STRATFOR report on the Naxalite threat

[scarletghoul]

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100707_closer_look_indias_naxalite_threat

An interesting assessment of the objective situation.

A Closer Look at India's Naxalite Threat

By Fred Burton and Ben West
On July 6, the Indian government issued a warning to railroad operators and users after Maoist rebels — known as Naxalites — declared a “bandh,” a Hindi word meaning stoppage of work, in eastern India. When a bandh is declared by the Naxalites, it carries with it an implied threat of violence to enforce the work stoppage, in this case against the public transportation system over a two-day period. It is widely understood that trains and buses in eastern India during this time would be subject to Naxalite attack if they do not obey the call for a shutdown.
Naxalites are an array of armed bands that, when combined, comprise the militant arm of the Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-M). Some of the most violent attacks conducted by the Naxalites have been against freight and police transport trains, killing dozens of people at a time. Civilians have typically not been targeted in such attacks, but they have been collaterally killed and injured in the mayhem. Whether targeted or not, civilians generally believe that Naxalites always follow through on their threats, so strike warnings are enough to dissuade people from going about their daily lives. The Naxalite “bandh” is a tactic that shows just how powerful the rebels have become in the region, and it demonstrates their ability to affect day-to-day activity merely by threatening to stage an attack.
The Naxalite declaration on July 6 was in retaliation for a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) operation that killed senior Naxalite leader, CPI-M Politburo member and spokesman Cherukuri Rajkumar (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100702_brief_senior_naxalite_leader_killed?fn=20 rss59) (alias Azad) on July 2 in Andhra Pradesh. The news of Azad’s death was unexpected, since India has had little luck capturing or killing key Naxalite leaders, but his absence is not expected to seriously hamper the movement. The Naxalites are a large, well-organized force that will be able to replace him with little or no visible effect on operational capability. What was not surprising was that Azad’s killing elicited a Naxalite response.
It is unclear exactly what precipitated the Andhra Pradesh operation by the CRPF (India’s federal police force) that killed Azad, though it did come after a busy spring in Naxalite territory. On April 6, Naxalites mounted a textbook armed ambush that killed 76 CRPF members (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100406_india_naxalite_tactics_and_deadly_ambush? fn=94rss29) conducting a patrol in Chhattisgarh state, at the time the deadliest attack the Naxalites had carried out in their 43-year history. Then, on May 17, they detonated an explosive device (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100517_brief_death_toll_rises_indian_bus_bombing ?fn=61rss61) along a road in Chhattisgarh and destroyed a bus, killing nearly 50 civilians and police officers. At the time, Azad issued several statements to the press indicating that the group regretted the death of so many civilians but blamed them for riding on the bus with police officers, something they had been warned against numerous times. Indeed, police in this region are typically not allowed to ride on public transportation due to the threat of Naxalite attacks and the possibility of collateral damage.
On May 28, less than two weeks after the bus attack, an act of sabotage against a railway line (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100528_brief_indian_train_derailment_death_toll_ hits_71?fn=28rss67) in West Bengal state caused a train carrying only civilians to derail. It was subsequently hit by a freight train, resulting in the deaths of nearly 150 people. While Naxalites initially denied that they were involved in the incident, they later admitted that a rogue gang trained by them had sabotaged the railway line without permission from Naxalite central command. (There is also the possibility that the Naxalites were attempting to derail the freight train — a much more common Naxalite target — but mistakenly targeted the wrong track.)
Finally, on June 24, in the wake of these deadly (if not all intentional) attacks, the Naxalites reiterated their intention to drive multinational corporations (MNCs) out of India and that they would use violence to do so. This most recent threat reflects the primary interest of the Naxalites, and it is backed by a proven tactical ability to strike economic targets (http://www.stratfor.com/threat_against_multinationals_indias_high_tech_cen ter?fn=23rss21), which is a top concern for the Indian government (http://www.stratfor.com/india_escalating_naxalite_threat?fn=31rss16). It is this situation that leads STRATFOR to look at one of the world’s longest-running insurgencies to see what makes it tick.
Background on a Rebellion

The Naxalites get their name from their place of origin, the village of Naxalbari in West Bengal, where in May 1967 a local Communist Party leader promised to redistribute land to the peasants. This was not the first time such a proclamation by a Party member had been made in eastern India, but earlier attempts to foment a peasant rebellion in the region had faltered. This one, however, triggered a wave of violence in which workers intimidated or killed landowners, in many cases running them off their land and reclaiming it as their own. The actions were based on sentiment among the peasants (made up largely of tribal members) that they were merely taking back what they had been forced to give up to wealthy prospectors from central India. These newcomers had gained the land from the local tribes, the peasants believed, through schemes in which the land was taken as collateral for the tribes’ outstanding debts.
On a grander geopolitical level, the Naxalites can be viewed through the prism of Chinese-Indian rivalry (http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical_diary/20090309_geopolitical_diary_geopolitics_tibet?fn=2 0rss53). The Naxalites adopted the ideology of Mao Zedong, the Chinese revolutionary and leader who converted China to communism and who had just begun the Cultural Revolution there in 1966. In the beginning of the Naxalite movement, there was mutual rhetorical support between the Maoist regime in China and the Naxalites in India. While there was little evidence of material support (and there is no indication of such support today), the advent and growth of the Naxalite movement certainly did serve China’s goal of weakening its largest neighbor to the south.
India was able to dampen the Naxalite movement significantly in 1971, but the regional belief that the government in New Delhi had robbed tribal groups of their land in eastern India persisted. The Naxalite movement continued in a somewhat dormant phase throughout the 1970s, ’80s and early ’90s. Violence resumed again in the late ’90s and has been escalating in the years since.
The increasing violence corresponds with India’s economic growth, and this is not coincidental. India has experienced a boom in economic growth over the past 20 years that has seen per capita income rise roughly 100 percent. By comparison, it took India 40 years to complete its last doubling of per capita income. Foreign investors have sustained this growth by pumping billions of dollars into India’s economy. However, economic growth in India has not trickled down, a political liability that the Naxalites have leveraged both to revive their movement and challenge India’s more mainstream political parties.

(http://web.stratfor.com/images/asia/map/7-7-10-India_red_corridor_800.jpg?fn=13rss94)
https://www.stratfor.com/mmf/166737 (http://web.stratfor.com/images/asia/map/7-7-10-India_red_corridor_800.jpg?fn=13rss94)
(click here to enlarge image) (http://web.stratfor.com/images/asia/map/7-7-10-India_red_corridor_800.jpg?fn=13rss94)


Geography and Development

India as a whole has a disparate geography and some 1.1 billion inhabitants, and the government in New Delhi thus has a tough time extending its writ (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20081215_geopolitics_india_shifting_self_contained _world?fn=35rss83) throughout the land. The Naxalites are not the only militant movement in India; groups in northwest and northeast India also take advantage of the terrain and the distance from New Delhi to challenge the government for control of the territory they inhabit. The Naxalites specifically inhabit an area known as the “Red Corridor,” which stretches from West Bengal state southwest to Karnataka state. The most violent states in this corridor have been Chhattisgarh, West Bengal and Orissa. The region is defined by rolling hills covered in dense jungle and has few improved roads, which allows the Naxalites to control access. The dense jungle also protects them from government aircraft.
The region’s geographic isolation has created a tribal mentality, and while the government lumps militant groups in the area under the Naxalite umbrella, the militant community is actually quite diffuse, with small units acting with varying levels of autonomy throughout the region. For example, there is little indication that a unit from Chhattisgarh would also be able to conduct operations in West Bengal. Transportation is expensive and dangerous, so people tend to stay close to home and defend it fiercely. This makes it difficult for outsiders to gain influence in (and access to) the area.
It also means the area is extremely poor. Although the region has an abundance of raw materials in its hills and forests, the state of India has been hard-pressed to get at those resources because it cannot effectively control them. And while Naxalites call for the improvement of the lives of the people they claim to represent, they have resisted any government attempt to develop the area’s economy. Indeed, the low level of trust between the Naxalites and New Delhi creates the conundrum of how the government can possibly provide security without developing sufficient infrastructure and how infrastructure can possibly be developed without sufficient security. An example of this can be seen in the Naxalites’ constant sabotaging of area roads by planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) under road surfaces or simply digging roads up. Roads are necessary for development, but Naxalites view roads as a means for the government to send its forces into their territory.
Eager to stimulate growth in the region, the central government promised foreign investors land without communicating, much less negotiating, with locals inhabiting the land, which naturally led to disputes between the locals, the foreign companies and the government. A famous example of an ongoing dispute involves the South Korean steel conglomerate POSCO (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/india_poscos_steel_investment_challenge?fn=99rss94 ), which is in the process of acquiring some 4,000 acres in Orissa state on which to build a $12 billion steel mill. The project has been delayed by protests and violence by locals opposed to the project, and police have been unable to secure the area to permit construction. Only now, some five years after the government promised the land to POSCO, is local compensation being negotiated.
India’s economic success has meant that foreign investors like POSCO are increasing their presence in India, which means that locals like the Naxalites are faced with both a threat and an opportunity. Outside business interests (whether investors from South Korea or wealthy prospectors from central India) in partnership with the government pose the greatest threat to the Naxalite movement. On the other hand, outside investment could bring jobs and development to an area that is desperately poor. But Naxalites are skeptical of letting the government control anything in their region, and successful economic development would have a calming effect on the region’s radicalized militants. Movements like that of the Naxalites have an array of motivations for why they do what they do, but self-preservation is always a very high priority.
The other opportunity is to force the central government or foreign investors to pay the group directly for any land in the region. Naxalites can raise the stakes by organizing more militant force to deny access to certain areas, sabotage transportation and commercial activity and otherwise mobilize the locals. This would essentially be a large-scale protection racket. The model has been implemented and followed successfully by other militant groups, most notably Nigeria’s Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20090316_nigerias_mend_different_militant_movement ?fn=31rss69) (MEND), which manages to extract concessions from energy giants operating in Nigeria’s oil-rich but dismally poor Niger Delta, and even from the Nigerian government itself. While Maoist leaders in eastern and central India do make statements about how commercial projects in the area need to provide locals with jobs, it is clear that Naxalites are also trying to enhance their capability to pursue the second option.
The Threat

Naxalites are honing the capability to construct and deploy IEDs, conduct armed raids and maintain an extensive, agile and responsive intelligence network. As seen in the examples above, Naxalite fighters can be opportunistic in their attacks. The April 6 raid on the soldiers in Dantewada and the May 17 bus attack were both actions that took advantage of opportunities to target and kill police forces. The April 6 raid was the culmination of two or three days of stalking the CRPF unit in the forest and waiting for the right time to strike. The May 17 bus attack was organized in a matter of hours, with spotters noticing the police on the bus and alerting other cadres who planted the device further down the road. This flexibility and autonomy among its various component parts, along with the group’s local support and indigenous knowledge of its turf, make the Naxalites a dangerous adversary against the slower moving, more deliberate and more predictable CRPF.
New Delhi insists that, according to the constitution, the Naxalite problem is one of law and order and, thus, a responsibility for the states to address. New Delhi has deployed the CRPF, but it has not gone so far as to deploy the military, something that many Indian politicians have called for as the only solution to the problem. While military advisers have been sent in to train local and federal police forces in the Red Corridor, they have not engaged in any known anti-Naxalite operations. India has unpleasant memories of past deployments of its military forces to address domestic threats. In the 1980s, use of the army to deal with Sikh militancy was criticized as being too heavy-handed. Military action at the Golden Temple in Amritsar, codenamed Operation Blue Star, also fanned the flames of Sikh militancy and sparked a series of serious reprisal attacks that included the assassination of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who had ordered the operation.
Also, the Indian military insists it is currently focused on fighting Islamist and separatist forces in Jammu and Kashmir (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100630_brief_indian_administered_kashmir_violenc e_blamed_pakistani_militant_group?fn=41rss36) in northwest India, along the disputed border with Pakistan, and is dealing with multiple ethno-separatist movements (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20081030_india_explosions_assam?fn=81rss18) in the northeast region of India surrounded by China and Bangladesh. While Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has labeled the Naxalite issue the biggest threat to the country’s internal security, incidents like the 2008 Mumbai attacks (http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20081127_india_update_mumbai?fn=25rss90) provide evidence to most Indians that Pakistan and the militants who hide there pose a greater external threat.
In the end, Naxalism is fairly contained. Despite threats and indications from Naxalites that they will attack urban targets throughout India (http://www.stratfor.com/sitrep/20100222_brief_naxalite_arrested_plans_attack_delh i?fn=15rss90), the group has yet to demonstrate the intent or ability to strike outside of the Red Corridor. But the group’s leaders and bombmakers could develop such a capability, and it will be important to watch for any indication that cadres are developing the tradecraft for urban terrorism (http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100526_failed_bombings_armed_jihadist_assaults?f n=42rss72). Even if they do not expand their target set and conduct more “terrorist-type” attacks, the Naxalite challenge to the state could materialize in other ways. The Naxalite organization is a sophisticated one that relies not only on militant tactics but also on social unrest and political tactics to increase its power. Naxalites have formed sympathetic student groups in universities, and human-rights groups in New Delhi and other regional capitals are advocating for the local tribal cause in rural eastern India.
Instead of using violence, these groups stage protests to express their grievances against the state. And they underscore the Naxalite ability to use both militant violence and subtle social pressure to achieve their goals. Even if the government did decide to deploy the military to combat the Naxalites in eastern India, it would face a tough fight against a well-entrenched movement — something New Delhi is not likely to undertake lightly or any time soon.

[the last donut of the night]

"And while Naxalites call for the improvement of the lives of the people they claim to represent, they have resisted any government attempt to develop the area’s economy."

Biggest crock of bullshit I've ever had the wonder to lay my nose upon.

[scarletghoul]

Haha. Well it's true but said in a stupid way that avoids all context and reason.. Anyway I thought this piece was interesting. The bit near the end about possibility to develop urban attack capability.. Also the opening point, about the bandh, really shows how much influence the Naxals have.

[the last donut of the night]

Haha. Well it's true but said in a stupid way that avoids all context and reason.. Anyway I thought this piece was interesting. The bit near the end about possibility to develop urban attack capability.. Also the opening point, about the bandh, really shows how much influence the Naxals have.

I agree. It is interesting, albeit a bourgeois piece.

[Barry Lyndon]

A Maoist victory in India would change everything. Everything. The success or failure of the international Left in the 21st century depends, in my view, in large part over whether the subcontinent goes red.
Inquilab Zindabad!

[FreeFocus]

Although an obviously bourgeois source, Stratfor gives excellent geopolitical/geostrategic analysis.

[28350]

FUCK YEAH STRATFOR

sorry, but it's pretty sweet.

[redSHARP]

so how big is the red corridor?

[scarletghoul]

so how big is the red corridor?
Well its not clearly defined. Naxals are active in about 40% of India, but the levels of control vary a lot. This is the commonly used map, from 2007-
http://oolaah.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/the-red-corridor.jpg
The red districts are places where they are in control. But things have changed a lot in the 3 years since then as the war has intensified. They have greatly increased their control in parts of West Bengal for example. And they are present in more districts across India. So the Red Corridor is probably a bit bigger than in this picture now.

[The Vegan Marxist]

^ Isn't the one provided in the article a more updated version of the "Red Corridor"?

[Ravachol]

"And while Naxalites call for the improvement of the lives of the people they claim to represent, they have resisted any government attempt to develop the area’s economy."

Biggest crock of bullshit I've ever had the wonder to lay my nose upon.

Like anyone cares about "developing the area's economy". In practice that means nothing but restructering production in a manner to generate profit more effectively all the while leaving the wage-slavery relation and general poverty intact. But then again, one could hardly expect STRATFOR to call for abolition of class society as a solution to the naxalite 'problem' :rolleyes:

[scarletghoul]

^ Isn't the one provided in the article a more updated version of the "Red Corridor"?
Don't think so, it looks like they've just coloured the whole states in red, rather than doing it by district and in a variety of colours. It's a simplified version

[the last donut of the night]

so scarletghoul, how is RAAN diffusing the message of solidarity with the naxalites? :laugh:

[zimmerwald1915]

This map's from the Indian Defense Review January-March issue of this year.

