaranya and Bihar?In the times of Srikakulam and Naxalbari Movement such conditions prevailed which gained asetback after the Charu Mazumdar adventurist line and the Emegency.

    Theoretically,not enough light has been thrown on the ideological weaknesses in the eras of Stalin and Mao.The mass repressions in the Stalin era, the over characterisation of the personality cult of Comradae Mao Tse Tung by Lin Biao and the over emphasis placed on Soviet Social Imperialism by the Maoist C.C.P have been overlooked.

    2. C.P.I.(M.L)led by K.N Ramchandran and Kanu Sanyal

    In late 1979 the central Re-Organisation Committee of the C.P.I.ML was formed.It was the first organization to uphold the Gang of 4 in China and reject the Dengist 3 Worlds theory. The Organisation’s efforts at an ideological level were the main reason that he term Mao Tse Tung Thought was not replaced by ‘Maoism’.The group predominantly led Struggles in Kerala.It adopted the analysis in 1982 that India is a neo-colony and not a semi-colony.Later The Group capitulated as a result of ideological de-generation.The leader of the Group K.Venu stated that India is a conglomeration of Nationalities and that now the principle contradiction was that between the nationalities and the State.He advocated that all the states would have different Communist Parties fighting for the liberation of each nationality.Eg.Kerala ,Uttar Pradesh,Punjab Etc. Venu also supported the multiparty System and opposed the party as the Vanguard in his document “Proletarian Democracy’..In 1988 a new Group called the Red Flag led by K.N Ramchandran emerged in Kerala.It held proletarian Revolutionary stands on various aspects of the line and opposed Venu’s Line. It stated that the proletarian positions had to be a necessary perquisite to qualify support for any nationality Struggle. The Red Flag Group countered this through propaganda explaining the Leninist Understanding of the line and the need of the proletarian Party. .
    In Kerala the Red Flag Group built a strong mass movement. It made strong efforts at countering the revisionist line of Venu.It also led a nationwide historic Unity Platform to unite the proletarian party.It called for a platform of Uniting all Revolutionary forces upholding Mao Tse Tung thought who opposed parliamentarism.It established links with the Peoples war Group ,Chandra Pulla Reddy Group Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India,Central Team and other groups in the Revolutionary Camp.This Organization gave great emphasis on combating sectarianism and stated that Sectarianism was the prime enemy in the movement.It had a strong opinion that in each state every group had a tendency to overemphasise a particular area and not give balanced Emphasis on all the parts of a particular district or state.It brought out a theoretical journal explaining that sectarianism was the chief cause for disunity in the revolutionary Camp.It brought about a most well analysed thesis where they explained the difference between the party and mass struggles .It stressed on not using armed Struggle one sidedly and building up mass protest movements and agitation. It also stressed on not neglecting work on the working class.It upheld the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and opposed participation in elections.The Red Flag Group also stated that secretism was a wrong trend.The secretary K.N Ramchandran stated that The party must openly come out and openly hold it’s banner. He also opposed armed squad actions not integrating with the broad masses.Mass Organisations functioning openly were a necessary perquisite in his view.He also explained the need for joint united actions.The Organisation criticized other revolutionary groups of varying trends for not coming out openly in 1991 in mass revolutionary Campaigns. when state Repression was launched in Andhra Pradesh particularly on the mass movement led by the Peoples War Group as well as when the Revisionist Regimes of he U.S.S R and East European Countries were overthrown.(Groups in their view should have led a united campaign defending Socialism when those regimes were toppled and explained that it was Revisionism and not Socialism that was defeated) Comrade K,N held programmes in Mumbai explaining the Fall of the Communist Party of Soviet Union in 1991.The Red Flag Group criticized revolutionary Groups for not unitedly staging programmes defending Socialism and combating the Revisionist Onslaught in 1989 to 1991. as well as against opposing State Repression in Andhra Pradesh in 1991.Aftrer the Communal riots in Mumbai on the Babri Masjid issue they openly criticized the revolutionary groups for not coming out of their “mountain holes and addressing the masses. ‘They also opposed the Dengist 3 worlds theory stating that it created wrong understanding amongst revolutionary groups. The Red Flag Group