JC1
6th June 2005, 01:30
Not very topical , but Canadian & Indian comrades should know about this Revisionist shmuck.
===========================
On the 1st anniversary
of the death of a charlatan
===========================
Hardial Bains died on August 24, 1997. According to CPC-ML he died in
Hull, Quebec. According to Prakash Rao, Hardial died in Ottawa, Canada
("On August 24, he breathed his last in Ottawa, Canada").
Hardial Bains was the national leader of the Communist Party of Canada
(M-L) (www.cpcml.ca). He founded the Hindustani Ghadar Party (HGP) in
the late sixties and the HGP(OIMLA) in the seventies. He was also the
founder of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (M-L)
(www.wwne.demon.co.uk), Communist Party of Trinidad and Tobago,
Communist Party of Ireland (M-L) and the Communist Ghadar Party of India
(www.southasia.org/Ghadar.htm). He also played a significant, if
controversial, role in the early history of the MLP-USA.
He founded a printing press in Toronto and a business enterprise in New
Delhi (www.southasia.org/Review.htm).
Comrade Hardial was a staunch defender of the Communist Party of China
and Chairman Mao Tse Tung until about 1978 and gave the slogans --
"China's Chairman is our Chairman", "China's path is our path" and
"India attacked China in 1962". From 1978 onward he became a most
vehement opponent of the the Communist Party of China and Mao Tse Tung
whom he then started calling as revisionist, opportunist,
anti-Marxist-Leninist, traitors etc. And he started saying that "China's
revolution was not a real revolution" and that "China attacked India in
1962". And he spent the next 2 years writing articles and giving
speeches against "Mao Tse Tung Thought". From this time on he started
calling names to all those who upheld China and Mao Tse Tung. And in
India he set up the Communist Ghadar Party in opposition to "Mao Tse
Tung Thought" and CPI(M-L) whom he called Maoist. In 1994 he once again
started praising Mao as " an outstanding revolutionary and
anti-imperialist fighter of the 20th century".
>From 1978 onward Hardial became a staunch defender and follower of
Albania, the Party of Labor of Albania (PLA) and of Enver Hoxha. He
tried to popularize the socialism in Albania and the PLA. After Enver
Hoxha's death he praised Ramiz Alia to the skies. After the rout of the
PLA (and also of leaders like Ramiz Alia) in elections in 1991-92,
Hardial Bains started calling Ramiz Alia "a big bourgeois democrat,
bigger than the bourgeoise". And he tried to mobilize opinion in support
of Enver Hoxha's wife who was under arrest on charges of having amassed
wealth for herself.
Since the early sixties Hardial was a vehement opponent of the Soviet
Union and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) . He
characterized the CPSU as anti-Leninist and revisionist because the CPSU
said that "revolution was on the retreat" and because they had restored
capitalism in the Soviet Union. He joined the band-wagon which called
the Soviet Union an imperialist superpower -- Soviet Social-Imperialism,
which was considered to be the most dangerous enemy of man-kind together
with US imperialism. After the events of 1990-91, when Lenin's statue
was toppled in Moscow and the Soviet Union broke up, Hardial Bains
described these events as "the collapse of Communism" in the Soviet
Union and other countries of Europe and that "this was an onslaught
against communism" and that they were a big setback for the communist
movement. Hardial Bains never explained how could Communism collapse in
a country where (in Hardial's own view) it didn't exist and where
"capitalism has been resored". And also how the collapse of a
social-imperialist super-power could be a set-back for the communist
movement and why Hardial was so concerned about the collapse of the
Soviet Union.
Hardial Bains was a vehement opponent of Cuba, Fidel Castro and
"Castroism" from the early sixties onward. "Castroism" and "Che
Gueveraism" according to Hardial Bains, were the biggest splitters of
the revolutionary movement. In the sixties, he wrote several articles
denouncing Castroism and Cheism, and even threw some members of the
Internationalists out of that organization for their "pro-Castro
stance". After the events of 1990-91 in the Soviet Union, Hardial Bains
started supporting Cuba and Fidel Castro.