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/the-red-corridor.jpg

[scarletghoul]

Cool. It doesn't look very differant at first glance, but West Bengal is now completely affected, even Bangladeshi border areas apparently unaffected in 2007 are moderately affected
Also the previously 'targetted' districts around Hyderabad are now highly affected
It doesnt indicate how much that Maoists' control in the highly affected areas has grown, but judging from the news I would think a lot.. They are consolidating these 2 areas very well :cool:

[howblackisyourflag]

Great news.

[Lyev]

This may have been covered and probably has been in another thread, but how heavy was the Naxalite influence in the recent general strikes, early this July?

http://www.speroforum.com/a/36061/India---General-strikes-bring-parts-of-India-to-a-halt
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/07/05/india.strikes/index.html

[Saorsa]

We don't know. They're an underground, illegal organisation - any sympathisers they may have amongst the striking workers can't openly announce it.

[Devrim]

This may have been covered and probably has been in another thread, but how heavy was the Naxalite influence in the recent general strikes, early this July?

http://www.speroforum.com/a/36061/India---General-strikes-bring-parts-of-India-to-a-halt
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/07/05/india.strikes/index.html

The Maoists have virtually no influence amongst the urban working class whatsoever.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

Devrim would love that to be true, but in fact we have no idea what level of support the Naxalites have among the urban working class.

[Devrim]

Devrim would love that to be true, but in fact we have no idea what level of support the Naxalites have among the urban working class.

I do. I have spent time in India for political meetings, spoken with comrades and other people there and that is the general impression I got. The Naxalites have admitted the same thing in public documents, and even Alistair, whose latest line is 'we don't know' has admitted in the past they have very little support.

An India poster on this site was quite clear about it a couple of weeks ago:


If you think in this term, then the revisionists now have the highest support of the "working class" at present. If you ask me, then I just want to say that IT IS THE INCAPABILITY OF THE WORKING CLASS THAT THEY TOGETHER CAN NOT STAND BESIDE THE MAOISTS. As per with my little knowledge of working class, I can say that at present DON'T HAVE THE SPIRIT TO FIGHT AND OVERTHROW THE BLOODY INDIAN RULERS AND THAT'S THE MAIN REASON BEHIND THEIR LACK OF SUPPORT TO INDIAN WORKING CLASS.

It is not though just that they don't have support amongst the working class. They don't even orientate themselves towards the working class.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

The Naxalites have admitted the same thing in public documents, and even Alistair, whose latest line is 'we don't know' has admitted in the past they have very little support.

My statements don't contradict each other.

I have always said that we don't know. That's the truth - nobody knows how much organisational strength and popular support the Naxalites have among the Indian urban proletariat, and in what areas this support is most widespread. India is a big place.

The Maoists do not have a level of support amongst any sector of society big enough to bring down the Indian state. They don't yet have *enough* support amongst the proletariat. But they have a lot more than any other group in India, and they're doing a hell of a lot more with the support they have than any other organisation.

Currently the group with the most political support in the New Zealand proletariat is the Labour Party. The WP, of which I'm a member, has almost no support at all. That doesn't mean our current tactics are wrong and it doesn't mean our strategic approach is wrong. It's just illustrative of the period we're in.

[Devrim]

They don't yet have *enough* support amongst the proletariat. But they have a lot more than any other group in India, and they're doing a hell of a lot more with the support they have than any other organisation.

How do you know that they have 'a lot more [support amongst the proletariat] than any other group in India' if ' nobody knows how much organisational strength and popular support the Naxalites have among the Indian urban proletariat'. I would imagine that the bigger bourgeois parties have much more support. It seems a little illogical to me.


...and they're doing a hell of a lot more with the support they have than any other organisation

I would imagine that if Maoists get any support amongst workers, they would only end up sending them out to the 'people's war' anyway. They don't have a vision, which sees the working class as the agent of revolutionary change.

Devrim

[pranabjyoti]

This man has a habit of thinking himself as the spokesperson of world proletariat and imposing his own thoughts on the "workers of the world". But, the number of workers unions directly attached to UCPN(M) at present is the right reply to him. While UCPN(M) had been waging armed struggle, their condition was very similar to Maoists of India and people like him can then easily speak about "lack of workers support to Maoists" etc kind of rubbish. But, after they become legal and coming into open, the drastic increase in the number of workers and unions close to them is the indication that how much support they actually have among workers. I am sure that, if the condition of India in future would become like Nepal of present or something close, then actually men of these kind can understand how much support base Maoists of India have among workers.
Though I am pretty sure, they will say then that "workers of Indian are now worshiping the wrong God" or something blabbering of that kind. Actually, I salute his extraordinary power of understanding workers of a country by just visiting there for some days, though even he don't know their mother language at all and despite being informed about the fact of presence of a demonic law like UAPA.

[Devrim]

Actually, I salute his extraordinary power of understanding workers of a country by just visiting there for some days, though even he don't know their mother language at all

As I said, I talked to many people in our organisation and in others, some of whom had been political militants for over forty years, and everybody had the same opinion.


But, the number of workers unions directly attached to UCPN(M) at present is the right reply to him.

No, the events in Nepal are no proof of anything in India.


This man has a habit of thinking himself as the spokesperson of world proletariat and imposing his own thoughts on the "workers of the world".

No, I don't. I am just reporting what seemed to me to be a pretty general consensus.

However you yourself were quite clear that first you have little knowledge of the working class:


As per with my little knowledge of working class,

And second that they don't support the Maoists:


I can say that at present [the working class] DON'T HAVE THE SPIRIT TO FIGHT AND OVERTHROW THE BLOODY INDIAN RULERS AND THAT'S THE MAIN REASON BEHIND THEIR LACK OF SUPPORT TO INDIAN WORKING CLASS.


IT IS THE INCAPABILITY OF THE WORKING CLASS THAT THEY TOGETHER CAN NOT STAND BESIDE THE MAOISTS.

And in my personal opinion the utter contempt that you hold the working class in comes through quite clearly in those lines.

Devrim

[The Vegan Marxist]

I would imagine that if Maoists get any support amongst workers, they would only end up sending them out to the 'people's war' anyway. They don't have a vision, which sees the working class as the agent of revolutionary change.

Devrim

No, really, tell us how you really feel. :rolleyes:

[Devrim]

No, really, tell us how you really feel. :rolleyes:

Do you see that forming peasant armies led by the intelligentsia offers a perspective to the working class, or sees it as the agent of revolutionary change.

Devrim

[red cat]

I hate to necro threads, but it should be stated here that despite the Maoist CP being underground, there is plenty of evidence indicating that the Maoist movement enjoys widespread support and participation from the working class. The invalid allegation that the Maoist movement has no base among the proletariat is made again and again by the Indian pseudo-communist groups which are constituted mainly by elite reactionary individuals and are themselves the "left wing of capitalism" that they accuse others to be.

EDIT : Anyone who is curious about workers' engagement in Maoist movements should take a look at the Situation in South Asia subforum.

[pranabjyoti]

The Maoists have virtually no influence amongst the urban working class whatsoever.

Devrim
Wavering your support in favor of Maoists in open means inviting prosecution from authorities, as per the latest version of UAPA. So, only an idiot can expect open support to Maoists in the urban area.

[RED DAVE]

I hate to necro threads, but it should be stated here that despite the Maoist CP being underground, there is plenty of evidence indicating that the Maoist movement enjoys widespread support and participation from the working class.What is your concrete evidence for this?


The invalid allegation that the Maoist movement has no base among the proletariat is made again and again by the Indian pseudo-communist groups which are constituted mainly by elite reactionary individuals and are themselves the "left wing of capitalism" that they accuse others to be.Maybe true, but we need evidence either way.


EDIT : Anyone who is curious about workers' engagement in Maoist movements should take a look at the Situation in South Asia subforum.Yes, and you will find out that while the Maoists in Nepal have definite support within the working class, they are not a party of the working class. Same, perhaps, with the Naxalites.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

What is your concrete evidence for this?

What kind of evidence do you want ? Should I repost the links which I have already posted many times in other threads?


Maybe true, but we need evidence either way.

Their practical inactivity in a country like India witnessing intensified class struggle is enough evidence for this.


Yes, and you will find out that while the Maoists in Nepal have definite support within the working class, they are not a party of the working class.

Evidence ?


Same, perhaps, with the Naxalites.

RED DAVE

Evidence ?

[RED DAVE]

What is your concrete evidence for [large-scale Naxalite support among workers]?
What kind of evidence do you want ? Should I repost the links which I have already posted many times in other threads?You have never supplied posts showing concrete support. A few hundred posters is not concrete support. What urban struggles have they engaged in? What urban demonstrations have they organized?

At this point, I'm not even asking for evidence that the Naxalites are a working class party, which they obviously aren't. Just show us evidence for significant working class support.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

You have never supplied posts showing concrete support. A few hundred posters is not concrete support. What urban struggles have they engaged in? What urban demonstrations have they organized?

So what exactly do you mean by concrete support in a country where being an open urban sympathizer gets you jailed or even killed ? Also, why are you asking specifically for urban support ? Since you consider countries like India to be capitalist, you should be okay if Maoists have support among what they call the landless and poor peasantry as well.


At this point, I'm not even asking for evidence that the Naxalites are a working class party, which they obviously aren't. Evidence please ? To me, the only thing very obvious is that Indian Trotskyites are not a working class party and are most likely to be crushed by the proletariat in the course of the ongoing revolution.


Just show us evidence for significant working class support.

RED DAVEAs soon as you make clear what you want as evidence given that the CP is outlawed.

[RED DAVE]

So what exactly do you mean by concrete support in a country where being an open urban sympathizer gets you jailed or even killed ?I mean evidence that the Naxalites are recognized as the functional leadership or at least are the beneficiaries of passive support. i see no evidence of either.


Also, why are you asking specifically for urban support ?Because I'm a Marxist, and, unlike Maoists, I believe that the future of mankind is in the hands of the working class.


Since you consider countries like India to be capitalist, you should be okay if Maoists have support among what they call the landless and poor peasantry as well.I have no problems with a real revolutionary organization gaining support; however, the history of Maoism in China and Nepal is does not promote hope.

E
To me, the only thing very obvious is that Indian Trotskyites are not a working class party and are most likely to be crushed by the proletariat in the course of the ongoing revolution.Could be. Maybe they're the assholes you think they are, but even if this were so, that doesn't explain or escuse the activities of the Maoists.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

I mean evidence that the Naxalites are recognized as the functional leadership or at least are the beneficiaries of passive support. i see no evidence of either.

But what kind of evidence do you expect to exist in a situation where supporting the CP could get one jailed or murdered ? If you specify exactly the kind of evidence you want, I will try to look for it.


Because I'm a Marxist, and, unlike Maoists, I believe that the future of mankind is in the hands of the working class.Please answer my question to the point instead of passing sectarian comments. Does the Indian working class exist only in cities ?


I have no problems with a real revolutionary organization gaining support; however, the history of Maoism in China and Nepal is does not promote hope.What hope does the history of Trotskyism in India provide ?


ECould be. Maybe they're the assholes you think they are, but even if this were so, that doesn't explain or escuse the activities of the Maoists.

RED DAVEOf course it doesn't, but why aren't you taking a clear stand against Indian Trotskyites even though there is no evidence of them having working class support or participating in any kind of effective class struggle ?

[RED DAVE]

With regard to underground work, the Bolsheviks worked underbround in the urban areas for decades. They became the leaders of the working class in a backward dictatorship by providing leaders. They published underground magazines, theoretical journals and newspapers in the Russian cities; members went to jail; they participated in the international life of the socialist movement; the leaders when necessary lived in exile; many of the leaders were jailed, sent to Siberia, etc. They believed in the working class as the leaders of the revolution, not the peasantry of any bloc of classes.

They ended up the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

RED DAVE

[Jose Gracchus]

How come none of the Maoists here can help themselves to just answer the question?

How hard should it be to provide evidence of major unions and working class radicals and organizations existing in support of and in solidarity with the Naxal movement?

Note: Of course this still falls below the threshold of being authentically Maoists, according to Mao's criteria itself: a proper Maoist party is a cross-class formation by nature (Bloc of Four Classes), but purportedly 'led' by the proletariat. How come no one can ever provide a single shred of evidence for how in what way other than metaphorical or mystical that actually existing working people in some capacity are leading a group of peasant and petty bourgeois rebels?

Why is it so hard to get a straight answer?

[red cat]

With regard to underground work, the Bolsheviks worked underbround in the urban areas for decades. They became the leaders of the working class in a backward dictatorship by providing leaders. They published underground magazines, theoretical journals and newspapers in the Russian cities; members went to jail; they participated in the international life of the socialist movement; the leaders when necessary lived in exile; many of the leaders were jailed, sent to Siberia, etc. They believed in the working class as the leaders of the revolution, not the peasantry of any bloc of classes.

They ended up the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

RED DAVE

Yes I know all that, but please don't compare the Indian situation with the Russian one. The treatment that Russian communists received when they were arrested was a luxury compared to what is generally done with Indian communists. So once again, what kind of evidence do you want ?

[red cat]

How come none of the Maoists here can help themselves to just answer the question?

How hard should it be to provide evidence of major unions and working class radicals and organizations existing in support of and in solidarity with the Naxal movement?

Note: Of course this still falls below the threshold of being authentically Maoists, according to Mao's criteria itself: a proper Maoist party is a cross-class formation by nature (Bloc of Four Classes), but purportedly 'led' by the proletariat. How come no one can ever provide a single shred of evidence for how in what way other than metaphorical or mystical that actually existing working people in some capacity are leading a group of peasant and petty bourgeois rebels?

Why is it so hard to get a straight answer?

Because straight questions considering the Indian situation are not being asked. By the way, since you have entered the discussion, I would like to see some evidence of working class support for whatever Indian leftist group you support.

[RED DAVE]

Yes I know all that, but please don't compare the Indian situation with the Russian one.Yeah, the Indian Maoists have all the instrumentalities of modern communication, which they could easily use to promulgate their beliefs in the cities. There's 150 years of experience setting up fronts, dummy organizations, underground publications, ginger groups, etc., all of which can be called on. And now there's the Internet.


lThe treatment that Russian communists received when they were arrested was a luxury compared to what is generally done with Indian communists. So once again, what kind of evidence do you want ?I would like to see, for example, even if there's no evidence of underground organizations, a significant theoretical journal produced in exile or something of the sort.

It would even be nice to see a statement of support for the beleagured workers in Bangladesh, or is that too much to ask for? I notice that as far as I know, the Tibetan Maoists haven't said anything about this either.

RED DAVE

[Jose Gracchus]

Yes I know all that, but please don't compare the Indian situation with the Russian one. The treatment that Russian communists received when they were arrested was a luxury compared to what is generally done with Indian communists. So once again, what kind of evidence do you want ?

What are you talking about? Care to substantiate that remark?


Because straight questions considering the Indian situation are not being asked. By the way, since you have entered the discussion, I would like to see some evidence of working class support for whatever Indian leftist group you support.

That's not how arguing works, jefe. You're the one claiming that the Naxals are a Maoist organization, and that presupposes some basic, in plain language, definitional criteria. Substantiate your claims. Otherwise you might as well be some religious fanatic babbling about the immanency of the Second Coming. Say-so is worthless. Evidence is everything. If you don't have it, maybe you shouldn't be such a partisan. Maybe you should acquire evidence, assess it rationally, and then decide who you support and why.

I love how you're trying to use the tu quoque ("Oh yeah? Well uh....you too!!!!") fallacy, without even knowing which heresy to point it at. :rolleyes: I could be the most idiotic, loony, clueless, reactionary tool in the shed, and it would not have a shred of anything to do with whether your arguments are worth the bits and pixels which make them up. Evidence and logic determines that. No attempt to shift the burden of proof in an argument not over my politics (again, don't want them criticized, maybe you shouldn't express them or have them - not our problem) will change that.