explained that left Adventurist understanding of the Charu Mazumdar phase was the result of Lin Biaosm within the Chinese Communist Party in the late 1960’s and the Early 1970’s.The Red Flag Group led a major movement in Kerala in memory of martyred Comrade Verghese.They held huge rallies against the Communist Party Of India Marxist to build a memorial.They also led struggles against Bus fare hikes .During the Collapse of the Communist Regimes in East Europe major mass programmes were staged explaining that it was revisionism that was defeated and not Socialism.Rallies were carried out throughout Kerala.In other regions like West Bengal, Mumbai and Delhi hall meetings were held defending Socialism.One historical Contribution of Red Flag Group was that they defended Mao Tse Tung Thought against using the term Maoism.They also opposed the formation of the Organisation ,the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement and insisted that only an International Revolutionary Platform has to be formed.(Significant in defending proletarian revolutionary line.Please read my essay in the same section on Critique of Mao Tse Tung Thought where I have explained this)The Red Flag section also differentiated against the two deviationist understandings on the question of elections in 1989.They opposed participation as well as did not give the boycott slogan.Instead they gave the call for building the Revolutionary Alternative.The Author is also impressed by the Efforts of the C.P.I.M.L.Red Flag in developing an All India Perspective whereby they functioned in a huge range of states including Kerala ,Tamil Nadu, Karntaka,Maharashtra, Gujarat,Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Bihar ,Madhya Pradesh ,UttarPradesh and Delhi.This was a commendable achievement. 1990 the Leader of the Central Team of the Communist Party of India Marxist Leninist was so impressed that he wished to initiate unity talks with Red Flag Group.However in the mid 1990’s this group deviated from the revolutionary path.The main cause of this was it’s understanding of the Indian State as a neo-colony.India at present is a semi-colony as it is exploited by various Imperialist countries and not just U.S Imperialism.It also opposed feudalism as the main contradiction in India.Having already shown defective understanding on the open functioning of the party they started uniting with right opportunist forces like the Kanu Sanyal Group,the Vinod Mishra Liberation Group Etc.It also opened up it’s party forces completely.This can be attributed to it’s earlier wrong understanding that the party organization must come out openly. True party forces must reach the masses but opening party forces to the state will lead to capitulation. It is like trying to make a fish move without water.(Central Team’s Analysis in their organ Liberation in 1993)The author witnessed the progressive era of the Group in Mumbai. It did it’s level best to create unity, create mass struggles and lead people’s issues. It also did significant work in defending thePeoples war in Peru.it had hall meetings all over the country.(I was present in Mumbai ina school meeting)In slum areas and chawls campaigns were held opposing the Indian Monetary Fund .Price rise and posters were done in various railway stations. There was a tendency of groups to remain huddled in their areas of work which Red Flag Group tried to actively combat. Some Groups were caught up in trade Union work Etc.A youth Front was formed .In Kandivli and Malad areas of Mumbai significant work was done to build youth organization and peoples struggles bas on grass roots issues.During the Rath Yatra of the Vishwa Hindu Parisad in 1990 a wall writing campaign was carried out stating , “You temple and mosque builders ,fight for the peoples right to jobs ,food and shelter!)In 1991 the soundness and clarity of the organization was elected in the author’s discussions with Comrade K.N Ramchandran,the secretary of the organsation.He stated that he supported the position of,the C.C.RI and the Central Team in Punjab during the Khalistani Movement and wished to establish unity with the groups.(Especially after the Sewewla Massacre) In the late 1990’s the Group started participating in the Parliamentary elections..It even openly disclosed their Central Committee Members!On the issue of Kargill it took a collaborationist stand where they took no clear cut stand against the Indian government’s action. In it`s stand of Elections not only it proposes unity with revisionist forces like the IndianLeftist parties but it gives no call for building a revolutionary Alternative.
    In 2005 the C.P.I.(M.L) led by Kanu Sanyal merged with the C.P.I.(M.L)Red Flag to form the ‘C.P.I.M.L”.It was a significant event in the polarisatiion of the revisionist Groups.
    The Author concludes that the Organisation has capitulated to Revisionism

