Lenin's Tallest Tribute - John Read's: Ten Days that Shook the World

 A Tribute to Lenin: The Revolutionary Who Rewired the World

1. Origins of a Revolutionary

In an age when empires seemed eternal and monarchs ruled by divine right, a quiet boy from Simbirsk—born on April 22, 1870—began asking dangerous yet thought-provoking questions. His name was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, but history would remember him simply as Lenin—the man who dared to challenge one of the world’s most powerful empires, forged by Tsar Alexander III, and ultimately restructured the operating system of civilization.

2. Ideas Over Vengeance

Long before hashtags, TikTok, and viral manifestos, Lenin was laying the groundwork for a revolution that would resonate into the digital age. The execution of his older brother, Alexander—a journalist executed for attempting to assassinate Tsar Alexander III—profoundly impacted him. Yet Vladimir did not retreat into despair or seek vengeance. He turned instead to revolutionary ideas—seeking not blood, but the end of a brutal empire.

To Lenin, ideas were mightier than weapons. He studied law and passed the bar in 1892, briefly becoming a lawyer. However, his immersion in Marxist circles soon drew him deep into revolutionary activism.

3. The Making of a Marxist

In the mid-1890s, Lenin opposed the Narodnik belief that Russia could leap over capitalism into socialism. He argued that capitalism was already taking root in Russia and needed to be addressed strategically. In 1895, his activities led to arrest and exile in Siberia, where he spent three years and married fellow revolutionary Nadezhda Krupskaya.

But Siberia could not suppress him, and exile did not silence him. On the contrary, it strengthened his resolve.

4. Organizing in Exile

Across Europe—in libraries and cafés thick with smoke and political theory—Lenin wrote, organized, and strategized. He launched Iskra ("The Spark"), a newspaper intended to ignite revolution across the Russian Empire. While Tsars clung to their thrones and the West plunged into World War I (1914–1917), Lenin sharpened his vision of a state without kings or capitalists—a state where the workers controlled the levers of power. This was the foundation of what he called the dictatorship of the proletariat.

5. The Revolution of 1917

In 1917, the old world cracked. War-weary and starving, Russia teetered on collapse. Into this chaos, Lenin returned—his passage through Germany sealed in a train, courtesy of the very enemies who hoped to destabilize Russia. Ironically, they accelerated one of history’s sharpest plot twists.

The Menshevik-led February Revolution had ended the monarchy, but that was not enough for Lenin. In October, he led the Bolsheviks in a swift and nearly bloodless coup that overthrew the Provisional Government. From the Winter Palace to the furthest Siberian outposts, power shifted overnight. The world stood stunned.

6. Architect of the Soviet State

As the first head of the Soviet state, Lenin moved quickly: abolishing private land ownership, pulling Russia out of the war, and beginning to construct the machinery of a planned economy. Yet revolution, like fire, often consumes its bearer. Worn down by strokes and political intrigue, he withdrew from public life in 1922 and died two years later, aged just 53—his mind a fading echo of its former brilliance.

7. Revolutionary Software

His slogans—"Peace, Land, Bread" and "All Power to the Soviets"—were not mere political catchphrases. They were data packets of revolutionary software: simple, elegant, and designed to overwrite the old system. With surgical precision, Lenin and the Bolsheviks launched the world’s first successful Marxist revolution. John Reed’s Ten Days That Shook the World remains one of the century’s greatest political-literary achievements, capturing the revolution through the eyes of a witness.

8. Reality Bites the Dream

Lenin's utopia clashed with harsh realities. Civil war, foreign intervention, famine, and dissent battered the fledgling Soviet Union. To stabilize the nation, Lenin introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP)—a tactical compromise with capitalism that shocked purist Marxists but reflected his pragmatic nature.

Lenin was never a rigid ideologue; he was a coder rewriting a crashing system. His seminal works—Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, What Is to Be Done?, Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder, One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, and his theses at the First International—challenged existing orthodoxy. One of his key positions on the Third World and India, originally contested by an Indian communist intellectual, was later accepted by Lenin himself, showcasing his intellectual flexibility.

9. A Legacy Beyond Borders

By the time of his death in 1924, Lenin had transformed not only Russia but also the trajectory of global politics. His legacy is a paradox: liberator and autocrat, idealist and realist, hero and heretic. Though the Soviet Union eventually collapsed, Lenin's ideas lived on—in anti-colonial movements across the Global South, in debates over inequality, and in enduring questions about the distribution of power and wealth.

10. The Modern Lens

Lenin left no ordinary legacy. His mausoleum became a shrine, his doctrine a political religion, and his image a global symbol. Whether revered or reviled, Vladimir Lenin remains a titan of revolution—a man who reshaped society from the ground up, wielding ideology like a hammer and determination like a sickle.

In a 21st-century world governed by data, networks, and decentralization, Lenin's legacy is being re-examined—not merely as a figure of the past, but as an early hacker of global structures. Whether you view him as a visionary or a cautionary tale, Lenin remains a towering figure in modern history—proof that ideas, when sharpened by experience and wielded with purpose, can still shake the world.