[red cat]

Yeah, the Indian Maoists have all the instrumentalities of modern communication, which they could easily use to promulgate their beliefs in the cities. There's 150 years of experience setting up fronts, dummy organizations, underground publications, ginger groups, etc., all of which can be called on. And now there's the Internet.

You are ignoring the fact that in a country like India where more than 80% of the population lives on less than half a dollar per person per day, access to modern communication facilities is extremely limited, and the main support base of Maoists is among the vast majority who are deprived of these facilities. If fronts and dummy organizations etc are set up with sufficient precaution, then we cannot point them out over here and claim that they are Maoist, can we ?

Even though a very small portion of the Indian population has access to the internet, in many cities, to use it from cyber cafes you have to show an official identity card, give them your address etc. Many of my friends who have visited Maoist sites from cyber cafes have been harassed by the authorities.


I would like to see, for example, even if there's no evidence of underground organizations, a significant theoretical journal produced in exile or something of the sort.The journals directly affiliated to the CP are illegal. In cities, the mass organizations that publish the reports of the Maoist movement are often turned down by publishers having the technical equipment. Even then they somehow manage to publish a highly censored magazine called the People's March, which is circulated in cities and made available online. The main editor of this magazine was practically thrown out of his job and his family was subject to physical and mental torture by the state forces. Another editor was jailed and refused medication so that he died in police custody. In this situation you should not expect much evidence.


It would even be nice to see a statement of support for the beleagured workers in Bangladesh, or is that too much to ask for? I notice that as far as I know, the Tibetan Maoists haven't said anything about this either.

RED DAVEWhat does this have to do with Indian Maoists having support among the Indian working class ?

[red cat]

What are you talking about? Care to substantiate that remark?

Of course. Indian Maoists are mostly tortured and murdered when they are caught.


That's not how arguing works, jefe. You're the one claiming that the Naxals are a Maoist organization, and that presupposes some basic, in plain language, definitional criteria. Substantiate your claims. Otherwise you might as well be some religious fanatic babbling about the immanency of the Second Coming. Say-so is worthless. Evidence is everything. If you don't have it, maybe you shouldn't be such a partisan. Maybe you should acquire evidence, assess it rationally, and then decide who you support and why.Why don't you clearly state what evidence I should produce ? You seem to be consistently avoiding the main question and posting useless bullshit.


I love how you're trying to use the tu quoque ("Oh yeah? Well uh....you too!!!!") fallacy, without even knowing which heresy to point it at. :rolleyes: I could be the most idiotic, loony, clueless, reactionary tool in the shed, and it would not have a shred of anything to do with whether your arguments are worth the bits and pixels which make them up. Evidence and logic determines that. No attempt to shift the burden of proof in an argument not over my politics (again, don't want them criticized, maybe you shouldn't express them or have them - not our problem) will change that.On the contrary, I find those who oppose Maoists to be most often affiliated to the most reactionary pseudo - communist organizations in India. Attacking communist movements from the left side has been an age-old trick of the ruling class. So you should name your tendency and its organizations in India before you go about attacking Maoists like a rabid dog. I wonder why you are so scared to answer these questions to the point.

[RED DAVE]

The following, from the official Naxalite website, is an interview with a Naxalite leader.


An interview with G.N. Saibaba.

Saibaba is 40 years old. He was born in Andhra Pradesh, a Southern state in India. He lives in Delhi now. He is the Deputy Secretary of the Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), an All Indian Federation of Revolutionary People’s Organisations.

Red!: If someone said to you that the Maoist movement in India is a marginal movement that is mainly operating in very backward, lowly populated areas, and it has been doing so for over thirty-five years without getting anywhere, what would be your answer?

Saibaba: The Maoist movement in India is not confined to the backward areas. It’s a vast movement, and includes the "developed" areas. Maoists work both in the countryside and the cities. The government says that the Maoists are active in 15 out of 28 states. And these include the major states. The Union Home Ministry says that 167 districts out total 600 districts in the country are covered by Maoists. This is a little less than 1/3 of India.

The Maoists in India follow the New Democratic Revolutionary method proved successful in China under the leadership of Mao. This method follows that the revolutionary movement must put priority on working in the areas where the state is weak. The Maoists work in the backward regions to smash the local reactionaries’ power and establish people’s power. They build revolutionary mass bases in these backward areas. This doesn’t mean that they don’t also work in the cities. In fact, in the Congress of the CPI (Maoist) held in January/February 2007, they decided to increase their work in the urban areas. They have produced a new document concerning work in the urban areas that analyses the work done in the last thirty years. This document sets out a strategy for developing the work in the urban areas.

The backward regions in the country are essentially semi-feudal and there is not much capitalistic development. The Maoist Party selected these areas for guerrilla warfare. The armed struggle is considered as the main form of struggle. In order to develop the main form of struggle the Maoists concentrate their work in the backward areas. The struggle in urban areas is secondary and complimentary. The work of the party among the working class in the urban areas helps develop proletarian leadership for the struggle in the backward areas.

At the same time the Maoists participate in developing a huge movement in the urban areas among the intelligentsia, students, women and the middle classes. Maoist cadres and leaders who have been working in the urban areas also are arrested, harassed and killed.

Maoists also work among the coal miners in a big way. There are vast coal mines in many regions in India. You can see, the Maoists work in many industrial areas all over the country, though their concentration of work proceeds from the rural areas.

In fact the CPI (Maoist) leads the single largest mass movement in India. The Central and local governments’ response is an indicator to the vastness of the movement. The Central Government has formed a Coordination Centre together with 14 state governments. They are cooperating to mobilise security forces and to gather intelligence about the movements of the Maoists. They have armed a huge military network. They have monthly meetings of this Centre. A large number of military forces are engaged against the Maoist movement. This also indicates the strength of the Maoist movement.

The Naxalbari uprising in 1967 that beckoned in the new revolutionary wave ended with splits into many groups. The splitting up of revolutionary communist forces lasted from 1972 to 1997. It is only after 1997 that the revolutionary communists started uniting. Two major parties who were waging armed struggle united in 1998 and the final unity took place in 2004 when the CPI (Maoist) was formed with the merger of MCCI and CPI (People’s War). Because of the splits the movement couldn’t grow faster before 2004.

(See note 1, to be posted with Part 2 of this interview. for a closer history of the splits and unification process of the Communist Movement between 1970 and 2004.)

Red!: How do the Maoists respond to accusations of being dogmatists, and not being willing to learn from the defeats of socialism in the 20th century?

Saibaba: The Maoists are creatively and in a genuine way implementing the Marxist principles to the concrete conditions of India. They don’t blindly copy from China or Russia. At the same time they are aware that the socialist projects in China and Russia were defeated by the capitalist roaders. They apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in a practical way for India. If one calls carrying armed struggle dogmatism, then one is moving away from class struggle in an impoverished country like India. Armed peasant struggle is the basic struggle, because 70% of the masses have been forced to remain with and depend on agriculture and backward relations of production. In such a situation where a vast majority don’t have a public democratic space, they will not be able to fight the fascistic ruling classes without arms. But armed struggle is also being waged creatively and practically. Armed struggle doesn’t mean the annihilation of the class enemy. Armed struggle is a form of class struggle where the oppressed classes assert their power and organise themselves by taking away power from the feudal and pro-imperialist comprador capitalists.

Armed struggle under the leadership of Maoists also means re-appropriation of the sources of livelihood by the wretched of the earth from the dominant and powerful classes. It also means building alternative institutions the people’s power. So in this way the armed struggle is redefined and practiced with Bolshevik spirit of giving all power to the soviets. Without armed struggle no resistance can be built in countries like India and the resistance that has been built up in the previous years cannot be retained. The armed actions against the state forces and feudal forces are carried out to protect the movement and in self-defence and self-assertion of the exploited classes.

The Maoists believe that the demise of socialist construction in Russia and China was mainly due to the revisionist line that developed within the respective Communist Parties of those countries. The capitalist-roaders in Russia and China captured power back from the working class because those parties could not guard against the infiltration of the bourgeoisie into the proletarian parties. The failure of the socialist projects have taught important lessons to the international proletariat in carrying forward the class struggle against the bourgeoisie in various countries and the monopoly bourgeoisie at the international level. In no country in the world has class struggle succeeded without armed struggle.

Red!: How many soldiers do the Maoists have approximately?

Saibaba: The Indian Government says 28,000, but the number may be much higher. The areas of their influence look much wider than what the Government estimations indicate. Also there is a vast people’s militia working at the village level. The militia is basic and primary in relation to the People’s Liberation Army as per the strategy of the CPI (Maoist).

Red!: Have there been any peace talks between the Maoists and the authorities anywhere?

Saibaba: There were peace talks in 2004. The Government of Andhra Pradesh invited the Maoists for peace negotiations. The Maoist Party always maintains that they are never averse to political negotiations with their opponents on the issues of people’s struggles, but no negotiations are possible on their central political line in terms of strategy. One round of peace talks were conducted in Hyderabad for about a month. This was facilitated and supported by the prominent intellectuals of the region. The Maoists said in the negotiations that if the government was willing to solve the problems of the people for which they had been fighting in the last thirty five years, they would welcome the change. They discussed the basic problems of the people. A ceasefire agreement was signed by both sides before the political negotiations began. The government said that they wanted to close the first phase of the negotiations and also said that it would implement the agreed upon points. And the Maoist leaders who negotiated went back underground. They waited for the implementation of the agreed points. The Government violated the ceasefire, started hostilities on the Maoists and killed several hundred Maoists, including leading cadres. This process revealed before the eyes the people how the reactionary rulers are not ready to solve the problems of the people.

Red! : Do the Maoists have any base areas?

Saibaba: The People’s War has not reached to the level of base areas yet. But it has almost reached this level in several places. In these areas where base areas are under construction, people’s governments at local level are functioning. The People’s governments are functioning in several hundred villages.

Red!: There is news that the Central and State Governments launched attacks against the Maoist positions in Andhra Pradesh, and that they have been driven out of most of the areas. Doesn’t this show that when the ruling classes want to, they can defeat the Maoists militarily, and that it is only a question of tactics from the enemy’s part, when it decides to smash the Maoists?

Saibaba: In the last decade more than two thousand Maoist cadres have been brutally murdered in Andhra Pradesh. There was a concentrated attack particularly after the peace negotiations. When the Maoists saw that they were facing larger losses of forces, they retreated from certain areas, and deployed them in other areas. There is a temporary setback in some areas in Andhra Pradesh for the Maoist movement, but they are trying to revive these areas. The Central and State governments use vigilante groups in a huge way to infiltrate the Maoist areas and smash them. The vigilante groups worked more effectively for the governments in breaking the Maoist resistance in some areas of Andhra Pradesh.

The movement is not merely a military movement. It is a political movement involving the masses. So the Maoists are not facing and confronting the Indian military forces just militarily but more politically so they have a vast mass base. It is not possible for the government to smash the movement because of massive popular support. The temporary setbacks are not uncommon in revolutionary movements. But the mature revolutionary movements could recover from such setbacks quickly from time to time.

Red!: Are there any revolutionary forces that are trying another strategy than protracted people’s war in India?

Saibaba: Yes, for example CPI (ML) New Democracy and a few other CPI (ML) groups. Ahead of the Lok Sabha elections (elections to the Union legislature i.e. the Parliament) in 2004, CPI(ML) Red Flag and a few other CPI (ML) groups took the initiative to form a united front of revolutionary communists basically to fight elections.

The Maoists consider them to be the right deviationists but not revisionist. They are progressive, but not on the right revolutionary path as per the Maoists. But Maoists are not averse to work with them in mass work.

Red!: India is a big country. In some areas there are civil wars, in other areas there is not much unrest. At the same time most parties are regional, not national. Are there revolutionary organisations in all the states of India?

Saibaba: The unrest is everywhere. Take for example Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. These two areas are poverty-stricken areas. But there is not a single revolutionary party exists in these regions. The unrest takes place in these regions many shapes. Sometimes mass militant movements arise. But the major problem is that the revolutionary subjective forces are not working there. These are two large states, but there is no history of revolutionary communist parties in these areas, mostly NGOs work in these areas. They are often foreign funded. But the objective situation is very much ripe for armed struggle in these areas as well. It is simply the question of spread of revolutionary forces to these regions that is awaited.

Red!: What is the percentage of people living in the cities? How many of these have employment?

Saibaba: 30 percent of Indian population live in urban and semi-urban areas and 70 percent in the countryside. Overall, about 77% of the people live on Rs. 20/- a day i.e. half a US dollar a day on an average. Unemployment is rampant in every part of India.

Red!: Officially India is growing at a GDP growth-rate of almost 10%. You contest this figure. Why?

Saibaba: At the moment the growth rate is around 9% as per the Government’s declaration. Only 0.5% percent of the workforce, which is engaged in the service-sector, is contributing 55% to the GDP. And 70% of the workforce, which is in the rural agriculture sector, is contributing with only 19% to the GDP. And 3% of the work force is engaged in the manufacturing sector. These figures from the government tell us that the vast majority of the people’s share in the GDP is very minute. Right now the growth rate figures are based to a large degree on speculative capital, which includes foreign investment. So the growth rate is both illusive and fragile. The calculations for the growth rate are also based on falsehoods. If these figures indicate anything, we understand that the top 10% is amassing the wealth with crudest exploitative methods.

Red!: In the Philippines there is a combination of People’s War and at the same time the party supports people’s parties that stand for elections, in Nepal the Maoists stood for elections to parliament in 1993, then they boycotted the elections and started a people’s war, and now they are in parliament. Isn’t it possible to combine people’s war and parliamentary work in such a vast and diverse country as India?

Saibaba: The history of the development of the Communist Movement in India in the last 40 years shows us that those Communist Revolutionary Parties that did not choose the strategy of People’s War, but chose the theory of people’s resistance first, before the initiation of People’s War or that chose to combine people’s resistance and parliamentary politics, gradually slipped into either right deviationist or neo-revisionist path.

People’s War is the main strategy, whereas standing for elections of the Parliament is a tactical question. The Maoists are not in principle against the elections, but doing this must facilitate the strategy of People’s War. The Maoists consider the question of participation in Parliamentary elections as part of the tactics which has a strategic importance. So they don’t see any immediate possibility of participating in elections. The Parliamentary institutions are highly discredited ones among the people in India. In the imagination of people at large, if one is participating in elections one is the enemy of the people who comes to rob them. The Maoists boycott elections and concentrate on building alternative people’s power and people’s institutions. In India the Maoists have no immediate plans of using this tactic.

Red!: Isn’t it possible to develop both legal struggle and underground struggle in the cities and larger urban areas, also including working in the Parliamentary organisations?

Saibaba: The Maoists do work in the urban areas among the working classes and the middle classes. This has secondary importance in relation to the main strategy of the revolutionary line. The primary importance is to develop the armed struggle in the villages among the peasants as the main force, and with the working class ideology in the leadership. This means not just the physical workers but those of the people who acquired the proletarian ideology and without property of their own. Maoists do combine legal and the illegal struggles as far as the struggles create space to operate and basically understand that more and more militant struggles create this space. Whatever there is any democratic space, it’s being used to the maximum extent possible. But the ruling classes don’t allow the use of legal means and different institutions of democracy always. Participating in elections is not the only way to participate in legal and urban spaces. Even boycotting elections is a highly political activity, which is another way of participating politically within the given democratic space that exists in India.

First of all, the Maoists are concentrating on gaining power for the people to build people’s democratic revolutionary institutions. When this is achieved in large areas, they will get more space in the urban centres.

Red!: Is employment growing?

Saibaba: The employment rate is not growing, it is standing still. But the real employment rate has declined very much, for several reasons. The economic surveys tell us that one million small industries were closed in the last few years, and this made a huge loss of jobs. Then land being acquired from the farmers is also responsible for unemployment. The small peasants and landless peasants have lost their jobs in a big way.