    3. Chandra Pulla Reddy Group-C.P.I.M.L

    Progressive Democratic Students Union upheld Comrade Chandra Pulla Reddy’s line. In Andhra Pradesh from 1972.The C.P.Reddy line opposed individual annihilation but some questions of their line were affected by Opportunism. Comrade C.P.Reddy advocated the use of revolutionary Armed squad actions prematurely .In 1974 Chandra Pula Reddy’s organization merged with the Satya Narayan Singh Group and called the new organization the C.P.Reddy-S.N.Singh Group..It was a Unity of an opportunistic character.He also with S.N.Singh supported the mass movement of Jayaprakash Narayan.Instead of developing mass agrarian revolutionary mass movement in some stages C.P.Reddy used armed squads to shelter the people’s mass movements.No doubt he formed a huge movement but he opposed Nagi Reddy’s ‘massline’ formulation In 1985 the Chandra Pulla Reddy Group which was the strongest revolutionary group in the 1970’s dwindled it’s mass base. A split took place twice in the Organisation .First the Chandra Pula Reddy Group split from the Satya Narayan Singh Group in the 1980.This was because S.N.Singh had called for a United Front with U.S A against the Soviet Union which was class collaborationist.(Ultimately C.P.Reddys own organization fell victim to the Dengist 3 Worlds Theory) and also supported the Janata Party(Opposition party) in the post Emergency Period. Later Pyla Vasudeva Rao split the party claiming that Chandra Pulla Reddy became arrogant and careerist and accused his daughter Nirmal of being undemocratic .This split was baseless and based on a personality cult.In Andhra Pradesh both these groups led the Progressive Democratic Students unionIt also led a trade Union movement Through the Indian Federation of Trade Unions..Like in 1978 the Chandra Pulla Reddy Group now led by Comrade Ramchandran participated in the Elections.This helped capitulate the revolutionary forces.Several cadres were lost as a result of this.Yet several democratic agitations were held.The party paper Vimochana was regularly brought out .Armed action took place based on Comrade C.P Reddy’s theory of Resistance Struggle.In Punjab the Group played a major role in combating the Khalistani movement. Several cadres dipped their blood .Their mass Front Kristi Kisan Union led major agitations of the landed peasantry for minimum wages and agricultural Inputs. However the group had a defective understanding towards revolutionary mass organization and accepted Armed licenses from the Indian state.It is one issue procuring arms through illegal means and other accepting armed licenses from the state .. This was capitulationism They also could not differentiate from the role of the party and mass organisation and formed the Revolutionary Unity Center an open forum that propagated party politics. They opposed the formation of a mass political front to combat the twin terror of State Repression and Khalistani terror. This group considered that mass organizations should only be used for economic issues and not for struggles on the political plane. They rejected the need for a separate mass organization to create blocks of mass revolutionary resistance. However it must be mentioned that this group played a major role in the democratic movement in that period. This year is the 20th death Anniversary year of Chandra Pulla Reddy who died on November 9th 1984. It must be stated that Chandra Pulla Reddy must be complemented for opposing Charu Mazumdar’s left Adventurist trend as well as Vinod Mishra and Satya Narayan Singh’s right oppurtunism.He also maintained the concept of the secret party and promoted the forming of mass organizations. He also developed an All India Perspective where party Units were formed in all parts of the Country. He always stood against the All India Movement being dictated by the strength of tdictated by the strength of the Andhra Party Squads .He stressed that each State committee must have a distinct style of functioning according to the required situation. He opposed the wrong understanding where all nationality Struggles were supported. He also created a mass base in the trade Unions. His main error was in prematurely advocating participation in the parliamentary election and prematurely creating armed squad Units. The C.P.I.M.L New Democracy Group and the Phani Bagchi Group were also 2 split away sections of C.P Reddy The New Democracy Group worked through the peasant front and participated in mass agitation and trade Union Work. The author as a member of the student Front observed the mass work of the group in Mumbai in the early 1990’s.The work done in the trade Union Front was commendable to the extent big union were organized at the Airport section and persistent efforts were made to lead the struggles of mill workers in Mumbai against closures. They also consistently participated in joint front activities against state repression through their trade Union Front The Indian Federation of Trade Unions. However a powerful economist tendency took place in the trade Unions where the Revolutionary politics was virtually detached. The Chandra Pulla Reddy Group started the 1990’s on the revolutionary Path. It led a historic 70,00o strong party rally in Delhi in 1990 March on Bhagat Singh’s martyrdom day opposing the V.P Singh Government and presenting a democratic Charter of Demands.Eg opposing State Repression, withdrawal of paramilitary forces in Bihar and Andhra Pradesh, opposing Police Encounters, opposing the Contract labour system, demanding repeal of black laws Etc..(Earlier on March 1989They staged a 70,000 strong rally) However again on a theoretical plane they were unable to differentiate between the political mass organization and the party and upheld the party banner.Infact they converted a rally to be held in the name of a mass revolutionary political platform into their party Rally, being the strongest Force. Mass organization participated from Maharashtra,Punjab ,Uttar Pradesh Bihar and Andhra Pradesh. The author however observed that amongst the workers mobilized from Mumbai there was a lack of adequate political understanding for such a political event. Revolutionary Slogans were raised but I don’t think they were compatible with the common worker. Overall however it was a great event to witness such a huge assembling of revolutionary forces. Later that year a series of Group clashes emerged with the peoples war Group. In their journals and protests they equated the Peoples war Group like Khalistani forces. They also began to support opportunist Dalit Organisations and advocated forming of a separate Dalit Organisation..In Mumbai although they were active in the Airport workers struggle an economist trend occurred. Emphasis was only given on organising on the basis of partial demands and neglecting political work. True they participated in democratic Organisations but there were strong rightist t tendencies.
    4.C.P.I.M.L Liberation Group and forming the Indian Peoples Front