Russia-India Relations - A Global Shift

 

Russia-India Relations: A Strategic Shift in Global Geopolitics

S Deman*

Abstract

A Love Story

India's recent strategic overture toward Russia, reportedly accepting a significant geopolitical offer, signals a notable shift in international alignments. This development not only strengthens the bilateral relationship between the two long-standing partners but also has far-reaching implications for global geopolitics, military strategies, and the balance of power. This paper examines the motivations behind India’s decision, the scope of the emerging agreement, and the international responses it could trigger. It evaluates the benefits and risks involved for India, explore the broader impact on international institutions such as BRICS, and consider how this evolving partnership might reshape the global order.

---

Introduction

A seismic shift is underway in global geopolitics. India has reportedly accepted a substantial and unprecedented offer from Russia—an action that could potentially recalibrate the balance of power in Asia and beyond. As Western powers seek to contain Russia following the Ukraine conflict, India's decision to deepen its strategic ties with Moscow marks a significant departure from its previously cautious diplomacy. This paper explores the motivations, content, and consequences of this move, as well as its implications for the global order.

---

The Nature of the Agreement

1. Defense and Technology Transfer

At the heart of the agreement is an expansive defense cooperation framework, reportedly involving advanced military technologies. Speculation suggests Russia has offered India not only weapons platforms but also full-scale technology transfers. These could include next-generation combat aircraft, hypersonic missiles, air defense systems, and submarine components. This aligns with India's "Atmanirbhar Bharat" (self-reliant India) initiative, enhancing domestic production capacity and reducing long-term reliance on foreign imports.

2. Energy Security

Another major component is a long-term energy partnership involving preferential pricing on Russian oil and gas. Amidst global energy volatility, access to reliable and affordable energy is crucial for sustaining India's economic growth. The deal may also include alternative financial mechanisms such as rupee-ruble trade arrangements, insulating both countries from Western sanctions.

3. Diplomatic and Strategic Alignment

India's alignment with Russia also signals closer diplomatic cooperation in global forums such as the United Nations and BRICS. This is seen as an attempt to challenge Western hegemony and promote a more multipolar world order.

---

Historical Context: The India-Russia Partnership

India-Russia relations are built on a foundation of trust, strategic alignment, and historical goodwill dating back to the Cold War era. During a time when India struggled to secure advanced defense technology from Western nations, the Soviet Union emerged as a reliable partner, supplying critical equipment and diplomatic support—most notably through the 1971 Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation.

The co-development of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile exemplifies the success of this partnership. Even today, over 60% of India’s defense equipment originates from Russia or the former Soviet Union, creating a lasting interdependence. This historical cooperation sets the stage for the present deepening of ties.

---

Strategic Timing and Motivations

1. Assertion of Strategic Autonomy

Western pressure to distance itself from Moscow has paradoxically strengthened India’s resolve to pursue a multi-vector foreign policy. By embracing a deeper relationship with Russia, India is asserting its strategic independence.

2. Security Concerns: The China Factor

The ongoing border tensions with China, particularly in the Himalayas, necessitate rapid military modernization. Russia, unlike Western suppliers, may be more willing to offer cutting-edge technologies without bureaucratic or geopolitical constraints.

3. BRICS and the Multipolar Vision

India's growing role within an expanded BRICS provides a conducive platform for deeper cooperation with Russia. The two nations, alongside others, aim to reduce dependency on Western institutions by promoting trade in national currencies and strengthening the New Development Bank.

---

Global Reactions

1. Western Powers

The United States and NATO allies are likely to perceive this development as a threat to their Indo-Pacific strategy, where India plays a pivotal role in countering China. Potential repercussions could include diplomatic pressure, sanctions under CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act), and revaluations of defense and technology partnerships.

The European Union may echo these concerns, raising the possibility of trade frictions and political misalignment.

2. China

While China may welcome a disruption in U.S.-led alliances, it may also be wary of Russian military technology empowering a regional rival. This could strain the China-Russia dynamic.

3. Middle East and Global South

Countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia may view the India-Russia axis as a stabilizing force and a potential boost to regional initiatives like the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC).

---

Implications for India: Benefits and Risks

Potential Benefits

• Strategic Autonomy: Reinforces India's independent foreign policy stance.
• Energy Security: Access to discounted Russian energy helps curb inflation and reduce trade deficits.
• Defense Modernization: Enhances indigenous capabilities and military deterrence.
• Economic Growth: Boosts industrial competitiveness under initiatives like “Make in India.”

Key Risks

• Sanctions and Diplomatic Fallout: Potential U.S. and EU sanctions could affect investment and critical technologies.
• Strain on Key Alliances: Partnerships within the Quad (US, Japan, Australia, and India) may suffer.
• Domestic Political Challenges: Aligning closely with a globally criticized regime could stir internal debate.

---

Future Outlook: What Happens Next?