Only IT-industry and some service industry are growing. But these are sectors where a miniscule number of people are employed. Employment in manufacture sector is on decline. The government doesn’t show these figures. The independent intelligentsia produce alternative figures on both the growth rate and unemployment. There is a huge controversy about the official figures about employment situation in India. On the whole, there is a decline in the employment growth rate, side by side there is decline in real wages of workers.http://firemtn.blogspot.com/2008/03/inside-look-at-maoist-strategy-in-india.html

This piece expresses, I believe, the official attitude. It's pseudo-Marxism is obvious from the entire way that it treats the working class. Rhetoric aside, there is no indication that, in fact, the working class is put forward as the leading class of the revolution. Despite the admitted fact that 30% of the population is urban (higher than that of Russia at the time of the Revolution), the Naxalites adhere to a rural strategy which precludes working class environment. As is being seen right now in Tunisia, Egypt, Bharain, Libya, etc., an urban working class strategy is both viable and necessary.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

The following, from the official Naxalite website, is an interview with a Naxalite leader.

http://firemtn.blogspot.com/2008/03/inside-look-at-maoist-strategy-in-india.html

This piece expresses, I believe, the official attitude. It's pseudo-Marxism is obvious from the entire way that it treats the working class. Rhetoric aside, there is no indication that, in fact, the working class is put forward as the leading class of the revolution. Despite the admitted fact that 30% of the population is urban (higher than that of Russia at the time of the Revolution), the Naxalites adhere to a rural strategy which precludes working class environment. As is being seen right now in Tunisia, Egypt, Bharain, Libya, etc., an urban working class strategy is both viable and necessary.

RED DAVE

The website that your post links to is not an official naxalite or Indian Maoist website and neither is G.N. Saibaba a naxalite/Maoist leader. The RDF is a mass organization that does not claim to be affiliated to the CPI(Maoist). Now you have plainly engaged in making false claims and sectarian anti-Maoist assertions without being able to justify your stand. It is clear that you have run out of logic, just like in the other threads where you try to slander Maoists.

[RED DAVE]

The website that your post links to is not an official naxalite or Indian Maoist website and neither is G.N. Saibaba a naxalite/Maoist leader. The RDF is a mass organization that does not claim to be affiliated to the CPI(Maoist). Now you have plainly engaged in making false claims and sectarian anti-Maoist assertions without being able to justify your stand. It is clear that you have run out of logic, just like in the other threads where you try to slander Maoists.Sorry that I confused one Maoist group with another. Google is not always the best political guide.

Now that you're finished your rant, would you say that Saibaba accurately defines Maoist strategy in India? Or is the Naxalite strategy different?

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Sorry that I confused one Maoist group with another. Google is not always the best political guide.

Now that you're finished your rant, would you say that Saibaba accurately defines Maoist strategy in India? Or is the Naxalite strategy different?

RED DAVE

Which part of what Saibaba says is bothering you ? If you think that India is capitalist, then you should consider the poor and landless peasantry to be the rural working class. So, your interpretation of the emphasized portion should be that Maoists are developing the armed struggle with the working class as the main force with working class ideology in the leadership. Is there anything wrong with that ?

[RED DAVE]

Which part of what Saibaba says is bothering you ? If you think that India is capitalist, then you should consider the poor and landless peasantry to be the rural working class.You obvious do not understand Marxism!

Poor peasantry is not part of the working class. It is a separate class from the proletariat; it stands in a different relationship to the means of the production. Landless laborers are part of the working class.


So, your interpretation of the emphasized portion should be that Maoists are developing the armed struggle with the working class as the main force with working class ideology in the leadership. Is there anything wrong with that ?What wrong is that you don't know Marxism.


The Maoists do work in the urban areas among the working classes and the middle classes.Note the formualtions that a so-called Marxist is using here.

First of all, there is the phrase "working classes." Now virtually everyone in capitalist society, except, in Marxist terms, the bourgeoisie itself, works for a living. However, in Marxism, the term "working class" has a fairly specific meaning. It means those who operate the means of production, who do the actual physical labor, who produce by their labor exchange and use values, who produce the surplus value that is the source of capitalist profit, and who have nothing to sell on the market but their labor power. Thus the term working classes, whatever it means

Secondly, verbally at least, he places equal weight on the "working classes" and the middle classes. This is, of course, in line with the Maoist strategy of the bloc of four classes. But it is in now way in line with Marxism. Even verbally here, the working class is not being treated as the leading class of the revolution. this is one more example that even when Maoists bother to rhetorically put forward the working class as the leading class of their revolutionary praxis, they are lying.


This has secondary importance in relation to the main strategy of the revolutionary line. The primary importance is to develop the armed struggle in the villages among the peasants as the main force, and with the working class ideology in the leadership.Now this is really fascinating. What this indicates, beyond the fact that the locus of Maoist struggle is in the countryside, which everyone knows, but that, if the translation is correct, the leadership is to be those who have a working class ideology! Not the working class but those who hold to a working class ideology. This means that the working class is not to be the leading class but the holders of the ideology: in other words, the party. This is exactly pure Maoism: hold to a working class rhetoric but in fact the party is to lead the revolution.

This is exactly what was done in China, where the working class was excluded for controlling society as a class. When the Maoists were about approaching the cities at the end of the revolution, the working class in many places rose up. they were told by the Maoists to go back to work under their existing managers. They are still there.


This means not just the physical workers but those of the people who acquired the proletarian ideology and without property of their own.Translation: the petit-bourgeoisie will find a welcome, leadership role in the party and the revolution.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

You obvious do not understand Marxism!

Poor peasantry is not part of the working class. It is a separate class from the proletariat; it stands in a different relationship to the means of the production. Landless laborers are part of the working class.

Okay, so then the Maoists must be developing the armed struggle with the working class and peasantry as the main forces with working class ideology in the leadership.


What wrong is that you don't know Marxism.You mean they should not develop armed struggle ? Or should they not have working class ideology in the leadership ?


Note the formualtions that a so-called Marxist is using here.

First of all, there is the phrase "working classes." Now virtually everyone in capitalist society, except, in Marxist terms, the bourgeoisie itself, works for a living. However, in Marxism, the term "working class" has a fairly specific meaning. It means those who operate the means of production, who do the actual physical labor, who produce by their labor exchange and use values, who produce the surplus value that is the source of capitalist profit, and who have nothing to sell on the market but their labor power. Thus the term working classes, whatever it meansStrawman, because he is obviously referring to different strata of the working class.


Secondly, verbally at least, he places equal weight on the "working classes" and the middle classes. This is, of course, in line with the Maoist strategy of the bloc of four classes. But it is in now way in line with Marxism. Even verbally here, the working class is not being treated as the leading class of the revolution. this is one more example that even when Maoists bother to rhetorically put forward the working class as the leading class of their revolutionary praxis, they are lying.Another strawman, because he is talking of organizing different classes, not about putting a particular class into leadership. There is no need to mention everywhere that all oppressed classes are organized while the working class provides leadership over the revolution.


Now this is really fascinating. What this indicates, beyond the fact that the locus of Maoist struggle is in the countryside, which everyone knows, but that, if the translation is correct, the leadership is to be those who have a working class ideology! Not the working class but those who hold to a working class ideology. This means that the working class is not to be the leading class but the holders of the ideology: in other words, the party. This is exactly pure Maoism: hold to a working class rhetoric but in fact the party is to lead the revolution.

This is exactly what was done in China, where the working class was excluded for controlling society as a class. When the Maoists were about approaching the cities at the end of the revolution, the working class in many places rose up. they were told by the Maoists to go back to work under their existing managers. They are still there.

Yet another strawman, because all he said was that working class ideology should be in the leadership. Or do you prefer a non-working class ideology in leadership, just like your Indian comrades ?


Translation: the petit-bourgeoisie will find a welcome, leadership role in the party and the revolution.

RED DAVETranslation : Marx and Lenin would be kicked out of your ideal communist party.

[RED DAVE]

Keep it going, red cat. Keep defending a non-Maxist strategy. We know how it's going to work out in the long run: China, which was state capitalism which led ot private capitalism. And we know how it works in the short run: Nepal, where Maoists are now partners in a capitalist government. It's not difficult to see where the Maoists in India are headed.

The bloc of four classes is a capitalist bloc, leading to capitalism.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Keep it going, red cat. Keep defending a non-Maxist strategy. We know how it's going to work out in the long run: China, which was state capitalism which led ot private capitalism. And we know how it works in the short run: Nepal, where Maoists are now partners in a capitalist government. It's not difficult to see where the Maoists in India are headed.

The bloc of four classes is a capitalist bloc, leading to capitalism.

RED DAVE

Your posts tend to be quite short when you run out of arguments. But still they are less boring then what you post usually, and also save me the time and effort of writing long replies that you ignore anyways. So keep it up ! :thumbup1:

[RED DAVE]

Your posts tend to be quite short when you run out of arguments. But still they are less boring then what you post usually, and also save me the time and effort of writing long replies that you ignore anyways. So keep it up ! :thumbup1:CHINA: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to the creation of state capitalism, which ended up as rapacious private capitalism;

NEPAL: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to entry of the Maoists into a bougeois government that preserves capitalist relatinships in the workplace, which will either entail state capitalism and private capitalism or, more likely, out-and-out private capitalism.

INDIA: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to the placing of the petit-bourgeoisie, peasantry and native bourgeolisie on the same political level as the working class. this will lead to either state capitalism and private capitalism or straight to state capitalism.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Those who do not know history's mistakes are doomed to repeat them. (Georges Santayana)

RED DAVE

[red cat]

CHINA: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to the creation of state capitalism, which ended up as rapacious private capitalism;

NEPAL: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to entry of the Maoists into a bougeois government that preserves capitalist relatinships in the workplace, which will either entail state capitalism and private capitalism or, more likely, out-and-out private capitalism.

INDIA: Maoist theory of the bloc of four classes leads to the placing of the petit-bourgeoisie, peasantry and native bourgeolisie on the same political level as the working class. this will lead to either state capitalism and private capitalism or straight to state capitalism.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Those who do not know history's mistakes are doomed to repeat them. (Georges Santayana)

RED DAVE

Clearly, you are omniscient, not to mention that all these discussions concerning evidences and other petty matters are simply a waste of time for you. Why don't you start a separate thread to share your knowledge of the past, present and future with us? I am sure that we will be highly benefited.

[RED DAVE]

Clearly, you are omniscient, not to mention that all these discussions concerning evidences and other petty matters are simply a waste of time for you. Why don't you start a separate thread to share your knowledge of the past, present and future with us? I am sure that we will be highly benefited.Better yet, why don't you explain to us how Maoist in China brought about the largest capitalist society in history.

And then you can explain why it's okay for a Marxist party to be part of a government that exploits the working class.

And then you can explain how the Naxalites are going to relate to the working class because it seems like they're doing the same thing that the Chinese and Nepalese Maoists are doing: substituting rhetoric for content and providing cover for capitalism.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Better yet, why don't you explain to us how Maoist in China brought about the largest capitalist society in history.

And then you can explain why it's okay for a Marxist party to be part of a government that exploits the working class.

And then you can explain how the Naxalites are going to relate to the working class because it seems like they're doing the same thing that the Chinese and Nepalese Maoists are doing: substituting rhetoric for content and providing cover for capitalism.

RED DAVE

This thread is about India, not Nepal or China, and I don't care about what the Maoist movement seems to you as long as it seems to me that the CPI(Maoist) is led by the working class. If you want any evidence of working class support, then state specifically what kind of evidence you want keeping the Indian situation in mind, or else just stop derailing the thread with irrelevant topics.

[RED DAVE]

This thread is about India, not Nepal or ChinaTypical Maoist provincialism.


and I don't care about what the Maoist movement seems to you as long as it seems to me that the CPI(Maoist) is led by the working class.It can "seem to you" anything you want if engage in enough doublethink and denial. If there is anything that's clear it is that the party is not "led by the working class."


If you want any evidence of working class support, then state specifically what kind of evidence you want keeping the Indian situation in mind, or else just stop derailing the thread with irrelevant topics.Don't get snotty; you haven't got the politics. If you were at all honest, you'd admit that there's a big hole in the middle of Maoism that theoretically you have never dealt with.

Evidence? How about, for openers, you locate online the basic program of the Naxalites and we analyze it, point by point. That's a good place to begin.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Typical Maoist provincialism.

As opposed to Trotskyite internationalism, of course. Your internationalism is very handy for derailing threads btw.


It can "seem to you" anything you want if engage in enough doublethink and denial. If there is anything that's clear it is that the party is not "led by the working class."

Evidence ?


Don't get snotty; you haven't got the politics. If you were at all honest, you'd admit that there's a big hole in the middle of Maoism that theoretically you have never dealt with.

Yes, a big hole that results in working class support and participation and the establishment of workers control.


Evidence? How about, for openers, you locate online the basic program of the Naxalites and we analyze it, point by point. That's a good place to begin.

RED DAVE

A better place to begin would be you explaining why Maoists have been able to establish workers control over certain fields or why the whole of the oppressed population joins them in struggle in red zones.

[RED DAVE]

This is now a pissing contest. I am making a suggestion, as above, that instead of making unsupported statements about workers control, you provide a link to the fundamental document of the Naxalite movement so we can analyze it. I'm being reasonable; this is not rhetoric. If you don't have access to such documents or no such documents exists, let us know.

By the way, there are many groups that are referred to as "Naxalites," so it would be better to select one of them.


Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_League_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Communist Party of Bharat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Bharat) led by Barnali Mukherje
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Naxalbari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Naxalbari) led by Rauf (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rauf&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Koora Rajanna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koora_Rajanna)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Ranadheer
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Chandra Pulla Reddy
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Bhaijee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Bhaijee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Prajashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Prajashakti&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Praja Pratighatana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Praja_Pratighatana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Prathighatana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Prathighatana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Mahadev Mukherjee) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Mahadev_Mukherjee%29) led by Mahadev Mukherjee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahadev_Mukherjee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Central Team (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Central_Team)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Kanu Sanyal) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Kanu_Sanyal%29) led by Kanu Sanyal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanu_Sanyal)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Liberation) led by Dipankar Bhattacharya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipankar_Bhattacharya)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Red Flag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Red_Flag) led by Unnichekkan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unnichekkan&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_New_Democracy) led by Chandra Pulla Reddy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Pulla_Reddy) and Yatendra Kumar (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yatendra_Kumar&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Somnath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Somnath) led by Somnath Chatterjee Ukhra (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Somnath_Chatterjee_Ukhra&action=edit&redlink=1) and Pradip Banerjee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pradip_Banerjee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Shantipal (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Shantipal&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Jan Samvad (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Jan_Samvad&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Nai Pahal (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Nai_Pahal&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Proletarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_New_Proletarian&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Maharashtra (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Maharashtra&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Organizing Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Organizing_Committee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of United States of India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_United_States_of_India)
Communist Revolutionary Centre (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Revolutionary_Centre&action=edit&redlink=1)
Provisional Central Committee, Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Central_Committee,_Communist_Party_of_ India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29) led by Satyanarayan Singh (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Satyanarayan_Singh&action=edit&redlink=1) and Santosh Rana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Santosh_Rana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party Reorganization Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_Reorganization_Centre_of_India_%28 Marxist-Leninist%29)
Marxist-Leninist Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist-Leninist_Committee) led by K. Venkateswar Rao
Re-organizing Committee, Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Re-organizing_Committee,_Communist_League_of_India_%2 8Marxist-Leninist%29&action=edit&redlink=1)
Revolutionary Communist Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Centre_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist-Maoist%29)
Revolutionary Socialist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Socialist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Revolutionary Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Unity_Centre_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Lal Jhanda Dal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lal_Jhanda_Dal)
Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India (Marxist-Leninist) (D.V. Rao) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Centre_of_Communist_Revolutionaries_of_India _%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28D.V._Rao%29)
Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Ajmer group) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Centre_of_Communist_Revolutionaries_of_India _%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Ajmer_group%29)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Naxalite_and_Maoist_groups_in_India

RED DAVE

[red cat]

This is now a pissing contest. I am making a suggestion, as above, that instead of making unsupported statements about workers control, you provide a link to the fundamental document of the Naxalite movement so we can analyze it. I'm being reasonable; this is not rhetoric. If you don't have access to such documents or no such documents exists, let us know.

The workers control claim is not unsupported. In red zones, the forests are controlled and guarded by forest-product workers, for example.


By the way, there are many groups that are referred to as "Naxalites," so it would be better to select one of them.


Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_League_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Communist Party of Bharat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Bharat) led by Barnali Mukherje
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Naxalbari (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Naxalbari) led by Rauf (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rauf&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Koora Rajanna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koora_Rajanna)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Ranadheer
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Janashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Janashakti) led by Chandra Pulla Reddy
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Bhaijee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Bhaijee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Prajashakti (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Prajashakti&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Praja Pratighatana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Praja_Pratighatana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Prathighatana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Prathighatana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Mahadev Mukherjee) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Mahadev_Mukherjee%29) led by Mahadev Mukherjee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mahadev_Mukherjee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Central Team (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Central_Team)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Kanu Sanyal) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Kanu_Sanyal%29) led by Kanu Sanyal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanu_Sanyal)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Liberation) led by Dipankar Bhattacharya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipankar_Bhattacharya)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Red Flag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Red_Flag) led by Unnichekkan (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unnichekkan&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_New_Democracy) led by Chandra Pulla Reddy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Pulla_Reddy) and Yatendra Kumar (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yatendra_Kumar&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Somnath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29_Somnath) led by Somnath Chatterjee Ukhra (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Somnath_Chatterjee_Ukhra&action=edit&redlink=1) and Pradip Banerjee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pradip_Banerjee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Shantipal (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Shantipal&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Jan Samvad (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Jan_Samvad&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Nai Pahal (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Nai_Pahal&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) New Proletarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_New_Proletarian&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Maharashtra (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Maharashtra&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Organizing Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_India_%28Marxis t-Leninist%29_Organizing_Committee&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party of United States of India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_United_States_of_India)
Communist Revolutionary Centre (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Revolutionary_Centre&action=edit&redlink=1)
Provisional Central Committee, Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Central_Committee,_Communist_Party_of_ India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29) led by Satyanarayan Singh (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Satyanarayan_Singh&action=edit&redlink=1) and Santosh Rana (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Santosh_Rana&action=edit&redlink=1)
Communist Party Reorganization Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_Reorganization_Centre_of_India_%28 Marxist-Leninist%29)
Marxist-Leninist Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist-Leninist_Committee) led by K. Venkateswar Rao
Re-organizing Committee, Communist League of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Re-organizing_Committee,_Communist_League_of_India_%2 8Marxist-Leninist%29&action=edit&redlink=1)
Revolutionary Communist Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Centre_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist-Maoist%29)
Revolutionary Socialist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Socialist_Party_of_India_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Revolutionary Communist Unity Centre (Marxist-Leninist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Unity_Centre_%28Marxist-Leninist%29)
Lal Jhanda Dal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lal_Jhanda_Dal)
Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India (Marxist-Leninist) (D.V. Rao) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Centre_of_Communist_Revolutionaries_of_India _%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28D.V._Rao%29)
Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Ajmer group) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Centre_of_Communist_Revolutionaries_of_India _%28Marxist-Leninist%29_%28Ajmer_group%29)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Naxalite_and_Maoist_groups_in_India

RED DAVEI don't know why even after almost everything we post in this forum about the Naxalite movement happens to be actions by the CPI(Maoist), you are providing a list that does not have its name in it. Are you doing this on purpose ?

[RED DAVE]

CPI(Maoist)Let's see the documents.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Let's see the documents.

RED DAVE

Here (http://socialism.in/?p=676).

[RED DAVE]

Here (http://socialism.in/?p=676).This is a genral website; I don't see any basic documents.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

This is a genral website; I don't see any basic documents.

RED DAVE

This (http://socialism.in/?p=430) is a basic document of the CPI(Maoist).

[RED DAVE]

Maybe we can start here.


Present Political Situation — Our Tasks”, a resolution of the Political Bureau of the CPI(Maoist) dated Dec. 20, 2008. (This 20-page document was published in Kolkata on Jan. 26, 2009.) PDF format (73 KB); MS Word format (76 KB)http://www.bannedthought.net/india/CPI-Maoist-Docs/index.htm#2011

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Maybe we can start here.

http://www.bannedthought.net/india/CPI-Maoist-Docs/index.htm#2011

RED DAVE

How can a political document be an evidence of workers' support ?

[RED DAVE]

How can a political document be an evidence of workers' support ?It can't be direct evidence, but by analyzing the presentation of the document of workers power, we might get some idea of what this group thinks workers power is and how they might implement it or call for it to be implemented.

Considering the fact that you have refused to provide any other evidence, and given the history of Maoism, which is ambivalent about workers power at best, this will have to do.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

It can't be direct evidence, but by analyzing the presentation of the document of workers power, we might get some idea of what this group thinks workers power is and how they might implement it or call for it to be implemented.

Considering the fact that you have refused to provide any other evidence, and given the history of Maoism, which is ambivalent about workers power at best, this will have to do.

RED DAVE

Or rather, given the history of Indian Trotskyism, which is apparently serving as a tool for imperialism to attack and derail the revolution in India, I first want to make sure that I know what you want as evidence. For example, when I want some evidence of Indian Trotskyites having workers' support, I ask for a report from some source other than their own newspapers, which indicates that they are organizing workers for militant struggle. Considering the fact that the Trotskyites are not outlawed, I would expect frequent reports of this, had they really been engaging in class-struggle.

Throughout this thread, you have not stated the kind of evidence you want. Now you are considering an open political document as such an evidence. Considering how you have cooked up straw-man arguments against the statements of Maoists or mass-organizers, I don't expect you to be able to seriously analyze any political documents or any practical evidence of Maoist activity.

[Dimentio]

The Maoists are invisible. Like the Phanton. They strike from the shadows, and one day just 50 million people will take on the streets guided by the Naxalites from their hyper-secret Skull Dungeon.

[scarletghoul]

red cat why do you continue to indulge this clown ? He is obviously more interested in proclaiming his position than looking at the facts. Its been shown through various reports that the Naxals are organising urban workers and have support in the cities as a vital part of their strategy. RED DAVE is just being stubborn for no reason, and i would not spend any more time on this useless discussion

[scarletghoul]

The Maoists are invisible. Like the Phanton. They strike from the shadows, and one day just 50 million people will take on the streets guided by the Naxalites from their hyper-secret Skull Dungeon.
Is there a point to this post or are you just laughing at the idea of an underground movement

[RED DAVE]

Or rather, given the history of Indian Trotskyism, which is apparently serving as a tool for imperialism to attack and derail the revolution in India, I first want to make sure that I know what you want as evidence.(1) I am at best, a dissident Trotskyist.

(2) If you are going to attack another political group, provide some evidence.

(3) I would seem to be quite evident what support for the Maoists in the Indian working class would include: (a) Indian Maoist-led unions or the presence of maoist factions or sympathy within unions; (b) Indian Maoist-led front organizations (these would be important as the Indian Maoists are an illegal organization); (c) Indian Maoist publications aimed at the working class, including online publications, which report on day-to-day struggles of the working class; (d) Indian Maoist theoretical journals; (e) cooperation with other groups; (f) some kind of an international presence; (g) constant references to the leading role of the working class in Indian Maoist publications and theoretical work; (f) demonstrations or public meetings supporting the Naxalites. And so on.

Surely, if the involvement of the Naxalites with the Indian working class is real, you should be able to provide something along these lines.


For example, when I want some evidence of Indian Trotskyites having workers' support, I ask for a report from some source other than their own newspapers, which indicates that they are organizing workers for militant struggle. Considering the fact that the Trotskyites are not outlawed, I would expect frequent reports of this, had they really been engaging in class-struggle.I agree, except that I would also pay atttnetion to their own publications. A close reading of them would show at least something.


hroughout this thread, you have not stated the kind of evidence you want.You have been nit-picking, rc. You're not stupid, and you know damn well what would consitute evidence. You just showed in in the paragraph above.


Now you are considering an open political document as such an evidence.Yes, I would consider a programmatic document by a political organization to be one piece of eivdence as to their involvement with the working class.


Considering how you have cooked up straw-man arguments against the statements of Maoists or mass-organizers, I don't expect you to be able to seriously analyze any political documents or any practical evidence of Maoist activity.And considering that you come from a political tendency that does not, in practice, believe in the leading role of the working class, I take anything you say very seriously.

Maoists in China and Nepal have used working class rhetoric to conceal the actual class nature of their politics. The so-called bloc of four classes downgrades the role of the working class and makes it only one component of a national revolution, and not the leading component. It is evident from the Chinese Reolution and the behavior of the Nepalese Maoists, that the working class is not the leading element of their strategy.

I believe that all the hemming and hawing you're doing about evidence of Naxalite involvement in the working class in India is that the same pattern will emerge. So let's see some evidence. Remember, I'm not the only person reading this stuff. If your evidence is genuine, you should be able to convince others.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

red cat why do you continue to indulge this clown ? He is obviously more interested in proclaiming his position than looking at the facts. Its been shown through various reports that the Naxals are organising urban workers and have support in the cities as a vital part of their strategy. RED DAVE is just being stubborn for no reason, and i would not spend any more time on this useless discussion

Comrade, I know that he is being stubborn, and he is unlikely to ever overcome his political dogma and hatred for real communists. However, in this forum itself there are some Trotskyite comrades who sympathize with our revolutions, and there are many more who have their revolutionary potential but are successfully liquidated by Trotskyism. The only purpose for which I engage in endless arguments with the likes of Dave is to show these comrades a real revolutionary alternative to what they are engaging in. If all my posts in revleft convince even one comrade from any other tendency to acknowledge Maoism as the only way to communism, then I will consider all my time spent posting here as usefully utilized.

[red cat]

(1) I am at best, a dissident Trotskyist.

(2) If you are going to attack another political group, provide some evidence.

Okay, I am attacking the New Socialist Alternative, the branch of the CWI in India. I claim that they are not a working class party and do not have working class support. If you want to negate me, then provide some evidence along the lines that I have outlined in my previous reply to you.


(3) I would seem to be quite evident what support for the Maoists in the Indian working class would include: (a) Indian Maoist-led unions or the presence of maoist factions or sympathy within unions;Maoists are outlawed, so it is impossible for them to lead unions. Any union that publishes its sympathy for Maoists online will be outlawed too.


(b) Indian Maoist-led front organizations (these would be important as the Indian Maoists are an illegal organization);How are they supposed to openly lead front organizations when they are outlawed ? Remember, if I can produce convincing evidence to prove that some organization is a frontal organization of the Maoists, then so can the Indian government, and that is enough for the state to outlaw that organization too.


(c) Indian Maoist publications aimed at the working class, including online publications, which report on day-to-day struggles of the working class; The Indian working class is largely deprived of the luxury of using the internet or knowing English or even being literate. Maoists communicate with them by person-to-person conversations, not through the internet so that they can be certified as revolutionaries by some self-proclaimed communist group or individual from an imperialist country.


(d) Indian Maoist theoretical journals; How does a theoretical journal provide any evidence of working class support ?


(e) cooperation with other groups;Which other groups ?


(f) some kind of an international presence;What do you mean by this ? Are you looking for individuals and groups from other countries that consider the CPI(Maoist) to be a revolutionary communist party ? You will find a few of them in this forum itself.



(g) constant references to the leading role of the working class in Indian Maoist publications and theoretical work;This is not necessary for an organization having workers support, specially when most of their publications are on the revolutionary war itself rather than theory.


(f) demonstrations or public meetings supporting the Naxalites. And so on.

Surely, if the involvement of the Naxalites with the Indian working class is real, you should be able to provide something along these lines.Of course. Public meetings and demonstrations openly supporting naxalites are impossible under normal conditions, as they are outlawed, but these have taken place when the ban on the CP was lifted temporarily. Here is a picture :

http://indianvanguard.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/naxal_gadar2.jpg?w=500&h=357


I agree, except that I would also pay atttnetion to their own publications. A close reading of them would show at least something. The documents of an organization alone cannot be evidence for its own role or support among the working class. Rather, when an organization is outlawed, it might even try to conceal most of its achievements in its open documents.


You have been nit-picking, rc. You're not stupid, and you know damn well what would consitute evidence. You just showed in in the paragraph above. I sure do, but the point is that you still haven't asked for such a piece of evidence yet. If you ask for them I will definitely try to find some online.


Yes, I would consider a programmatic document by a political organization to be one piece of eivdence as to their involvement with the working class.

And considering that you come from a political tendency that does not, in practice, believe in the leading role of the working class, I take anything you say very seriously.You haven't yet backed up your claim of Maoists not believing in the leading role of the working class. Furthermore, you fail to see that a political organization can be revisionist by not implementing a revolutionary programme that it publishes.





Maoists in China and Nepal have used working class rhetoric to conceal the actual class nature of their politics. The so-called bloc of four classes downgrades the role of the working class and makes it only one component of a national revolution, and not the leading component. It is evident from the Chinese Reolution and the behavior of the Nepalese Maoists, that the working class is not the leading element of their strategy.That is your opinion.


I believe that all the hemming and hawing you're doing about evidence of Naxalite involvement in the working class in India is that the same pattern will emerge. So let's see some evidence. Remember, I'm not the only person reading this stuff. If your evidence is genuine, you should be able to convince others.

RED DAVEIf you were the only person reading this stuff, then I wouldn't have replied to your posts in the first place. I think you should also produce the kind of evidence that I wanted, to show that the NSA has working class support. Others are reading this, after all.

[RED DAVE]

The Trots in India are hardly the point. If you want to discuss the evils of Indian Trotskyism, start a trhead about them.

I one more time am asking you, red cat, to produce some kind of credible evidence of large-scale working class involvement by the Naxalites or large-scale support for them in the working class. Produce any kind of evidence you think is credible. We can debate the credibility after you've shown us some material.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

The Trots in India are hardly the point. If you want to discuss the evils of Indian Trotskyism, start a trhead about them.

Why another thread ? It is very much relevant to this thread itself. It throws some light on the possible reasons for Trotskyites attacking Maoists.


I one more time am asking you, red cat, to produce some kind of credible evidence of large-scale working class involvement by the Naxalites or large-scale support for them in the working class. Produce any kind of evidence you think is credible.

In my previous reply to you, I have already posted a picture of a mass demonstration in support of Naxalites, in case you haven't noticed.


We can debate the credibility after you've shown us some material.

RED DAVE

First set your standards for an evidence being credible, then I shall show you more evidences.

[RED DAVE]

I can only conclude that you have no evidence, except for a few photographs, and that you are bullshitting. If anyone wants to believe this seeming clown, please go ahead. For the now, it is reasonable to believe that:

(1) There is no credible evidence that for the Naxalites the working class is the leading class of the revolution in India; and

(2) it is also reasonable to believe that the Naxalites have no base in the working class.

Prove this wrong, red cat. put forth whatever evidence you have. Let the comrades here evaluate it. A few pictures of demonstrations is not a lot of evidence. But, in any case, would you please repost them.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

I can only conclude that you have no evidence, except for a few photographs, and that you are bullshitting.

Funny, because it seems that you are the one bullshitting around and trying to avoid the piece of evidence that I have already provided.


If anyone wants to believe this seeming clown, please go ahead.You don't need to talk about yourself so much in your own posts.


For the now, it is reasonable to believe that:

(1) There is no credible evidence that for the Naxalites the working class is the leading class of the revolution in India; and I thought you were asking for evidence just for working class support ?


(2) it is also reasonable to believe that the Naxalites have no base in the working class.
Who are the men in the picture ? Capitalists ?


Prove this wrong, red cat. put forth whatever evidence you have. Let the comrades here evaluate it. I have already put forth one. Let's first evaluate that one.


A few pictures of demonstrations is not a lot of evidence.Why ?