    Comrade Vinod Mishra was a staunch supporter of the Charu Mazumdar line and was the first to re-organise the Bhojpur faction of the C.P.I M.L that came out of jail and supported the Charu line after the revolutionary martyrdom of Comrade Johar(30th death Anniversary year, martyred in 1974)In the late 1970’s the calling itself the Liberation group carried out attacks on police stations .However from the late 1970’s a rectification line was launched whereby the annihilation line was demarcated from .In 1981 under the influence of the C.P.I.M.L Liberation Group a historic meeting of 13 revolutionary Groups took place. However the Unity efforts were unsuccessful. In 1982 the Indian Peoples Front a mass revolutionary Front was formed as an Extra Parliamentary form of revolutionary Struggle. This had historic significance as it saw the need for a mass democratic revolutionary Front to promote the broad based democratic aspirations of the People. At an All India level it tried to co-ordinate movements for Democratic Rights and held a huge convention. However resorting to participation in the parliamentary election without sufficient development of the party of the proletariat and revolutionary democratic structures linked with the armed agrarian revolution led the group to Capitulation. It also had electoral alliances with ruling class parties like the Janata Party. This amounted to alliances with the Comprador bourgeoisie Ruling Classes. In India’s semi –colonial Structure we do not have developed bourgeois democracy and parliamentary Institutions can be used as means of legal struggles only in Certain Conditions. The ‘Dengist’ Influence was the chief cause of this tendency to form a ‘broad democratic Front.’ In the 1980’s it built up a huge revolutionary peasant movement in Bihar but in the late 1980’ met with a huge setback. Earlier it upheld the Chinese leadership of Deng Xiaoping but now in 1988 it termed Gorbachev’s Soviet Russia as Socialist and called for Unity with the Revisionist C.P.I and C.P.M.today this group is basically revisionist and only wears a revolutionary garb. However it created a great number of revolutionary cadres particularly in the earlier period. Winning them over to the revolutionary Camp would be of great value. In that sense the organisation has made an invaluable contribution.

    5.C.P.I.(M.L)-Towards New Democracy or Prajaphanda Group.