India’s acceptance of Russia's strategic offer is only the beginning. The global response—especially from Washington—will heavily influence the direction of this new alignment. If met with harsh retaliation, India may pivot further toward non-Western partners and reinforce BRICS-related initiatives such as de-dollarization, national currency trade, and governance reform.

Expect increased India-Russia military collaboration, joint research, and potentially greater intelligence sharing. This could further entrench the partnership and act as a catalyst for a broader shift in the global power structure—from a unipolar to a multipolar order.

---

Conclusion

India’s decision to deepen its partnership with Russia represents a calculated gamble—balancing geopolitical risks with strategic imperatives. It reflects a desire to maintain autonomy, secure national interests, and reshape its global role amidst a turbulent international environment. Whether this will usher in a new global order or provoke new conflicts remains to be seen. What is certain is that the India-Russia alliance will play a pivotal role in shaping the contours of 21st-century geopolitics.

 

* Director, Centre fir Econ & Finance, London

References

1.             Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. India-Russia Relations. New Delhi: MEA, 2024. https://mea.gov.in/india-russia.htm

2.             Stratfor. "Russia’s Strategic Partnerships in Asia." RAND Corporation, 2023. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA1621-1.html

3.             Krishnan, Murali. "India’s Energy Ties with Russia Deepen Despite Western Pressure." The Hindu, March 15, 2024. https://www.thehindu.com

4.             Mukherjee, Arpita. "India to Buy Russian Oil in Rupees to Sidestep Sanctions." Reuters, April 10, 2024. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-russian-oil-rupees

5.             Saran, Shyam. India’s Quest for Strategic Autonomy: A Diplomatic Balancing Act. New Delhi: Carnegie India, 2023. https://carnegieindia.org/2023/11/20/indias-strategic-autonomy

 

 

RUSSO-UKRAINE CONFLICT - WESTERN INTERVENTIONISM

A Historical Perspective on NATO, Russia, and Western Interventionism                                                                                                                                                                                                    Europe in general—and the UK in particular—continue to suffer from a deep-rooted Russophobia. To this day, no solid evidence has been provided by President Biden or any Western leader to support claims of Russian interference in European affairs or in Donald Trump’s first presidential election.

Historically, Kyiv was the capital of ancient Rus'. Crimea, meanwhile, was handed over to Ukraine by Nikita Khrushchev due to his Ukrainian heritage. Even Mikhail Gorbachev had Ukrainian roots. Following the collapse of the USSR in 1991, the U.S.-led NATO alliance began to unilaterally expand, bully, invade, and orchestrate CIA-backed coups and regime changes around the world. According to a report by a group of professors at Brown University, the U.S. has intervened in 97 countries since then.

In the early post-Soviet years, Russia was governed by Boris Yeltsin—a weak and ineffectual leader, often ridiculed for his drunken behavior. Under his leadership, the country fell into disarray. Key public sector enterprises were sold off for peanuts, often to oligarchs with close ties to the West. Many of these individuals, particularly of Jewish background, took their money and moved to Germany, Finland, the U.S., and possibly even France.

When Gorbachev agreed to German unification, it was on the condition that NATO would not expand eastward. Later, Western leaders backed away from this commitment, claiming there was no formal written agreement.

Fast forward to 2008: at the NATO summit in Bucharest, the alliance declared that both Ukraine and Georgia would one day become members—yet provided no roadmap. Despite repeated warnings from President Putin, NATO kept pushing eastward. Five countries joined first, followed by seven more that encircled Russia. The only remaining access point for Russia to the rest of Europe was through Ukraine—a border stretching over 2,000 kilometers.

In 2014, NATO’s involvement in Ukraine escalated after the Maidan coup, widely viewed as U.S.-supported. This further inflamed tensions. Then came the Minsk Agreements, signed by France’s President Macron and Germany’s Chancellor Merkel, which were supposed to de-escalate the situation. However, in 2022, both leaders admitted their real aim was to buy time to arm Ukraine and prepare for conflict—a clear act of bad faith.

In April 2022, during peace talks in Istanbul, an agreement was nearly reached to end the conflict. However, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson flew to Kyiv on the orders of Washington to persuade President Zelensky not to sign the deal—prolonging the war unnecessarily.

Putin’s requests to address Russia’s security concerns were consistently ignored by the West. Left with no diplomatic path, he was forced to act to secure Russia's sovereignty—no longer the weak state it was in the 1990s.

NATO’s track record speaks volumes: from the bombing and dismantling of Yugoslavia with the support of far-right groups, to the 1990 invasion of Iraq, the 2001 war in Afghanistan, and the 2003 re-invasion of Iraq that led to the deaths of over half a million civilians. The West also backed extremist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria, and orchestrated the brutal killing of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi.

This cycle of regime change and destruction was not going to be allowed to continue—at least not without resistance. Of course, the West may have the last word in the media, but perhaps some of us will have the last laugh when history writes its final verdict.

TRIBUTE TO SUNITI KUMAR GHOSH : ONE OF THE GREATEST MARXIST HISTORIANS

Tribute to Suniti Kumar Ghosh: One of India’s most outstanding

Marxist Historians

Harsh Thakor*

May 11^th we commemorated the 10^th death anniversary of one of the greatest-ever Marxist intellectuals. Suniti Kumar Ghosh. I was privileged to have personally met him in Kolkata in March; 2009.