But, in any case, would you please repost them.

RED DAVEFirst evaluate the picture that I just posted.

[resurgence]

The Maoists are invisible. Like the Phanton. They strike from the shadows, and one day just 50 million people will take on the streets guided by the Naxalites from their hyper-secret Skull Dungeon.

The Maoists are illegal because well revolution is against the law which makes underground organization necessary.

Maybe we should be asking why the revisionist organizations in India are legal?

[RED DAVE]

First evaluate the picture that I just posted.
http://indianvanguard.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/naxal_gadar2.jpg?w=500&h=357

This is a picture.

It is a picture of a man.

He seems to be, possibly, Indian.

He is carrying a flag.

The flag may be the flag of of the CPI(M) of India.

He is in front of a large group of people.

They may be part of demonstration.

The demonstration seems to be in or near a city.

He might be part of the demonstration.

There is no indication of what the demonstration is about.

The man might be placed in front of the demonstration by using Photoshop.

Happy now?

RED DAVE

[red cat]

http://indianvanguard.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/naxal_gadar2.jpg?w=500&h=357

This is a picture.

It is a picture of a man.

He seems to be, possibly, Indian.

He is carrying a flag.

The flag may be the flag of of the CPI(M) of India.

He is in front of a large group of people.

They may be part of demonstration.

The demonstration seems to be in or near a city.

He might be part of the demonstration.

There is no indication of what the demonstration is about.

The man might be placed in front of the demonstration by using Photoshop.

Happy now?

RED DAVE

This post of yours is pure gold. :lol:

Have you tried to answer your questions yourself yet ?

[scarletghoul]

RED DAVE, it is a picture of many many thousands of people in an urban area. It is a Maoist rally. It is proof of mass urban support for the Maoists.

What is so difficult to understand ?

[RED DAVE]

RED DAVE, it is a picture of many many thousands of people in an urban area.Right.


It is a Maoist rally.Not clear. One man with a Maoist flag, not in and among the participants, does not make this a Maoist rally. When and where did this rally take place? Who spoke? What was the purpose


It is proof of mass urban support for the Maoists.It is no such thing.


What is so difficult to understand?What's difficult to understand is how obtuse you Maoists are.

We are dealing with politics here, not show and tell.

Let me give you an example.

Yesterday, I got an email from a comrade in Madison about the the demos there. He said that one of the political groups, the ISO, was there. The ISO had a table, gave out leaflets and later sold humorous t-shirts. Nothing would be easier (I'm an amateur photographer) than to line up a shot with people wearing the ISO t-shirts, including parts of the crowd, that would make it look like we were seeing an ISO-sponsored rally. And this would be a falsification.

Your constant refusal to provide any real evidence of Maoist support inside the Indian working class is not encouraging.

RED DAVE

[resurgence]

Yesterday, I got an email from a comrade in Madison about the the demos there. He said that one of the political groups, the ISO, was there. The ISO had a table, gave out leaflets and later sold humorous t-shirts. Nothing would be easier (I'm an amateur photographer) than to line up a shot with people wearing the ISO t-shirts, including parts of the crowd, that would make it look like we were seeing an ISO-sponsored rally. And this would be a falsification.



You just dont get it do you? The class enemy views Trotskyitism as a lovable eccentricity of romantic idealists which is sometimes necessary in the political realm the same way trade unions are viewed by them as necessary in large enterprises to stop wild cat, i.e. to undermine the political struggle of genuine revolutionary communists. They the International Communist Movement rather differently to say the least.

You can be jailed, tortured and killed for membership of the Communist Party of India (Maoist), it is an illegal organization, what part of that do you not understand?

And LOL at selling humourous tee-shirts. I feel the capitalist system must be trembling.

[red cat]

Right.

Not clear. One man with a Maoist flag, not in and among the participants, does not make this a Maoist rally. When and where did this rally take place? Who spoke? What was the purpose

The rally took place in the Nizam College grounds, Hyderabad, on 30th September, 2004. The rally was organized to openly display a portion of the mass base of the Indian Maoist movement. Open sympathizers like Gadar and Varavara Rao organized the speeches and cultural programmes.


It is no such thing.

What's difficult to understand is how obtuse you Maoists are.

We are dealing with politics here, not show and tell.

Let me give you an example.

Yesterday, I got an email from a comrade in Madison about the the demos there. He said that one of the political groups, the ISO, was there. The ISO had a table, gave out leaflets and later sold humorous t-shirts. Nothing would be easier (I'm an amateur photographer) than to line up a shot with people wearing the ISO t-shirts, including parts of the crowd, that would make it look like we were seeing an ISO-sponsored rally. And this would be a falsification.

Your constant refusal to provide any real evidence of Maoist support inside the Indian working class is not encouraging.

RED DAVEIt is obvious that you will reject any evidence of mass support for the Maoists as not "real" or "enough". You are here to do nothing but cover up the reactionary stand of your Indian comrades by attacking the Maoists. Let's not forget that almost every piece of news on south Asia that we receive from Trotskyite sources are never backed up by any convincing reports from other sources. Now let us see some workers' support for Indian Trotskyites. Or will you just dodge this point again ?

[RED DAVE]

The rally took place in the Nizam College grounds, Hyderabad, on 30th September, 2004. The rally was organized to openly display a portion of the mass base of the Indian Maoist movement. Open sympathizers like Gadar and Varavara Rao organized the speeches and cultural programmes.Excellent. Now you're talking. Are there any links that can be followed to learn more, such as programmatic demands, if any, text of speeches, names of cooperating groups?


It is obviousFew things on Earth are obvious.


that you will reject any evidence of mass support for the Maoists as not "real" or "enough".Not so. I just rejected one picture of one demonstration. Now, I'd like to know more. Were there any unions involved? Where, if it's know, did the attendees at the rally come from? Etc.


You are here to do nothing but cover up the reactionary stand of your Indian comrades by attacking the Maoists.(1) I have no Indian comrades, as you well know. I am, at best, a dissident Trotskyist. If you want to be considered a serious political personal, and not a shit-slinger in the best stalinist/maoist tradition, cut it out.


Let's not forget that almost every piece of news on south Asia that we receive from Trotskyite sources are never backed up by any convincing reports from other sources. Now let us see some workers' support for Indian Trotskyites. Or will you just dodge this point again ?Start a thread on Indian or South Asian Trotskyism and find some orthodox Trotskyists, and maybe they'll give you some evidence.

Meantime, we have one interesting rally, about which more details would be welcome. For instance, what was the text of the call for the rally? On wah basis was it organized? Which organizations participated?

For example, right now, I can tell you that no US leftist organization, of any stripe, has major input into the mass rallies in Wisconsin. At least two (the ISO and the SP-USA) have some kind of presence. I've made it a point to find this out. You need to be scrupulous about this. You claim the ortho-Trots are lying. Maoists don't exactly have a spotless reputation for the truth.

This is all political A-B-Cs.

RED DAVE

[RED DAVE]

http://indianvanguard.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/naxal_gadar2.jpg?w=500&h=357


The rally took place in the Nizam College grounds, Hyderabad, on 30th September, 2004. The rally was organized to openly display a portion of the mass base of the Indian Maoist movement. Open sympathizers like Gadar and Varavara Rao organized the speeches and cultural programmes.Now, first of all, let's note that you slipped in the term "mass base" when we were discussing the "working class." They are by no means the same. The "mass base" of the Naxalites is not at issue. What is at issue is whether or not they have support in the working class. Either way, I was able to get some information about the rally.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manitham/message/404
http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/sep/30ap.htm)

But, once again, it doesn't show working class support for the Naxalites. And it certainly doesn't show support for the CPI(M) because that party didn't exist when this picture as taken. It shows a rally for two other groups, one of which, the PWG, became a part of the CPI(M) somewhat later and the other did not.

Anyway, there is no proof fthat this picture that the Naxalites have working class support.

The link above refers to "sympathisers and members of PWG's frontal organisations, mobilised from across Andhra Pradesh." In other words, these people are from the entire state of Andhra Pradesh, which in 2001 had a population of over 75 million. From a state with a population of 1/4 that of the USA only a few thousand could be moblized. (a) This is not mass support. And (b) what support there is is not necessarily working class. These people could easily be from rural areas. The fact that there was an issue of people being armed at the rally shows that we are dealing with Naxalites from the rural.

I could go on and on about this. But the picture and supporting information, unsurprisingly, do not show working class support for the Naxalites. I would like to see any material you have about the rally in 2004.

Try again, red cat.

RED DAVE

[DaringMehring]

Guys, this debate seems endless, mindless, and pointless.

RED DAVE points out again and again that CPI(M) is not recognizably Marxist based on program & base. This is obviously true.

Red cat retorts that Naxals are progressive revolutionaries. Again, quite true.

Each tries to counter the others' points, by slinging old insults that, the sooner retired, the better.

Is there really anything else to say?

[red cat]

Excellent. Now you're talking. Are there any links that can be followed to learn more, such as programmatic demands, if any, text of speeches, names of cooperating groups?

The official reports by the mass media on this are highly confusing. But the rally is said to have been focused on the aims of the people's war.


Few things on Earth are obvious.

Not so. I just rejected one picture of one demonstration. Now, I'd like to know more. Were there any unions involved? Where, if it's know, did the attendees at the rally come from? Etc.

I cannot recall whether any unions were involved officially or not, but the attendees had come from all over Andhra Pradesh.


(1) I have no Indian comrades, as you well know. I am, at best, a dissident Trotskyist. If you want to be considered a serious political personal, and not a shit-slinger in the best stalinist/maoist tradition, cut it out.

Start a thread on Indian or South Asian Trotskyism and find some orthodox Trotskyists, and maybe they'll give you some evidence.

Meantime, we have one interesting rally, about which more details would be welcome. For instance, what was the text of the call for the rally? On wah basis was it organized? Which organizations participated?

For example, right now, I can tell you that no US leftist organization, of any stripe, has major input into the mass rallies in Wisconsin. At least two (the ISO and the SP-USA) have some kind of presence. I've made it a point to find this out. You need to be scrupulous about this. You claim the ortho-Trots are lying. Maoists don't exactly have a spotless reputation for the truth.

This is all political A-B-Cs.

RED DAVE

If you are a dissident Trotskyite having no comrades in India then how come you never ask whether the Indian Trotskyites have any working class base or not ? Have you already concluded that they don't, which is why you never seem to be curious about this ?

[red cat]

http://indianvanguard.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/naxal_gadar2.jpg?w=500&h=357

Now, first of all, let's note that you slipped in the term "mass base" when we were discussing the "working class." They are by no means the same. The "mass base" of the Naxalites is not at issue. What is at issue is whether or not they have support in the working class. Either way, I was able to get some information about the rally.

This is the portion of your earlier post in response to which I posted the picture :


(f) demonstrations or public meetings supporting the Naxalites. And so on.

Surely, if the involvement of the Naxalites with the Indian working class is real, you should be able to provide something along these lines.While posting the above, you had the fact in mind that a successful public meeting or demonstration with a large mass attendance is never devoid of significant working class participation. Now you are trying to ignore this fact purposefully. You wanted a demonstration or public meeting as evidence, and I gave the same to you. Now you are changing the standards that you yourself had set. I was aware that you would try these cheap tricks of yours. That is why I wanted you to post in details what you wanted as evidence.



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manitham/message/404
http://in.rediff.com/news/2004/sep/30ap.htm)

But, once again, it doesn't show working class support for the Naxalites.
Why do you think that some evidence along the lines that you described in your post does not show working class support ? Do your standards keep changing this often ?


And it certainly doesn't show support for the CPI(M) because that party didn't exist when this picture as taken. It shows a rally for two other groups, one of which, the PWG, became a part of the CPI(M) somewhat later and the other did not.Wrong information, again. The CPI(M) had been formed through merger of the poitical military wings and all other organizations by 21st September. The rally took place on 30th September. The merger was announced officially to the mass media on 14th October. So the active mass bases had merged before the rally took place. Also, the other group is a fraternal CP of the CPI(Maoist), only much smaller in size. If any of the sympathizers in the rally supported one only party, which would be quite unusual because these parties differ only in very tactical points and cooperate with each other in almost all issues, then that party was most likely to be the CPI(Maoist).


Anyway, there is no proof fthat this picture that the Naxalites have working class support. There is, according to the standards that you set.


The link above refers to "sympathisers and members of PWG's frontal organisations, mobilised from across Andhra Pradesh." In other words, these people are from the entire state of Andhra Pradesh, which in 2001 had a population of over 75 million. From a state with a population of 1/4 that of the USA only a few thousand could be moblized. (a) This is not mass support. And (b) what support there is is not necessarily working class. These people could easily be from rural areas. The fact that there was an issue of people being armed at the rally shows that we are dealing with Naxalites from the rural.

I could go on and on about this. But the picture and supporting information, unsurprisingly, do not show working class support for the Naxalites. I would like to see any material you have about the rally in 2004.

Try again, red cat.

RED DAVEFirstly, the number of people mobilized was more than a hundred and fifty thousands. Nothing of the dimensions of "a few thousands" can overflow the Nizam college grounds, which that rally did.

Secondly, the attendance at a public meeting is limited by the organizers' ability to actually arrange for its supporters to reach the venue, and to find enough space for them. You should be knowing that Indian workers and peasants are not exactly rich enough to drive cars and reach a public meeting. Those from far away regions cannot attend meetings if the CP or some mass organization does not arrange for the transportation. Also, there was no open space in the city that was allotted for such a meeting and could hold more than the numbers that attended the rally. Were you expecting a picture of a mass rally of a few millions ? If the rally had been an all-India one, then probably you'd be expecting a few tens of millions, not caring about whether such a rally is practically possible or not.

Your arguments are getting more and more pathetic with each post. So you'd better try again, and harder.

[red cat]

RED DAVE points out again and again that CPI(M) is not recognizably Marxist based on program & base. This is obviously true.


Why do you think that it is true ? If by a Marxist party you mean some party which talks and talks of workers seizing power and yet does not move a single step towards creating the necessary conditions, then the CPI(Maoist) is definitely not a Marxist party. If on the other hand, by a Marxist party you mean some party or organization which focuses more on field activities rather than repetitive theory, organizes the working class to lead the broad masses to revolution, and achieves workers control in certain fields in the intial stages of the revolution itself, then I would argue that not only is the CPI(Maoist) a Marxist party, but it is also one of the most advanced ones ever.

[DaringMehring]

Why do you think that it is true ? If by a Marxist party you mean some party which talks and talks of workers seizing power and yet does not move a single step towards creating the necessary conditions, then the CPI(Maoist) is definitely not a Marxist party. If on the other hand, by a Marxist party you mean some party or organization which focuses more on field activities rather than repetitive theory, organizes the working class to lead the broad masses to revolution, and achieves workers control in certain fields in the intial stages of the revolution itself, then I would argue that not only is the CPI(Maoist) a Marxist party, but it is also one of the most advanced ones ever.

CPI(M) obviously base themselves on peasantry/tribals, not the working class. Plus the whole "semi-feudal" schtick, the upshot of which is that, it is not the goal of the Party to expropriate the bourgeoisie and eliminate capitalist social relations, equals decisively not Marxist. Or at least not Marxist in the classical mold.

You don't seem to understand, that someone considering themself Marxist could support the CPI(M) without upholding it as Marxist. We don't have to pretend everything is perfect, "the most advanced ever," to support it. That is cult-like thinking.

I support the CPI(M) in so far as, it represents the self-activity of the downtrodden of India, fighting back against the social relations that exploit them. And it does do that!

However, to the degree that it does not actually do that, which approximately coincides to my mind, with its deviations from classical Marxism (after making allowances for how Marxism can be applied to different countries), is the degree to which I or any socialist should criticize it. If we give up on that, then we might as well go back to the days of the infallible Party, the cult of Stalin, and end up with the same old disastrous results -- capitalism preserved, despite the heroic efforts of so many brave comrades.

[pranabjyoti]

CPI(M) obviously base themselves on peasantry/tribals, not the working class. Plus the whole "semi-feudal" schtick, the upshot of which is that, it is not the goal of the Party to expropriate the bourgeoisie and eliminate capitalist social relations, equals decisively not Marxist. Or at least not Marxist in the classical mold.
So you want a revolution just based on workers only, excluding the peasantry/tribals. Moreover, tribal people live in "primitive communism" state and lack the sense of personal property. Their social structure is such that social property and social functioning is like inhale/exhale, which we, people from class based society have to acquire with intellectual labor.
Moreover, do you think that agriculture labors doesn't belong to the working class and they aren't "industrial". I am sure that CPI(Maoist) have some pretty good base among agriculture labors, who lived in rural areas.

You don't seem to understand, that someone considering themself Marxist could support the CPI(M) without upholding it as Marxist. We don't have to pretend everything is perfect, "the most advanced ever," to support it. That is cult-like thinking.
Well, then do something to reach perfection instead of finding blackheads.

I support the CPI(M) in so far as, it represents the self-activity of the downtrodden of India, fighting back against the social relations that exploit them. And it does do that!
Well, what can any workers "revolutionary" party will do in such scenario.

However, to the degree that it does not actually do that, which approximately coincides to my mind, with its deviations from classical Marxism (after making allowances for how Marxism can be applied to different countries), is the degree to which I or any socialist(!) should criticize it. If we give up on that, then we might as well go back to the days of the infallible Party, the cult of Stalin, and end up with the same old disastrous results -- capitalism preserved, despite the heroic efforts of so many brave comrades.
There are many reasons and personality cult is the least among the lesser reasons. Like other imperialist brainwashed morons, you say in such a way that fUSSR belonged to some alien planet and it's the only state there. No counter-revolution, no foreign invasion, no sabotages occurred there.
In my opinion, leave the matter of applying Marxism to some country to the workers of that country don't GIVE THEM THE SHOE AND ADVISE THEM TO CUT THEIR FEET TO MATCH THE SHOE.

[red cat]

CPI(M) obviously base themselves on peasantry/tribals, not the working class. Plus the whole "semi-feudal" schtick, the upshot of which is that, it is not the goal of the Party to expropriate the bourgeoisie and eliminate capitalist social relations, equals decisively not Marxist. Or at least not Marxist in the classical mold.

You don't seem to understand, that someone considering themself Marxist could support the CPI(M) without upholding it as Marxist. We don't have to pretend everything is perfect, "the most advanced ever," to support it. That is cult-like thinking.

I support the CPI(M) in so far as, it represents the self-activity of the downtrodden of India, fighting back against the social relations that exploit them. And it does do that!

However, to the degree that it does not actually do that, which approximately coincides to my mind, with its deviations from classical Marxism (after making allowances for how Marxism can be applied to different countries), is the degree to which I or any socialist should criticize it. If we give up on that, then we might as well go back to the days of the infallible Party, the cult of Stalin, and end up with the same old disastrous results -- capitalism preserved, despite the heroic efforts of so many brave comrades.

The problem is that what you mean by a "classical" Marxist party might need "classical" capitalist conditions to exist in the first place. You are probably looking for a party most of whose members are workers, or which conducts open strikes and demonstrations etc. But these assume a demographic majority of the proletariat and a bourgeois democratic government in the country concerned. Open strikes conducted by revolutionaries etc. cannot take place in a fascist semi feudal country like India where the state forces usually respond to every unarmed mass movement with bullets. In India the workers' movement has to be predominantly clandestine in nature.

However, every movement has a particular class character. So we have to look for other acid-tests that confirm the class character of the CPI(Maoist). Having said this, I ask you, which class other than the proletariat is able to establish workers' control over the means of production, even in a single field ? This alone is enough to deduce which class leads the revolution through the CPI(Maoist).

[RED DAVE]

If on the other hand, by a Marxist party you mean some party or organization which focuses more on field activities rather than repetitive theoryNothing Marxist here.


organizes the working class to lead the broad masses to revolutionMaoists do not do that. Show me in what country you have ever done that.


and achieves workers control in certain fields in the intial stages of the revolution itselfWorkers guarding forests is what you are, presumably talking about. How are the economic transactions of selling the wood handled? Do the workers control their own wages? If in fact they are harvesting wood in the forests and selling it on their own, they are petit-bourgeois and not workers.


then I would argue that not only is the CPI(Maoist) a Marxist party, but it is also one of the most advanced ones ever.It is obviously not a Marxist party.

RED DAVE

[DaringMehring]

So you want a revolution just based on workers only, excluding the peasantry/tribals. Moreover, tribal people live in "primitive communism" state and lack the sense of personal property.

First, they are feudal, or "semi-feudal," now, they live in "primitive communism," --- come on, they live in capitalism. They are among the most exploited and dispossessed of capitalism.

And I don't suggest revolution based on workers "only," look at Russia for instance --- but there is a reason Marx called it the proletarian revolution, and there is a reason as Engels pointed out, that peasants have failed to make socialism for thousands of years despite many egalitarian outbursts and uprisings.



Well, then do something to reach perfection instead of finding blackheads.


My own activity is where I live, the USA.


Like other imperialist brainwashed morons, you say in such a way

As soon as someone criticizes CPI(M), even expressing critical support, you are off into accusations and insults.

It's the same mindset, that would execute a dissident communist for daring to suggest the Party wasn't already perfect. Everybody knows where that leads. Comrades lose the ability to think critically. In the 1930s, communists used to have that problem. The Stalinized Comintern kept them at a level where the best arguments they knew were some insults about being a capitalist or imperialist. They were losing arguments on street corners to Social Democrats...



In my opinion, leave the matter of applying Marxism to some country to the workers of that country don't GIVE THEM THE SHOE AND ADVISE THEM TO CUT THEIR FEET TO MATCH THE SHOE.

It is up to the exploited of every country to figure out how to win their fight; that doesn't mean we can't give them advice, hard fought for in our own struggles, to try to help them.

[DaringMehring]

The problem is that what you mean by a "classical" Marxist party might need "classical" capitalist conditions to exist in the first place. You are probably looking for a party most of whose members are workers, or which conducts open strikes and demonstrations etc. But these assume a demographic majority of the proletariat and a bourgeois democratic government in the country concerned. Open strikes conducted by revolutionaries etc. cannot take place in a fascist semi feudal country like India where the state forces usually respond to every unarmed mass movement with bullets. In India the workers' movement has to be predominantly clandestine in nature.

However, every movement has a particular class character. So we have to look for other acid-tests that confirm the class character of the CPI(Maoist). Having said this, I ask you, which class other than the proletariat is able to establish workers' control over the means of production, even in a single field ? This alone is enough to deduce which class leads the revolution through the CPI(Maoist).

In Russia the proletariat were not a demographic majority, they were a minority and many of those were freshly "converted" peasants. Nor did Russia have a bourgeois democratic government up until Feb 1917. So those aren't really pre-conditions for having a classic Marxist Party.

CPI(M) clearly represents the downtrodden, but to say that they have established workers' control -- I haven't heard of this. Last articles I read about life in the forests, said that work was still done under Party administration, with the Party taxing the labor much less than the capitalists had formerly skimmed, and that democratic forms were being constructed for political governance, in terms of village and district councils. In other words, it was all a work in progress, and didn't yet equal workers' control.

Big step in the right direction, but project not yet complete.

Question is, without a self-conscious and active component of worker militants in the lead, can that project ever be completed.

I agree with you that, due to the repressions, Maoists have to keep their activities hidden; so it is hard to say what is really happening.

I also agree with you that, due to the configuration of social forces in the struggle, there could be a socialist outcome -- I just don't believe that it can happen that way without new forces coming into play. And any policy of protecting the national bourgeoisie, or national exploiters, is a big block to that.

Look at Nepal, they had almost won "people's war" but hadn't captured the cities, and then, even as the workers slowly were starting to rise up in Kathmandu, the CPN(M) cuts a deal with the bourgeois SPA to win control of the cities, not on the backs of the workers, but via an alliance that protects the bourgeoisie.

[resurgence]

So you want a revolution just based on workers only, excluding the peasantry/tribals. Moreover, tribal people live in "primitive communism" state and lack the sense of personal property. Their social structure is such that social property and social functioning is like inhale/exhale, which we, people from class based society have to acquire with intellectual labor.
.

Maybe Karl Marx's discussions with Russian narodniki in the mid 19 th century before the peasant communes in Russia were broken up about the possibility of them going from a primitive form of socialism (albeit one over shadowed by a parasitic nobility and an autocratic state) to communism without passing through capitalism might offer some insights into some of the situation in India today.

[red cat]

In Russia the proletariat were not a demographic majority, they were a minority and many of those were freshly "converted" peasants. Nor did Russia have a bourgeois democratic government up until Feb 1917. So those aren't really pre-conditions for having a classic Marxist Party.

Which is better; a CP with a large mass base among the working class and a small one in the peasantry, or one with large mass bases in both, specially when the peasantry are a demographic majority ? Also, I think there were some very prominent characteristics of bourgeois democracy even before 1917. How many Bolsheviks were killed by the Russian state forces in the years just before 1917 ?



CPI(M) clearly represents the downtrodden, but to say that they have established workers' control -- I haven't heard of this. Last articles I read about life in the forests, said that work was still done under Party administration, with the Party taxing the labor much less than the capitalists had formerly skimmed, and that democratic forms were being constructed for political governance, in terms of village and district councils. In other words, it was all a work in progress, and didn't yet equal workers' control. Taxing has to be done in order to maintain the red army and continue developmental works. For examples of workers' control you can look at the people's rights to forests, or the reports of construction of schools, canals, hospitals etc. Many of those are carried out through mass decisions without top-down instructions.


Big step in the right direction, but project not yet complete.True. Workers' control over more fields would represent an advanced stage of socialism, and the Indian revolution is only in its new democratic stage nationally.


Question is, without a self-conscious and active component of worker militants in the lead, can that project ever be completed.

I agree with you that, due to the repressions, Maoists have to keep their activities hidden; so it is hard to say what is really happening.You can find some interesting news from the bourgeois mass-media online. In quite a few places Maoist organizational activities among the proletariat have been reported.


I also agree with you that, due to the configuration of social forces in the struggle, there could be a socialist outcome -- I just don't believe that it can happen that way without new forces coming into play. And any policy of protecting the national bourgeoisie, or national exploiters, is a big block to that.This "new force" will be a larger and stronger proletariat created by the new democratic revolution, which is already forming in many places. Without the proletariat maintaining and expanding its hold on the revolution, new democracy can degenerate to capitalism.

I think you should study the type of alliance with the national bourgeoisie in details. The workers and peasants present some conditions for a platform for common struggle or cooperation. Only that part of the national bourgeoisie which accepts these is considered as an ally. Also, as it is seen in India, sometimes a portion of the national bourgeoisie spontaneously supports the revolutionary forces.


Look at Nepal, they had almost won "people's war" but hadn't captured the cities, and then, even as the workers slowly were starting to rise up in Kathmandu, the CPN(M) cuts a deal with the bourgeois SPA to win control of the cities, not on the backs of the workers, but via an alliance that protects the bourgeoisie.The people's war was far from won. When the monarchy lost its absolute hold over Nepal, other agents of imperialism tried to seize power. Maoists took this opportunity to enter the struggle for power and prevent any one imperialist agent to win major control of the state. Since the red army was too weak to fight the state forces openly, let alone an imperialist invasion, they entered a ceasefire and started strengthening their mass bases, specially over the cities. The workers in Kathmandu had never moved as an organization separate from Maoists to seize power. Militant workers movements are being observed only in the last few years, due to the increasing influence of the UCPN(M) over the urban working class.

[red cat]

Nothing Marxist here.

Maoists do not do that. Show me in what country you have ever done that.

Workers guarding forests is what you are, presumably talking about. How are the economic transactions of selling the wood handled? Do the workers control their own wages? If in fact they are harvesting wood in the forests and selling it on their own, they are petit-bourgeois and not workers.

It is obviously not a Marxist party.

RED DAVE

What is obvious is that your previous claims of Maoists having no support among workers have been proved false, which is why you are resorting to a separate attack now, unable to defend your claim after the picture I posted has been evaluated thoroughly.

[pranabjyoti]

First, they are feudal, or "semi-feudal," now, they live in "primitive communism," --- come on, they live in capitalism. They are among the most exploited and dispossessed of capitalism.
First, kindly try to understand what I have said. I have said that the tribals of India (like other tribal people around the world) lived in primitive communist societies, NOT THE PEASANTS.

And I don't suggest revolution based on workers "only," look at Russia for instance --- but there is a reason Marx called it the proletarian revolution, and there is a reason as Engels pointed out, that peasants have failed to make socialism for thousands of years despite many egalitarian outbursts and uprisings.
The questions isn't about who is leader in revolution, but about whether it (the leading class) can have support of other classes or not. There is no question of revolution under peasant leadership.

As soon as someone criticizes CPI(M), even expressing critical support, you are off into accusations and insults.
As if by being a CRITIC, you and others like you are beyond criticism.

It's the same mindset, that would execute a dissident communist for daring to suggest the Party wasn't already perfect. Everybody knows where that leads. Comrades lose the ability to think critically. In the 1930s, communists used to have that problem. The Stalinized Comintern kept them at a level where the best arguments they knew were some insults about being a capitalist or imperialist. They were losing arguments on street corners to Social Democrats...
Well, it's the basic incapability of "non-stalinized communists(!)" around the world.

It is up to the exploited of every country to figure out how to win their fight; that doesn't mean we can't give them advice, hard fought for in our own struggles, to try to help them.
First think about whether you are in a position to advice them or not. Have they asked for your "advice"?

[red cat]

First think about whether you are in a position to advice them or not. Have they asked for your "advice"?

He is trying to help from a genuine concern for the revolutionary movement. Whether or not his suggestions are practical, is a different question though.

[t.shonku]

I have often seen some people in this forum whose only aim in life is to criticize Maoists without ever knowing a single fact about India , these people also support CPI (Marxist) without doing some background research many of them don’t even know nor have they ever tried to know that CPI (Marxist) is responsible for countless genocide and yet they support CPI (Marxist) .


Today I am going to expose CPI (Marxist) in front of you all ! I am going to show you it’s actual ugly face, I am going to show you how racist they are , today I am going to show you how they killed so many Dalits in Marichjhapi !







Marichjhapi and the Revenge of Bengali Bhadralok The story of a Dalit Genocide that remains untold

Exactly 30 years ago, Dalits, in West Bengal, came to realize the true nature of Indian state that is being dominated, in every sense, by a tiny section of population but at a great personal cost. It was in 1979, when thousands of Dalits, refugees from East Bengal (now Bangladesh) lost their lives at Marichjhapi, in Sunderbans, for their dream of resettling in the region which they considered part of their motherland.
Marichjhapi is just one incident in the tragic tale of one of the most powerful Dalit Community-Namashudras of Bengal – who first became the victim of Hindu-Muslim communalism during the partition and later became the victims of their castes in independent India.
Moreover, the complete silence of Bengal’s civil society for almost 30 years and the fact that Dalits were killed by Communist government of West Bengal that came to power in the name of poor and dispossessed, raises some serious questions about representation of Dalits in every sphere, the constitution of civil society and the hegemony of a few privileged castes over the political power in Independent India.
Apart from these, the Namashudra problem also poses a big question for the Dalit movement and Dalits living in other parts of the country about whether they are willing to fight for the rights of their fellow community people who, unfortunately, paid the price for sending Babasaheb Ambedkar to the Constituent Assembly.

Before Marichjhapi
In 1946, Constituent Assembly was constituted with the mandate to frame Indian Constitution and to function as provisional parliament for independent India. Its members were elected by state assemblies and represented almost all major communities of the country. However, the Congress government in Bombay province, headed by B.G. Kher and under instructions from Sardar Patel, ensured that Babasaheb Ambedkar was not elected.
At this crucial juncture, a very prominent leader Jogendra Nath Mandal ensured his election from the Bengal province. Thus Babasaheb could enter into the constituent assembly and, later, become prime architect of Indian Constitution that guaranteed many rights for the Dalits including representation in education and government jobs.
Who was Jogendra Nath Mandal? How could Babasaheb enter into Constituent Assembly from Bengal being ambushed by Congress in Bombay province and declared persona non grata due to his exposure of Gandhi and Congress as upholder of ‘upper’ caste Hindu domination?
He could enter at the strength of the then untouchable community called Namashudras and Jogendra Nath Mandal was one of the prominent Namashudra leaders of Bengal.
Namashudras were largely an agrarian community well-known for its hardworking nature, agricultural and artisan skills. It was one of the biggest communities of Bengal, with majority of its population based in the eastern part of undivided Bengal (now Bangladesh) with a long tradition of resisting caste-hindu domination and fighting against practice of untouchability and other ignominies thrust on them by the caste system.
The Namashudra movement had been one of the most politically mobilized untouchable’s movements in colonial India that had rejected Congress’ leadership even before Dr. Ambedkar, as it was upholding the interests of landowning ‘upper’ castes under the ruse of Indian nationalism. The complete monopoly of rich Bengali Bhadralok (a land owning class of people consisting of three Hindu ‘upper’ castes – brahmins, kayasthas and vaidyas) on congress leadership validated their severe indictment of the policies of the Congress.
Even prior to Congress, the Namashudras were the only voice of resistance to much touted Bengal ‘renaissance’ that, in all practical terms, were efforts of ‘upper’ caste Hindus to consolidate themselves and aggressively bargain with British colonial government to restrict the benefits of British built institutions like that of education, judiciary, bureaucracy and local governance for themselves.
The success of the Namashudra Movement could be easily measured by the autonomous political space which they were able to chalk out for themselves in Bengal politics and in alliance with Muslims had kept the Bengal Congress Party in opposition from the 1920s. At the strength of this political space they could get Babasaheb elected to the Constituent Assembly.
This exclusion of ‘upper’ caste Hindus from power in Bengal led Hindu elite and eventually the Congress Party pressing for partition of the province at independence, so that at least the western half would return to their control. So successful they have been in their design that West Bengal is probably the only state in the country where ‘upper’ caste hegemony went completely unchallenged in independent India till today.
It is clearly manifested in every sphere of life there and one hardly comes across any murmur of Dalit assertion ever.
One of the best indicators of ‘upper’ caste Hindu domination over West Bengal would be the number of Cabinet positions enjoyed by them in the successive state governments – the tiny tri-caste Bengali elite (consisting of brahmins, kayasthas and vaidyas) increased its Cabinet composition from 78 percent under the Congress regime (1952-62) to 90 percent under the Communist regime indicating their complete domination over West Bengal.
How was this achieved? What happened to the once powerful Namashudra community that resisted the ‘upper’ caste hegemony in pre-independence India?

The Plight of Namashudras in post-independence India
Marichjhapi is one of the small islands lying within the Sundarbans area of West Bengal. It was here in 1979 that thousands of Dalits were killed by the communist led West Bengal government. Hundreds were killed directly in police firings but many more died of starvation, lack of drinking water and diseases due to the economic blockade that was imposed on them by the state government and carried out by the police and communist cadres together.
Their settlements in Marichjhapi were completely bulldozed and destroyed. Hundreds of women were raped and killed, their bodies either dumped in the water bodies or left behind to be eaten by the beasts of nearby jungles in one of the biggest genocide carried out by any state in independent India.
The people who survived were driven out of West Bengal to continue living with the tragic memories of their lost loved ones and perpetual longing for the soil that once constituted parts of their motherland.
What happened at Marichjhapi is just one incident in the long tragic history of this particular Bengali Dalit community that started with the partition of the country and is continued till today. They have been living in their own country as second grade citizens, scattered throughout the country.
These helpless victims belonged to a Dalit community called Namashudras and were refugees from East Bengal (now Bangladesh) who were dispatched to different parts of the country by the state government citing the lack of space in West Bengal . The same state government took no time and readily provided maximum possible relief and rehabilitation to the ‘upper’ caste refugees.
Apart from this, these upper caste refugees illegally occupied large areas in and around Kolkata and other major cities of Bengal and got them regularized but when it was about Dalit refugees, the then Congress Chief Minister B.C. Roy wrote to Prime Minister Nehru that ‘we have no place for them, send them to other states’.
Then these Dalit refugees, despite their vociferous protests, were dispatched to inhospitable and far flung areas of states like Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Uttaranchal, Assam to live in completely alien environment. They were driven down to these places packed in government vehicles as cattle, under strict police supervision. Later many of their settlements in different states, like Mana camp in Orissa, were turned into concentration camps as government employed the services of Indian army to guard the camps for 12 long years, lest these people would escape to West Bengal.
Marichjhapi massacre of Dalit refugees by Left government in Bengal is just one incident. Even before Marichjhapi there were numerous incidents where many Namashudra refugees got killed by police while demanding for better provisions in the camps where they were being forcefully kept.
Apart from being persecuted by the state, the Namashudras, settled outside West Bengal, also suffered enormously from various other factors. They continuously faced hostility of local populace that strongly resented the presence of outsiders in their surroundings. Most of the camps were in the areas that were not fit for agriculture and being primarily an agrarian community, totally different type of climates and soil conditions made them handicap.
Also, even the reservation provisions for which, as Dalits, they would have been eligible in West Bengal, were not recognized in the states in which they were settled, as their castes were not native to those states. Despite all the difficulties, Namashudra refugees settled in different states kept alive their dream of returning back to the environment, culture and the land that they belonged to.

The Great Communist Betrayal (note- by communist betrayal they mean CPI (Marxist) , please don't get any other ideas ! )

During this period from late 1960s till mid-70s, the Bengali communists led by CPI (M), which was in opposition then, took up the case of these refugees and demanded that the government settle them within their native Bengal rather than scatter them across India on the lands of other peoples.
The communist, again its leadership monopolized by ‘upper’ caste, started raising their voices in the support of Dalit refugees and promised to provide them rehabilitation in West Bengal. The sites they mentioned in West Bengal for resettlement were either the Sundarbans area of the Ganges delta or vacant land scattered in various places throughout the state. The party leaders went around various Dalit camps campaigning for their return to West Bengal, simultaneously promising full support after coming in power. Particularly one, Mr. Ram Chatterjee, who later became minister in the CPI (M) led government, exhorted the Dalit refugees by thundering, “The 5 crore Bengalis by raising their 10 crore hands are welcoming you back.”
In 1977, when the Left Front came to power, they found that the Dalit refugees had taken them at their words having disposed off whatever their meager belongings were and have marched towards West Bengal. In all, 1, 50,000 refugees arrived from Dandakaranya region of what is now Chhattisgarh expecting the communists to honour their words. Instead the Left Front government started sending them back forcibly citing the lack of space in the state – the same reason that was cited earlier when the Dalits arrived from East Bengal during the partition. It was a rude shock for the Dalit refugees who were depending on the newly elected Left Front government. Dalit refugees were brutally evicted from various railway stations, being fired upon by the West Bengal police and were denied food and water. Still many refugees managed to escape and reached Marichjhapi, an island that lies in the northern part of the Sunderbans. Thousands of other Dalit refugees also marched to Marichjhapi on feet along the railway tracks, avoiding the police.
By the end of the year 1978, there were 30,000 Dalit refugees in the island of Marichjhapi who rapidly established it as one of the best-developed islands of the Sundarbans. Within a few months tube-wells had been dug, a viable fishing industry, saltpans, dispensaries and schools were established. In short, in just few months, the hard working Namashudras built a thriving local economy without any government support in the region that is considered the poorest in West Bengal.
Deeply humiliated by the successful resettlement of Namashudra refugees in Marichjhapi, the Left Front government started their propaganda against them by stating that the ‘Marichjhapi is a part of the Sundarbans government reserve forest’ and therefore Dalit refugees were ‘violating the Forest Acts and thereby disturbing the existing and potential forest wealth and also creating ecological imbalance’.
This was a blatant lie as Marichjhapi did not fall under government reserve forest at all. The Bengali Bhadralok leadership of Left Front had to resort to such lies and take up environmental concerns as an excuse as the Marichjhapi exposed their earlier lie too regarding ‘lack of space in West Bengal’.
The West Bengal government launched a full frontal assault on the Marichjhapi and the Dalit refugees. It started with the economic blockade. The police cordoned off the whole island, cutting every communication link with the outside world.
Thirty police launches encircled the island thereby depriving the settlers of food and water; they were also tear-gassed, their huts razed, their boats sunk, their fisheries and tube-wells destroyed, and those who tried to cross the river were shot at. Several hundred men, women and children were believed to have died during that time and their bodies thrown in the river.
And those who tried to defy this economic blockade by swimming across to other islands in search of food and water were brutally shot. On January 31, 1979 the police opened fire killing 36 people who were trying to get food and water from a nearby island.
It was not that the media was not aware of the sufferings and police brutalities on hapless Namashudras. When the reports of Marichjhapi started appearing in the media, Jyoti Basu, then chief minister of Bengal, shamelessly, termed it as ‘CIA conspiracy’ against newly elected communist government of Bengal and exhorted media to support the government in ‘national interest’.
Jyoti Basu justified the police actions by accusing Namashudra refugees of being agents of foreign forces and using Marichjhapi as arms-training centre. Moreover, Jyoti Basu declared the whole area to be out of bound for media and thus effectively silencing any dissenting voices or reporting of the killings of Dalit refugees.
It took more than five months and killings of thousands of Dalit refugees for the West Bengal government to effectively crush the Namashudra resistance in Marichjhapi. Totally devastated by the government brutalities the rest of the Namsahudras were packed off, as prisoner of war, back to Chattishgarh and Andaman.
After destroying all the huts, markets, schools and all other visible markers of Namashudra settlement, West Bengal government declared, in May 1979, Marichjhapi ‘finally free from all refugees’.
Regarding the total lives lost during the West Bengal government’s assault on Marichjhapi we will quote from one of the earliest writings on this incident by A. Biswas who wrote, in 1982, that ‘…out of the 14,388 families who deserted [for West Bengal), 10,260 families returned to their previous places . . . and the remaining 4,128 families perished in transit, died of starvation, exhaustion, and many were killed in Kashipur, Kumirmari, and Marichjhapi by police firings". [A. Biswas, 1982, "Why Dandakaranya a Failure, Why Mass Exodus, Where Solution?" The Oppressed Indian 4(4):18-20.]

Memories in the black hole
Exactly thirty years have passed by this fateful event that took place in Marichjhapi but not many from outside are aware of the communist government’s genocidal acts against Dalits. There has been complete silence even from the Bengali civil society that claims to be very progressive and free from caste biases.
The Bengali scholars, Marxist or otherwise, rule the Indian academia and write, articulate on all the problems that plague this earth. But none of them broke their silence ever on the merciless killings and eviction of people who belonged to the same Bengali society but happened to be Dalits. Marichjhapi was soon forgotten, except by the Dalits themselves.
The communists who keep on harping on fighting for the poor and dispossessed took no time in killing the same people soon after occupying the state power.
Perhaps this was the revenge of the Bengali Bhadralok, (that completely monopolizes the Bengali civil society, it’s so called scholarly class, communist and congress leadership) against Namashudra community that once successfully challenged ‘upper’ caste hegemony in undivided Bengal. So successful is the revenge that the community now lives in complete oblivion and scattered across the country without anyone standing for their rights or speaking about what actually happened in Marichjhapi in 1979.

References:
While writing this article, we have drawn heavily from following two research articles among very few that are available on the tragic tale of one our Dalit communities. We are reproducing both the articles for the benefit of our readers so that we all become aware of the tragedy and are able to fight for the justice.

1. Mallick, Ross, ‘Refugee Resettlement in Forest Reserves: West Bengal Policy Reversal and the Marichjhapi Massacre‘, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 58, No. 1. (Feb., 1999), pp. 104-125.

2. Jalais, Annu, ‘Dwelling on Morichjhanpi: When Tigers Became ‘Citizens’, Refugees ‘Tiger-Food’, Economic and Political Weekly, April 23, 2005


Link to Original article
http://dalitandtribe.wordpress.com/2010/01/02/marichjhapi-and-the-revenge-of-bengali-bhadralok-the-story-of-a-dalit-genocide-that-remains-untold/



Please take time and read this ! It is a long article I know ........!!


CPI (Marxist) has no right to carry that holy red flag ! they are giving a bad name to Communism !

[DaringMehring]

As if by being a CRITIC, you and others like you are beyond criticism.


There's a difference between criticism and name-calling.



First think about whether you are in a position to advice them or not. Have they asked for your "advice"?

I agree, that they have to figure it out for themselves. They shouldn't trust anybody but themselves. At the same time, we are all part of one fight, proletarians of the world against bourgeoisie of the world. We have to share ideas, experiences, and strategy. We can't become isolated from our class allies.

[DaringMehring]

He is trying to help from a genuine concern for the revolutionary movement. Whether or not his suggestions are practical, is a different question though.

Thank you for recognizing that.

I can't tell you the burning desire I feel for a victorious socialist revolution. Right now India, Nepal, and south Asia in general (I think Bhutan and Burma are ripe for revolution) is a very important theater for the world revolution.

But -- we can't let these revolutions turn into social democratic capitalism --- we need them to win, and to act as a base to spread the revolution.

Right now, in Nepal for instance, we can't see the government or the state acting to help a revolution like the USSR tried to do. They haven't even expropriated their domestic bourgeoisie! And the "United Marxist-Leninists" in power openly taunt the Maoists, saying they won't give them important governmental portfolios. You can't deal with such people and still implement a socialist program! No deal with those arrogant capitalist roaders! The real revolutionaries need to take them down and they need to do the same in India.

It is not impossible. In any strike, it is some hundreds of workers against a multi-billion dollar corporation, but yet workers can still win. When the fight is militant enough, it becomes something bigger than just the workers. Same thing with a revolution. The Bolsheviks conquered the Russian Empire with only 100,000 members leading the insurrection in October 1917.

[red cat]

Thank you for recognizing that.

I can't tell you the burning desire I feel for a victorious socialist revolution. Right now India, Nepal, and south Asia in general (I think Bhutan and Burma are ripe for revolution) is a very important theater for the world revolution.

Indeed, but there is need of red armies and CPs that have participation from the whole of the working class and lower peasantry from all corners of these countries to achieve the south Asian revolutions. Because after defeating the south Asian state armies, these revolutions will have to take on the combined forces of all imperialist powers.


But -- we can't let these revolutions turn into social democratic capitalism --- we need them to win, and to act as a base to spread the revolution.Very true. You can do your part by keeping yourself well informed about these movements, spreading awareness about them, and organizing the working class for seizure of political and economic power in whichever country you live.


Right now, in Nepal for instance, we can't see the government or the state acting to help a revolution like the USSR tried to do. They haven't even expropriated their domestic bourgeoisie! And the "United Marxist-Leninists" in power openly taunt the Maoists, saying they won't give them important governmental portfolios. You can't deal with such people and still implement a socialist program! No deal with those arrogant capitalist roaders! The real revolutionaries need to take them down and they need to do the same in India.The situation in Nepal is very complex. In spite of possible revisionist lines trying to block its progress, the UCPN(M) is actually doing quite well. Their attempts to win the army over to their side are quite impressive. Always keep in mind that the revolutionary forces will not challenge the state forces until they are absolutely sure to be able to defeat the bourgeois state and invasions by its foreign allies.


It is not impossible. In any strike, it is some hundreds of workers against a multi-billion dollar corporation, but yet workers can still win. When the fight is militant enough, it becomes something bigger than just the workers. Same thing with a revolution. The Bolsheviks conquered the Russian Empire with only 100,000 members leading the insurrection in October 1917.Strikes are tools for organizing the working class, and for measuring the strength of the CP only in times of ceasefire. The final battle in Nepal will be won not by an ordinary strike, but a movement consisting of an army of workers militarily defeating and taking over the last camps of the ruling classes in the big cities.