[lbo-talk] caste and the Indian CPs

[Hari Kumar]

>
>
>John Mage wrote: 
>Ulhas wrote:
> >  distraction from the primary goal: the struggle against imperialism.
> >
> > It has been argued that the upper caste background of CPs leadership
> > was the main reason for the neglect of the caste oppression. But I am
> >  not convinced.
>
>I forwarded this comment to a professor friend in Delhi, who is a
>student of the history of the Indian communist movement. His response is
>posted below. No doubt Ulhas is an expert on many things, but
>unfortunately he pretends to be one on yet more.
>
>john mage
>-----
>
>Ulhas has indulged in a sweeping condemnation of
>Indian CPs. He cites no evidence to support his
>propositions. I still think a brief response may be
>in order.
>
>Caste has not received the attention it deserves from
>Indian CPs. But that does not mean that Indian CPs
>have neglected the struggle aginst caste as an
>ideology and as an institution. The ideology of caste
>has fragmented peasant movements and workers'
>struggles led by CPs. In more recent decades the CPs
>have had to deal with 'caste associations' and
>'caste-based' political parties as economic interest
>groups. These latter organizations have further
>fragmented class struggles led by the CPs, including
>the Naxalite CPs.
>
>Marxist and non-Marxist intellectuals (the latter, for
>instance, M. N. Srinivas and Andre Beteille) have
>recognized important elements of class in the caste system,
>for instance, the caste which owns land exercises
>effective dominance, despite a lower ritual status. There is
>also a close interconnection between caste and class, with
>the 'untouchable' castes generally landless laborers. With
>this brief background, let us briefly get to the facts.
>........................
>
>.....The period 1946-51 in the context of decolonization
>witnessed the major movements of Telangana and in
>Bengal of Tehbaga. The Telangana movement led by the
>CPI witnessed large-scale guerilla action ("Peoples'
>War"). In liberated districts caste oppression was punished
>as criminal. These movements raised the possibility of
>realizing "land to the tiller".
>
>In all the struggles mentioned, and many more, say in
>Travancore and so on, it would be absurd to claim that
>the "untouchable" castes or the lower castes did not
>have a voice. In independent India, the CPI and later
>the CPM, in their areas of influence, have played an
>important role in land reform. The Naxalite movement
>from the late 1960s onward has consistently fought for
>"entitlements" of the rural poor, especially dalits
>and tribals, to material resources and izzat
>(dignity). This movement has had many martyrs, among
>them the dalit poor and Naxalite activists, including
>dalits."
>
REPLY:
Thanks for that John.

I regret the spirit was willing but the flesh was weak - as I merely 
contemplated an adequate reply to Ulhas.
In fact your correspondent herself/himslef may have neglected one 
additional aspect: Namely that the seismic Telanagana struggle - itself 
refelcted a caste element.
Alliance ML descirbed this at soem length in our [now ancient document - 
& thus may need further up-dating] at this web-site: 
http://www.allianceML.com/AllianceIssues/All-5b.htm

To quote breifly from that document:

"Within one month of the Second Congress of the CPI, the party was 
desperately floundering. But the top leadership was deliberately 
excluded from arrest and left outside. Only now did they go underground. 
Ranadive from hiding issued declarations for general strikes and peasant 
rising, for which no work had been prepared, and the appeal fell on dry 
soil. The party deteriorated at this time into individual terrorism. The 
Congress party was incorrectly labelled as being Fascist. This 
adventurist path soon lost the CPI support.

 
After the exposure of the Yugoslavs by the Cominform, the CPI was rebuked.
Dyakov wrote:

      "That the situation was far from being revolutionary. He did not

      describe the Indian scene in terms of "revolutionary upsurge", as

      had Ranadive, but spoke merely of the "peoples' great

      disappointment" with the new government. He declared that the

      Government of India and Pakistan "are becoming more and more

      isolated from the masses", and are " becoming tools of the

      imperialists."
O&W, Ibid, p.281.

Telangana, an open insurrection had taken an avowedly Maoist line by 
exempting the rich peasantry from CPI attack. This class collaboration 
was of course inconsistent with the Ultra-Left swing of the CPI and it 
was condemned by Randive:

      "Communist parties in the non-Hindi regions wanted a doctrinal

      pretext for local alliances with aggrieved regional caste groups

      whose interest conflicted with the Marwaris.. To ally with any

      capitalists or landowner was intolerable of course for

      B.T.Ranadive, then secretary for the CPI.. he screamed heresy at

      the Andhra Communists.. with their leadership in the wealthy Kamma

      landowning caste, the Andhra Communists had good reason to espouse

      the Maoist line in India. The Andhra Communists had established

      ground rules at the start for the Telengana insurrection in 1948

      which assured most of their Kamma brethren went unscathed. So long

      as the middling rich farmers who make up the bulk of the caste

      stayed above the battle, they were classified inCommunist strategy

      as neutralized. This outright deviation from the Ranadive line,

      which saw all landowners as equally villainous.. Ranadive

      attacking the Andhra Secretariat, publicly charged that in Andhra

      Communist ranks:

            "It is the rural intellectuals, sons of rich peasants and

            middle peasants that preponderate in important positions.

            The party politically based itself on the vacillating

            politics of the middle peasants and allowed itself to be

            influenced by rich peasant ideology'".
Selig Harrison, Ibid. p.162

Of course the Andhra Communists had been Ultra-Rightist, or Maoist on 
this issue.
Nonetheless, an Insurrection had already been mounted.
A parallel can be made to Stalin's view that the Kuomintang Generals 
should not have their lands expropriated, whilst they cooperated with 
the worker and peasants. The Andhra Communists do not say this but their 
line appears to be similar:

      "The Andhra Communists had made no secret of their "Rich peasant"

      policy within the party. They explicitly declared themselves on

      this point in a 1948 program report.. which stressed 2 major

      tactical rules of thumb:

            "1. In delta areas the pressure of population would be heavy

            and as such slogans should be raised for the distribution of

            lands belonging to rich ryots among the poor peasants and

            labourers.

            2. Propaganda should be carried out to convince the ryots

            about the just demands of the workers, and we should also

            effect compromises with those of the ryots who would follow

            with us. Assurance should also be given that we should not

      touch the lands of rich ryots." Ranadive also singled out for

      special attack anotherstatement of this position in a 1948 Andhra

      statement discussing tactics towards Government rice procurement

      for rationing:

            "In the matter of procurement of paddy the Secretariat

            believes that it is possible to neutralize the rich peasants

            as the government plan goes against the rich peasantry also.

            Though the rich peasantry as class is not standing firmly in

            the fight, it is parting with paddy with dissatisfaction."

            Harrison, Ibid. p. 163."

            Cheers,

            hari Kumar

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20040524/0c0af8ac/attachment.htm>