Hardial Bains founded various organizations in Canada to oppose
"state-organized racist attacks" like the East Indian Defence Committee
(EIDC), West Indian Peoples' Organization (WIPO), Canadian Peoples'
Defence Committee, Peoples Front (PF) against racist and facist
violence. These organizations tried to implement the slogans "an injury
to one is an injury to all" and "an attack on one is an attack on all"
and " all for one and one for all" and "self-defence is the only way".
These organizations had a mass character and were very active in the
seventies in oppposition to racism.
In the late seventies, based on the great support he got from these
organizations, particularly EIDC, Hardial Bains set up Community centers
in Winnipeg, Toronto and Vancouver B.C. These were called Desh Bhagat
Temple (DBT) and were housed in fair-sized buildings which were
purchased with money contributed by ordinary citizens, but mainly from
the East Indian community. Local radio stations even used to carry ads
for them. They were managed by the EIDC and owned by a trust set-up by
the EIDC. Hardial used these centers for his political meetings and EIDC
got regular revenue from renting these places to citizens for social
occasions. In 1989-1990 Hardial changed the composition of the trust,
and brought into it his own nominees. These trustees manipulated matters
so as to convert these properties into money. By early 1994 all these
deals had been done and the community centers ceased to exist. The
beneficiaries of these manipulations were none other than Hardial Bains
and his close collaborators. The amount they benefitted by is estimated
to be about $2 million!
Several people who contributed money for the purchase of the DBT's and
other properties opposed the sale on the basis that they wanted control
on the way their money was used. In spite of this opposition Hardial
disposed off the properties. He threatened those who opposed the sale
with legal action. But in so doing, Hardial lost the support of
hundred's of supporters in Toronto and Vancouver. And since the middle
of 1994 until his death in 1997, Hardial Bains never again had a
political meeting in Vancouver B.C. And at the big anti-racist protest
in Vancouver B.C. on June 28, 1998, there was no EIDC. The way Hardial
made money for himself by manipulating EIDC and the trust leading to the
sale of the community centers (the DBT's), puts to shame the money
launderers in Albania and the Ceausescu's in Romania. In this instance
of making money for himself, Hardial Bains showed another of his facets,
as a cheat extraordinaire.
At different times Hardial Bains put forward various slogans. In the
seventies it was "Make the rich pay". In the late seventies he put
forward the slogans "bolshevise the party", "prepare for the coming
revolutionary storms" because "the revolution is no longer just a dream
and an aspiration, but a problem taken up for solution" and "the time
has come to go back to India" In the late eighties he gave the slogan
for a "Mass Party Press". The CPC(M-L) newspaper never was read by more
then a few hundred people and that number has dwindled over the years.
And by 1993-94, Hardial's newspaper publishing activity had been
completely marginalized primarily due to quality of its content which
was poor and was becoming increasingly rhetorical, and also due to the
growth of the Internet.
Then at the Sixth congress in late 1993 Hardial gave the thesis that
"revolution is on the retreat world-wide". He claimed that this retreat
and the "collapse of communism" were happenings which he knew, as far
back as in 1985, were going to happen. This thesis was further
elaborated in mid-1994 by his collaborators in India, Lal Singh and
Prakash Rao, who explained thus "when we say that revolution is in
retreat what we mean is that there is an ebb and flow of revolution. At
present there is an ebb, later there will be flow".
Hardial and his defenders in India also pointed out that "the greatness
of our leadership lies in the fact that it knew in 1985 that the
revolution was going to retreat and that the exit policy would come".
Hardial indeed had very loyal defenders in India. The question presents
itself -- If Hardial knew these things in 1985, how come he never told
anyone then? There was no mention of it even in the fifth Congress of
CPC-ML in 1988 which talked only of the Mass Party Press. After Hardial
died in 1997, these Comrades in India stated that they had failed in
uniting the various communist parties and groups in India and summarized
their activities in the last twenty years thus "The main point is that
in the last twenty years this situation (in India) has not changed".
According to Prakash Rao, "He (Hardial) firmly believed that the
twenty-first century would be the century of the triumph of the working
class and of socialism and communism. And he worked with conviction and
rare dedication, according to a well defined plan, for the realisation
of this lofty mission, ...." But neither Hardial nor Prakash Rao have
explained what Hardial's plan was, in practical terms, for the triumph
and when it would take place -- in year 2000 or in 2093 ? Neither did
they say when the ebb (of revolution) would turn into tide.
At the Sixth congress, in 1993, Hardial got a majority of women into
the Central Committee and then gave the theory that "women are more
revolutionary than men". This theory was his very own which he created
to justify his actions in respect of women in his organization and his
attitude toward women. His followers in India upheld this theory as
well.
In December 1993 he held a meeting in India and wrote a pamphlet titled
"What kind of Party" claiming that to be the most important theme of the
time. Here is an excerpt from the book
"...... The time has come to elaborate these matters in full view of the
class and answer the question, What Kind of Party? Once such a question
is elaborated, all those in whose interest it is to build such a party
will join together while those who persist on the path of disunity will
part company."
That question was never answered or elaborated since he wrote the book.
Will it ever be answered, in full view of the class? And then in 1994,
he claimed that another theme had become the most important -- "Whither
India?" And he published another pamphlet of that title. And recently
his defenders in India have defined the purpose of their party is "to
put forth ideas and stimulate debate".
At the Seventh Congress in 1997 Comrade Sandra Smith gave the slogan
"Take Canada into the 21st century on a new basis" and "It can be done,
it must be done". Are these slogans for the working people? If so what
do people have to do? And exactly what is that "new basis"? She further
theorized ---
"The Party works hard to preserve its living link with the collectives
of the people on the basis of the principles that an injury to one is an
injury to all, and all for one and one for all. This means that the
condition for the prosperity of the part is the prosperity of the whole
and that the whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts."
"... the condition for the prosperity of the part is the prosperity of
the whole ..." So, if a part (that is, a few people) is already
prosperous, then the whole (that is, all people) must be prosperous. So,
the conclusion from Sandra Smith's theory is that the rich (a part) are
properous, and so the working class is properous. Or, a few leaders of
CPC-ML (the part) are properous so all people (the whole) must be
properous. So, everything is hunky-dory, there should be no more need
for injury and protests and strife, and consequently CPC(M-L)'s purpose
for existence has come to an end. Does Comrade Sandra mean to say that?
Logically speaking, the answer to that question should be yes, but she
may mean to say something much more profound, like "the whole is greater
than the sum of its constituent parts".
"The whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts". Does this
mean that 4 is greater than 2 + 2? Certainly not. Comrade Sandra
couldn't mean that! Does it mean that 4 is more important than 2 + 2?
Or that $2 million in the hands of 1 "leader" is more important than
$5000 in the hands of each of 400 individuals? Plausible, but which
would mean that "an in injury to many gives victory to one". The
latter is what Comrade Sandra really wants to say. And so, the spirit of
the slogan "an injury to one is an injury to all" is completely denied.
Comrade Sandra makes the denial by reasoning of the type -- A means (not
A). She does use many Marxist sounding phrases but doesn't explain how,
both A and (not A) can be true at the same time. Hardial and Lal Singh
were more open in this denial and their policy was "we don't care for
individuals".
The purpose on the death anniversary of Hardial Bains is not to analyze
the words or deeds of Sandra Smith or Charles Boylan or Lal Singh or
Prakash Rao but to provide a glimpse of the deeds of these hand-picked
lieutenents of Hardial Bains and of their power of thought and
reasoning. Hardial Bains has indelibly has left his imprint on these
individuals.
Besides writing articles, another of Hardial's major activity was
meetings. And after every meeting Hardial had a practice of interviewing
his party members individually behind closed doors. And behind closed
doors he would ask questions like "what did you think of my speech" or
"what do you think of the party". He had such interviews with his women
as well. Yet another major activity for Hardial Bains was the struggle
he organized every so often against this or that individual and for
ideological purity which, in the sixties, he termed as "the proletarian
revolutionary line of Comrade Hardial Bains". These struggles according
to him were inevitable ("Inevitable struggle's broken out").
By the time of his death, the organizations that Hardial founded were
completely marginalized, had a miniscule membership and shrinking
rapidly (barring a couple of score persons in Quebec), and had no
recognition whatsoever among the working people. Even among the few
sections where these organizations were earlier known, they have left
behind a dubious reputation for themselves.
Hardial Bains came from Mahilpur in Hoshiarpur district in Punjab,
India. His father was a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
who is reported to have caused attacks on several members of his rival
party, the CPI(M-L).
Hardial Bains is known to have manipulated his near relatives, to make
them subservient to him, and to use them.
Hardial Bains is survived by his wife Sandra Smith and six children,
four by Sandra Smith and two by his first wife whom he divorced.
The occasion of the 1st anniversary of the death of Comrade Hardial
Bains is one which calls for a sober evaluation of Hardial's deeds over
the years. It is a time to question and review, leaving no stone
unturned, his deeds and to judge his true colors, in the words of his
follower Geetha Ramachandran ([email protected]) "with a
commitment to the search for truth rather than to any partisan
interests".
It is also an occasion to ask, where is the money which Hardial Bains
stole from Canadian working people? His untimely death prevented him
from giving an answer "in full view of the class" to this important
question. In keeping with the highest values and best democratic
traditions of working people everywhere, his collaborators would do well
to answer the question "in full view of the class" and to return the
money.
================================================== =======
This is posted at:
www.Leninism.org/stream/98/hardial-1st-anniv.htm
===========================
On the 1st anniversary
of the death of a charlatan
===========================
Hardial Bains died on August 24, 1997. According to CPC-ML he died in
Hull, Quebec. According to Prakash Rao, Hardial died in Ottawa, Canada
("On August 24, he breathed his last in Ottawa, Canada").
Hardial Bains was the national leader of the Communist Party of Canada
(M-L) (www.cpcml.ca). He founded the Hindustani Ghadar Party (HGP) in
the late sixties and the HGP(OIMLA) in the seventies. He was also the
founder of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (M-L)
(www.wwne.demon.co.uk), Communist Party of Trinidad and Tobago,
Communist Party of Ireland (M-L) and the Communist Ghadar Party of India
(www.southasia.org/Ghadar.htm). He also played a significant, if
controversial, role in the early history of the MLP-USA.
He founded a printing press in Toronto and a business enterprise in New
Delhi (www.southasia.org/Review.htm).
Comrade Hardial was a staunch defender of the Communist Party of China
and Chairman Mao Tse Tung until about 1978 and gave the slogans --
"China's Chairman is our Chairman", "China's path is our path" and
"India attacked China in 1962". From 1978 onward he became a most
vehement opponent of the the Communist Party of China and Mao Tse Tung
whom he then started calling as revisionist, opportunist,
anti-Marxist-Leninist, traitors etc. And he started saying that "China's
revolution was not a real revolution" and that "China attacked India in
1962". And he spent the next 2 years writing articles and giving
speeches against "Mao Tse Tung Thought". From this time on he started
calling names to all those who upheld China and Mao Tse Tung. And in
India he set up the Communist Ghadar Party in opposition to "Mao Tse
Tung Thought" and CPI(M-L) whom he called Maoist. In 1994 he once again
started praising Mao as " an outstanding revolutionary and
anti-imperialist fighter of the 20th century".
>From 1978 onward Hardial became a staunch defender and follower of
Albania, the Party of Labor of Albania (PLA) and of Enver Hoxha. He
tried to popularize the socialism in Albania and the PLA. After Enver
Hoxha's death he praised Ramiz Alia to the skies. After the rout of the
PLA (and also of leaders like Ramiz Alia) in elections in 1991-92,
Hardial Bains started calling Ramiz Alia "a big bourgeois democrat,
bigger than the bourgeoise". And he tried to mobilize opinion in support
of Enver Hoxha's wife who was under arrest on charges of having amassed
wealth for herself.
Since the early sixties Hardial was a vehement opponent of the Soviet
Union and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) . He
characterized the CPSU as anti-Leninist and revisionist because the CPSU
said that "revolution was on the retreat" and because they had restored
capitalism in the Soviet Union. He joined the band-wagon which called
the Soviet Union an imperialist superpower -- Soviet Social-Imperialism,
which was considered to be the most dangerous enemy of man-kind together
with US imperialism. After the events of 1990-91, when Lenin's statue
was toppled in Moscow and the Soviet Union broke up, Hardial Bains
described these events as "the collapse of Communism" in the Soviet
Union and other countries of Europe and that "this was an onslaught
against communism" and that they were a big setback for the communist
movement. Hardial Bains never explained how could Communism collapse in
a country where (in Hardial's own view) it didn't exist and where
"capitalism has been resored". And also how the collapse of a
social-imperialist super-power could be a set-back for the communist
movement and why Hardial was so concerned about the collapse of the
Soviet Union.
Hardial Bains was a vehement opponent of Cuba, Fidel Castro and
"Castroism" from the early sixties onward. "Castroism" and "Che
Gueveraism" according to Hardial Bains, were the biggest splitters of
the revolutionary movement. In the sixties, he wrote several articles
denouncing Castroism and Cheism, and even threw some members of the
Internationalists out of that organization for their "pro-Castro
stance". After the events of 1990-91 in the Soviet Union, Hardial Bains
started supporting Cuba and Fidel Castro.
Hardial Bains founded various organizations in Canada to oppose
"state-organized racist attacks" like the East Indian Defence Committee
(EIDC), West Indian Peoples' Organization (WIPO), Canadian Peoples'
Defence Committee, Peoples Front (PF) against racist and facist
violence. These organizations tried to implement the slogans "an injury
to one is an injury to all" and "an attack on one is an attack on all"
and " all for one and one for all" and "self-defence is the only way".
These organizations had a mass character and were very active in the
seventies in oppposition to racism.
In the late seventies, based on the great support he got from these
organizations, particularly EIDC, Hardial Bains set up Community centers
in Winnipeg, Toronto and Vancouver B.C. These were called Desh Bhagat
Temple (DBT) and were housed in fair-sized buildings which were
purchased with money contributed by ordinary citizens, but mainly from
the East Indian community. Local radio stations even used to carry ads
for them. They were managed by the EIDC and owned by a trust set-up by
the EIDC. Hardial used these centers for his political meetings and EIDC
got regular revenue from renting these places to citizens for social
occasions. In 1989-1990 Hardial changed the composition of the trust,
and brought into it his own nominees. These trustees manipulated matters
so as to convert these properties into money. By early 1994 all these
deals had been done and the community centers ceased to exist. The
beneficiaries of these manipulations were none other than Hardial Bains
and his close collaborators. The amount they benefitted by is estimated
to be about $2 million!
Several people who contributed money for the purchase of the DBT's and
other properties opposed the sale on the basis that they wanted control
on the way their money was used. In spite of this opposition Hardial
disposed off the properties. He threatened those who opposed the sale
with legal action. But in so doing, Hardial lost the support of
hundred's of supporters in Toronto and Vancouver. And since the middle
of 1994 until his death in 1997, Hardial Bains never again had a
political meeting in Vancouver B.C. And at the big anti-racist protest
in Vancouver B.C. on June 28, 1998, there was no EIDC. The way Hardial
made money for himself by manipulating EIDC and the trust leading to the
sale of the community centers (the DBT's), puts to shame the money
launderers in Albania and the Ceausescu's in Romania. In this instance
of making money for himself, Hardial Bains showed another of his facets,
as a cheat extraordinaire.
At different times Hardial Bains put forward various slogans. In the
seventies it was "Make the rich pay". In the late seventies he put
forward the slogans "bolshevise the party", "prepare for the coming
revolutionary storms" because "the revolution is no longer just a dream
and an aspiration, but a problem taken up for solution" and "the time
has come to go back to India" In the late eighties he gave the slogan
for a "Mass Party Press". The CPC(M-L) newspaper never was read by more
then a few hundred people and that number has dwindled over the years.
And by 1993-94, Hardial's newspaper publishing activity had been
completely marginalized primarily due to quality of its content which
was poor and was becoming increasingly rhetorical, and also due to the
growth of the Internet.
Then at the Sixth congress in late 1993 Hardial gave the thesis that
"revolution is on the retreat world-wide". He claimed that this retreat
and the "collapse of communism" were happenings which he knew, as far
back as in 1985, were going to happen. This thesis was further
elaborated in mid-1994 by his collaborators in India, Lal Singh and
Prakash Rao, who explained thus "when we say that revolution is in
retreat what we mean is that there is an ebb and flow of revolution. At
present there is an ebb, later there will be flow".
Hardial and his defenders in India also pointed out that "the greatness
of our leadership lies in the fact that it knew in 1985 that the
revolution was going to retreat and that the exit policy would come".
Hardial indeed had very loyal defenders in India. The question presents
itself -- If Hardial knew these things in 1985, how come he never told
anyone then? There was no mention of it even in the fifth Congress of
CPC-ML in 1988 which talked only of the Mass Party Press. After Hardial
died in 1997, these Comrades in India stated that they had failed in
uniting the various communist parties and groups in India and summarized
their activities in the last twenty years thus "The main point is that
in the last twenty years this situation (in India) has not changed".
According to Prakash Rao, "He (Hardial) firmly believed that the
twenty-first century would be the century of the triumph of the working
class and of socialism and communism. And he worked with conviction and
rare dedication, according to a well defined plan, for the realisation
of this lofty mission, ...." But neither Hardial nor Prakash Rao have
explained what Hardial's plan was, in practical terms, for the triumph
and when it would take place -- in year 2000 or in 2093 ? Neither did
they say when the ebb (of revolution) would turn into tide.
At the Sixth congress, in 1993, Hardial got a majority of women into
the Central Committee and then gave the theory that "women are more
revolutionary than men". This theory was his very own which he created
to justify his actions in respect of women in his organization and his
attitude toward women. His followers in India upheld this theory as
well.
In December 1993 he held a meeting in India and wrote a pamphlet titled
"What kind of Party" claiming that to be the most important theme of the
time. Here is an excerpt from the book
"...... The time has come to elaborate these matters in full view of the
class and answer the question, What Kind of Party? Once such a question
is elaborated, all those in whose interest it is to build such a party
will join together while those who persist on the path of disunity will
part company."
That question was never answered or elaborated since he wrote the book.
Will it ever be answered, in full view of the class? And then in 1994,
he claimed that another theme had become the most important -- "Whither
India?" And he published another pamphlet of that title. And recently
his defenders in India have defined the purpose of their party is "to
put forth ideas and stimulate debate".
At the Seventh Congress in 1997 Comrade Sandra Smith gave the slogan
"Take Canada into the 21st century on a new basis" and "It can be done,
it must be done". Are these slogans for the working people? If so what
do people have to do? And exactly what is that "new basis"? She further
theorized ---
"The Party works hard to preserve its living link with the collectives
of the people on the basis of the principles that an injury to one is an
injury to all, and all for one and one for all. This means that the
condition for the prosperity of the part is the prosperity of the whole
and that the whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts."
"... the condition for the prosperity of the part is the prosperity of
the whole ..." So, if a part (that is, a few people) is already
prosperous, then the whole (that is, all people) must be prosperous. So,
the conclusion from Sandra Smith's theory is that the rich (a part) are
properous, and so the working class is properous. Or, a few leaders of
CPC-ML (the part) are properous so all people (the whole) must be
properous. So, everything is hunky-dory, there should be no more need
for injury and protests and strife, and consequently CPC(M-L)'s purpose
for existence has come to an end. Does Comrade Sandra mean to say that?
Logically speaking, the answer to that question should be yes, but she
may mean to say something much more profound, like "the whole is greater
than the sum of its constituent parts".
"The whole is greater than the sum of its constituent parts". Does this
mean that 4 is greater than 2 + 2? Certainly not. Comrade Sandra
couldn't mean that! Does it mean that 4 is more important than 2 + 2?
Or that $2 million in the hands of 1 "leader" is more important than
$5000 in the hands of each of 400 individuals? Plausible, but which
would mean that "an in injury to many gives victory to one". The
latter is what Comrade Sandra really wants to say. And so, the spirit of
the slogan "an injury to one is an injury to all" is completely denied.
Comrade Sandra makes the denial by reasoning of the type -- A means (not
A). She does use many Marxist sounding phrases but doesn't explain how,
both A and (not A) can be true at the same time. Hardial and Lal Singh
were more open in this denial and their policy was "we don't care for
individuals".
The purpose on the death anniversary of Hardial Bains is not to analyze
the words or deeds of Sandra Smith or Charles Boylan or Lal Singh or
Prakash Rao but to provide a glimpse of the deeds of these hand-picked
lieutenents of Hardial Bains and of their power of thought and
reasoning. Hardial Bains has indelibly has left his imprint on these
individuals.
Besides writing articles, another of Hardial's major activity was
meetings. And after every meeting Hardial had a practice of interviewing
his party members individually behind closed doors. And behind closed
doors he would ask questions like "what did you think of my speech" or
"what do you think of the party". He had such interviews with his women
as well. Yet another major activity for Hardial Bains was the struggle
he organized every so often against this or that individual and for
ideological purity which, in the sixties, he termed as "the proletarian
revolutionary line of Comrade Hardial Bains". These struggles according
to him were inevitable ("Inevitable struggle's broken out").
By the time of his death, the organizations that Hardial founded were
completely marginalized, had a miniscule membership and shrinking
rapidly (barring a couple of score persons in Quebec), and had no
recognition whatsoever among the working people. Even among the few
sections where these organizations were earlier known, they have left
behind a dubious reputation for themselves.
Hardial Bains came from Mahilpur in Hoshiarpur district in Punjab,
India. His father was a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
who is reported to have caused attacks on several members of his rival
party, the CPI(M-L).
Hardial Bains is known to have manipulated his near relatives, to make
them subservient to him, and to use them.
Hardial Bains is survived by his wife Sandra Smith and six children,
four by Sandra Smith and two by his first wife whom he divorced.
The occasion of the 1st anniversary of the death of Comrade Hardial
Bains is one which calls for a sober evaluation of Hardial's deeds over
the years. It is a time to question and review, leaving no stone
unturned, his deeds and to judge his true colors, in the words of his
follower Geetha Ramachandran ([email protected]) "with a
commitment to the search for truth rather than to any partisan
interests".
It is also an occasion to ask, where is the money which Hardial Bains
stole from Canadian working people? His untimely death prevented him
from giving an answer "in full view of the class" to this important
question. In keeping with the highest values and best democratic
traditions of working people everywhere, his collaborators would do well
to answer the question "in full view of the class" and to return the
money.
================================================== =======
This is posted at:
www.Leninism.org/stream/98/hardial-1st-anniv.htm