    Amongst the rightist Groups one of the most progressive. Has a mass base in Trade Union Movement and leads Peasant struggles but basically lacks proletarian revolutionary perspective. Has made a class analytical standpoint on caste question .Also operates in Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal mainly. Made efforts to co-ordinate All India Platforms The group leads peasant struggles of considerable strength in Punjab and to some extent in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh. Theoretically they uphold the Chandra Pulla Reddy Line..It still maintains that agrarian revolution is the key question but by resorting to parliamentary politics by participating in Elections deviated towards right capitulationism to considerable extent. They participate in elections and oppose the line of the C.PI.I (Maoist)as left sectarian. They fail to understand that only after sufficient development of the party of the proletariat can participation be used as a tactic in the parliamentary elections. They are fast embracing revisionism and their mass organizations are vitiated with economism and lack of political content. Agitations are organized but without grasp of proletarian revolutionary line. In Trade Unions often movements are led without connecting the political significance to the Workers. Quoting the party’s analysis ‘Our Party is taking building [the] agrarian revolutionary movement as its primary task. On the other hand we are developing joint struggles particularly on the impact of the new economic policies and subservience of the ruling classes to the imperialists. We are trying to build joint movement[s] along with other revolutionary and struggling forces against the increasing loot and plunder of our country by the imperialists as well as against the attacks of feudal criminal gangs against poor peasants. We are also undertaking joint movement[s] with other forces on the issues of the people.’

  3. Harsh Thakor said

    I wish to state after re-evaluation of the movement I still feel that the analysis on Tarimela Nagi Reddy is incorrect by G.N.Saibaba..In the era of Naxalbari and Srikakulam he defended the armed revolutionary peasant struggles of Naxalbari and Srikakulam but that of the mass line. He continuously stressed for the need of building agrarian revolutionary movement and combating the line of ‘individual annihilation of the class enemy’ as propounded by Charu Mazumdar in the late 1960’s.The greatest contribution towards building the mass line came from Tarimela Nagi Redy with D.V.Rao in the late 1960’s and early 70’s.through the Andhra Pradesh Co-ordination Commitee of Communist Revolutionaries.A similar effort was made by the Punjab Co-ordination Commitee of Communist Revolutionaries led by Harbhajan Sohi .I suggest all comrades read the History and polemics of the Indian Communist Movement from 1964-72 published by the Tarimela Nagi Reddy memorial Trust and particularly refer to the document on left trends by the Andhra Pradesh Co-ordination Commitee of Communist Revolutionaries .Historically,the C.P.I.(Maoist) erstwhile groups failed to recognize the historic contribution and organisation of T.Nagi Reddy.

    Today,I must say the C.P.I.(Maoist) and their P.L.G.A. have done invaluable work in rectifying the old defective line of Charu Mazumdar of the late 1960’s and partially in the 1980’s and 1990’s.(vitiated the Party Unity,M.C.C and Peoples war groups)No doubt great achievements were made in the peasant movements in Bihar and Andhra Pradesh through mass fronts like the Mazdoor Kisan Sangrami Samiti,Andhra Pradesh Rytu Coolie Sangham and Radical Students Union.The peasant struggles of Jehenabad and Karimnagar reverberate in the hearts of revolutionaries as well as the All-India Peoples Resistance Forum rallies in 1992 and 1994 in Calcutta.However in Dandkaranya they have set up a model for development and made the best achievement since the Naxalbari armed struggle.Great strides have been made to developing a military mass line and giving a slap to those who accuse them of being Che Guevarists.Embryonic and parallel forms of political power have been created,although sufficient development and democratic form of functioning has not been created.Still,greater agrarian revolutionary movement has to be built and mass struggles are needed as a component of the overall armed struggle,in both Dandkaranya and Jharkhand.The military line is still partially defective,towards building a base area.However in terms of mass military line they have surpassed the levels of the 1980′ and 90’s in Andhra Pradesh,Bihar and Jharkand.

    To have survived against all odds for 40 years is an outstanding achievement and on the practical plane they are the most genuine revolutionary force.The greatest achievement is the credibility the have given to launching armed struggle even if the mass line in protracted Peoples War has not been completely developed.The unification in 2004 was a historic step.However they must still imbibe the lessons of Comrades T.N Reddy and D.V.Rao and later Harbhajan Sohi and apply them to the re-organisation of the Communist party as a whole and not just it’s components.I disagree that the Indian Communist party has been re-organised and all the revolutionary groups are the components of the proletarian party.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: