1

INDEX

1. 50 Years of Naxalbari: A Path for Alternative Development

Purnendu Sekhar Mukheriee

2. The impact of Naxalbari on Social Movements

Vernon Gonsalves

3. Kishenji In West Bengal : Genesis of the Maoist Movement and

Assessment of a Revolutionary Peoples Leader
Pro. Amit Bhattacharyya

4. Mass Organizations and Mass Line

5. Re-feudalisation : Need for Concrete Analysis of Specific Conditions

Pankajdutt

6.   


2
 50 Years of Naxalbari:
A Path for Alternative Development
The Beginning
This year is the 50 year of the Naxalbari
th
uprising. The Naxalbari struggle arose at a time
when there was an unprecedented upsurge in
peoples struggles both nationally and
internationally. The ideological struggle within the
Communist camp was also getting stronger and
sharper. On one hand the struggle led by Mao
Tse-Tung against the theory of three peaces
(peaceful coexistence, peaceful transition to
socialism, peaceful competition) by neo-
revisionists such as Kruschev, Tito and Togliatti
was consolidating the international ideological
debate between socialism led by the Communist
Party of China and the interests of social
imperialism. Nearly at the same time, within China
the continuous revolution in the superstructure
to eliminate the capitalist roaders began, a struggle
popularly known as the Great Proletarian Cultural
Revolution. In order to consolidate socialism and
eradicate capital- ism, slogans such as fight
against self , change the world, change oneself
, put bravery above everything, be honest and over the land. Although in agrarian revolution the
open minded , be brave to swim against the
tide became the basis for the development of
the socialist new human and creation of
socialist new ingredients within society.
On one hand the increase in the intensity of
peoples struggles and the severe socio-political-
economic crisis of world capitalism and on the
other the unprecedented development of the
struggle against revisionism led by Mao Tse-tung,
resulted in the sharpening and intensifying of the
struggle between the two lines within the
Communist movement in India. Basically the
Naxalbari movement was the result of this
- Purnendu Sekhar Mukheriee
ideological struggle, which instead of being a
spontaneous or sudden incidence was a consc10us
initiative of Communist revolutionaries. Comrade
Charu Majumdar (CM) was the life force of this
movement. However, within the CPl (M) a
number of other revolutionary centre against
rev1s10msm had developed, led by some
revolutionaries who like Com. Charu Majumdar
believed that like China the path of revolution in
India was the path of protracted peoples war. The
stage of revolution in this country was the stage
of New Democratic revolution. The working class
1s the class that will lead this revolution while the
peasantry is the motive force of this revolution.
Comrade Kanai Chatterjee (KC) was foremost
among these revolutionaries. Also many
revolutionary comrades such as Com. Amulya
Sen, Com. Chandrasekhar Das, Com. Sushital Roy
Choudhury. Com. Saroj Dutta, Com. Suniti
Ghosh and others played major roles in this
movement.
Naxalbari was not merely a struggle to take
land question 1s of immense importance, but
Com. Lenin has taught us that if any struggle is
limited to a movement for partial demands it will
in reality be economism, maximally a militant
economism, however militant be its outward
appearance. In the Naxalbari struggle the question
of seizure of state power came forward in a
concrete form. Simultaneously it made the
strategy and tactics of the Indian Revolution clear.
Therefore soon after the peasant uprising in
Naxalbari, in a Report on the peasant movement
in the Terai adopted in a convention held in
Siliguri subdivision on 15th September 1968 in
3
support of the struggle it was clearly stated that
The struggle of the peasants of the Tera1 1s
not an armed struggle for land, but an armed
struggle for seizing state power. This is a
fundamental question. Especially the resolution
of the revisionist practices prevalent in the peasant
movement for the past many decades is dependent
on the solution to this question. In the sixteenth
edition, second year of the magazine Dakshin
Desh it was written that The lesson of Naxalbari
is the real application of the lessons of Mao: to
establish base areas in villages. Such revolutionary
bases will one by one form a chain around the
cities in such a way that the enemy will not have a
path to escape. (Dakshin Desh, 2ndyear, Volume
16, 1968, January 6).
The struggle of Naxalbari allowed the
correct identification of the friends and enemies
of the Indian revolution and made the correct
path or the revolution clear. The revolutionaries
correctly analyzed the class character of the Indian
state. They showed that as India is a semi-feudal,
semi-colonial state, only agrarian revolution can
bring about the liberation of the masses of this
country. On May 16, 1968 Com. Charu Majumdar
wrote We have to conduct a peoples democratic
revolution in India against the bureaucratic and
comprador capitalists in the country and against
the wide- spread feudal exploitation in the
countryside. As 40 crores of the 50 crores
population in the country live in villages and are
subjected to this feudal exploitation, therefore still
in our country the principal contradiction is
between the peasantry and the landlord class. The
resolution of this conflict can happen only in the
villages, by the formation of liberated areas by a
peasant army led by the working class. (Peoples
Democratic Revolution in India ...Char u
Majumdar, Deshabrati, 1968, May 16). Similarly
in Dakshindesh, 2nd year, Volume 16, 1968,
January 6 it was written that India is a country
dependent on agriculture. Seventy percent people
in this country are farmers. Peasants are dying of
starvation, the life of farmers is a hell due to the
exploitation by zamindars and jotedars (landlords).
Whoever wants the development of the country
4
has to want the development of the farmers. Be-
cause, they form the country. In order to change
the conditions of the peasantry, which comprises
the majority of this countrys peoples the only
path is the path of armed agrarian revolution.
In reality, only this path of agrarian revolution
can emancipate the people of this country. Which
for the first time came out in a concrete and
practical manner through the historical Naxalbari
uprising.
The Naxalbari str ug gle has left its
contribution in different areas in society. On one
hand it has brought forward clearly the direction
of revolution in this country and simultaneously
it has clearly set up a distinction between the
revisionists and those who believe in revolutionary
struggle. Nothing has remained the same after the
Naxalbari movement. It has left its imprint on
education, culture, historiography and the study
of science. Even aft fifty years, the armed agrarian
revolutionary struggle on the lines of Naxalbari
is still being wage/ (Every single day in some or
other part or India, revolutionaries are shedding
their blood to take forward the inextinguishable
torch of this great struggle.
The two roads to development: Capitalist
versus Proletarian
The idea of development became prominent
with the advent of capitalism but with the
apparent demise of the socialist countries, and
especially when in the name of economic
liberalization and free market economy the
economic aggression of monopoly capital became
widespread and intense, the capitalist world makes
a great hue and cry about development. There is
not a single ruling class party in the country which
does not declare itself as development friendly.
They declare all their misdeeds as in the interest
of development and label all opposition to
themselves as opposition to development. But
the reality is that at different stages of capitalist
development whenever they have faced a crisis
they have intensified the exploitation of the
working class. They have fine-tuned different
modes of exploitation, and tried to establish these
different modes of exploitation as development
in the popular consciousness. The corporate
media cooperates with this process serving their
own class interest. What is the basic issue of this
capitalist development?
Capitalism converts the entire society into a
huge market. Especially during the period of
monopoly capitalism, the capitalist production
process commodities every product of human
labour and thereby creates a universal market.
Firstly, monopoly capital converts all material
production into commodities and then converts
a large service sector also into a commodity. This
process is not limited to a national market, but
spreads globally. Mainly two things are functioning
in this unprecedented development of global
capitalist production. Firstly, the export of
commodities and capital to other countries,
especially the colonial and semi-colonial countries.
Secondly, the plunder of resources, plantations,
minerals and petroleum from the colonial and
semi-colonial countries. This process has taken
different shapes during the different crises of
capitalism. After the Great Depression of the
1930s, and especially after the 2nd World War
when the capitalist system suffered great losses,
they brought forward the welfare state model.
This was the Keynesian model which allowed
global monopoly capital and speculators to extract
a huge amount of surplus while maintaining an
appearance of a welfare economy. However, the
world economic crisis which began in the 1970s
made it difficult to obtain this high level of profit.
This removed the mask of welfare from the face
of capitalism. From this time onwards every ruling
party (be they from the developed capitalist
countries or from the semi-feudal, semi-colonial
or neo-colonial countries of Asia, Africa and Latin
America) championed the neo-liberal free market
economy proposed by von Hayek and Milton
Friedman. As the full employment based
Keynesian system made it difficult for capital to
obtain its cheap labour, it had to destroy the
bargaining power of the workers and create a vast
reserve army of labour. Rejecting the limited
regulatory power of the state on the economy in
the Keynesian model, it brought forward the
slogan of deregulation .Any regulatory
mechanism was shown as an obstacle in the path
of business. Slogan was raised for liberalization-
privatization-globalization. Obviously this
globalization was the globalization of imperialist
finance capital. This was the background of
liberalization and globalization. This is the
perspective of development of CPI (M)-
Congress-Trinamool-BJP, of Buddhadev-
Mamata-Manmohan-Modi. The special features
of this mode of development are: 1) It allows the
free flow of monopoly capital throughout the
globe 2) By removing License raj, MRTP Act etc.,
it takes the initiative to remove any sort or state
control over the economy 3) Increased Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) in the semi-feudal, semi-
colonial and nee-colonial countries 4) Increased
network of speculative capital 5) Development
of capital-intensive industries such as IT and non-
productive industries such as real estate leading
to jobless growth and creation of a huge mass
of unemployed 6) Intensification of the attack
by capital on labour. In many countries, including
our country, labour law reforms, creation of
special Economic Zones etc. were used to deny
the rights acquired by the working class after long
battles 7) Appointment of contractual labour
instead of permanent labour, and the removal of
the permanent jobs 8) Development of vast socio-
economic inequalities 9) Loss of jobs for lakhs
of workers. Lakhs of farmers committed suicide.
Conditions of virtual famine was created in many
parts of the country. The starvation deaths in
Kalahandi, Amla shol or in the tea gardens of
North Bengal are just the tip of the iceberg 10)
Localized conflicts and imperialist aggression by
American and other imperialists caused million
of deaths on a regular basis 11) As the grievances
of people in various parts of the world increased,
so did state terrorism in order to curb these
grievances. Draconian laws such as UAPA, TADA,
POTA. MCOCA, AFSPA were increasingly
promulgated and applied 12) Huge influx of
national-global capital in the service sector and
to facilitate that the agents of global capital such
5
as our ruling class disinvested banks, insurance,
railways and many other profitable public sector
enterprises. Based on this theoretical foundation
of free market economy was done so-called
structural reforms which gave rise to widely-
discussed developmental model of globalization.
Whose central basis .1s capital investment. Whose
main objective is profit and more profit. Every
ruling part of our country irrespective of their
professed ideologies is a supporter of this model.
That is why all of them chorus their support for
investment and development. Although even the
United Nations own development report
(UNDP) has acknowledged the real nature of this
development and described it as ruthless,
rootless, futureless, jobless growth. Actually there
is a great difference between the ideas of
development of the capitalist class and the
proletariat. The main objective of capitalist
development is to earn profits. That is why capital
takes the most important role in this model of
development. In the developmental model or the
proletariat the prime objective is the end of
exploitation of man by man, therefore the
proletariat considers labour, not capital, as the
most important thing in its system of
development. We know that the relationship
between capital and labour is dialectic. Capital
cannot survive for a day without appropriating
human labour. That is why capital does not
understand anything except profit. Lenin while
defining capital has described it as Capital is a
special historically defined social production
relation which stands on the exploitation of
labour. It does not understand anything expect
profit. Resultantly, the developmental model in
which capital plays the predominant role has no
option but to continuously increase the
exploitation of labour. Therefore, whatever be the
various stories of development that the ruling
classes of our country tell us, in reality that
development is nothing but development in the
interest of imperialist capital and national
comprador monopoly capital. This development
is a curse in the life of the working class. For the
past 25 years, the Indian government is formally
6
following a neoliberal economic path. In these
last 25 years unemployment has increased, prices
have increased, areas afflicted by starvation and
famine have increased, farmers and plantation
workers have filled the ranks of people dying of
starvation, industries have either closed or fired
thousands of workers, agricultural land has been
acquired in the name of development, lakhs of
people have been evicted from their land,
livelihood and homes, social inequality has
increased manifold , records have been created in
corruption and financial scandals by the political
leaders, environmental destruction by the plunder
of jal-jangal-jamin has increased manifold while
mountains of wealth have accumulated in the
hands of a class of people. From Manmohan to
Modi, Chidambaram to Arun Jaitley, Buddhadev
to Mamata, all the leaders of ruling class parties
have the same thing to say, We want
development, we want investment. In order to
plunder the wealth of the country, to suck dry
the people of the country, to serve the big
multinational and transnational corporations and
their allies, the Ambanis, Adanis, Tatas and Birlas
and to maximize their profits, that is the main
aim of these ruling class parties and their leaders.
There is a competition to show who is the greatest
servant of the capitalists.
Practical experience has shown us that the
path of development followed during the last two
and half decades of globalization has not been
able to bring real economic betterment of India,
neither would it have been able to as it is based
on the transfer of wealth to the multinational
capitalist. It should be remembered that the
corporate capital, closely allied with foreign
monopoly capital, that has been encouraged by
this system has been able to provide jobs to only
2 % of the working population whereas 58% of
the population is engaged in agriculture and 10%
are employed in informal industrial sector. During
the last 25 years of globalization, the major share
of bank loans have been given to corporations
while loan to agriculture and small scale industries
have been cut down. In the last 15 years
agricultural loans have been cut down from 15.9%
to 11%, leaving far mers at the mercy of
moneylenders and usurious traders and leading
to the spate of farmer suicides. On the other 34%
of bank loan have gone to corporate capital.
However, even with this state support a big market
has not been created for the expensive products
made by these corporations. Therefore in order
to build a market for their expensive flats, cars,
appliances etc. huge amounts of credit are offered
to potential customers. In 1990, the amount of
bank loans for buying consumer goods and real
estate was 6.4% which increased to 23.3% in 2007.
In 2007, the loans given for just buying cars
amounted to 109 crore dollars. Not only that
around 79% of the value of sold cars i s actually
from credit. On the other hand, inequality has
increased tremendously during this period. The
relative demand for products such as soaps,
matches, watches, detergent powder, sandals,
shoes, clothes etc. produced by the organized and
unorganized sector has reduced as people have
been forced to invest more in the basic needs for
survival. However the developmental model
followed by the ruling class will never be able to
increase the purchasing power or the masses and
the normal demand for consumer goods for mass
utilization will not recover. This is because the
demand for consumer goods is finally tied to the
system of production. If there is no qualitative
development in the production activities of the
95% people who are involved in agriculture,
unorganized industries and unorganized trade, the
demand for consumer goods will not rise. For this
what is primarily needed is to break the nexus
between the feudal elements-moneylenders - crop
trader and institute radical land reforms together
with state supported development of agriculture
and agro-based industries. To increase the small
scale industries, this will help in the accumulation
of capital on one hand and the development of
larger market for consumer goods, which will
create the future base for large scale organized
industries. To achieve this, a revolutionary political
change in society is required. Let us try to
understand how the market for consumer goods
can expand through land reforms. If the
purchasing power of farmers increase the demand
for simple consumer goods that will increase
include clothes, shoes, soap, cooking utensils,
furniture, cycles, building material etc. Currently
the overall expenditure for such goods in our
country is much less compared to our population
size. For example, currently the per capita mean
expenditure in villages for clothes and bedding is
only Rs. 304 and for shoes and slippers is Rs. 51
(NSSO report, 508). This is average or per capita
and in reality 70% of the rural population can
spend much less than this. It is ironical that the
average expenditure of people for clothes in the
self-declared powerful country of India is less
than one third of the world average expenditure
on this item. Obviously only if revolutionary
changes in agriculture can cause the purchasing
power of the vast majority of masses to increase,
it will increase the demand for simple consumer
items greatly which will create the material basis
for industrialization. Agrarian revolution is
required for this, which Communist
revolutionaries are building up in vast poverty
stricken areas of the country including
Dandakaranya, Jharkhand, Odisha, Bihar, Andhra
and Maharashtra. Where they are building up an
alternative model of development, built by the
people themselves. Because this model is a brave
alternative to the anti-people developmental
model of imperialism, feudalism and big
bureaucratic comprador capitalism, because this
model represents the interests of common people
rather than that of national and multinational
corporate capital, that is why the ruling class fears
this scientific developmental model and has
declared the agrarian revolutionary movement of
this country as the greatest internal security
threat and has declared a war on people named
Operation Green Hunt to annihilate it. It is
required to raise the voice of the masses against
this and stand firmly on the side of the continuing
agrarian revolution.
We should not forget that this agrarian
revolutionary struggle of today represents the real
legacy of Naxalbari. When the Naxalbari
movement suffered an apparent defeat in the 70s
7
of the last century and a right revisionist
opportunist line and a left adventurist line arose
within the movement, then real Communist
revolutionaries dialectically analyzed the
revolutionary peasant struggle of Naxalbari,
Debra Gopiballavpur, Kamalpur, Lakhimpur-
Kheri, Srikakulam. Sonarpur, Kanksa-Budbud etc.
and came up with a line to establish a new agrarian
revolutionary struggle and develop protracted
peoples war. This initiative has today spread to
vast areas of the country such as Dandakaranya-
Jharkhand-Bihar-Andhra-Odisha-Maharashtra-
Karnataka-Kerala-Tamil Nadu-Jangalmahal and
West Bengal. Although the rulers have branded
this as greatest internal security threat, anti- under the RPC, text books have been developed
development etc. and are desperate to destroy
this struggle, but till now resisting all such
repression in large areas an alternative
revolutionary peoples developmental model has
been created. Let us learn about some instances
of this alternative revolutionary developmental
model.
In 1997-98 itself the inhabitants of 237
villages in Dandakaranya dug 110 ponds by giving
voluntary labour. Simultaneously 47 large water
reservoirs were created, some for irrigation, some
for fish cultivation and some for the needs of
cattle. During August-September of that year,
nearly 3 lakh fish spawn and some thousands of
prawn seeds were used to start extensive
pisciculture. In 1998 the peoples government
started distributing fish spawn in a large scale
among the local population, which soon became
a basis of the local economy. Now there are water
reser voirs or ponds in the area of most
revolutionary peoples committees (called as
Janatana Sarkar). In the same area where
agriculture was once very limited now there is
extensive cultivation of fruits such as papayas,
bananas, mangoes, lemons and guavas and
vegetables such as onion, garlic, brinjal, gourds,
pumpkin, ladies finger, cauliflower, maize, spring
onion, tomatoes etc. The revolutionary peoples
committees (RPC) have taken the initiative to train
the local population in agricultural practices,
develop irrigation systems, protect cattle and
8
develop animal husbandry, convert forest land into
agricultural land and arrange for collection and
preservation of fertilizers, seeds etc. In the Mad
area of Dandakaranya, which was once the most
backward area, today there is cooperative
agriculture and cooperative farms under the
direction of RPCs. Every year during January-
February, the work to level the land is taken up
for 10-15 days. Cultivation of herbs is being
expanded keeping in mind the health needs of
the people. A number of local health centres have
come up, together with mobile health centres. The
mobile health centres provide free basic health
services to people over a large area. In the schools
in eight subjects, mathematics, social sciences,
political science, Hindi, culture, biology, general
science and the history of Dandakaranya for
students from classes one to five. Most
significantly, with great effort Gondi, the language
of the adivasis, has been restored and primary
curriculum in Gondi language has been started.
Remarkably, a dictionary in the Gondi language
has also been written. Efforts are being made to
enrich the Halbi language further. More than 25
magazines are published regularly just from
Dandakaranya. In the areas under the Janatana
Sarkars, Indian made foreign liquor is banned
although there is no ban on country liquor, handia
etc. However, drinking alcohol is forbidden in the
revolutionary organization and campaigns are run
to build public consciousness against the drinking
of country liquor, smoking etc.
In those areas of Dandakaranya where
peoples governments have been set up till district
level, the struggle began with the establishment
of peoples rights over the fundamental aspects
of rural economy - land, crops, cattle and water
bodies. Private property has not been ended but