Applying Marxist mode, in diverse spheres he classically delved into a refuting distortion of Indian history and the autocracy of the Indian state

I greatly admire his tenacity in the most adverse of situations to refute the ruling class and revisionist propaganda and still never going overboard. When many intellectuals fell into the quagmire of bankruptcy after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 Ghosh stood relentless like a rock. Till the very end, he grappled with the problems and concerns of the rebuilding of the communist revolutionary movement in India.

EARLY LIFE

Suniti Kumar Ghosh was born on 18 February 1918 in the Sibpur area of district Howrah in West Bengal. After matriculating from the B K Paul Institution, Sibpur, he joined St. Paul's College, Kolkata, and received his BA with honours in English literature and an MA degree in English from the University of Calcutta. He adopted teaching as his career and taught at nearly eleven colleges encompassing East and West Bengal as also Bihar. He was an active participant in the Tebhaga movement (l946-47) and joined the Communist Party of India (CPI).

POLITICAL LIFE

Suniti Kumar Ghosh joined the Communist Party of India (Marxist) sometime after its formation in 1964 and was associated with the editorial boards of Desh Hitaishi and People's Democracy—the two organs of the CPI(M). Being disappointed by the CPM’s revisionist he revolted against it he associated with a radical Bengali periodical (magazine) known as Kalpurush along with Saroj Datta and others. He wrote a series of articles that reflected the ideology of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China and the impact of Mao Tse-Tung's Thoughts on it.

The 'Naxalbari, propelled Sunitibabu into action. He accepted the role of editor of organs such as Deshabrati and Liberation which propagated the mass-line of the Indian revolution and became highly popular.  

He was an integral part of the movement for the rest of the decade, and only returned home when burnt to the last straw. In that decade of the revolutionary movement not only his family (his wife Anima and his two daughters, but he was subjected to turmoil.. He never forgot the martyrs of that movement, to whom he dedicated several of his writings. “I owe to those who, sharing my ideals and braving immense risks, gave me shelter and food when shelter was more precious than food.”

In 1974 Ghosh was instrumental in the formation of the Central Organising Committee of the CPI (ML), which made a constructive self-criticism of past errors of CPI (ML).  In 1977 he officially left the party stating.

“The COC held that the battle of annihilation of class enemies, carried out by secret squads of militants, cannot solve our problems nor can it serve as the beginning of the guerrilla war. That is why the COC considered it necessary "to participate in and lead mass struggles of the people on all fronts – economic, political and cultural – and establish the Party's political leadership over mass organizations to organize armed struggles of the peasantry based on an Agrarian Programme and for building up base areas in the countryside.“

2^ND PHASE

Thereafter he ventured on a second phase, in which he methodically welded a treasure house of literature: The Indian Big Bourgeoisie: Its Genesis, Growth and Character (1985, then revised and enlarged in 2000); India and the Raj 1919-1947: Glory, Shame and Bondage (vol. 1: 1989; vol. 2: RUPE, 1995; re-published as a single volume in 2007 by Sahitya Samsad); The Historic Turning-Point: A Liberation Anthology (in two volumes,1992 and 1993); The Tragic Partition of Bengal (2002); Naxalbari – Before and After: Reminiscences and Appraisal (2009). Apart from these, he published several shorter publications or booklets: Development Planning in India: Lumpen Development and Imperialism (RUPE, 1997, 2002); Imperialism’s Tightening Grip on Indian Agriculture (1998); India’s Constitution and Its Review (RUPE, 2001); The Himalayan Adventure: India-China War of 1962 – Causes and Consequences (RUPE, 2002); and India’s in journals such as Aspects of India’s Economy, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, Economic and Political Weekly, Frontier, Monthly Review, and Visvabharati Quarterly. He dipped his pen as late as 2010, at the age of 92, after which his body simply gave in.

Since the 1980s, Ghosh was not politically active and did not formally belong to any political organization, but handed over the baton to those activists who waged revolutionary struggles in the following years. His academic vigour and political activism were intertwined. The root of his academic work was the Naxalbari struggle, and his academic work planted the theoretical breeding ground for the activists to bloom in the later phases of the revolutionary movement.

His arduous toil in the second phase were never ends in themselves; but part and parcel of serving the same cause to which he devoted his energies in the earlier phase. Now no longer in a position to directly participate in the revolutionary movement, he took up the mantle of neglected political tasks of that movement as if it was his very duty, in particular, the analysis and substantiation of the character of India’s ruling classes, the nature of modern India’s historical development and political economy, the revolutionary struggles of the Indian people to transform Indian society, and the political leadership of that revolutionary movement. No author has as classically analyzed the nature of the Indian big bourgeoisie.

He nourished revolutionary optimism at every juncture and placed unwavering faith in an India emancipated from exploitation and that the Indian Communist revolutionary movement would emerge triumphant sometime in the near or distant future. Many of his old associates were disillusioned with the future of the Indian revolution and joined the reactionary camp, but Ghosh never relented in holding the baton of the ideals he cherished. No intellectual gave the politics of Naxalbari such a concrete frame or shape to revive its politics.

SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT BOOKS BY GHOSH   

 In India and the Raj 1919-1947, no historian has as analytically diagnosed the collusion or complicit role of the bourgeoisie with imperialism and exploded the myth of conventional historiography of 1947 independence as Suniti Ghosh did. He surgically contrasts the domain of the politics of the people of revolutionary violence with the domain of elite politics, which seeks to secure a place within the social order.

The book investigated Gandhi’s early experiments with Satygagraha, the collaboration of the Indian bourgeoisie with imperialism, the repression in Jallianwala Bagh and Chauri-Chaura, civil and criminal disobedience, the hypocrisy of nonviolent nationalism and goals and strategies of the Congress. In his book, he illustrated how the Gandhi-led Congress consistently acted on the behest or patronized the industrialists and landlords, as well as appeased religious politics and a grounded analysis illustrated how the Congress was devoid of genuine mass character and never took into its fold genuine anti-colonial uprisings. He projects the economics of a comprador bourgeoisie with intrinsic detail that did not divorce links with imperialism and explained how Congress leaders appeased or operated in hand and glove with the landlord classes. Ghosh evaluated how the Tat as, Birlas, or Singhanias acted as brokers for British capital and differentiated the comprador bourgeoisie from the national bourgeoisie.

In  ‘Himalayan Adventure –India-China 1962 War, Ghosh most comprehensively analyzed how it was India or Nehru who was on the offensive in the 1962 Indo-China War, by violating the McMahan line agreement. Even some Indian generals admitted this. He extensively quotes Neville Maxwell.

Ghosh logically probed the collusion of superpowers, the USSR and the US to conspire against China and promote Indian expansionism. They backed India’s declaring war on China and India’s claim over Tibet, which was part of China. Earlier appeals from China for negotiations for a peaceful settlement found no echo in the hearts of the Nehru.  However, in 1960 Nehru agreed to Chou En-lai’s proposal to meet. The Chinese prime minister accompanied by Chen Yi, China’s foreign minister, came to India in April 1960 to negotiate a peaceful settlement.  However, the hosts were not quite friendly; Nehru had assured the Indian hawks that there would be ‘talks’ but no ‘negotiations’. The decision of the Indian ruling classes to go to war with China was, as the Times of India noted, a political decision – a decision that conflicted with military advice. This political decision invited a rebuff from China under which the Indian army, the Indian government, and Nehru reeled.  In a short span of  20-24 October, the Chinese forces overran Indian positions, penetrated the NEFA territory, and occupied Towang (not far south of the McMahon line), but halted and again began diplomatic exchanges.  But Nehru was his old self-righteous, apt to turn truth on its head and determined not to enter into negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the boundary problem.

In Naxalbari before and after, in incisive detail, Ghosh made a balanced appraisal of the CPI ((ML), formed in 1969. Most illustratively, he showed how Naxalbari revolutionized Indian history and how the party shaped the rebellion of all oppressed classes. Ghosh most dwelled in his analysis of how the movement was based on the mass character and how it was a turning point in the history of India. He projected how the party, uprising, and masses were an integral part of revolutionary change and symmetrical synthesis of the party with the armed struggle and mass movement.

Although a great admirer of Charu Mazumdar, CPI(ML), and Naxalbari , Ghosh was critical of left adventurism’. He refuted the abandoning of mass organizations and movements, the path of ‘annihilation of the class enemy ‘, and the party's authoritarianism which was unable to obstruct all forces to converge. Instead of placing the blame on Charu Mazumdar solely, he asserted that the fault of the setback was due to a lack of collective leadership.

He dwells on the crystallization of the evolution of the Naxalbari revolt into the broader ideological zone, illustrating the dichotomy between the theory of armed struggle and the peaceful, parliamentary road to socialism.

Ghosh’s critique lucidly portrays the leader’s autocratic style of functioning, while it has no reflection of factional rivalry or personal bitterness. His book revealed that Mazumdar negated from the party the criticism of his line by Zhou Enlai and Kang Sheng, the two top CPC leaders, when the former emissary, Souren Bose, met them in Beijing in mid-1970.

In India’s Constitution and Its Review Suniti made a scientific dissection of the essence of the Indian Constitution, portraying its class character, exploring how the Constitution could not protect the genuine rights of the people and how in practice lot of what was enshrined was nonexistent.

WEAKNESSES

In my personal view, Ghosh failed to analyze in what ways the path of the Indian revolution had unique characteristics being divergent from the Chinese path of people's war or how its semi-feudalism erred.

 I also disagree with his evaluation that the 1947 independence was a mere transfer of power or his complete negation of the role of MK Gandhi as a colonial agent, denying his role in bridging the link of Congress with the masses.

However penetrative his analysis was Ghosh failed to expose the autocratic nature of the formation of the CPI (ML) in 1969 or give comrades like Tarimela Nagi Reddy, DV Rao,  Kanu Sanyal, Kanhai Chaterjee or organizations like the  Andhra Pradesh Coordination Committee or Dakshin Desh, their proper due contribution to the revolutionary movement.

*A freelance Journalist. Thanks for the information from the Research Unit for Political Economy and Amit Bhattacharya in Frontier Weekly. He personally met Suniti Kumar Ghosh in Kolkata in 2009.

 

The fascist BJP has to be defeated in the 2024 Elections

The fascist BJP has to be defeated in the 2024 Elections but only through a genuine revolutionary alternative and not the tailiism of bankrupt political parties.

HarshThakor, Freelance Journalist

                

The 2024 elections are starting when India is on the verge of turning proto-fascist. In every sphere, the Hindutva saffron brigade has penetrated every sphere or rung of the social order and destroyed the very fabric of the constitution. Persecution of minorities, particularly Muslims has reached heights unscaled, laws or bills have been passed violating constitutional norms and jeopardising the projection of farmers and industrial workers like never before, economic disparity is wider than ever before, inflation and unemployment have sky-rocketed at an unprecedented level, democratic dissent has been crushed more mercilessly than ever in the nation’s history, corporates have been given free license to plunder at a level unmatched, and communal fervour has gripped every corner the nation, giving overtones of fascist regimes of the 1930s.

The political scenario e of India has been dramatically reversed after the 2014 Lok Sabha elections when the BJP-led NDA (National Democratic Alliance emerged victorious. Development was the only agenda of the BJP government in the election of 2014, which shifted to Kashmir and CAA-NRC in 2019. Recently, the Indian government has amended the preamble and scrubbed the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ without any constitutional amendment. The government thus unscrupulously evaded the very base of constitutional morality in the Indian constitution. Regretfully there is no organised mass movement sprouting in the country, which illustrates the need to elevate the process of development of consciousness with historical bondage n of religious beliefs and feudal relations and practices far stronger than democratic values. 

Background (based on CPI-Maoist statement)

India is going for elections to the 18th Lok Sabha in 7 phases starting from April 19th to June 1^st, 2024. The proto-fascist BJP is fortified to the last tooth converting the country into a Hindu state. Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) has been on its agenda for a long time along with the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) and the present decision to implement CAA just before the announcement of the election schedule was to win over the majority Hindu votes, which will strip the minimum rights of the people of all other religions. While the electoral parties are busy trying to make alliances to defeat the BJP, their disunity in seat sharing only helps the BJP.

Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS), the Hindutva organisation has around forty crore members together in its affiliated organisations penetrating various classes and sections of people all over the country. This is where BJP is rooted in its neo-fascist ideology with the saffron forces constituting above one-third of voters of the country fed brainwashed with  Hinduism, that unleash brutality at its most ruthless height on the people. With this massive penetration and absolute support from the imperialists and big corporate houses, the BJP government is carving the path to build ‘Vikasit Bharat’ (Hindu Rashtr) by 2047with this election is playing a major role in achieving its agenda. 

Parliamentary democracy in India is illusions Elections violate democracy and the percentage of polling in any General election is just 60 percent. Real democracy can never materialise in the existing semi-feudal conditions where money power, caste power, and religious frenzy are dominant..

While the ruling classes of India project it to be the biggest democracy in the world they mask an autocratic country where Parliamentary elections are held only to consolidate and strengthen comprador bureaucracy and to stabilise the exploitation and oppression by the imperialists of the world, domestic comprador bureaucratic bourgeois and feudal classes on the oppressed people of the country. Despite the t natural resources aplenty, the government is making the country more and more subservient to imperialist aid and technology. ‘Vikasit Bharat-2047’ road map, Make in India, Digital India, Smart Cities, Start-up India, Skill India, and Fasal Bima schemes are examples of instruments of domestic and foreign corporate companies. 

When the BJP captured power for the second consecutive term in 2019, it enforced several anti -Muslim, anti-nationality, anti-tribal traitorous Acts such as Triple Talaq, CAA, etc. UCC and other such Acts that transform the country into a Hindutva fascist autocratic state if it comes to power for the third time. 

Manipulating proceedings for election victory

The issue of electoral bonds exposed the BJP government‘s merciless strategy to escalate it’s monopoly. The bonds were money donated to the electoral parties, in lieu of expenditure on elections. The Supreme Court directed the State Bank of India 2 (SBI) to give all details. It must convey to the Election Commission the names of bond buyers, the dates and amounts of purchase, and the names of those who benefited. The Election Commission should communicate the data on its website to the people. Bonds already bought but not deposited were ‘directed’ to be returned. 

When the SBI finally submitted the details of the 18,871 purchases and 20,421 encashment of the electoral bonds worth Rs. 12,551.1 crores, out of which BJP owns Rs. 6,060 crores, it lacked details of the alphanumeric numbers and the serial numbers that reveal accurate details.

BJP is plundering funds in a big way to spend it in elections. ‘Buying’ the elected candidates, creating pandemonium in the state governments, and bringing them into its fold. It is robbing the funds of the opposition parties in the name of silly matters only to help BJP come to power. So, this is not at all a true democracy as it claims to be. 

The facts about the expenditure of BJP on advertisements additionally show the extent of its corruption. BJP spent Rs. 30 crores in 30 days starting from the end of January this year on streaming ads, mostly videos according to Google Ads Transparency Centre data. It clearly shows that the present fascist rule of the BJP in India is no more a ‘democracy’. 

Communal thrust

Another major problem faced by the people under BJP rule, especially tribal and Muslim people was evacuation. According to a report “Forced Evictions in India: 2022 & 2023” by The Housing and Land Rights Network (HLRN), 58.7 percent of the evictions were in the name of ‘slum clearance’, ‘removal of encroachment’ or ‘beautification of the city’. 35 percent were for infrastructure projects, 4.7 for environmental projects, and 0.7 percent for disaster management. One and a half lakh houses were demolished by the government in which 7.4 lakh people were forcefully evicted. In 2023 alone, more than 5 lakh people were evicted in Delhi being in the first place. Courts always were in favour of evictions. This is nothing but marginalisation of tribal and Muslim communities from society. The elections would intensify attacks on these communities with the goal of the BJP to provoke  Hindu sentiments and gain votes. 

The inauguration of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya on 22nd January was one issue that the BJP used as a weapon its political propaganda. Crores of people’s money was spent for the purpose. The construction of Ram Mandir, also a part of the agenda of Brahmanic Hindutva was done at the time before elections to exploit the sentiments of the majority Hindu people of the country. It also illustrated the Supreme Court’s anti-people character that gave judgment in favour of the construction in 2019.

Modi government created a propaganda machine of Nazi scale against the ongoing people’s movements through feature films. After the infamous ‘Kashmir files’ and Kerala story’ that Modi personally also promoted in his public speeches, ‘Bastar, the Naxal story’ and ‘Joram’ in the background of the revolutionary movement in Bihar-Jharkhand were released in March.

Regressive political economy

In the past decade of BJP’s rule in the leadership of Modi, Lakhs of workers and employees were deprived of employment in favour of modernisation of corporate enterprises. Casualisation and outsourcing of labour intensified in unprecedented volumes. Lakhs of small and medium-scale industries were closed to facilitate big corporate tycoons. 26 crores of agricultural labours are living miserable lives. 2.7 lakh central government 3 permanent employees were removed in the name of lay off and VRS. 15 lakh workers were removed from 7 big public sector organisations. Employees, small traders, students, unemployed, women and all the oppressed sections are facing the wrath of Brahmanic Hindutva Fascism. The Hindutva forces in power are making these oppressed classes a scapegoat in favour of the corporate houses. Such policies gain validity through winning the elections. 

BJP Modi government about India projects India as the third biggest economy, and the everyday turnover of various sectors testify that it is development pertaining to domestic and foreign corporate companies. As per the fresh assessment of IMF, the GDP of the US is 26.8 trillion dollars, and per capita income is 80.41 thousand dollars. India is in the 5th place with a GDP of 3.7 trillion dollars and per capita income of 2.6 thousand dollars. As per the statistics of per capita income, our country is the poorest in the G-20 alliance. 

The loan on the people of the country is estimated to reach Rs. 169 lakh crores by March 2024. In addition to this, the state governments made a loan of another Rs. 76,09,926 crores. The government collected more than Rs. 26, 51,919 crores from the people in the name of fuel taxes on petrol, diesel, and cooking gas. An amount of Rs. 1,70,000 crores are being collected per month in the name of GST. In addition to all the taxes paid by the people, the central government collects cess (special taxes) in education, health, agriculture, railways, coal mines, roads, infrastructure, exports, and other sectors. 6,68,400 hectares of forests were destroyed in our country in 2015-2020 under Modi’s rule. India is in the 155th place among 188 countries in the World Environment Protection Index in 2021. 

These facts and figures illustrate that the governments elected through elections only serve the coffers of imperialists, comprador bureaucratic capitalists, and big landlords.

Weaknesses within the anti-fascist Movement and correct approach

Unlike Western developed nations, Indian parliamentary democracy only had a semblance of bourgeois democracy, being still subservient to imperialism after 1947, with landlordism, morally not abolished. It is incorrect to equate the fascist tendencies of the ruling classes in India with the historical fascist phenomena in Nazi Germany or Italy. In those countries, these phenomena crystallized as a tirade against bourgeois democracy - while in a country like ours, bourgeoisie democracy never completely established its social base. Thus it is fruitless to adopt an anti-fascist classical model applicable to fascist countries of the 1930’s in Europe.

Regretfully there is no organised mass movement sprouting in the country to check the fascist wave which illustrates the need to elevate the process of development of consciousness with historical bondage n of religious beliefs and feudal relations and practices far stronger than democratic values. 

The last mass movement was against the CAA-NRC which engulfed almost every part of the country. The way that the students took part in this movement was outstanding exposing the general masses to the draconian laws of the country, under which a number of activists were arrested on fabricated charges of UAPA. It projected the character of the proto-fascist nature of the state, where the entire Delhi police administration rallied behind the RSS forces and even the Apex court accepted the Delhi Police’s biased investigation into the Delhi pogrom case. However, this movement scarcely mobilised the peasantry and working-class population. Being controlled largely by petty-bourgeois leaders and limited constituency-holding forces. (This para is based on views of Nazariya) 

The farmers' movement of Samyukta Morcha, has waged valiant resistance but its leadership has in important stages blunted the revolutionary resistance, and been complicit in promoting electoral politics.

The traditional left parties hardly undertook political education inside their trade unions to build solidarity on the class line and instead projected   Hindu-Muslim Ekta. The parties were correct to build communal harmony between the two communities, but they failed to wedge class solidarity and a working-class movement to force fascist forces to retreat. The opportunistic tendency of left parties misleads common people that all left parties are bidding for only gaining votes and winning a few seats in the election. Here, we need to distinguish between the opportunistic tendencies of the progressive section

Today most organized forces of the state and the on-ground fascist movement are operating complicity and are working hand-in-hand to suppress the people’s voice.

The history of Congress and other ruling parties in India is more or less the same. The Congress never eradicated or even restricted the flow of foreign finance penetration from imperialists. Under the regime of Congress, the first idol of Ram-Sita was installed inside Babri Masjid, and entry was restricted. Congress stormed into Nagaland to suppress their demand for nationhood. It paid no heed to the Sachhar Committee report in the interest of minorities, Congress introduced draconian laws like AFSPA, NSA, UAPA, etc. It was sold Indian agriculture to the WTO. This very Congress opened the gates of Babri Masjid in 1986 to sponsor Rath Yatra and brick worship. This very party opened the gates to globalisation and liberalisation, which sold out India to corporates. It was Congress, which gradually dismantled the industrial sectors. It never effectively combated RSS-like organizations and morally and craftily tried to support the idea of Hindutva Nationality. The BJP has merely sharpened the path that Congress was treading in the past.     It has also been a common e phenomenon of opposition parties like Aam Aadmi Party or Janata Dal to pamper Hindu politics and the indirect agenda of Hindutva and corporations.

To stir a revolutionary wave or combat against fascism, the independent initiative of the proletariat is an imperative task. The independent initiative of the communist party is essential to establish its own base within the masses.  Without an independent initiative, the communist party will ultimately be tailing behind the big parties (they might be social-democrats or comprador bureaucratic parties). The electoral left parties firmly adhere to the fact that the current regime can only be toppled through the electoral means and there is no other way to combat it. They also endorse the idea that the current political regime of BJP-RSS is fascist, and must be overthrown in the election. (This para is the view of Nazariya journal).

A united front like the Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) under the leadership of Congress will not check the wave of fascism, because most of the parties harbour fascist inclinations and show electoral opportunism. The history of fascism manifested that it takes a violent mass movement stirred by the direct influence of the ruling class. There. We have witnessed throughout history that, if the communist forces delay action the feeling of nationality blunts the class consciousness of the working class too. The working-class people rallied behind the Nazi forces not because they cherished d the working condition or facilities provided by Hitler, but due to the weakness of the proletarian leadership to act on time.. If democratic forces fail to undertake collective organized action against fascism, it will rob us of time to cut its weeds.(view of Nazariya)

There are also deviationist trends amongst Communist revolutionaries. Some like the CPI (Maoist) call for election boycotts, without establishing alternative organs of democratic power or requiring revolutionary democratic consciousness. In spite of great sacrifices and strides the people often become hapless spectators and indirectly the Maoists give support to ruling class candidates. On the other hand CPI(ML) factions like ‘Red Star’, ‘Mass-line ‘, or ‘Class Struggle’ participate in the parliamentary process without properly securing a re-organized vanguard party., with the Communist party being in scattered bits. This is capitulationism. The only correct approach is undertaking an active political campaign, calling for building a democratic alternative, utilising contradictions of ruling class parties.

Therefore, to confront the fascist attack of the Modi government, the true secular and democratic sections of the people need to garner a common solution around class and democratic issues. All the people of the working classes, including the tribals, Dalits, Women, oppressed religious minorities, and oppressed nationalities who are victims of the special oppression of the special Indian state,  intellectuals, journalists, and other democratic sections, who are under the attack of this Hindutva corporate fascist attack need to build a front. This fascist attack needs to be combated at the ideological political plane as well as in the arena of practical class struggle. Communal nationalism in particular should be strongly fought in the ideological field, with anti-imperialism the real Rashtriyaism (concluding para is stand of Punjabi journal Surkh Leeh).

I recommend reading the pamphlet of the Democratic People’s Front of India convened by Arjun Prasad Singh which in the most balanced manner projects what the doctor orders in 2024. Elections.

Harsh Thakor is a freelance journalist .Thanks information from Nazariya blog, Surkh Leeh and CPI(Maoist)  statement on Maoist path.