land has been taken from landlord and distributed
among the peasants.
A gram sabha is a fundamental unit or the
Janatana Sarkar. The gram sabhas look after the
local administration of each village and all
inhabitants of the village except those belonging
to the enemy camp are its members. Every year
each gram sabha organizes at least two meetings.
In the first meeting decisions are taken while they
are reviewed in the second meeting. If the villagers
are unsatisfied with the functioning of an
individual in the gram sabha they have a right to
recall and they can remove the person from the
working committee. Three to five such villages
or roughly 500-3000 individuals constitute a
Revolutionary Peoples Committee (RPC). Ten to
fifteen such RPCs constitute a regional RPC or
regional government which comprises or roughly
I 0000- 20000 individuals. Finally 3-5 such regional
RPCs make up a divisional or district level RPC.
There are 9 depar tments under the
administration of a district level RPC
1. Defence, 2. Finance, 3. Agriculture, 4.
Small scale industries, 5.Justice, 6.Education and
Culture, 7. Health social development, 8. Forest
protection, 9. Mass communication.
Seven or nine or eleven members constitute
local or regional RPCs. There are 15 members in
the district committee which comprise of a
president, a vice president, a representative or the
PLGA, individuals responsible for the functioning
of the 9 departments and 3 representatives of
the area committee or the Party. In the
fundamental unit or the gram sabha all villagers
except class enemies elect the committee members
and decide upon the agenda to he considered for
development work. The villagers have a right to
recall an elected committee member if she I he
fails to perform an assigned duty. In 2008, a
Dandakaranya Special Zonal preparatory
committee was formed to coordinate between the
2 district level RPCs. In spite of the Salwa Judum
operational from 2005-2008 and the operation
Green Hunt, which was instituted by the
reactionary central and state governments to crush
the Janatana Sarkars, the RPCs were able to
function because of the support of the people
and their active participation, allowing the
revolutionary struggle of the people to go
forward.
It is to be clearly understood that the current
aggressive nature of global capitalism is taking
the world towards a disaster, it is taking us towards
a situation in which natural resources are going
to get over, environment will be degraded, human
disease will increase and in order to increase
humanitys suffering and sick lifestyle life-saving
drugs and health services will become even more
expensive. It does not need to be said that the
insatiable greed for profits is responsible for this.
In order to prevent this disaster and to save the
future of the world what is of utmost need is to
build an alternative environment friendly, self-
reliant, employment generating and non-wasteful
political-economic system. Only the proletariat
has that worldview that can build a society free
of oppression and exploitation. Where there will
be a balance between the use of human and
natural resources. The people of the vast areas or
Dandakaranya-Jharkhand-Bihar-Andhra-Odisha-
Maharashtra and other places are fighting to
establish such a society. And till today, the
inspiration for this struggle comes from the
historic Naxalbari movement that happened 50
years ago, a movement that showed the path of
liberation to the working masses of India.
Naxalbari is still the dream of emancipation of
the struggling people of lndia, it is still the
nightmare of rulers and exploiters. Long live the
Naxalbari struggle.
9
 The impact of Naxalbari on Social Movements
We have gathered to not only interpret the
world, but also to attempt to change it. In that
spirit we have to not merely do analysis of social
movements, but analysis for social movements.
When we talk about the impact of Naxalbari
on Social Movements, we are, in essence, dealing
with the relation between the Indian Revolution
and the various national and sectional movements,
partial struggles, issue-based uprisings constantly
going on in our country.
Since the time of Naxalbari, through periods
of ups and downs, the movement taking its line
and drawing its inspiration from Naxalbari - the
Naxalite movement - has remained synonymous
with the striving for revolutionary transformation
of Indian society. The equivalence of Naxalbari
with Indian Revolution - except perhaps for the
short-lived Sampoorna Kranti movement led by JP
- has remained unchallenged for fifty years. It
remains the best hope for those yearning for
fundamental social transformation.
Social movements are about change. They
have been defined as non-institutionalised collective
political action which strive for political and/or social
change.1 The participants in social movements are
typically those who resist and fight injustice and
oppression and who desire some social change.
There are a range of mass social movements,
whose focus and objectives are varied: movements
to protect and promote the interests of the
oppressed classes and sections such as the working
class, peasantry, women, nationalities, adivasis,
dalits, students, etc; movements to resist
displacement and environmental destruction, and
for jal, jungle and jameen; movements against
corruption, against price-rise and for basic food
and housing; movements for regional
10
- Vernon Gonsalves
development, autonomy, statehood and secession;
movements to fight gender, caste and communal
attacks and atrocities and to end patriarchy,
annihilate caste and defeat Brahminical fascist
forces.
The common thread through all these
movements is the aspiration for social change. The
masses participating in these movements are those
classes and sections who need a democratic
transformation of Indian society
Thus, the question of Naxalbari and social
movements is basically the question of the relation
between the core, leading forces of the Indian
revolution and its allies. It is about the relation of
the armed revolutionary movement and its
potential supporters. It concerns the questions of
the tactics of the proletarian vanguard in
revolution. It is fundamentally a question of the
United Front of the Indian Revolution.
This impact of Naxalbari on Social
Movments, has a spontaneous, objective, is aspect
and a conscious, subjective, should be aspect.
The first aspect is seen in the influence that
the idea of Naxalbari and the real battles of the
revolutionary movement per se have wielded on
the ideas and aspirations, and even actions of the
activists and advanced sections of the masses
participating in a variety of movements over the
last fifty years. This is often reflected in more
radical demands and greater militancy in action.
Some examples of such impact could be seen in
movements of Dalit Panthers, Sampoorna Kranti
or Total Revolution, nationality movements, anti-
displacement movements, etc.
The second aspect is in the active
collaboration and intervention of the
revolutionary vanguard forces in social
movements. This was seen in the Dalit Panther
manifesto, signing of memoranda of
understanding with nationality movements,
participation in Nandigram movement,
intervention in Telangana statehood movement.
The spontaneous impact and influence of
revolutionary Naxalite thought on social
movements is directly proportional to the strength
and progress of the core revolutionary movement
- mainly the armed struggle.
During and immediately following periods
of increase in the spread and intensity of the
armed struggle and other militant revolutionary
struggles, there has been a corresponding boost
in the response of social movements to the politics
of Naxalbari. There have been increases in
militant struggles, more radical demands from
existing movements and even the emergence of
new fighting movements.
This was seen in the late sixties and early
seventies in the context of the spring thunder of
Naxalbari and the revolutionary armed upsurges
that followed in its wake. The frequency and
militancy of movements in this period are in no
small way attributable to the influence of
Naxalbari, Srikakulam and other such struggles.
Such an impact also came from the post-
emergency Naxal armed upsurges in Telangana
and Bihar and their spread in the eighties to
Dandakaranya and Jharkhand. A similar response
came with the formation of CPI(Maoist) leading
to a new rise of the armed struggle in the second
half of the first decade of this century. Conversely,
periods of ebb and downswing have seen a
corresponding shrinking of influence.
The success of conscious active
collaboration and inter vention of the
revolutionar y vanguard forces in social
movements is dependent on two things - one,
the extent and skill of planned intervention
and outreach by the revolutionary forces and
two, the intensity and force of the counter-
intervention and disruption of the ruling class
forces.
Intervention by the revolutionary vanguard
in social movements would seem to be a given,
but that has not always been the case. In fact the
early years, when the objective influence of
Naxalbari was at a height, also saw a neglect of
mass organizations and mass movements, which
were seen as impediments to armed struggle2.
The 1970 programme of the CPI(ML) consigned
the task of building the United Front to some
time in the future when worker-peasant unity is
achieved in the course of armed struggle and after
Red political power is established at least in some
parts of the country.3
This meant that there was few attempts to
participate, collaborate or intervene in the Social
movements of the late sixties and early seventies.
This was however later corrected and since the
time of the post-emergency upsurge there have
been attempts to intervene in the important mass
social movements of the day.
This increased participation and engagement
by the revolutionary core has been met by a
heightened surveillance and repression on all
organizations and movements suspected to be
actually or potentially allying with the
revolutionary movement. Intelligence and security
agencies have, in alliance with ruling class parties
and organizations, and media outlets, developed
a range of measures to discourage, suppress and
pre-empt any links between the Naxalite
revolutionary cadre and the leadership and
activists of ongoing social movements. A favorite
ploy to exert pressure is to leak lists of mass
movement leaders via pliable media channels,
claiming that they are members of banned
organizations and soon to be put behind bars.
Intimidation and other forms of coercion by
ruling class politicians are some other means used
to forestall any linkages that could develop
between social movements and the revolution.
The core question of any United Front is
always the extent to which the revolutionary
vanguard is able to win over the masses away from
the influence of the ruling classes.
The social movements are the arenas where
the masses are out in large numbers. These mass
participants are normally the advanced sections
of the classes and sections who constitute the
leading and main force and the reliable friends of
the revolution. No revolution can be successful
in this country without winning over such
advanced sections.
11
 Several of these movements and their
organisations have petty bourgeois leadership (e.g.
Narmada Bachao, genuine Caste annihilation and
anti- displacement movements). Reformist trends
in such leadership are common. However those
that remain uncompromising and dedicated to
achieving the goals of the movement have the
potential of realizing, over time, the limitations
of reformist solutions. Petty bourgeois leaderships
can and should be allied with. Such alliances can
be cemented into strategic partnerships.
A significant section of the masses in social
movements are however under the influence of
ruling classes. Ruling class parties very often
occupy leading positions in large and even militant
mass movements (e.g. separate Telangana,
Jharkhand). This does not however mean that the
revolutionary forces should shirk away from
intervention and building alliances even in
movements where the ruling classes are in
command.
The main basic requirement is the mass
presence and mass participation in the movement
of the class friends of the revolution. The
revolutionary forces should attempt to establish
a presence wherever the masses are in struggle
and aim to take the struggles forward along a
revolutionary politic al path. This is the process
through which the struggling masses can be drawn
away from the influence of the ruling class and
into the camp of revolution.
A correct analysis and identification of the
class character of leaders and organizations of a
social movement is crucial to appropriate tactics
in this regard. A proper approach and methods
in dealing with allies is also essential. Experiences
of the inter vention and participation of
revolutionaries in movements from the seventies
to the struggles of Lalgarh and for Telangana
statehood provide useful lessons.
Potential friends in the leaderships of social
movements are sometimes wrongly identified and
branded as partners of the ruling classes, leading
to sectarian errors and isolation of the
revolutionary forces. Bureaucratic methods and
artificial insistence on formal leadership roles for
revolutionary elements can also lead to isolation.
On the other hand, the lack of a clear-cut
12
recognition of the ruling class nature of some
parties and leaders can create dangerous illusions
in the revolutionary camp, among leaders and
cadre alike. While revolutionaries cannot shun all
opportunities to utilize contradictions among the
ruling classes, particular care is absolutely
necessary while doing so. It is essential to maintain
independence and educate activists sufficiently in
this regard and as to the dangerous character of
the ruling class forces who are being collaborated
with.
It is through such education and through
experiences in practice that the revolutionary
forces must acquire the flexibility of organization
and struggle tactics to build broader and better
alliances. These experiences will hold in good
stead for the major battles that lie ahead.
The situation in the fiftieth year since
Naxalbari is rife with peril as well as promise
On one hand is the spectre of fascism which,
if allowed to consolidate, would herald dark times
that could well last for decades. On the other hand
there are repeated upsurges of various social
movements. They are the forces of resistance that
project the possibility of fascist defeat and a better
tomorrow.
This promise however primarily hinges on
the ability of the revolutionary forces to knit
together a coalition of the diverse elements that
stand against and are ready to stand against the
Brahminical fascists.
As of today resolute resistance to the fascists
is restricted to certain parts - Kashmir, some parts
of the North-East and the zones of revolutionary
guerrilla struggle. In the rest of the country, the
opposition to fascism is yet fragmented and
relatively inconsistent.
The Rohit Vemula movement and the JNU-
DU students struggles were inspiring for the
powerful challenge they threw to the powers that
be. However, after the initial upsurges which
brought all progressive forces together, the
periods of ebb have seen widespread disunity and
disarray. Nevertheless the students movement
continues to offer potential for new surges.
The womens movements have seen periodic
agitations and upswings. They have not yet been
able to spread, but hold prospects for new militant
battles.
 The Una movement has been staunchly and
steadily pushing forward, with short and medium
term programmes marching forward with the goal
of caste-annihilation. The great potential of the
caste-annihilation movement to challenge the
Brahminical order was also seen in the militant
upsurge led by the Bhim Army. Despite being
suppressed by widespread repression and arrests,
it is not likely to be subdued for long.
The recent farmer agitations in a number of
states shook the government and managed to
force some concessions. It is now in a period of
consolidation and preparation for new battles.
The current massive multi-class mobilisations
at numerous centres, first against lynching and
now against the murder of Gauri Lankesh and
other anti-Hindutva intellectuals are symbolic of
the rising resistance against the Brahminical fascist
regime.
Each period of upswing and each new surge
has seen an ever wider variety of forces coming
together to oppose the fascists. Ambedkarites and
Lohiaites, feminist groups and Islamic
organisations, Marxists and Gandhians, political
party fronts and NGOs, have all participated
wholeheartedly to stand against the present
reactionary regimes fascist onslaught. Almost all
genuine forces see the need to fight unitedly.
However, considering the divergent and
sometimes antagonistic ideological positions, the
setting up of a single formation may not happen
anytime soon.
The way out would be to build a number of
different fronts - area based, section based, issue
based - which could at some time in the future
get together on broader anti-fascist platforms. The
revolutionary forces, which have been active in
most of the anti-fascist actions, could play a role
in initiating such unity of mass-based anti-fascist
fighting forces. Such unity would be a stepping
stone for building the united front of democratic
revolutionary forces.
The task of building of a united front
however, has not only to overcome the
differences between the allies, it has also to
survive the efforts of the state to scuttle such
unity
Over the decades, there have been attempts
by the revolutionaries to build alliances with the
nationality movements. However the vigilance of
the state to prevent such alliances and the
repressive measures taken in this regard have seen
that no such alliance has matured. During the
Lalgarh struggle the UF took on new forms and
levels but was eventually crushed with many of
the leading figures being thrown into prison. Even
in the current scenario of rising resistance the state
has embarked on a strategy of branding almost
all present and potential anti-fascist leaders as
Maoist sympathisers or members of banned
organisations and threatening them with
repressive action.
History however proves that repression
can only provide temporary respite to the
ruling classes from an idea whose time has
come
Though the ruling classes and their state are
formidable and powerful forces today, each
forward step of the resistance exposes their
weaknesses and proves them to be paper tigers in
the face of mass anger.
Even recent history offers examples like the
Arab Spring, where regimes, backed by efficient
and powerful state apparatuses, which had ruled
for decades were toppled by popular movements.
The same history is also of course witness to the
truth that, if there are no revolutionary forces to
make use of a crisis in favour of revolution, the
advantage will only go to other ruling class forces,
propped up by the imperialists.
Our revolutionary forces - both leaders and
cadre - should prepare to attain the flexibility and
skills to rise to the demands history is now making
of them.
Endnotes
1 Ghanshyam Shah, Social Movements in India A
Review of Literature, http://www.arvindguptatoys.
com/arvindgupta/movement-shah.pdf
2. Self-Critical Report of the Communist Party of India
(Marxist-Leninist) (Peoples War) adopted on 22nd
April, 1980
3. Para 33 of the Programme of the Communist Party
of India (Marxist-Leninist) adopted at the Party
Congress held in May 1970, https://
cpindiaml.wordpress.com/about/programme-of-the-
c-p-im-l/
13
 Kishenji In West Bengal : Genesis of the Maoist Movement and
Assessment of a Revolutionary Peoples Leader
Mallojhula Koteswar Rao was one of the
leading representatives of the new generation of
dedicated Communist revolutionaries after the
historic Naxalbari rebellion. He towered over
many Communist leaders of India. He, as he
appeared to some, was not a theoretician of a high
order. Marxism, to him, was a guide to action.
Like many others, he imbibed and reposed faith
in Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought
with commitment and un-put-down-able
revolutionary spirit. Yet he reigned supreme in
the hearts of all those who came across him,
worked with him, stayed with him, as an human
being with almost superhuman qualities. Although
he was a member of the Politburo of the Central
Committee of the CPI(Maoist), he was known,
endeared and admired for his down-to-earth
identity.
Koteswar Rao was known among his party
members and the people by several pseudonyms
such as Kotamma, Prahlad, Ramji, Kishenji,
Pradip, Bimal, Surya etc. He was born in 1954 in
Koddapally town in the Karimnagar district of
erstwhile Andhra Pradesh, now Telangana region.
As a high school student, he actively took part in
the movement for a separate Telangana state in
1969. Like many of his contemporaries, the
Naxalbari struggle of 1967 and the Girijan
struggle in Srikakulam that came in its wake
influenced his mind profoundly. He was then a
graduate student at SSR College at Karimnagar.
In 1974, after the end of the first phase of the
CPI(ML) struggle, he joined the Radical Students
Union(RSU), went underground during the
emergency under the Indira Gandhi regime and
worked extensively among the peasants in the
14
- Pro. Amit Bhattacharyya
Karimnagar-Adilabad districts and exposed the
20-point programme of the ruling Congress party.
The second conference of the RSU was held in
February 1978 and the first conference of the
Radical Youth League(RYL) was held in May 1978.
These two gatherings were important in Koteswar
Raos political career. He took part in the to-the-
village- movementa movement that was
initiated after Naxalbari by Charu Mazumdar
when he gave the call to the youth and students
to go to the villages and integrate with the poor
and landless peasants as a preliminary step towards
revolutionary transformationa step that
subsequently became part of revolutionary
Communism in India. That appears to be
Kishenjis first step towards baptism in the process
of integration with the peasantry. In September
1978, he took part in a peasant movement known
as Jagityal Joitrajatra(Victory March to Jagityal)
which was the culmination of a mass movement
for occupying land by landless peasantry in as
many as 150 villages embracing Karimanagar and
Adilabad districts. It was this movement that gave
birth to such future Maoist leaders as Ganapati,
Keshenji and others. Kishenji was, by then, the
secretary of the CPI(ML) COC, in Karimanagar
district. According to media reports, he was
associated with the Adilabad-Karimnagar joint
committee, Karimnagar district committee, AP
state committee as the secretary and also
shouldered many organizational and military
responsibilities in many parts of Dandakaranya1.
From the mid-1990s, he assumed the
leadership of the movement in the Jangalmahal
region of West Bengal as also in some other states
of Eastern India. It was he who personally gave
leadership during the Lalgarh movement. From
then on, the name of Kishenji became a
household name in West Bengal.
Kishenji came to West Bengal around August
1994. That was the period of a vacuum in the
practice of revolutionary Communism in West
Bengal. New theories such as Post-modernism,
Post-structuralism, Subaltern studies etc
dominated intellectual thinking. Kishenji started
reorganizing the revolutionary forces through
ideological struggle. Why is it that new struggles
could not develop in West Bengal? To Kishenji,
the problem lay in the lack of adherence to the
Leninist theory and practice. Most of the Marxist-
Leninist parties/groups including the CPI(ML)
Party Unity harboured erroneous notions about
the role of the CPI(M) and believed that the
people in West Bengal held illusions about the
CPI(M) till 1977-80. Kishenji, however, held the
view that the illusion was there not among the
people, but among the different ML-groups. He
was the first in the revolutionary camp to
condemn the CPI(M) party as a social fascist party
right from 1967 after the killing of eleven persons
including eight women, and two babies in
Naxalbari. There was a debate within the
revolutionary camp on this issue. The other debate
was over the time the CPI(M) had become
transformed into a fascist party. To the CPI(ML)
PU, it was after 1980. To Kishenji, it was because
of this wrong assessment, the CPI(ML) PU could
not make any breakthrough in West Bengal. The
issue was clinched by majority vote at the WB
State Conference of the united CPI(ML) Peoples
War in 2000(The merger between the CPI(ML)
Peoples War and the CPI(ML) Party Unity took
place in 1998) and the year 1967 was accepted as
the year since when the CPI(M) was turned into a
fascist party.
How to start the Protracted Peoples
War(PPW)? There Kishenji played the principal
role. He usually started with a call made to his
comrades to come forward to become a
professional revolutionary. Those who were
willing to lead an underground life volunteered.
That was followed by regular study and discussion
of Marxist classics and CPI(ML) PW documents
with those cadres. In order to revive the memory
of the Naxalbari struggle, he took the initiative
to publish life sketches of comrades who had
fallen in the battlefield. When Ashim Chatterjee
decided to stand as a candidate in the WB
assembly elections and the CPI(M) was busy in
condemning the Baranagar-Cossipore genocide
of August 1971, Kishenji exposed the nefarious
role played by the CPI(M) during that period.
Later on, the Bengal-Jharkhand-Odisha bordering
zone was selected as the area of PPW due to its
favourable terrain and the long heritage of peasant
struggles. The majority of the professional
revolutionaries (PRs) were sent to the villages to
set up organizational structure. After that, the
need was felt for the formation of armed squads.
However, Kishenji insisted that squads could be
formed only after the development of mass
movements and the creation of mass base in those
areas. Hence some mass organizations were set
up with the peasants and adivasi population. These
forums carried on struggles over day-to-day issues
such as corruption in rationing system,
exploitation by thikadars and the subsequent
struggle against them for more wages for plucking
kendu leaves in the Jharkhand Odisha areas; for
increase in wages for daily labourers, against
corruption in potato bonds, demand to keep 75%
forest produce for Adivasis and 25% for
government i.e, tebhaga for the forest-dwellers.
According to knowledgeable sources, the
first armed training camp was organized during
May 1998 somewhere in the Mayurbhanj area. The
question that cropped up was: Why should there
be such guerrilla training when the formation of
guerrilla squads was not allowed? Kishenji
reportedly replied: Before the peasants start
cultivating the soil, they take some necessary,
preliminary steps such as removing the weeds,
cleaning the soil etc. What we are doing is just
thattaking preparatory steps for the future. He
also predicted that the situation in West Bengal
was fast moving towards a crisis and struggle
would begin soon. That situation came in
December 1998 with the repressive anti-people
15
activities of the BJP-TMC combine in the
Garbeta-Keshpur area. In the face of armed
attacks by the BJP-TMC forces, the Peoples War
activists formed local armed squads(LAS). That
was the first experience of armed movement in
West Bengal after a long time; later on, these
guerilla squads had to deal with the CPI(M) armed
cadres/harmads and in course of such struggles,
areas such as Garbeta, Goaltor, Salbani, Bandwan,
Lalgarh, Ramgarh, Belpahari, Banshpahari, Arsha,
Balarampur, Barikul etc became part of guerrilla
zones2.
This whole processcommencement of
mass movement, for mation of mass
organizations, initiating armed struggle in the
countryside and coordination between mass
movements in the villages and towns and city was
initiated and led personally by Koteswar Rao.
Every six months, special general body meetings
were held with committee members and
organizers. In all such meetings, reports to the
minutest detail were placed and discussed, errors
were identified and guidance was given. It seems
that in some of these meetings, Cherukuri
Rajakumar@ Azad was also present.
In West Bengal, the armed struggle against
the social fascist forces of the CPI(M) was going
on. When the armed forces of the State were
mobilized against them, the People War cadres
stood against state repression too. By then, in the
face of state terror, vacillation cropped up from
within the party, with members emphasizing the
development of working class struggle before
party formation and in that way, negating armed
peasant movement altogether. At that juncture,
Kishenji initiated a rectification movement
ideological struggle which they call
Bolshevizationto combat that trend. That was
followed by an armed action against the state
police forcesthe first mine explosion in
Bundwan.
It seems that such ideological struggles and
armed actions made the cadres feel that even if
the CPI(M) was in power, they could be resisted
and defeated. That confidence helped a lot in
giving rise to the Nandigram and Lalgarh
16
movements in the days to come.
The Lalgarh Movement
The Lalgarh movement began in November
2008 and suffered a major setback in late
November 2011 with the arrest and killing of
Kishenji in a fake encounter after brutal torture.
The Maoists had been at the helm of the Lalgarh
movement right from its inception. Their
resistance to state repression was accompanied
by the mobilization of thousands of people and
the implementation of an alternative programme
of development based on peoples initiative and
their voluntary labour. That new model of
development was totally opposed to the Indian
states model based on foreign capital and
technology. The most important aspects of that
model consisted of the anti-feudal land-to-the-
tiller programme, providing irrigation facility and
storage of water, construction of roads, shelter
and health facilities, education , culture and social
awareness as also fight against environmental
pollution etc.
Kishenji called the Lalgarh movement the
second Naxalbari. It spread throughout the
Junglemahal region and was a qualitative leap
forward after Singur and Nandigram. What we
witnessed in Lalgarh is the blending of the mass
democratic movement of the Adivasis, dalits and
other lower class people on the one hand and the
armed revolutionary struggle, on the other.
Thanks to peoples initiative, a number of steps
were taken, such as the formation of the Peoples
Committee Against Police Atrocities(PCAPA),
equal representation of men and women in local
and higher committees within the PCAPA,
formation of men and women youth wings of
the PCAPA, Nari Ijjat Banchao Committee
(Committee to safeguard the dignity of women),
Gana Militia(Peoples Militia) to combat attacks
by CPI(M) harmads, fight for dignity in the face
of severe adversity, anti-liquor movement, fight
for a new culture with songs and poems reflecting
the strug gles of the people and drawing
sustenance from the adivasi rebellions of the past,
fight against environmental pollution caused by
the establishment of sponge-iron factories,
adoption of new methods of struggles and, along
with these, the implementation of an alternative
model of development that bear the imprint of
the Maoist model in Dandakaranya. Throughout
that period, he was at the forefront of the
movement, leading it from the front, issuing
statements denouncing government action,
formulating the strategy and tactics and planning
operations.
An Assessment of Kishenji
How was Kishenji as a human being? How
was he as a revolutionary leader? Many people
knew him personally, some of whom were media
persons, some met him on occasions, some knew
him quite intimately and were fortunate enough
to observe him from close quarters, and shared
things together. Whatever one could get from
them can be pieced together and made into a living
profile of a great, simple man totally dedicated to
the peoples cause he held high.
When Kishenji landed in West Bengal in
1994, he appeared to be a gentle person and totally
devoid of revolutionary fervour. He did not at
that time know the Bengali language and
manufactured tales about himself that he lived
near the Maharashtra border close to Mumbai with
his daughter and wife. His natural politeness and
innocent appearance like a goody fellow stood in
the way of exciting any curiosity or generating
any suspicion about his role and position. By
degrees, he learnt the Bengali language, broken
to start with, and composed poems in Bengali
under the penname Ashidhara. By then, his
appearance also changed. He was much fond of
reading and was always eager to learn new things.
He was a voracious reader. Wherever he stayed,
he literally devoured books available at hand. He
also read as many newspapers as possible to get
updated over happenings both inside as also
outside the country. One recounts him asking for
books on linguistic formations in India.
He stood miles away from putting on air or
indulging in heroics, narrating his personal exploits
or prolonged struggling life, nor did he write any
article with fiery effusion brimming over. His
language was lucid and written with ease,
affordable banter and convincing mode taking off
from the ground reality in order to reach the
crescendo of robust conviction. His poems,
written in Bengali, were examples of calm
determination, revolutionary zeal and restrained
emotion.
Kishenji was a political leader; but politicking
was never his cup of tea. Persons who knew him
could not recollect one single incident during the
Lalgarh movement where he had lied. He could
have, even with honest intentions, played tricks
on the CPI(M)-led government in murderous
spree to gain political advantage. But he would
not. In certain cases, he could have kept mum or
avoided responsibility for sheer political gain; but
he did not. The ruling CPI(M), on many occasions,
must have savoured the taste of such apparently
foolish acts of the dreaded Kishenji and smiled.
Those who had the opportunity to observe
his leadership qualities from close quarters would
assert that he was eager to respond to political
questions raised by opposing political groups.
Once one such group asked: Where at all were
the anti-feudal elements in the Lalgarh movement?
Kishenji asked his comrade: What should be the
answer? He always tried to counter contrary
opinion logically. Never did he seek brush off
critical opinion coming from side of other forces.
There was an important debate within the
Maoist party in West Bengal during the Lalgarh
movement. Should the Maoist party allow other
organizations to work in areas under their
influence? According to one view, we should
allow them to work; we will handle it politically.
Kishenjis view was that we should not. How can
we allow them entry when we know for certain
that they would make propaganda against armed
struggle. That would only strengthen the bands
of the State. The reply was that in case we disallow,
hoe can then we talk about democratic revolution?
In fact, it is rather difficult to theorize the issue.
It is difficult to say so during the stage of the
New Democratic Revolution. Actually there are
different stages here. To permit entry or not to
17
permit entry will depend on the concrete situation.
It could be yes in a particular situation or no in
another situation. On one point there was
complete agreement. The RSS and the CPI(M)
would not be allowed as they belonged to the
enemy camp.
How would Kishenji respond to a question
whether the revolutionaries would adopt
diplomacy in a war situation? In case a member
in the enemy camp is killed by the revolutionary
forces, should they take the responsibility or
simply keep mum, hoping that it could create
tension within the enemy camp and make them
disunited? In a situation where remaining silent
would sow dissention in the enemy camp and help
the cause of revolution, should they not do that?
On the other hand, if responsibility is taken then
the enemy would be given the chance to
reorganize themselves against the revolutionaries.
Kishenji was against such diplomacy. It showed
his honesty. However, it was also his weakness
and a dangerous one.
Kishenji was the co-author of a number of
booklets and articles. As an editor, he was good
at striking off inessentials in a write-up and added
relevant points in order to give it a coherent shape.
He was acutely aware of his weakness in English
grammar and sought help from others to
overcome it. He was known to be fluent in 4/5
languages and understood a few more. He himself
maintained hygiene and taught others why hygiene
must be taken care of. He narrated to his friends
how the village folk made it their practice to use
boiled drinking water and serving it to others. That
reminds one of the fact that Mao developed the
same practice of maintaining health and hygiene
among the peasants and urban poor in his own
country during the stage of New Democratic
Revolution.
Kishenji was a very amiable personality; but
his firmness was occasionally noticed by his
friends. It was sometime during December 2004
or January 2005 that a meeting took place in the
Paharpur forest region in the Gaya district of
Bihar just after the merger between the CPI(ML)
PW and the MCCI. At that meeting, hundreds of
18
cadres assembled to implement the Politburo
decision of unilateral truce with the CPI(ML)
Liberation in Bihar. Among those who attended
were many women whose husbands were killed
by the Liberation activists. They asked: How can
we make a unilateral truce with Liberation who
had killed so many of our men? The meeting was
almost in the doldrums. At that juncture, Kishenji
intervened and told them firmly that as a Politburo
member, he would not allow any discussion on it
and that the said meeting was organized only to
decide on how to implement that decision.
Around 2001, the question of ceasefire in
Andhra Pradesh came up as a contentious issue
within the party. Kishenji agreed to the proposal
arguing that tactical advantage might be derived
from such a move. He was firm and made it clear
that it would be temporary in the context of the
on-going peoples war. Sometime later, when it
proved to be nearly disastrous, he frankly admitted
that he was utterly metaphysical in his reading of
the reality. Personal ego, dishonesty etc, in any
form, were the traits Kishenji stood miles away
from. Here possibly lay his great ethical strength
as well as his apparent vulnerability. He was
accessible to all and sundry, a leader truly down-
to-earth and bereft of the halo of a legend.
Yet Kishenji had already become a legend
during his lifetime. His prolonged telephonic
conversation with the mediathough terribly
risky, the abduction of Atindranath Datta, the
officer in charge of Sankrail police station,
subsequent release of 15/16 women prisoners
hailing from the Junglemahal areafrom
Medinipur Central Jail in exchange of the officers
release as a prisoner of war before the media,
his appearance in front of the media with one
old adivasi woman whose family members had
been subjected to police harassment and torture
all these had become part of history. That was a
time when people, particularly youngsters
assembled before the TVs to listen to his voice.
Telugu-speaking Kishenjis Bengali accent, his
speech and responses to the media, his boldness,
dedication to the cause he had been fighting for
and his self-sacrifice made a deep impression
among people irrespective of their views. People
treated him with respect, awe and admiration.
Sections of the media acclaimed him as the Man
of the Year; as he covered his face with a towel
for security reasons, he was described also as the
ghost who walks or the invisible man.
Wherever he went, be it an urban shelter or
an adivasi hut, he mixed with the members of the
family and sought to be one of them. He had no
qualms in so-called menial jobs like washing
utensils, rubbing and sweeping floors, cooking,
washing clothes of his own as also others, and
even changing babies nappies. He literally took
utmost care for anyone and everyone around and
most of all, was gifted with childlike simplicity
without an iota of shrewdness or complexity.
He was a person with a very strong will and
cool temperament. It is said that once he entered
some shopping mall to buy certain essentials. So
many stories gathering round him emerged
emphasizing the strenuous life he lived in the
forests with lingering threats from the police, para-
military forces, the CPI(M) harmads and even
snakes. On one occasion, while he was writing
something sitting on the ground, he noticed a
snake coming down a tree close by. Unperturbed,
he carried on his job. Steeled and tempered that
he became in course of struggle, his body
language rarely gave the impression of
nervousness or fear when enemy forces kept
pursuing or started surrounding the area. The
innocent appearance concealed the fact that he
was one of the best Marxist strategists having
mastered military aspects of guerrilla warfare in
India. The lapses in that regard he strove to
overcome by being in the midst of the battlefield,
not bidding adieu to the real life battles.
Kishenji was shocked when the Gnaneswari
Express derailment in 2010 by sabotage occurred
on the railway track near Jhargram that took away
149 innocent lives. He instituted a team of enquiry
immediately. The report, subsequently made
public and released to the press, apportioned the
blame to one Bapi, a youth who switched over to
the CPI(M) harmads from the PCAPA. However,
there was possibly a blanket unofficial ban on the
report going public, in order to vilify the Maoist
movement.
The Singur and Nandigram movements were
neither the creations of Mamata Banerjee, nor was
she part of it initially. She was successful in
hijacking them, first as an outsider supporting it
without her party banner and with the drama of
hunger strike and then by projecting herself as its
vociferous supporter. In fact, many were faced
with the Hobsons choiceeither to reject the
popular and apparently pro-movement posture of
Mamata Banerjee and her TMC or to ally with
her and the TMC. A third option was also there,
i.e to support the movement as an independent
alternative. Kishenji most probably stood for the
third option. However, at the grassroots level,
particularly at Nandigram, the anti-CPI(M)
government and anti-police operation forces of
the CPI(Maoist), forced by necessity, had to make
a common cause with the TMC cadres at that
juncture. However, the Maoists did have a far-
reaching programme as to how to turn Nandigram
into a zone of resistance movement. Despite the
fight against the common enemy, Kishenji did not
have any qualm in caricaturing and lambasting
Mamata Banerjee and her party as evident in
numerous press statements issued by his party
from time to time.
Kishenji, according to police claims, was
killed by bullets in an encounter on 24 November
2011 in the Burishol forest area. His body bore
marks of injury of four kinds: bullet wounds,
bayonet wounds, wounds caused by burning and
wounds caused by the pounding of parts of the
body by heavy instruments. The WB government
claimed that the Maoists were given three days to
surrender through microphones; instead they
reportedly fired 1000 rounds and that forced the
police to fire back. Field investigation reports
conducted by civil rights organizations in that area
found no trace of such as exchange of fire and
totally belied the police claim4. Varavara Rao, who
formed part of the team that came to take the
body to Andhra Pradesh, stated that never before
in his lifetime did he see so many wounds inflicted
on one single body. It seems that the news about
19
the location of his hideout was leaked to the police
by sources from within. The trusttoo much
trustthat he reposed on some of his comrades
proved to be his undoing.
Kishenji was one of the main architects of
the Maoist movement in India and West Bengal
in the later phase. After the departure of Charu
Mazumdar, no other leader in West Bengal could
gain such respectability, awe and admiration from
the people irrespective of their views. He was a
leader of the oppressed people; at the same time,
he was also one of themwho regarded the
sufferings of his own countrymen as his own. It
was his integration with the people and his
personal Communist qualities that must have
made him what he really became.
End Notes:
1. See Statement captioned captioned Red
Salutes to the Great Leader of Indian
Revolution, The Beloved Leader of the
Oppressed Masses and Politburo Member of
the CPI(Maoist) Comrade Mallohjala
Koteswaralu!, issued by the central
20
committee of the CPI(Maoist) dated 1
January 2012 a pdf downloaded from the
net: www.bannedthought/net).
2. See Garbetay BJP fascibadi-der utthan o
Peoples War-er Protirodh/Rise of BJP
fascists in Garbeta and the resistance of the
Peoples War, Biplabi Yug Prakashani,
Published by Niranjan Bose, Kolkata,
December 1999). Local armed squads thus
turned into local guerrilla squads(LGS).
3. For details about the movement, see Amit
Bhattacharyyas Singur to Lalgarh via
Nandigram Rising Flames of Peoples Anger
against Displacement, Destitution and State
Terror, Visthapan Virodhi Jan Vikas
Andolan, 3 volumes, April 2009, June 2009,
August 2009); See also Bhattacharyyas Is
Lalgarh showing the Way?, EPW, January 9-
15, 2010).
4. See Press Statement issued by the
Coordination of Democratic Rights
Organizations(CDRO) Killing Talks and
faking an encounter dated 2nd December
2011 in the Kolkata Press Club.
 Mass Organizations and Mass Line
At the very outset I would like to offer my
humble revolutionary homage to all those
innumerable comrades who have laid down their
lives in building mass organisations and mass
struggles.
I would like to start with a broad outline for
the topic in question Mass Organisations Mass
Line.
On the occasion of 50 years of Naxalbari,
we have to look at the way the understanding of
the revolutionary party and various mass
organisations has evolved over the period. At the
same time, we have to also look at the impact it
had on the revolutionary practice, i.e. on the
building of the Mass Organisations and the
revolutionary movement itself and the mass line
etc. We have to also critically evaluate the stand
and practice of the revolutionary party and the
revolutionary mass organisations in this regard.
There are certain Marxian principles that
define the role of the mass organisations.
The first and foremost principle from which
emanate the theory about the role of mass
organisations in the revolutionary movement is
that the masses and the masses alone are
makers of history and not some heroes and
enlightened souls.
But how do the masses play their role in the
revolution? Though spontaneous actions by the
masses have at times definitely played a role in
changing history, it can only be the action by the
organized masses that can make revolution a
success.
Mass Organisations are absolutely
indispensable for the victory of any revolution.
The principal aim of building mass organisations
- N. Ravi
is to organise the masses for revolution. Without
mobilizing the masses into innumerable struggles
and raising their political consciousness in the
course of those struggles, they cannot realise the
need to overthrow the state power of the
exploiting classes, they cannot acquire the
necessary consciousness and collective will to
overthrow the oppressive state machine. It is
needless to say that the revolutionary party cannot
lead the masses to victory in the revolution.
Specifically speaking in the Indian context
and in similar contexts, we need to understand
the relation between mass organisations and mass
struggles and armed struggle as the path of
revolution in India is the path of Protracted
Peoples War.
As Com. Mao had pointed out:
... War is the main form of struggle and army is
the main form of organisation. Other forms such as the
mass organisation and mass struggle are also extremely
important and indeed indispensable and in no circumstances
to be overlooked, but their purpose is to serve the war.
Before the outbreak of war, all organisation and struggle
are in preparation for war....After the war breaks out, all
the organisations and struggles are coordinated with the
war directly or indirectly.
Therefore, from the very beginning, the
orientation, perspective and the method of
building mass organisations and mass struggles
should be to serve the war directly or indirectly.
The mass organisations which are built without
such a perspective would be unfit to advance the
revolution. Here the idea of transforming mass
struggles and mass organisations gradually into
armed struggle is to be recognized as wrong
thinking.
21
 If this direction is lost, the mass organisations
and mass struggles will get bogged down in
legalism and economism, and we will be unable
to prepare the masses for the seizure of political
power.
The struggle for power is the principal aspect,
but it cannot be separated from the struggle for
economic and other partial struggles. To put it
differently, they are two sides of the same coin.
Another crucial aspect of building mass
organizations is the orientation given to them.
Various types of mass organizations are formed
among the workers, peasantry, students, women,
youth, adivasis etc. and on various issues like caste
question, communalism, fascism, displacement
etc. etc. So, many of these mass organisations fight
on partial demands like increase in the wages, for
land, on the unemployment question etc. But
however valiantly these masses put up a struggle
on economic or other partial demands,
revolutionary consciousness does not
automatically dawn upon them. Com. Lenin had
repeatedly warned, that this consciousness should
be instilled in the toiling masses from outside; they
cannot acquire it through struggles on their
economic or partial demands.
These are certain basic principles of Mass
Organisations.
Mass Line:
Mass line is one of the fundamental
principles of mass work, developed especially in
china.
Mass line is the work method of the
revolutionary mass organisations and the
revolutionary party. At the same time it is also the
method of leadership.
As a work method it envisages that
All work done for the masses must start
from their needs and not from the desire of any
individual, however well-intentioned.
(We should serve) the people whole heartedly
and never for a moment divorce ourselves from
the masses, to proceed in all cases from the
interests of the people and not from the interests
of individuals or groups, and to understand the
22
identity of our responsibility to the people.
We communists are like seeds and the people
are like the soil. Wherever we go, we must unite
with the people, take root and blossom among
them. Wherever our comrades go, they must build
good relations with the masses, be concerned for
them and help them to overcome their difficulties.
We must unite with the masses; the more of the
masses we unite with, the better. We must go all
out to mobilise the masses.
The relationship between the Party (Mass
organisation) and the masses, like the relation
between the Party (Mass organisation) leadership
and the rank and file, is a unity of opposites, in
which each acts and reacts upon the other.
As Mao Tse-Tung says, the correct political
line should be from the masses, to the masses.
To ensure that the line really comes from the
masses, in particular that it really goes back to the
masses, there must be close ties not only between
the Party and the masses outside the Party
(between class and the people) but above all
between the Partys leading bodies and the masses
within the Party (between the cadres and the rank-
and-file).
Further, this cyclical interaction between
Party and people corresponds to the dialectical
relation between theory and practice in the Marxist
theory of knowledge.
In all the practical work of our Party, all
correct leadership is necessarily from the masses,
to the masses. This means: take the ideas of the
masses (scattered and unsystematic ideas) and
concentrate them (through study turn them into
concentrated and systematic ideas), then go to the
masses and propagate and explain these ideas until
the masses embrace them as their own, hold fast
to them and translate them into action, and test
the correctness of these ideas in such action. Then
once again concentrate ideas from the masses and
once again go to the masses so that the ideas are
persevered in and carried through. And so on,
over and over again in an endless spiral, with the
ideas becoming more correct, more vital and
richer each time. Such is the Marxist theory of
knowledge.
 Thus, the above basic principles form the
bedrock of the mass line.
In the light of these principles, let us critically
examine the practice of the revolutionary
movement.
Let us examine the issue of various forms
of mass organisations and struggles and the aspect
of mass line later.
A Brief Review of the past:
Naxalbari uprising, that started on 23rd May,
1967 and resulted in the killing of a police person
and caught the attention of the whole nation on
25 th May with the killing of eleven people
including eight women, a boy and two infants in
police firing, broke the backbone of revisionism
and put the agenda of armed revolution firmly
on the political landscape of India. It inspired,
galvanized and mobilized thousands of students,
youth and intellectuals and lakhs of workers and
peasants to throw away the yoke of feudal and
imperialist oppression that had enchained India
and to build a new, democratic and truly
independent India. Com. Charu Mazumdar, the
principal architect of this uprising dreamed of a
new society and made others too to dream about
creating such a society.
Though the strategic path of protracted
peoples war and the path of the armed struggle
adopted by CPI (ML) under the leadership of
com. Charu Mazumdar was absolutely correct, it
grossly overestimated the international and
national revolutionary situation and the subjective
factor and adopted many left adventurist tactics.
Here, let us take up the position taken by the then
CPI (ML) regarding mass organisations and mass
struggles.
CPI (ML) very wrongly equated annihilation
of class enemies to guerilla warfare and sought it
as the panacea of all the problems facing the
revolutionary movement. Instead of the Maoist
principle of armed struggle being the principle
form of struggle, it was formulated as the only
form of struggle to be adopted. It was wrongly
thought that the annihilation of class enemies
alone will arouse the masses and prepare them
for the armed struggle. It was viewed that the mass
movement and mass organisations are obstacles
to guerilla warfare. The painstaking work of
preparing and organizing the masses was thus
completely neglected. So, a mass line based also
on mass organisations and mass movements was
not adopted. The building of mass organisations
was almost equated with revisionism.
Communist party is a vanguard party of the
working class. But the CPI(ML) wrongly assessed
that forming trade unions in the working class
will divide them and therefore advocated against
the forming of trade unions. The revisionist
practice of the mass organisations bogged down
under reformism and economism under the
leadership of CPI and CPM may have partially
contributed to this understanding, but basically it
is alien to Leninist and Maoist understanding of
mass line and against the understanding given by
Marxist teachers, Lenin and Mao.
Even though the official line of the party
was not to form any mass organisations, it is to
the credit of the indirect encouragement of com.
Kondapally Sitaramaiah and initiative shown by
the prominent revolutionary writers of Andhra
Pradesh that Revolutionary Writers Association
was formed in 1970 itself. The history has
vindicated the stand taken in 1970 by these path
breakers. And as they say, rest is history. The
legendary JNM was also formed in 1971 itself
before even summing up the experience of the
past and the mistakes were rectified.
The document summing up the past
experiences, let us advance victoriously along the
path of the armed struggle, which is commonly
called self-critical review, reviewed among other
things, the stand taken by the CPI (ML) on the
mass organisations and mass movements.
Our Party correctly formulated that armed
struggle is the only path ofour peoples democratic
revolution as against the parliamentary path.
Butwe confused the path of armed struggle with
the forms of struggle. Asregards forms of
struggle, Chairman Mao taught us that armed
struggle is the main form of struggle and army is
the main form of organization; butother forms
23
of struggle, and other forms of organisation (mass
struggleand mass organizations) are indispensable
and should be linked directly orindirectly with the
revolutionary war. We wrongly took armed form
ofstruggle as the only form of struggle. In order
to combat the longstandingrevisionist practice of
conducting mass struggles on the lines of
economismand adopting legal and open forms of
organisation as the only form oforganisation, our
party arrived at a one-sided, and wrong
formulation thatarmed form of struggle is the
only form of struggle and the armed form
oforganisation is the only form of organisation.
Secondly, this wrongconception regarding the
form of struggle arose because we refused
torecognize the uneven economic growth and the
consequential unevendevelopment of political
consciousness in different parts of our country.
As a result of this, we rejected other forms of
struggle and organization whichare auxiliary to
armed struggle for seizure of power. From this
understandingit inevitably followed that no
conscious efforts need be made to build upmass
movements and mass organisations (illegal, semi-
legal and legal), onthe basis of agrarian
programme, corresponding to concrete
conditions ofdifferent areas and linking them with
armed struggle. In cities and workingclass belts
also, the importance of organising economic and
political strugglessuch as anti-imperialist struggles,
struggles against repression by Statepower, etc.
have been minimised.
.. organisations and womens struggles, I shall desist
theparty should consciously lead and carry
on all these struggle with the viewto make the
people realise through their own experience the
inevitability ofarmed struggle for their liberation.
If we adopt an attitude of eitherindifference or
hostility towards these struggle on the Plea of
combatingeconomism, we cannot wipe out the
bourgeoisie petty-bourgeoisie andrevisionist
influence and leadership on the masses and cannot
build theproletarian hegemony over them which
is so very vitally necessary to carry on the armed
struggle successfully.
. of eighties saw unprecedented mass struggles by
24
Along with the incorrect view point about
economic struggles, an erroneous outlook
developed in us regarding other forms of
organisationalso. Had we ever thought ofother
forms of struggle as auxiliaries to armed struggle,
other forms oforganisation also would have been
there. As we have negated other formsof struggle
in our past practice, our attitude towards other
forms oforganisation also was negative.Moreover,
we regardedmass organisation as impediments to
armed struggle. As a result we adoptedan entirely
negative approach during the past decade of
struggle towardsboth the forms of struggle and
organisation which the people are ready toaccept
according to the level of their preparedness and
consciousness,which could have easily rallied them
and facilitated their consolidation. Tothat extent
we failed to fulfil our part of the duty in
penetrating into themasses and bringing them out
of the clutches of bourgeoisie petty-
bourgeoisieand revisionist influence and
establishing: the working class hegemony
overthem.
This self-critical review paved the way for
the formation of mass organisations and
launching of mass struggles on a hitherto
unknown scale.
Here, in this paper in the present seminar, I
will not dwell much into the practice of Virasam
and JNM and literary and cultural organizations
in other states of India as well. As there is a
separate paper regarding the womens
from venturing into that as well.
I shall briefly venture into the formation of
various other mass organisations in the then united
AP and the present two Telugu states and in the
other states.
The critical evaluation regarding the role of
mass organisations, as described above, paved the
way for the formation of student, youth, peasant
and workers organisations and Telangana districts
and many districts in Andhra were engulfed by
mass upheavals. The post emergency-period and
the decade of eighties, and especially the first half
students, youth and landless agricultural workers
and peasantry and mining and industrial workers.
Certain conceptual and theoretical debates and
struggles also took place during the formation of
these mass organisations.
Students rose up in Osmania University,
Kakatiya University, Regional Engineering
College, Warangal, in Tirupati, Gunturand
Visakhapatnam in support of Naxalbari struggle.
They demonstrated against price rise in
1973,demanding the commutation of death
sentence to Bhumaiah and Kista Gowd; fought
against the communal ABVP, integrated with the
mess workers and other workers around the
university and college campuses etc. to arouse
political consciousness among them and to
organise them on their economic and other partial
demands. The stage was set for the formation of
student organization. On 12th October 1974,
PDSU and RSU were formed. In fact, students
had gathered for the first conference of PDSU,
in which the students who subsequently formed
RSU were also present. Differences cropped up
on the orientation that the student organization
had to take. The basic question was whether the
student organization had to fight only on the
student issues or the student movement should
be built as part of new democratic revolution and
support the armed struggle being waged by the
toiling masses, whether the student organisation
should give a slogan hailing the armed struggle
and if it should give a call for the boycott of the
elections or not etc. The RSU was formed
proclaiming that it would have M-L-M as its
guiding thought.
Some of these questions came up later also
as an internal debate within the EC of RSU in
1978. The leadership carried out this internal
debate within RSU and explained how most of
the above arguments would lead to economism
and keep the students away from the struggles of
the basic classes and revolutionary politics of
transformation of the whole society, only which
can address the basic issues of students like
scientific education system, unemployment etc.
This stand of the RSU paved the way for
launching numerous militant struggles on student
issues, which endeared them to the students and
it won student union elections in hundreds of
colleges and even universities. It also paved the
way for their extensive propaganda of the politics
of new democratic revolution and protracted
peoples war not only among the students but
among the masses of the bastis and villages, their
hugely successful go to the village campaigns
which served the dual purpose of spreading the
politics of NDR in the villages, understanding the
semi-feudalism better and the lives of basic toiling
masses and dalits in the villages. Radical students
not only did the propaganda work but in fact
organized many youth organisation (RYL) units
and RCS units in hundreds of villages. It is not an
exaggeration to say that it is radical students and
youthalong with Virasam and JNM and of course
under the guidance of the revolutionary party,
who sowed the seeds of agrarian revolutionary
movement in many Telangana districts and
Andhra districts. The clarion call of com. Mao to
the students during Cultural Revolution and the
call of com. Charu Mazumdar to the students to
integrate with the masses was thus implemented
in its true spirit. Thousands of students turned
into full time revolutionaries and many of the
leaders of the revolutionary movement today are
the yester year radical students.
For close to two decades, till the RSU was
banned in 1992, RSU also fought many pitched
battles against Hindu Fascist forces masquerading
as students in the form of ABVP. Hundreds of
RSU students braved all kinds of state repression
right from the days of Emergency. Thousands
were arrested, jailed for prolonged periods,
tortured and killed in fake encounters and yet that
did not dampen their spirits but only steeled them
in struggles.
Radical Youth League was formed in 1975.
RSU and RYL as well as other mass organisations
could function openly only after Emergency, as
soon after their formation Emergency was
imposed and no programmes could be taken up.
After the first conference of RYL in Guntur, RYL
also gave a call for go to village campaign. It is
25
to the credit of the militant struggles and
dedication of the RSU and RYL that the
revolutionaries throughout the seventies and the
first half of the eighties were more known as
Radicals and the Peoples War party also as
Radicals Party.In 1984, during its peak of these
annual campaigns 1100 students and youth
including 105 girls campaigned in 2410 villages
and formed 200 RYL and RCS units. In 1985,
Radicals protested against the Karamchedu Dalit
massacre in a big way and in many places
throughout the state and stood with the victims
throughout the struggle period.
The formation of RSU, RYL and the RCS
gave the mass line a new impetus. Innumerable
anti-feudal struggles launched in the Telangana
districts, especially in Karimnagar and Adilabad
districts, the historic Jagityala Jaitra Yatra etc. are
fine examples of mass line where hundreds and
thousands of people participated in all kinds of
struggles against feudal oppression and
exploitation as well as imperialist exploitation and
the exploitation of the comprador big bourgeoisie.
In Nijamabad, Warangal and other districts
RCS mobilised thousands of middle class farmers
and even rich peasantry to demand remunerative
prices for their crops like sugarcane, cotton etc.
and demanding an end to the exploitation by the
traders in the markets.
RSU has played a pivotal role in the
formation of AIRSF comprising of many
revolutionary student organisations from all over
India. APRSU, TNRSU, VPS, PSU, PVK, Punjab
Students Union were initially involved in the
formation of AIRSF.
The experience in other states:
Almost during the same time as the AP
revolutionary movement was overcoming the left
adventurist tactical line of Naxalbari period,
similar reviews were conducted by other parties
and groups in other states as well and made
corrections in tactical line. CPI(ML) Party Unity
put out its stand in its political organisational
review in 1987. Though PU upheld the general
Maoist principle about the relation between war
26
and mass struggles, which is stated earlier, it stated
that due to the objective differences between
China and India, mass movement will be the main
form of movement for a relatively long time. Even
the legal mass movement will continue to have a
role for a long time. It was also pointed out that
although the mass organisations would take both
legal and illegal forms, the direction of the mass
movement should be towards the illegal and that
should eventually be the main aspect of our mass
movement.
Armed with this understanding PU built a
very strong peasant and agricultural workers
organisation, MKSS, and carried out many a mass
struggles against the feudal exploitation and
oppression in the Magadh region of Bihar. It was
a unique experiment by one of the revolutionary
parties. Non-communists like Lohiaites and the
followers of JP were also mobilized even to lead
the mass organisation. This held out both positive
as well as negative lessons. While it led to a very
broad based mass organization, which led militant
mass struggles in tandem with armed resistance
movement, this very leadership betrayed and
sullied the movement and the revolutionary party
and split the organisation when the state
repression was launched on it and it was banned
in 1987 (This was the first organisation to be
banned officially). Though the revolutionary
forces were the true force behind the massive
organisational strength of MKSS, the leadership
was basically in the hands of non-Maoists,
especially after the murder of com. Krishna Singh,
the main revolutionary leader in the organisation,
by the goons of landlords.
Mass organisations used to have a condition.
Only those who accept M-L-M as a pre-condition
were to be given membership. PU reviewed and
removed this condition in 1981 itself for many
mass organisations like students organisations,
youth organisations, workers and peasants and
agricultural workers organisations etc. as this
would defeat the very purpose of having mass
organisations. Mass organisations will have to
enroll all those who basically accept the goal of
new democratic revolution and are ready to fight
feudalism and imperialism apart from fighting on
the partial and economic demands of those
particular section. It is the duty of those advanced
sections within these mass organisations to
identify those who are inclined to adopt M-L-M
and inculcate it among them.
It is to be noted here that mass organisations
like RSU also dropped this condition during 90s
for the same above reason and also for the reason
that it is the communist party that should have
the condition that its member should accept M-
L-M.
At the same time it should be borne in mind
that not all organisations should do away with M-
L-M. Some organisations like RWA which
basically work in the ideological sphere and in fact
propagate Marxism can have M-L-M as pre-
condition.
Another stream of revolutionaries, who
independently of CPI (ML) built armed agrarian
revolutionary movement, especially in Bihar and
Bengal, namely MCC, did not theoretically reject
the importance of mass organisations and mass
struggles from the beginning. In practice, however,
MCC was successful only in forming only peasant
organisation and womens organisation, which had
a very deep and wide mass base. Even here, the
peasant organisation was part mass organisation-
like and part revolutionary council-like.In that
sense it initially did not acquire a true mass
organisation form.
The growth of mass organisations and the
militant mass struggles led by them and the
impetus that it gave to the spread of the
revolutionary movement across many states and
in a vast area encompassing millions of people,
had naturally invited the ire of the state and it
unleashed unprecedented violence on all such
revolutionary mass organisations. As noted above,
MKSS was the first such organisation to be legally
banned, but in A.P. an undeclared ban was
implemented on RSU, RYL, RCS, JNM, SIKASA
etc. since 1985 itself. Practically no open
programme was allowed. It was the time of aata,
paata, maata bandh (Ban on performances, songs
and speeches). It was the time when these
organisations had to take a decision on the course
to be adopted. The main leadership was ready to
adopt to the newly developed situation and
therefore started functioning clandestinely. Even
while working clandestinely it adopted many
creative methods and led many struggles of the
students.It was in the forefront in leading the pro-
reservation movement when anti-reservation
movement raised its head after Muralidhar Rao
commissions recommendations about enhancing
reser vations to OBCs were sought to be
implemented by the A.P. government in 1987-88.
Not limiting itself to legal methods of functioning
and education and preparation of the cadres
regarding this from the beginning facilitated this
transition without much difficulty. It is important
for the revolutionary mass organisations to deftly
use both legal and extra-legal methods in
organising as well as building and carrying out
the struggles. Every effort has to be made, of
course, to utilize every legal opportunity and to
avoid all sorts of left adventurist thinking and
methods, which may unnecessarily curtail these
opportunities, but at the same time we have to
realize that in a semi-colonial, semi-feudal country
such as ours, where even bourgeois democracy
does not go much beyond electoral politics, the
scope for legal struggles and legal methods of
organizations is very limited and therefore one
should not entertain any illusions about it. So, the
mass organizations have to have the orientation
of combining legal and extra-legal struggles and
open and secret methods of organizing.
It is during this time of repression that radical
students started floating student organisations
with different names and with limited
geographical or sectional scope. Such organisation
came up first in Gadwal and then in agricultural
university, Rajendranagar and later in some other
places also. Though there was some skepticism
initially about such organisations, without any
declared agenda of new democratic revolution etc.
they were viewed as an experiment and were not
discouraged. Later for a brief period from 1990
to 1992, RSU again functioned openly till it was
banned in AP along with other revolutionary mass
27
organisations and Peoples War party.
During this phase of repression, open
functioning of RCS was completely disrupted.
However the revolutionary party organised small
units of RCS clandestinely in villages. This method
of functioning and the struggles carried out even
during this period, paved the way for a new wave
of land struggles during 1992-93.
This proved the close relation between the
armed struggle and mass struggles.
Relation between mass struggles and
armed struggle:
Some idealists and right opportunists do not
realise the relation between the agrarian armed
peasant struggles and the mass struggles and think
that the armed struggles bring in repression and
hence are an impediment in the path of mass
struggles.But experience shows that every advance
made in ar med strug gle helps the mass
organisations to expand and deepen their base and
to advance the mass movement further. And,
conversely, every advance in the mass movement,
particularly the political mobilization or arousal
of the masses boldly against the principal enemies
of our revolution, will contribute to the deepening
and expansion of the armed struggle. The past
experience has proved this beyond any doubt.
During Jagityala Jaitra Yatra (Victory March
of Jagityala), the historic first mass upsurge in
Telanganaafter Emergency, nearly twenty to thirty
thousand people attended it. Even the JNM
programmes used to be attended by only a few
thousand at the most. But during the period of
90-92, dozens of JNM programmes and RCS
programmeswere attended by one to two lakh
people and the conference of RCS held in
Warangal was attended by nearly ten lakh people,
even though in the interim period, neither JNM
nor the RCS could function openly. There was an
upsurge of land struggles and tens of thousands
of acres of land was occupied. All this became
possible because of the extension and
intensification of the armed struggle and the
ability of the movement to resist the state
repression and feudal oppression. Thus the armed
28
strug gle and the mass str ug gles were
complementary to each other.
In fact, this peasant upsurge gave an impetus
to the workers struggles also.
Workers Unions:
The initial stand of the CPI (ML) with regard
to the workers unions was that separate trade
unions should not be formed for the workers, as
that would further split the workers who are
already organised under the bourgeois and
revisionist trade unions. Instead the
revolutionaries were given a direction to do only
fractional work in those trade unions and thus
organise them into the revolutionary movement
and party. The same stand was retained in AP even
during 70s, unlike the stand taken with regard to
other mass organisations. But this stand was clearly
in conflict with the needs of the workers
movement. This came out sharply in Singareni.
Party organisers organised workers within the
bourgeois trade unions and revisionist unions
since 1973 itself. As everywhere else, the meetings
conducted by Virasam and JNM spread the
revolutionary politics among the Singareni
workers who had already been inspired by
Naxalbari and Srikakulam struggles. Till 1981,
workers organised by revolutionaries took up
many struggles both in the Singareni mines as well
as the bastis of the workers. Workers strikes were
called by putting up posters in the name of
Radicals.
SiKaSa
It is worthwhile to recall the 56 day strike
that led to the formation of SiKaSa. Under
leadership of the radicals KK 2 miners went on
strike on April 18, 1981 opposing a British time
Act which entailed deduction of 8-day wages for
one day strike. After a week, it spread like fire
from KK2 mines to other mines in Mandamarry
division, and after 20 days to Ramakrishnapuram
division and then after 30 days to Srirampuram
division as well.All the bourgeois and revisionist
TUs and the management, setting aside their
differences together with the loyal police force
employed several methods to water down the
strike. On the second day of the strike police fired
on the adivasi peoples meeting at Indravelli on
April 20 killing 13 people and injuring scores of
others. Mandamarry police authorities openly
warned and threatened the workers with a
repetition of the Indravelli bloody incident in
Singareni in case they did not call off the strike.
But, instead,all efforts were made tospread the
strike and reach other divisions as well.As the stir
entered 40th day a mammoth public meeting was
organised under the banner of Singareni Karmika
Samakhya (SiKaSa) in Godavarikhani with an
intention to swell the stir.The stir was started in
Godavarikhani area the next day and caught up
with other mines.
The indefinite agitationended victoriously on
the 56thdaycreating a history.
The needs of this strike brought forth the
necessity to form a separate trade union, which
was contrary to the stand of the party till that
time. It is to the credit of the leadership then,
especially of com. Nalla Adi Reddy and com.
Mallojula Koteswar Rao, who took initiative and
decided to form SiKaSa.SiKaSa was registered as
a trade union to publicly continue activities. This
was a breakthrough.
Sikasa conducted innumerable small and big
struggles in a very militant manner. Another huge
strike was conducted in 1995 in which more than
onelakh miners participated demanding
implementation of 5 th wage board
recommendations, which also ended successfully
with all the demands accepted.
Akasa
During early nineties, when an upsurge of
peasant struggles swept Telangana districts, it
inspired various sections of the working class.
RTC workers are among those. In many districts
RTC workers came in touch with the
revolutionary party and they were organised
initially separately in various bus depots etc. and
were finally organized into RTC Karmika
Samakhya - RTC Workers Federation (AKaSa,
being its Telugu acronym). This too conducted
many militant struggles in early nineties in various
districts, until many organisers were killed in fake
encounters. Though this AKaSa won the trust of
the RTC workers, it never actually developed into
a true trade union.
ViKaSa
Hyderabad is one of the biggest industrial
centres in India. The agrarian revolutionary
movement being one of the strongest in A.P., it
had positive impact on industrial workers and
other workers in the unorganized sectors as well.
Organising the workers in Hyderabad started in
1982 and took a shape by 1985. The organising
activities spread to many medium and small
industrial enterprises in Patancheru, Balanagar,
Sanat Nagar, Jeedimetla, Shaapoornagar,
Nacharam industrial areas. Revolutionary trade
union activities were going on in public sector
units like BHEL, IDPL, ECIL etc. Unions were
established among Alwyn apprentice workers,
Dairy contract labourers, FCI hamalies, sanitation
workers and press workers. But by 1986,
repression increased a lot and the workers were
terrorized. Neither the revolutionary workers
could take up struggles independently nor through
the established trade unions, as they were not
taking up any struggles. During this time, efforts
were put up to organise the workers in the
unorganized workers in small industries, as they
were functioning like feudal fiefdoms. The
managements used to engage goondas to suppress
the workers if they raised their voice even for basic
legal rights. This had to be resisted, but at the
same time the question of the ability to sustain
the organisations later was also there. Some
punitive actions were taken on some notorious
goondas and management personnel as an
ultimate resort. Some had excellent positive results
like the one on the manager of Duktron casting
company in 1989,of Ampro biscuit factory and
Vijay Electricals Company etc. which had a
positive impact not only in that company, but
throughout the industries in Hyderabad. It is not
that these punitive physical actions were taken
with impetuosity, but with careful consideration
29
of the strength of the workers as well as the
demand of all the workers, who were pushed to
the wall by the legal and labour laws and nothing
was materializingand without those actions, there
was no way that the workers struggles there could
move forward.
There were struggles in Amber and other
biscuit factories and the union was effectively in
the hands of the revolutionary workers and
leaders. Similarly in Kankaria Company, Crystals
and Eggfoods old trade union leadership made
way for the new revolutionary workers. In some
companies like Sarathi Engineering works, Solvex
graphite, Abhin laboratories etc. new trade unions
were formed and many issues of the workers were
solved. In companies like Satya Distilleries,
Chandra Tobacco, Shalimar water Development
works, Kakateeya Karshak, Golconda Surana and
Kiran also workers fought under the new
leadership and won bonus and other benefits and
rights. In MMT, MTAR, Sree Shakti, Sidhaartha,
AVU, Pankaj and Inter Food companies also,
struggles were conducted.In 1991, workers
collected a fund of Rs.60,000 and conducted a
public meeting with 10,000 workers.Attempts
were made to unify various trade unions of
different factoriesunder a single banner and
conduct struggles on common issues. An attempt
was also made to form ViKaSa (Revolutionary
Workers Federation), to propagate revolutionary
politics among workers. But it could not get much
momentum before the city workers movement
suffered heavy losses.
By 1994, egged on and even bribed by the
company managements, the state intelligence
agencies and the police could hunt down the main
underground organisers and even the open trade
union leadership. While most of the organisers
were killed in fake encounters, trade union
leadership was arrested, threatened with encounter
killings etc. and by the mid-nineties, work in the
industrial areas almost came to a naught.
Employees Unions:
Many efforts were made to organize both
state government employees and the central
government employees. There were fairly
30
successful P & T Employees Union, teachers
union, NGOs union etc. There were some active
unions among railway workers and dockyard
workers in Visakhapatnam etc. But there were no
concerted efforts to sustain them with long term
perspective.
One of the main criticisms about the Maoist
party by some of the naxal groups and parties
and well intentioned intellectuals is that it has not
given due importance to mass organisations and
mass movements. The criticism is especially shrill
against it for not building any workers
organisations and workers struggles. It is only
partially from true. As we have shown above, by
far it is these revolutionary politics that have built
most successful employees unions as well as
workers unions, the shortfalls notwithstanding.
The other groups and parties do not have even
this much of positive experience form which one
can genuinely learn. This does not at all mean that
this experience does not suffer from serious
shortcomings.
Different kinds of mass organisations and
united fronts:
During 90s a different kind of review was
done on the kind of mass organisations to be built
and their perspective. Most of the mass
organisations that were hitherto built were almost
directly propagating the politics of the
revolutionary party, like armed revolution,
boycotting of elections and having MLM as a
precondition to become a member etc. Though
this resulted in the extension of the revolutionary
movement, certain limitations were also realized
with these kind of organizations.
To mobilize all the sections of the masses
which were ready to get organized more readily
into broad anti-feudal and anti-imperialist
struggles and many other forms of struggle
certain of the above conditions were proving to
be impediments. At the same time many new
sections which were getting affected by the so
called neo-liberal policies of Liberalization had
the potential to be organized into broad anti-
imperialist forums. Many oppressed sections were
getting ready to fight for their rights based on their
identity and not on the basis of class. Nevertheless
these also broadly have anti-feudal and anti-state
character and these could and should not be left
to be led by petti-bourgeois or bourgeois
reactionary ideology but have to be channelized
into revolutionary stream. The realization to fight
the scourge of caste by forming organizations to
fight exclusively on this issue and also to fight
majoritarian communal fascist forces etc.
warranted a review on the stand hitherto taken
about mass organizations. Last, but not least, the
banning of many organizations which were
directly propagating revolutionary politics also
necessitated this.
Therefore, apart from such mass
organizations which directly propagate partys
revolutionary line a need is there for organisations
which remain open or semi-open and propagate
the politics of new democratic revolution and
prepare the masses for armed struggle by utilizing
the available legal opportunities to the fullest
possible extent.
Doing fractional work in the already existing
various mass organisations is another method.
Many broad based organisations also can be
and should be formed that may have limited
agenda and may work only on a limited
programme.
Extreme state repression may also warrant
these organisations.Even under normal conditions
also, these may be needed to mobilize broad
sections of people. The scope of such
organisations is very wide, extending to the broad
coalitions and alliances formed to fight on the
question of caste, against repression, globalisation,
Hindutva forces and right up to the all-
encompassing bodies formed with the banners
of anti-capitalism or peoples struggles.
The Growing need and importance of
United Fronts:
Since the early nineties, when the duo of PV
Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh started
implementing the Liberalization,Privatization and
Globalisation policies at the behest of the
imperialist financial institutions newer and newer
sections of people got affected and the need to
organise these sections broadly into anti-
imperialist for ums arose. Displacement,
environmental issues, encroachment of Forests,
job cuts due to privatization etc. are forcing new
sections of people to struggle. Broad based united
fronts like Rytu Seva Samiti in Warangal, Jala
Sadhana Samithi in Nalgonda etc. also came up
during this period which fought on wider issues
mobilising even middle and rich peasants on the
issues of remunerative prices, irrigation water etc.
In Bihar and Punjab also general democratic
organisations came up on a broad basis to build
united struggles on these issues. All India
organisations like AIPRF, SFPR, FAIG etc. came
up to build struggles on an all-India basis.Many
struggles emerged as in Nandigram, Singur,
Kalinga Nagar, Niyamgiri, Surajgarh,
Kudankulam etc.A new section of liberals are
coming out opposing state sponsored vigilante
groups like Salwa Judum and state repression like
Operation Green Hunt. At present, with the
increasing saffronization and the strengthening of
the Brahminical Hindu fascist forces and their
acquiring of the state power, there is an increasing
alienation and insecurity among religious
minorities and especially the Muslims and
Christians. The attacks on Dalits, especially on
those who are asserting their rights is on the
increase. The rising consciousness among Dalits
and other backward classes and Adivasis, especially
among the emerging middle classes among them
has brought them into confrontation with the
authoritarian feudal forces and the saffron forces.
So, they are hitting the roads. All this comes with
its own challenges, opportunities and
responsibilities and the revolutionaries have to rise
to the occasion and form as broad based united
fronts as possible. Some fronts have already
emerged. But they are beset with many problems
in emerging as broad based mass united fronts.
The challenge to overcome is there.
As these aspects are likely to be covered in
another paper in the seminar, I will desist from
going into much details.
31
Shortcomings and challenges before the
mass organisations:
We can see that the mass organisations suffer
from the following main shortcomings.
Though a clear stand was taken to form
different mass organisations to organise
different sections of people in their
respective fields as early as 1970s, a decision
was not taken to for m a womens
organisation till as late as 1982 and it took
some more time to actually implement it.
However, once this need was appreciated and
womens organisations were formed and
perspective on womens issue was evolved,
there have been very good results.
It took still longer time for the party to
appreciate the need for forming separate
organisations to fight the issue of caste, the
scourge of Indian society and one of the
main obstacles in achieving working class
unity. Though efforts have been made in this
field, there are certain gaps and challenges
confronting the revolutionary movement in
this field, which the party and the respective
mass organisations have to overcome.
When we come to building workers trade
unions and employees unions and their
movements, even the party has not been able
to sufficiently specialize.
All the mass organisations,except perhaps
KAMS and DAKMS in Dandakaranya, never
followed proper membership methods.
None of the organisations could properly
tell the number of their members. Though
for malism is to be avoided, mass
organisations have to adopt formal methods
too if they have to function properly like
mass organisations and proper democratic
functioning method is to be followed.
Almost all the mass organisations not only
organised people in their respective fields
adopting a mass line, they propagated
revolutionary politics extensively and helped
the spread of revolutionary movement far
and wide, but they sometimes did not
function with a long term perspective
32
keeping in mind the nature of the Indian
state and the protracted nature of the Indian
revolution. This can be especially said about
the workers movement. The tactics adopted,
did not even reflect the correct
understanding, to whatever extent that may
be there. For e. Many trade unions with two,
three or even more years of painstaking
clandestine efforts would invite known and
identified revolutionary intellectuals or JNM
for some open programme of theirs and all
the efforts of yesteryears would go waste.
This is the result of not appreciating the long
term perspective of the workers movement
and only reflect revolutionary impetuosity.
The same thing applies to many cover
organisations also. Perhaps the fear of getting
bog ged down in economism and the
revisionist ways plays its part in such
impetuous attemptsto impart revolutionary
politics to the workers movement by
adopting methods such as above.
It is true that utmost care has to be taken
not to be bogged down in economism in the
name of long term perspective, but creative
methods have to be adopted to propagate
revolutionary politics. A proper perspective
should be developed for the workers
organisations on the ways to propagate
revolutionary politics. Otherwise they will
not survive.
Almost all the mass organisations have
suffered from the wrong practice of not
consolidating the gains organizationally and
strengthen their organisations when they
were able to extensively build struggles.
Even open trade unions and other mass
organisations have to have semi-legal and
secret functioning methods. Otherwise, they
cannot withstand the repression. Ignoring
this principle has been the bane of mass
organisations. In these days of technological
surveillance this is truer than ever.
While adopting some militant forms of
struggle also, the mass organisation
leadership and even the party committee
 leadership have sometimes ignored the
strength of the state and lost the long term
perspective for the short term gains of the
success of the struggle. Mass line was not
adhered to on such occasions. It is relatively
easier to implement mass line when the
movement is on the upswing and/or when
there are legal opportunities. But it is
necessary to adhere to it when there is
repression and the going is hard. Only
adhering to mass line will help us regain the
lost space. In Dandakaranya, the party,
peoples ar my as well as the mass
organisations are far far better in adhering
to mass line even in times of Salwa Judum
and Green Hunt.
Another aspect that the mass organisation
leaderships have to appreciate and acquire
skills, especially when forming united fronts
on various issues and organising struggles
and conducting programmes through such
fronts, is to have a proper balance of unity
and struggle. There are many occasions when
we failed to appreciate the need for unity and
the emphasis was more on putting forth our
demands and our stand and taking up such
forms of struggle for which the other
participants in the unite front were not ready
to adopt. Sectarianist approach in had on
more than one occasion harmed the unite
activity. At some other times, we lost initiative
forgetting that unity is not the sole purpose
if others in the united front are deviating
from the common goals.
Though theoretically, the need and
importance of the four class alliance is
appreciated, it is not put into practice on a
wider scale. For eg. when the workers of
Singareni mines or other workers were on
strike, peasant organizations could have
rallied in support of the workers which
would have fortified worker-peasant unity.
Such other measures have also should be
taken up.
The core communist leadership within the
mass organisations has to understand all the
dynamics of the protracted peoples war and
what is exactly required of them to do in
their respective fields. We see a dearth of this
appreciation and it is wrongly left only to
those involved in the armed struggle.
It is the bounden duty of the core communist
leadership of the mass organisations to
propagate and implement the party line in
their respective organisations. Sometimes we
are witnessing a shortcoming in this regard
especially in some organisations formed on
specific issues, when the leadership is giving
more emphasis on their sectional stand or
problems and not on the partys stand on
the question.
At the same time there is also another
deviation of bluntly propagating party stand or
party politics without giving due consideration to
the political needs and long term perspective of
their own organisations. The skill to adhere to the
party stand and at the same time taking that stand
creatively to the masses has to be acquired. This
does not at all mean that the mass organisation
should not give a feed back to the party on its
stand or conduct a political struggle, even if it
differs from the stand of the party. But as long as
the party has a stand on the issue, it has to be
adhered to, even while conducting an internal
struggle. Some are falling short in taking this
correct stand which harms the revolution.
These challenges and shortcomings have to
be overcome.It is easier said than done, but we
have to appreciate the need for it and acquire those
skills if we want to build mass movements keeping
in mind long-term perspective.
33
 Re-feudalisation :
Need for Concrete Analysis of Specific Conditions
To understand the totality of these social
relations which strengthen the backward
superstructure, which in turn modifies the base
relation, one needs a live study of the society in
motion - Prof. R.S. Rao in a note titled In An
Attempt To Communicate
Introduction
The left movement in India saw a significant
departure from its previous history in the late
sixties by way of a new analysis of the society.
Itpresented an alternative conceptual framework
for defining the stage of revolution, class
alignments, political line and strategy. This new
formulation, ofunderstanding the class character
of the Indian State as semi feudal, semi colonial,
was the basis of the Naxalbari-Srikakulam
struggle, fifty years ago.However it didnt take very
long for this Naxalite analysis to becomea bone
of contention among social scientists,
academicians, economists, political analysts,
researchers, a large section of the intelligentsia,
engaged media, activists of various hues, the
established left political parties, some international
political scientists, and even within the very fold
of the political stream that gave birth to it. The
debate commenced within a short while of the
Naxalbari-Srikakulam movement, gaining
momentum in the early seventies itself and to this
day schools of thoughtcontend whether India is
a capitalist state or continues to besemi feudal,
semi colonial in character.The debate not only
puts at centre stage the question of the stage and
strategy of the struggle, but also what should be
the development path for Indian society national
indigenous or an internationally assimilated one.
34
- Pankajdutt
The CPI(ML) representing the Naxalite
movement, proposed the stage of revolution as
New Democratic in the context of its analysis of
the Indian society being semi feudal, semi colonial
in character. That the society had not transformed
into a capitalist one due to the interruption caused
by British imperialism, and that post-
independence the neo-colonial character of the
society continuedthereby restricting Indian
economy to its arrested and imperially
dependentform, defined this partysprogramme
and development path for the society as one that
required completion of the unfinished democratic
tasks at the level of both, the economy and culture.
It identified feudalism and imperialism as the two
interdependent forces that were keeping the
society backward and decadent; that the removal
of these twin forces was fundamental for the
societys development and progress, alongthe
historical path.Accordingly an anti- feudal, anti-
imperialist struggle defined theNew Democratic
stage of the revolution. And that this would be
the interim stage, prior to undertaking socialist
transformation. Agrarian overhaul was identified
as the pivot in the New Democratic programme
wherein the anti-feudal struggle would be the
fulcrum of democratic change, best represented
by the call Land to the Tiller. This would
inherently and effectivelyundermine imperialism,
as feudalism was its social base. Programmatically
the party therefore defined both, the anti- feudal
and the anti- imperialist aspects of the strategy
that needed to be conducted by the
movement.The revolutionary stage was New
Democratic because the leadership would now be
in the hands of the worker-peasant alliance, under
the guidance of the party, for completing the
unfinished democratic tasks. Thebourgeoisie,
characterised as comprador, was seen as
compromised,ineffective and disinterested in
completing the unfinished democratic tasks due
to its imperialist alignment; it was described as
incapable of providing leadership in this post-
colonial situation, unlike how that class had led
in the classical bourgeois democratic revolutions
of England, France, Germany and elsewhere.
The debate on the mode of production
began in the early seventies with participants
ranging from academicians to political activists,
opining on the topic in multiple waysspanning
presentations, analytical papers, research studies,
conceptual formulations, political analysis and
through reports of practice as well. From Pradhan
H. Prasad to RanjitSau, to UtsaPatnaik, to Amiya
Bagchi, to Arvind Das,to many more, the debate
raged in seminars andas propaganda, written
about in newspapers, analysed in economic,
political and social sciencejournals and
magazines,articulated at public meetings, et al.
Even to the extent that factions that broke away
from the CPI(ML) party, continued the debate in
its varied nuances impacting political lines and
programmes for revolutionary action. This debate
however never died and continues as a bone of
contention to this day,not only amongst
economists, social scientists, political activists and
left parties, but also bears witness to
officialspokespersons, planners and organs of the
State engaging with opinions, formulations and
strategies, promoting an international
developmental model for Indias growth, in
opposition to the New Democratic path of
national indigenous development. At ground level
the State has laid down a sharp line of delineation
between its plansfor societys growth, versus the
fifty years of continuing left movementand its
practice. Swordsare literally drawn against each
other, with the State deploying military forces in
the movement areas.
What are the essential components of the
debate and how should the scientific
analystconceptualise the frame of reference for
understanding change in society? This note takes
two domainsof government initiative deployed
over the years one, internationally assimilated
development projectsmeant to provide modernity
and bring market based momentumin society; and
two, a set of corrective actionformulations
addressed at ameliorating the endemic problems
of a crisis ridden agrarian sector -andbriefly
discussestheir impact in the form of economic
and extra-economic forces that get generated in
the process, whilecontextualising it within the
dynamics of a society in motion.
The noteconsiders some media reported
projects, andagrarian sector aimed formulationsat
a high level; it tentatively sketches a construct
within this narrative in which the debate could
possibly be discussed for further studies and
enrichment. Theagro initiativestouched upon
Agricultural loans and waivers, Crop Insurance,
National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme
(NREGA), Minimum Support Price(MSP) -
representanacknowledgement ofthe
concernabout the crisis within the agrarian sector.
Additionally, and directly addressing land owners
in the context of developmental projectsfor
facilitating a modern capitalist path of growth, is
the impact of the Land Acquisition process. In
the wake of this discussion it is hoped that some
added light will be thrown on the choice between
the two contending development models the
international assimilated one and the national
indigenous path.
Part I
Some recent reportsreveal dimensions of
hope and despair that emanate from growth
projects initiated. Within the national capital
region two stories unfold in the wake of projects
proposed in the past,as well as in the current. And
the period of reporting in mainline dailies span
just two months - June and July 2017.
Present :
The announcement of a new international
airport to be built in Jewar in Greater Noida region
was headlined in June 2017 as Noidas growth
35
to take a new flight path, Booster shot for
troubled realty biz and Farmers: Will give land
if price is good. The airport is seen as a growth
driver for travel, tourism, retail, manufacturing,
realty, exports, local employment and more.
Infrastructure build up around the airport would
require metro projects and other complimentary
feeder transport systems as well. This is the
discourse of industry led urban modernisation
projects that represent growth and development
and purportedly capitalist in nature. In the
development-displacement-reintegration debate
this is what people from some walks of life had
to say, in hope, as publishedbytheleading English
dailies:
The airport will be growth driver not only
for NCR but also Western UP.. It is likely
to become a booming aerotropolis with multi
modal logistics, industrial, commercial, and
tourism facilities in close vicinity . In the
years to come, it could become a hub airport
for one of Indias major airlines
- CEO, Yamuna Expressway Industrial
Development Authority, Shri Arunvir Singh
We are expecting a great push to the existing
inventory as well as forthcoming projects in
the region. There is speculation that property
prices will go up once the project takes off
- President CREDAI ( NCR ), Shri Manoj
Gaur
There are no jobs here. There is no industry.
If the airport comes up, at least people like
me will get job opportunities
- 19 year old Ankit, college going student
Since the new airport will provide seamless
domestic and international connectivity, it
will be good for air passengers
- Sunny Bansal, entrepreneur
We are not opposed to acquisition of our
land by the government. But we want
adequate compensation
- 75 year old Vijay Shankar Sharma of
Neemka
Most of us have small holdings, just
between five and 15 bighas. Most are poor
farmers, who cannot make two ends meetand
36
are under severe debt, owing money to
farmers with larger land lots. Every harvest
pushes us deeper into debt. For us, it will be
a boon to have an airport here
- Ajay Singh, farmer
Notably the interests of larger, wealthier land
owners and their perspective on surrendering land
for the project, landless peasants who are
dependent on land for their livelihood,share
croppers, tenant cultivators and the variety of
agro-linked artisans, craftspeople and traders
integralto the land based system, were not part
of the narrative. The articles were focused on
reflecting the hopes built intothe growth project.
It would appear that compensation, employment
and business opportunities, as a universal benefit,
were powerful in themselves for promoting the
growth story, in one form or the other, for all in
the milieu to avail.
Past:
Almost simultaneously in July 2017 reports
emerged of agitation being conducted by
erstwhile cultivators of villages Harsar u,
GadoliKhurd, Khandsa, Mohammadpur and
Narsinghpur in the Gurgaon area, demanding
return of land acquired by the government 14
years ago. This is the case of despair from a similar
urban project initiated in the past.
While land was acquired in 2003 at a
compensatory rate of Rs12.5 lacs/acre by the
government, it was transferred to Reliance in 2006
for an SEZ project that they subsequently
withdrew from. In 2007 the farmers protested
against the land being given to a private firm.They
protested, with a major demonstration in Gadoli
where 150 villagers including women and children,
were jailed. The villagers felt cheated because they
felt that the land had been given at a very low
price while the government had invoked the
public purpose clause under the old land law (a
clause used for public infrastructure projects).
Several court battles later the compensatory
amount was revised upwards by four folds.
Reliance backed out from its proposed project in
2014.
 But what of the people in this period of 14
odd years? The governments land acquisition
policy mandates a social impact survey and
measures to ensure livelihood and food safety in
the area. Of the 1590 acres acquired, owners of
206 acres refused compensation. The villagers
discontent also stems from the fact that they have
been running from pillar to post for enhancement
and timely disbursal of compensation. They have
filed 80 cases and petitions in the District, High
and Supreme courts. Meanwhile the government
has proposed a Global City project on this land
which will be a commercial cum residential
enterprise; a far cry from an SEZ which was slated
to generate a good employment potential. The
peasants are demanding negotiation for a new set
of terms now. Their primary demand, however,
is that the land be returned to them as it has been
lying idle for over a decade and they cite the
Supreme Courts order on West Bengals Singur
case to return land, originally acquired for the
Nano factory, despite compensation being paid.
The Singurland owners were allowed to keep the
compensation given to them in lieu of their land,
because they were deprived of a source of income
for a decade. This is what some of the affected
from the five villages in the Gurgaon region had
to say :
I lost all my land to acquisition. Now my
three sons work as labourers to meet our daily
needs. The government did not even give us
jobs in exchange for our land which they had
promised
- Mukhtiyar Singh
This land has been left unattended for over
a decade. If the government had just left it
with us, imagine the amount of crops that
we would have produced in these many
years
- Satbir
This land has been left unused for 14 years,
which not only has cost the region, but also
the state government. The new land
acquisition law says if land has not been
utilised for more than five years it must be
returned to farmers
- Nathu Singh, former Sarpanch of
Mohammadpur
They didnt just take our land, they took
away our livelihood. Now the youth in these
five villages is falling prey to addiction and is
turning to crime to make some money
- Balwant Singh
The land owners employed multiple people
and generated jobs for barbers, labourers,
cattle herders, ironsmiths etc. All these jobs
went away with our lands.
- Ramesh Kumar, Gadoli, who lost two acres
According to the villagers, when they
cultivated the land they provided for at least 10
families other than their own, by employing farm
labourers. Mukhtiyar Singh sums up thus The
condition of these villages is a lesson for the
government to understand the consequences of
unplanned acquisitions and the fact that villages
are much in need of infrastructural development
as the cities. Collectively they argue that that
they would not be protesting and asking for their
land back if the government had created enough
infrastructure and employment opportunities for
the villages.
Unfortunately, in such reportings and articles
written, the voice of landless peasants, share
croppers, tenant cultivators, artisans, craftspeople,
petty agro traders and similar marginalised
sections, remain unheard.
The Presentversus the Past, or is it a continuum?
On the face of it projects such as these, raise
hopes in people of participating in and partaking
of the modern development process and progress,
but over time, a different and often a distorted
and dismal picture emerges. In formulation and
initial implementation it appears as economic
driven and therefore a part of the capitalist
process. The end result however can well be
vulgar, presentingthe face of distress and
indebtedness; and finally the helpless dependence
on extra-economic coercive factors, including
crime, that provide people a dubious and
precarious way to live; while some may even face
a life ofdestitution.
Just by these two contrasting examples, can
37
one hesitate to ask whether the internationally
assimilated path of development suffer from a
conundrum? Of conceiving development projects
in a modern frame, but in practice lacking
ininherent logic and integrity of capitalist
processes and expanded economic reflections,
given the societys historical complexities and a
powerful traditional culture?Very often failure,as
seen in the distress of the affected people, get
ascribedtopoor project conception, administrative
weakness, corruption, fund over r uns,
bureaucratic systems, unforeseen implementation
hurdles, technology insufficiencies and technical
glitches, and so on.Even if a project is initiated
for implementation as conceived, the very
character of projects,many a time, does not
incorporateand offer a holistic and practical model
with means toreintegrate, for the displaced. The
success and failure can well be summed up by
paraphrasing an insightful observation by Dr.M.
Bharathi in her paper Tribal Womens Perspective
on the Land Acquisition Bill. She states that
development and displacement are two sides of
the coin wherein from surplus generating people
in their native system, they become surplus people
in the new system.She goes on to say that as more
and more capital gets investedthrough projects,
more surplus people get generated. And as any
social scientist will know, surplus people
expectedly fall out of the purview of economic
systems and relations. Such peoplebecomeeasy
fodder, reinforcing pre-capitalist forms of
existence within an economy that is unable to
answer issues on re-integration.
The two foregoing projects that reflect hope
and despair may be considered as a little peephole
that shows the magnitude of a reality that needs
to be checked for its veracity, comprehended and
analysed critically and urgently. Therefore how
such developmental initiatives pan out, inall
practicality for the people, is a matter of specific
and necessary investigation.
Investigations in this sphere can be
predicated on generalised, theoretical principles.
Butonly conceptually derived, specific and
detailedstudieswill reveal and describe how new
38
forms of existence manifest for the people in the
wake of such projects. What categories of people
get displaced? How does proposed re-integration
actually turn out? What character of re-integration
gets ser ved to specific sets of people
displaced?What types of new relations, exchanges
and transactions in the long term, intermediate,
and the immediate, get generated? What impact
do such factors have in concrete terms? How does
compensation translate for different sets of
people, post displacement? What programmes
defined within the project for various affected
segments,get implemented, practically? Which
results canbe deemed a success, or a failure or a
distortionas perceived by those initiating and
implementing projects, and separately by the
intended beneficiaries? Which new types of power
centresand coercive forms get established in the
daily lives ofvarious affected people? Who offer
loans and informal support and what leverage do
they exercise in return?What are the dynamics of
such new relations? How do they practically
operate? What new cultural forms develop in the
wake of all this? How does the body politic
respond to this new scenario? Does migration take
place? What is the character of linkages that
remain?
A multitude of questions need to be
specifically answered, in its varied nuances and in
great minuteness,by studies. Perceiving and
characterising frozen moments will be anathema
to the scientific method of investigation if one
wishes to generate a dynamic understanding of
the socio-economic impact of such projects.
These need to be specificallyinvestigated as a live
study of a society in motion.It therefore becomes
imperative for the social activist and researcher
to evaluate urban and rural based projects and
the impact they have on the lives of the people.
The study of such projects - whether implemented
as conceived, or modified in the implementation
process,established in urban areas, such as SEZ,
industrial centresandprivate projects, or in rural
areas such as dams, mining, power or timber based
projects - willprovide individual and unique
stories; storiesthat will throw light on whether the
results can be categorised as overall economic in
character, reflecting aconsistent and expanded
capitalist path of development, providing a
genuinely alternative set of new liberated and
democratic social relations for people, pulling
them out of the morass of a decadent system.
Or,as those that get modified over time and slide
intoextra-economic practices and existence,
reflecting a derailment into new forms of pre-
capitalist coercive living. As the title of this note
suggests, onlyconcrete study and analysis of
specific conditions, in the context of a society in
motion, will reveal the true character of changes
that actually take place, over time.
Part II
The gamut of agrarian programmes such as
cultivator loans, crop insurance, loan
waivers,NREGAand MSP on the one hand, and
distressed living, marginalisation and even the
scourge of suicides, on the other, is a repetitively
intertwined story, intrinsic to agrarian India. The
situation is studied with facts and figures,and
constantly analysed at macro levels by planners,
official agencies and fora, economists,social
scientists and now increasingly joined by
criticalresearchers within media,for improving
programme constructs, implementation strategies,
deployment structures,targets and even policies,
with the hope of plugging gaps and loopholes
somehow, to achieve better results in future and
present a more hopeful and progressive
scenarioof economic efficiency and growth. 70
years, however,have proved a challenge to these
efforts.A weakly structured look at some facts and
figures, more as indication than one of exactitude,
could perhaps create a backdrop for taking this
discussion a little further. Let us begin with Vishwa
Mohans article (Times Nationsection) titled Crop
insurance gave farmers little relief .
Successive governments have come out
with various schemes to cover farmers against
crop loss during disaster or extreme weather
events, but the relief for farmers remains patchy.
He refers to reports by CAG and a private think
tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE),
both of which speak of severe challenges to the
crop insurance programme. He states that CSEs
findings of the previous crop insurance
programmes - National Agricultural Insurance
Scheme, subsequently styled as MNAIS, and
Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS)
spanning the period 1985 to 2015 showed them
as flawed and cause of major concern. He further
goes on to write The CAG has slammed the
poor implementation of crop insurance schemes
in 2011-2016, saying funds to the tune of over
Rs3,622 crores were released to private insurers
without verification. While the CAG in its
report, tabled in Parliament, also figured out how
(the two schemes) had failed on various counts
during 1985-2015 period.CSE analysed the
ground situation on implementation of the
NarendraModi governments ambitious PMFBY
(Pradhan MantriFasalBimaYogana) and noted
several loopholes Based on its field study (of
farmers) in Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Uttar
Pradesh.insurance companies and government
departments, the CSE noted that the PMFBY
mainly remains a scheme for loanee farmers it
means farmer who take loans from banks are
mandatorily required to take insurance. Like
previous crop insurance schemes, the PMFBY
fails to cover share-croppers and tenant
farmerseven the CAG pointed out this flaw of
previous schemes. The PMFBY. At the state
level, its vision is diluted and at the district level,
its implementation is seriously compromised.
While mentioning share-croppers and tenant
farmers as not being covered by the crop insurance
schemes, it needs to be noted that Vishwa Mohan
doesnot acknowledge, as extended consideration,
landless labour who are the poorest of the poor,
and variousagro-artisans, craftspeople and related
agents, integral to the landed system, who play a
significant role in the crop production and
accompanying processes. While technically,
insurance schemes may not, in formulation, be
obliged to considerthese agrarian segments, it begs
the question of holistically addressingthe land
system and the entire process of crop production
and its related activities. After all it is about the
39
plight of human beings who arepart of one
system; and that these unconsidered
peoplefaceconsequences without any safety net!
Or then policy integration may argue that
NREGA is designed to answer just that; another
initiative in the basket of agrarian solutions, which
is supposed to provide succour to the poorest
sections, for at least 100 days in a financial year!
But let us go a step further with facts and
figures on crop insurance.
Subodh Varma writes Continuing suicides
and intermittent protests by farmers across the
country prompted the Supreme Courtto ask
why the much publicised (PMBFY) had not
provided relief to hapless farmers. While the
government said that it is the first year and they
are ironing out the problems, a look at the details
of this first years implementation throws up more
systemic issues.
Year 2016, single Kharif season
Total premium collected by insurance
companies for providing cover for crop
Rs9081.8 crore
Number of farmers covered 2.5 crore
Contribution from central government
Rs3708.7 crore
Contribution from state governments
RsRs3729.9 crore
Contribution from farmers Rs1643.3 crore
Claims received for the season Rs2725.2
crore
Claims paid till March 2017 Rs638.5 crore
Number of benefitted farmers 32.7 lacs
Subodh Varma deems it significant to
highlight the earningby insurance companies, in
a single season, by way of total premium received
versus claims, under the much touted PMBFY
scheme, even considering that the entire claim
amount wouldbe paid, finally. Professor Gopal
Naik of IIM Bangalore and Board Member of
the public sector Agriculture Insurance Company
(AIC) says It is unfair to farmers to delay
insurance payments as has happened in this case.
Even six months after Kharif season 2016 ended
the insurance claim settled are less than a quarter
of the total claims made. After a crop loss takes
40
place anything beyond a month to receive claims
is a long time for farmersto wait. However, in
the same breath he offers the following causes
such as long time taken in assessment of crop
losses, delay in payment of subsidies by state
governments, deficient IT structure of insurance
companies and absence of good agricultural data
as the main reasons for delays. Which of the two
aspects of crop insurance he rues most, is open
to conjecture.
What is of real interest ishis key analysisof
the situation as a professor belonging to a leading
management institute,which is moot in the context
of this discussion. Hestates his belief in free play
of market forces and the resultant corrective
balances that would expectedly occur in any
efficiently driven market economy, as the means
to making such schemes workable and reasonable
in application; in other words a capitalist process-
driven economy would solve such anomalies in
the lives of peasants. He is quoted as agreed
that there was an imbalance in the payout.He
attributed this to high premium rates which in
turn are because there is lack of ground level data.
Competition created under the PMFBY should
over a time address this problem. Setting proper
data systems on land ownership, crop area data
and good crop assessment system will facilitate
competition in the market place and bring down
the premium rate. What of the woes of
cultivators, while competition in the market place
supposedlycorrectsthese problems over time?
Should theyremain a sad tale?Asserting some
indicative aspects of the scheme that would self-
correct in a competitive market based play, appears
a shallowapproach to understanding systemic
issues, given the schemes commencement and
continued failure since 1985!
A report by Amit Anand Choudharystates
that A day after questioning the Centres PMFBY
for not being able to address agrarian crisis in the
country, the Supreme Court saidit was the
responsibility of governments to ensure that
farmers distressed by crop failures didnt commit
suicidea bench said that the onus (and duty)
was on the governments to take preventive steps
. to ensure that such incidents (do) not happen.
The policy for welfare of farmers must be
implemented at the ground levelthe approach
should be preventive rather than
compensatory. The orientation to addressing the
agrarian situation gets abject, with anundertone
ofinsurmountability, and even condescension, as
the report unfolds. In response to Tamil Nadus
Additional Solicitor Generals statement to the
court that the government was taking all
necessary steps to rescue farmers and that the
Centre (was) sharing financial burden (in the)
FasalBimaYojana intended to protect
farmers(and that) RBI had also instructed banks
to help farmers by granting loan to them, the
court said We do not know about insurance
business but prudence and common sense says
that premium for crop insurance should not be
commercial oriented. How would poor farmers
pay the premium? A Tamil Nadu based NGO
petitioner contended that farmers were being
harassed by banks for default in paying back the
loan forcing them to commit suicide. The court
directed the state government to refrain financial
institutions from taking coercive steps for
recovering farmer defaults. This has to stop. No
coercive step should be taken in violation of the
procedure. They are poor and illiterate people and
they must be protected.
It is not intended here to question or
challenge thebona fidesofthe courts observations
which has notably placed the rider of coercive
steps in violation of procedure while
admonishing financial institutions on recovering
loan.Such observationsdo express a concern at
the inadequate and ill-for med nature of
administrative programmatic response. In fact
they bring to focus, in a larger perspective, that
the State system cannot abdicate from its
responsibility of bringing fundamental, structural
changes in the system, which programme alone
can empowerpoorer and vast sections of the
peasantryto take control of, and socio-economic
responsibility for their own cultivating life. And
not remain mute spectators and helpless recipients
of stop gap, limited, at times ill-conceived and
reactive initiatives.
This note looks to bring to the attention of
those concerned, in the context of the debate,the
need for enquiry into the impact various kinds of
initiatives have on the propensity to transformthe
old land based systemsand accompanying social
relations into progressive, democratic, and new
economic forms of life. Initiatives that address
and bring structuralchanges within the agrarian
economy, in areas such as land distribution to the
landless, rationalising land holding patterns
andimplementing appropriate cap on land
holding, relationship between cultivating peasants
with non-cultivator land owners,
addressinggenerational indebtedness, issues of
bonded existence, tenancy farming and share
cropping, hierarchy in social strata affecting
economic activities, cropping patterns, increased
commodification, marketable surplus orientation
and greater integration into market economy,
together with for mation of appropriate
institutional structures, infrastructure, and
adoption of technologies of production that
balance displacement and re-integration within the
production system.
The crop insurancescheme as one of the key
initiatives till now,appears to have come a cropper.
Only detailed and specific studies at the ground
level will reveal the true change impact and
ensuing aftermath of such initiatives on the
realities of peasant life.Therefore arigorous probe
into facts and figures with qualitative studies
beyond what has been presented at a high level
here, will throw up hidden dimensions of life for
the cultivating masses. There is need to understand
decentralised realities down to the village level. It
is imperative to understand the actual functioning
and analyse both, success and failuresaspects of
such schemes. More importantly,to understand
what exactly transpires in the lives of each
category of participating peasants. How economic
or extra-economic in concrete terms do their lives
become under different circumstances - crop
success, crop failure, claims paid, claims unpaid?
Do some fail to apply for claim despite crop
failures and under what circumstances? The
41
Scheme prohibits share-croppers and tenants
from being party to the scheme, but in reality do
non-cultivating farmers influence and get the
schemes benefit extendedin their favour as a
means to underwrite failures? How is crop failure
defined and denoted for purposes of claim? What
are the objective and independent verification
systems in place to denote eligibility for claim?
Are there instances of multiple claims by a
cultivator? How many categories of cultivators
participate in the insurance scheme and what are
the criteria for such categorisation? What criteria
of eligibility define the prerequisite for deploying
the scheme? What verification processes are
deployedby the scheme? What crop changes
occur, tracked over a period of time and
considering the emergence of new conditions, for
cultivators belonging to different categories based
on landholding and status thereof? Studies and
investigations need to be cogently structured at
the micro level and particularly account for the
political economy of the matter.These and many
more probe areas will throw up the character of
change that occurs, providing crucial
understanding of the short and long term effects
on the movement towards or away from market
economy based practices. Equally importantly it
will throw up the impact on cultural dimensions
of the socio-economic practices of peasant life
thateither get alignedto new market orientations,
or get modified without any fundamental change,
reinforcing extra-economic and pre-capitalist
forms of existence.
Beyond crop insurance, but as an intrinsic
link in the discourse of agrarian crisis,
thisnotetouches upon and contextualises the other
key agrarian initiatives - that of loan advances,
waiver of loans by state governments,NREGA
and MSP -and the changes these bring in the lives
of peasants. Do efficient economic parameters
of capitalist mode of production get generated
and established, and expand under the influence
of such initiatives, bringing a refreshing,
progressive change in peoples lives? Or does the
story of re-feudalisation prevail over time, and
engage with new forms of extra-economic
coercion in the lives of people?
42
Part III
Banks responsible for farmers suicide:
Mantri. State Agricultural Minister of
Uttarakhand attacked banks for being
responsible for the increasing cases of farmer
deaths in the state.
Banking is an integral component of
structured capitalist system. Banking, in one
essential part is predicated for its existence on
advancing loans and earning interest. In its very
logic, it collapses if return on investment by way
of loan advanced is not consistently maintained
to acceptable profit levels.As banking comprises
an essential part of the bulwark of the capitalist
economy, failure of this is anathema to capitalism.
Bankingoperations in India come founded on
established systems and procedures from the
British days and has evolved continuously to
conform to internationally required standards.
Characteristically in its approach, it is expected
not to differentiate between types of loans. But
in India it perhaps hesitates to advance loan to
the farming community as it does not find it
conducive to deal with it, given the deep rooted
informal practices within rural structures.But
every nation employs control over its banking
system and banks are obliged to obey the
governing machinerys guidelines and commands.
Public sector banks in India were formulated, at
a point in time, as an extension of the governing
machinery and an infrastructural initiative,
required for providing growth to a young nation.
While the court in its admonishment of financial
institutions on the matter of rural loan recovery
places a rider of violation of procedure the
Mantri questions the functioning of the banking
system in its faulty processes. He, it appears,
unknowingly presents a truer picture of systemic
inefficiency widely prevalent in the practice of
most institutions and of governance itself;a
lethargy reflecting an inefficient pre-capitalist
hangover inherent within Indian society, perhaps?
The ministeralleged that banks were not
verifying the credentials of farmers before
sanctioning loans, and then putting pressure on
themto recover the money. The investigations
into the deaths by farmers, has revealed that in
the case of one of the farmers who recently
committed suicide, three banks had extended
loans for a single crop. In another case, a farmer
was given more loan than he was eligible for,
which naturally increased his stress since he was
incapable of returning the amount. Banks are
directly responsible for such deaths and they
should ensure more stringent norms to provide
loans to farmers rather than disbursing money
blindfolded.banks should have a system in place
where it is possible to check the actual financial
condition of the farmer before sanctioning the
loan. The Uttarakhand government is also against
loan waivers because that will send a wrong
message to farmers. So the advice here for both,
the banking and agricultural sectors is to get
efficient or else. The young Northern state appears
to have currently taken a market economy
oriented stand. For how long, is a question only
time will tell, given the imperatives of a crisis
ridden sector requiring to be periodically bailed
out, and also of protecting the rural vote bank.
Meanwhile other states are initiating loan
waivers Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, Tamil
Nadu, Karnataka, Rajasthan, MP and UP. About
Rs3.1 lac crores, amounting to about 2.6% of
Indias GDP is expected to be written off by these
states; and the banking sector given relief from
facing the huge Non Performing Asset. This will
provide succour to about 10.6 million small and
marginal farmers. How crop insurance, which is
supposed to be mandatory for all farm loans given
by banks, is factored into this waiver, which in
turn impacts theoverall subsidy based condition
of the economy, is all together another story;
perhaps the lack of or poor linkage between the
two schemes will also suffer the accepted clichd
narrative of inefficiency, corruption and poor
implementation; a story symptomatic of the
Indian economic and social systems.
Some related facts and figures give an added
dimension to the context of the debate. It is
acknowledged that waivers dont impact the much
larger body of small and marginal farmers
because, with their average holdings of 1.7
hectares, they rely on informal sources of credit
from money lenders, traders, crop agents,
landlords etc. Further, while bank loans are given
against crop for production activity, it is reported
that about 40% of such loans are used for non-
productive purposes such as consumption,
marriages, ceremonies, education, medical and
other expenses, as also on non-farming business.
Given the Mantris directives to banks to employ
an efficient system to assess eligibility for
advancing farm loans, how non-production
expenditure can be brought under the purview
of controls, is any bodys guess. The realities of
peasant life,together with socio-cultural
obligations operating in rural societies, and the
factor of local poweralignments and bias,
monitoring and controlling this dimension would
pose an exceptional challenge to implementing
capitalistic efficiencies.
Agriculture contributes only between 15 to
20% to GDPs kitty while employing 60% of all
work-force. This is a fact worth noting in terms
of the imbalance this creates between agriculture
and industry. Indicatively agricultural growth is
3% p.a. while domestic demand is growing @6.5%
p.a. Average yield per hectare is 3 tons per hectare
against that of 7 tons in advanced countries. The
average farm household borrowing has not been
excessiveindebtedness is a symptom and not a
root cause of the farm crisis, according to an
exert group report on agricultural indebtedness
chaired by economist R.Radhakrishna. The report
says that the factors contributing to the farm crisis
are stagnation in agriculture, increasing
production and marketing risks, institutional
vacuum and lack of alternative livelihood
opportunities.
In A Note on an Aspect of the Indian
Economy Prof Rao presents some indicators
that can provide an approach to understanding
the mode of production debate. An aspectthat
did not attract the attention it deserves was the
persisting tendencies of a part of the economy
possibly a substantial part to base itself on a
natural economy (NE) network. An economy may
be designated as NE where the circulation
43
relations are absent or negligible. This implies an
economy where the producers produce the means
of subsistence and raw material which he himself
for the most part consumes. In other words, the
dominantaim of production remains one of self-
consumption with a minimum of commodity
production.To look at an economy or to
characterize an economy as NE is definitely
unscientific, as classification is purely on the basis
of a mode of exchange, while scientific
classification is based on the mode of production.
Nonetheless the distinction more so the
identification of the NE component of an
economy has significance. NE by its very nature
belongs to a pre-capitalist periodThe
correspondence between the NE and pre-
capitalism helps one to identify the mode of
production in the sense of negating the existence
of capitalism on the basis of the mode of
exchange.(his) note suggests that the NE
component of the Indian economy is not only a
substantial but also a stable component of the
national economyand hence an indication of
the limitations of the home market.
He goes on to write Looking at the same
problem from a different angle (that is, of the
impact of a large amount of monetary expansion
in terms of supply of money at a certain point in
time in the past, which caused a significant rise in
prices in the monetized sector, instead of inducing
the non-monetised sector, i.e. agriculture, to come
out of its shell) the marketable surplus of the
agricultural sector did not increase substantially
over the years. Referring to a study on
monetisation by RBI he says This apparently
means that more than half the food grain
productionis consumed at home and this is an
economy where food grain production is a
dominant activity, indicates the extent of non-
market forces in the economy and their stability.
With small and marginal peasants
constituting the bulk of the farm sector who
depend primarily on informal credit, trader and
crop agents, and if given access to bank loans,they
continue to use 40% for consumption activities
and the balance for consumption oriented
44
production, then schemes such as agricultural
loans, crop insurance and Minimum Support Price
by the government, seem necessary to be
accompanied by loan waiver and NREGA
schemes.Theseprima facie denote the
acknowledgement of a stagnating sector and
unchanging character of agriculture. As a
complementary set of programmes,these
initiatives are meant toperhaps prevent peasant
restiveness and their resorting to agitations, given
the perennial nature of the crisis.This is borne
out by SubodhGhildiyals report on the official
Economic Survey-II. Demonetisation hurt the
informal economy and triggered a rush for
distressed labour under job guarantee scheme
(MGNREGA)the wages available under the
scheme may also have helped contain rural unrest
and a political backlashAmong the states where
MGNREGA employment soaredfor nearly three
months (post demonetisation, by 30% over
previous years) were Bihar, Chattisgarh, Rajasthan,
West Bengal and Orissa.
The ability of loan, crop insurance and MSP
schemes to build and strengthen market economy
and encourage structural change
seemquestionable. Studies need to focus on
investigating trends in land transactions, renting,
tenancy and share cropping, informal credit and
indebtedness, switching of crops, role of influence
related sale of agricultural inputs, social effects
on family, cultural disruptions, migrations,
marginalisation, destitution and even lumpen
trends. The discussion reiterates the point that
social activists, change agents and researchers need
to conduct micro level, even village levelstudies
in order to understand the dynamics of change,
considering a society in motion. The findings may
richly illustratethe veracity of conceptual
formulations such as re-feudalisation, otherwise
being debated ad infinitum and very often without
factoring in reality.
Part IV
The debate on the capitalist Vs pre-capitalist
social foundations, and the inter-relationship
between the two, throws up a puzzle for
researchers and social scientists. Anomalies,
dualities and contradictions abound. One part of
the development strategy for the economy is
treated with modern, high tech projects, conceived
and initiated in urban, semi urban and rural areas
with the intention of changing agrarian practices
into industry based relations through
compensation, employment and re-settlement, in
return for land acquired.Theother part of the
strategy provides for various agrarian sector
schemes that are designed to address the crisis in
agriculture by providing production related relief.
On the one hand aggregate agricultural produce,
over the years, has increased, but on the other
hand loan waivers are becoming a practice year
on year. Crop insurance has been deployed to
underwrite crop failures, but at the same time MSP
is invoked to provide relief against very low farm
prices. Health, literacy and education, hygiene and
a host of skilling programmes are stridently
promoted, but peasants are forced to resort to
availing NREGA. High technology farming
techniques are vigorously introduced as part of
world trade expansion, but issues ranging from
plant infestation based crop failures, to sales chain
constraints and poor pricerealisations,can also
plague thecultivator. Agro chemical and farm
input industries show healthy andconsistent
upward growth, but the scourge of heightened
farmer suicides continues to plague the nation.
Development by the very term means change
in the relations, process and forces of production
- characteristically, qualitatively. Progressive
capitalistmode is one which abhorsextra economic
interventions and detractions. In fact it attempts
to rout pre-capitalist forms of social living,
aggressively. But that appears to be belied in the
Indian context as the discourse seems to illustrate.
What begins with a bangtends to end with a
whimper. After the initial spurt, projects seem to
atrophy over time, with the participating players
failing to re-integrate into the new system
andmissing the intended fruits, as envisaged.And
at the same time studies inthe domain of
agricultural processesstrongly indicate that new
types of agents are operating inextra-economic
forms in the system,exercising their leverage over
farmers -leverage of renting out land, leverage
of loaning money, leverage to buy produce,
leverage to influence purchase of seed and other
agricultural inputs, leverage to store and distribute
at leisure. The list is not short.
R.S.Rao in his note In an Attempt to
Communicatewrites, as a part of his critique of
the author who presents a paper titled Growth
of Capitalism in Agriculture - Case Study of
Andhra Pradesh : Ignoring the vulgar fallacy of
the argument that the rate of return determines
the flow of capital from one sector to the other
and further that for capital to flow from one sector
to the other it requires that both the sectors need
to be capitalistic, it is important to note that what
worries the author in question is the slow growth
of capitalist relations. Capital for him, like for
many others in the debate, is a thing, is money
and not a social relation. It is a thing to be moved
from one sector to the other, from one village to
the other. It is not a relation, which the owner of
the capital uses to expand his control over owners
of labour power, the source of capital. It is not a
social relation which dispossesses the immediate
producer of his means of production so that he
is formally subordinated to capital initially and
really subordinated to capital finally.
Rao goes on to say The author of the paper
is oblivious of the gamut of social relations
and their mutual interactions. He suggests that
huge amounts are spent on unproductive, social
religious and other functions and laments that
these should be curbed so as to mobilise these
amounts for productive investments. Confusing
the symptom with the disease, the author does
not see the wisdom of the ruling class in holding
such unproductive expenditure whose motive is
to reproduce a superstructure which is essentially
pre-capitalist. Commoditising the god may be in
the imperialist interest, but perpetuating god
serves the feudal interestsin subjugating the
human mind rather than initiating processes of
liberating it. Using caste associations, the rich
peasants may get their narrow benefits but caste
associations solidify the feudal division of society.
45
Personalising the State apparatus may suit
imperialist interests, but it does take away the
locally autonomous character of the state which
is necessary under capitalism, to gloss over the
contradictions of the society. While all these look
unproductive from a national capitalist point
of view, these are essential to the social base to
control State power.
He concludes the point by saying To
understand the totality of these social relations
which strengthen the backward superstructure,
which in turn modifies the base relation, one needs
a live study of the society in motion. This is the
starting point for this note, in an attempt to build
an approach to understanding re-feudalisation.
There are people who that say that cultivators
no longer want land and are looking to opt out
of the cultivation and land based systems. So the
programmaticalcall of Land to the Tiller appears
anachronistic and is questioned. From the history
of being a colony, to the 70 years history of
independence and world imperialisms strong in-
roads into the Indian socio-economic fabric,
alternatives for living outside land based systems
are available as enticement to people, giving
apparent choices. But, at the same time, the trend
of the emigrating marginalised people living in
urban, semi-urban areas, preferring to go back to
their rural roots, when the economy shrinks, is
also an indicator to the contrary. And further, in
this very note, the two examples of projects in
NCR present an interesting commentary on how
hopes can turn to despair over time, and how the
loss of land and the safety net it provides, can be
deeply mourned by those displaced.
Land in India is a set of social relations. It
encapsulates, represents and reflects huge
dimensions of extra economic social praxis within
rural life. Land as a productive force, literally, does
not appear to have effectively gained primacy;
which is why there is repeated tendency during
heightened crisis to convert its use even more
towards consumption, which in turn weakens
market oriented commoditised production from
46
taking root. Add to this the increasing practice of
share cropping and tenancy farming, which
establishes the growth in the non-cultivating
category of land owners, and the agrarian crisiscan
be seento be getting deeper. How these are
reflections of the re-feudalisation process depends
on the conceptual framework, theoretical analysis
and the methodology employed to understand it.
RS Raos views may be questioned by some
as dated considering the time that has elapsed,
thedegree of apparent changes that have occurred
in urbanisation and modernisation including the
e-revolution that has gripped todays society. And
the argumentproposes that capitalism has got
established and gained primacy in the economy.
But the veracity of R.S.Raos proposition, based
on the conceptual framework he works
with,including the tenet that the social base of
imperialism is feudalism,can only be challenged
by i)investigating and analysing the processes that
actually occur over time ii) in specific terms and
in defined areas iii) capturing their
impactwithnuances of change brought about, on
the basis of which,a conceptual formulation to
the contrary can be presented. On the other hand
these very same studies may well exemplify and
reinforce his point! What will ultimately prevail is
practicewith the results it accrues in narrating
thehistory of success, in the context of the
development path envisaged for the people.
There is an urgent need to study the two
Indias co-existing - one with a 70 year history and
the other with a 50 year history. Both are
competing with their respective models of
development. Which one will prevail as a success
story for the people of India, only history will
tell. But meanwhile as serious researchers,
academicians, social scientists, economists,
political activists, planners and policy
makers,ideologically aligned to either of the two
histories, Prof. R.S Raos words from the past
remain seminal : We need to know what it
is.but more importantly we need to know what
it is becoming.
   

   ,  % ' )
 .0 ,  2  
2   9  )
 :    ,
)  
 = ?  0 B 
0
  ) 
 
   , 
)0  9 =
  G ,  0
H0 , I
  ,    J K 
0 9  , )  = K 0 
0 K  = ?  2M 
 N 9 K   H , 9
2   K 9
9,  T  
 9   
 -    B
2M   )
BK  , = ? B 0 J 
  0 M  ? 9
 V V 0   9
  ? 9 X   , 
 , 9  

K 9  M 9 -

Y '  V  V ' V  '

[  9 B. ,   9 


47
  0 ,
2 9 ?   , = ?
0 ,   B  

   , )0 9  9 ,
 , 2M 9 0
  
1946  ,  = ? B
0 2 2  K ] K
2  = ? , 
9 )K  ,
H = J K Y 0
 , 0
 0 ^ 
0 ^ ^ 
)0 K 9 _ , 2.
 , a
 .   K ? B 
, ]  ?  9 
K 9 , 0
N0 0  0  ) 
= ? 9 c 2= 9 
a  9 
^ N0
 B N0
2 G  2= 
0 , 2= 9 2 d 
 = ? J K 
9  , 2  9  X
K ? ) M  2    ?
B 
% 0  -

0 ,  0  9
0 ,     
)K    M B
  0 2 0 
 , 2 K G 9 0 15 

48
 0  ?
9 9, )0   0 
= ?   
  ,      
2 0 K ,   
N0  = ,
 -   0 
  =0 9 0 ? KK 
  ) 1950-51  -
V  K 9 , 2 B   f 
1948 0 K K ,  ?
B    )0 %  
9  2  , 0 -
 9   HK -
  , 0 0 , J K 9
, ,  H = ,   ,
0 -  , G ? ...........
      K
  ..........  0
H = 
 9 ,  
- K
1951 ? B   9
0 K 9  ,  0 , 47

1954 ? 2 0
B K   
0  ,  0 . ?  
    K , 9 9
,  
, J K 0
j B  0 ,
,  ? )   K  ,
  9 
- '  9 ?  )0
9 , 2   
  lH ] l

49
  0   B- l 1964
    2   150
0    B 
  , B ,  9
 - , )0
2  )K  ? 9 = ? ,

    9  
:  0   V : , 
   9 
9 9 ?
l  9 K J 9
 l 9  9 ,  
0  
  , 2
 ) J K 0 =K G HM
0 9 ) ?
= ?  m   
?  0 
? B 2 ,  9 2

  m  ,  J K
0 ,   n 
B ]  
, 2 0  ] M , B
   
K 0 9 lH  9
l 0 , 2 9
] 2  
 J 9   9  
 , 2M  9 j
9 ? 0 HM ' 9 K 
] 9 ,   
HM ' 9  G ,  X    ) ,
2M 0 0
0  ] , 0  0 j

50
 ,  0  ?
,   Yo 0 
0 ,  0 -
0 = ? 9 =K   
 = ? HM . ?
  
,  0   K
, = ? 9 ,  ? )0
 , J K 9  , 9  
-   ,   
B   Yo0
0 ,   ,
K  ,  2 ,

)  ] 
0 )  . ,   ? =
,  0 ,  M ? 0 ?
 2  ) . 
% q   ) 
.... 9  d0 J q  0 
 ......) J K 2 : .
  , H ' K H 0 9 s

 ]   ,  -
 . 250 0 9  j
 9 0 2  
 0 K 0 9 0
    . ] =K
K  29  J K ]
t 2  
J K u 0 J K 
K   0 0 ]  0 9
 9 2M K , 2
   100 0 2   , 
9 0 9  ,  , l  B

51
 H ,  BN 9 ,  HH
, 0 -
 9 ]  0
J  ?  HM 0 ] ,
9 9   X  9 HM 0 -
K0 
^ K 0 9 , 0
,  K 0 9 0 ,
HM , 0 0 =H 0
1500  2 HM 0 0
  K  )
 HM  9 
- , 
^0 H
0 9 
0 ^  ,
  l   K0 
H K 0 B
  9   0
 j0 . J K0  M
?  ]  . . 
9   . 0 K ]
 .   , 2M  
 , ) K d0 d 
M HM 0 K  
%  0 0 9 
, 0 9 =  0 ,
v

v ] , 2 9
 9
)  72  
 , K , 
0 w  ] ,  V % 9 
. 9 K 0 X 
, 2  G
0 K 2 2 M
 2 V X^  9 2 G 
0 ?, d K

52
)  = X  d
K 9 9K   0 0 9
 ,  ? 9  , 
,  ?   
 1948 M , 0  .
% ] G ,
x  K ,
?  0 
 G , ^  ? n ,  9,
 [d ,    K  2 K 0
, 2  B V 9
] K 0   G
  G ,   K
G ,   [ HK  -
 9 0 0 
  9   , 0 0

-   ] - 
B  )    2M  B 9 ,
)  B0 [ , 9 2 ,
9 [d d 9 
9  yt ' , 
9 - 9 K   2M M
- f 9   '
) B , d 9  9 -
[d  0,  0
9  B d  9
)  0 B d
   B
K , , fY
), , H , N 0 , , 0 9
  , 20 ) 9 2j0 ^ 
T 0 9 , 2 ,  9
 9  2j
 B   )   B 
' ,   G ,   ,
 B ) 0 q 

53
G ,  2  G ,   2
  )  9 2  , d
)0 ) G ,  B0, '0
 G ,  a B0   )0 G ^-^ 2 
 ,   ,  9

0   ,
B  [  ,  9 K d
- )    9 ,  
 9 0   ,
0
)     9 J 
= ,  d   G   , 0
 9  G   [ 9
G 9  9 G , 
   '
0 = G 
'  B 9 K d 

54
 All India Seminar on
The Impact of Naxalbari on Indian Society: Achievements and Challenges
September 9-10, 2017, Sundarayya Vignana Kendram, Bagh Lingam Palli, Hyderabad

Revolution blossomed like spring and armed struggle began like the spring thunder. It is indeed amazing to this
generation to imagine that spring thunder after fifty years. How poetic was the entry of Naxalbari like a spring into the
history of people? The then Communist Party of China described it as the spring thunder on the horizon of Indian
revolution. People all over thought it was the onset of spring when some adivasis in the hills in a remotest corner of the
country rebelled and raised arms. Naxalbari came not only as a sternly armed and concrete practice from the layers of the
mother earth, but also as a greatest emotive power. Thats why it brought spring not only to forests, but also to imaginations,
dreams, passions, intellect and creativity.
Revolution is really a splendid concept. Its a great confidence. Its a great dream that will not die in the eyes even when
the head is severed. Thats why all and everything were new thoughts, new decisions and new approaches after Naxalbari.
The new paths were paved by people who taught how to make history. As a poet who dreamed of future said, it is literally
blood sprinkled from the heart all along the way. The revolution that began as spring with a political decision of people
evolved itself into a material force with the blood of thousands of martyrs. Now it is the fragrance of that spring that
spread all over Dandakaranya and all adivasi lands in the country.
What a reality is this to a creative being, how inspiring and how saddening! Isnt this a confidence that tells about the
people who will fly their head as a flag on the summits of future? Isnt this a historic statement that bursts out from the
lowest depths? Fifty years. How many tests this period in history has undergone? So many crises, both within and without,
so many floods of tears - but Naxalbari braved everything and rose again. Every time somebody used to say: everything is
over, there wont be any thing, revolutionary practice itself is outdated, its only the remnants of the flickering light, etc.
etc. But Naxalbari as a historical force overthrew all these assessments and comments by gossip mongers. In its fifty years
journey, it proved the hollowness of these chatterboxes. It has been facing a manifold war for a long time. Indeed, its
adversary is still most powerful when compared to all the strength Naxalbari acquired over time. But then, it is already
proved that Naxalbari is going to be the victor. That is its strength of practice, strength of mass support and the strength of
ideology that shows the way to the practice and mass support.
All the parliamentary parties, all the forces aspiring to win in the arena of votes, and all those immersed in ballot
equations to achieve social emancipation in the country, all of them are politically on one side. Naxalbari alone as the only
alternative is on the other side. Alternative ideas for everything from the most sensitive human relations to the objective
laws needed to run systems, exist only in Maoist perspective. They are also put in practice wherever possible.
There are people who interrogate what did Naxalbari achieve in fifty years. Sure, the question certainly needs to be
asked. But the question has to be asked with a peoples perspective without any prejudice or malice. Beginning as a small
spark of a rebellion, Naxalbari grew in strength to become an alternative in all spheres. That is Naxalbaris achievement.
Thats why fifty years of its existence is an occasion to celebrate. Do we stop there? No, Naxalbari not only has its
impacts and achievements, but it also has challenges. Naxalbari knows how complex and strong are the systems that it wants
to transform and how they evolved on the social and cultural foundations for hundreds and thousands of years. That means
Naxalbari is very well aware of its enemy. Not only that, Naxalbari also knows that whatever it doesnt know today, it has to
and it will know tomorrow. That is the political virtue of Naxalbari.
Viplava Rachaiyatala Sangham (Virasam - Revolutionary Writers Association) also knows that. Virasam knows the
essence of the whereabouts, development and setbacks, challenges and debates of Naxalbari. Virasam has been interpreting,
commenting and conceptualizing how Naxalbari is growing as a revolutionary force on this land. In fact, Virasam has been
expanding its creative strengths taking inspiration from Naxalbari. It has been trying its best to recreate Naxalbari in art
forms. Really Naxlabari itself has great artistic potential. To take the side of Naxalbari itself is a great artistic experience.
Thats why all revolutionary writings display that emotion and the most perceptive insight. How can Virasam not present
that emotion and insight at this historic occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of Naxalbari? This seminar is a part of that
presentation. The seminar is being organized to understand the impacts and achievements of Naxalbari and courageously
discuss the challenges being faced by Naxalbari. Please do attend.

55
 Programme Schedule
09.09.2017
10.00 A.M: Flag-Hoisting
Session I: 10.30 A.M to 1.30 P.M
Presiding: CSR Prasad
Key note: Varalaxmi, Secretary VIRASAM
Naxalbari, the path of liberation of the oppressed:
Saleem
The History of Revolutionary Movement in former
united Andhra Pradesh: A review: Raghavulu
The Impact of Revolutionary Movement in Andhra
Pradesh: Achievements and Challenges: G. Kalyan
Rao
1.30 A.M to 2.30 A.M: Lunch Break
Session II: 2.30 P.M to 5.30 P.M
Presiding: Ujwal
Impact of Naxalbari on Haryana Society: Ajay
Revolutionary Movement in Punjab: The
Experiences of Agrarian Revolution: Sukhvinder
Achievements of Naxalbari Movement in
Telangana: G. Ilanna
Class Struggles in Maharashtra: Sudhir Dhavle
The Experiences Revolutionary Movement in Uttar
Pradesh: Seema Ajad
Fifty Years of Naxalbari: The Alternate
Development Model: Purnendu Sekhar
Mukharjee
Session III: 6.00 P.M to 9.00 P.M
Presiding: Ratnamala
Revolutionary Movement in Kerala: Ravunni
Impacts of Naxalbari in Bihar and Jharkhand:
Achievements and Challenges: Natash
Mode of Production in India: Semi-feudal and
Semi-colonial Relations: N. Venugopal
Mass line and Mass organizations: N. Ravi
Naxalbari to Lalghad: Prof. Amit Bhattacharya
Civil Rights and Indian Judiciary: Prof. Seshaiah
56
10.09.2017
Session I: 10.00 A.M to 1.30 P.M
Presiding: Basith
Naxalbari, the only Alternative:
Madkam Vijay
Naxalbari Revolution in Punjab: Baru
Satwarg
Women Liberation movements and class
struggle: B. Anuradha
Impact of Naxalbari on Adivasis and Dalits in
Telangana: N. Rajita
Dalit Movements and Naxalbari: Anand
Teltumbde
1.30 P.M to 2.30 P.M: Lunch Break
Session II: 2.30 P.M to 5.30 P.M
Presiding: Nalluri Rukmini
The Impact of Naxalbari on Social
movements: Vernon Gonsalves
The nature of Indian State-Changes in its
policies: Prof. Haragopal
The Impact of Naxalbari on Bengali Literature,
Arts and culture: Kanchan Kumar
The Impact of Naxalbari on Telugu Literature,
Arts and culture: Allam Rajaiah
The Impact of Naxalbari on Odiya Literature,
Arts and culture: Lenin
6.00 P.M: PUBLIC MEETING
Presiding: Varalakshmi
Speakers: Vir Satidar, Varavararao
Book Releases and Cultural programmes
by various cultural teams from
different states