Bankruptcy of "Peaceful Transition" Fraud: "Non-Congress Governments" —Instruments of Reactionary Rule in India
Peking Review, No. 51, 15th December, 1967.
[Nepal is not the first country in history where communist party accomplished a victory in parliamentary election. It happened in Chile, Indonesia and India before. The following article depicts the view of the Communist Party of China, under the leadership of Comrade Mao over the parliamentary line adopted by so called Indian communists. It is important to mention that in India the “non-congress” government, whose deputy chief minister was Jyoti Basu, the leader of Communist Party of India (Marxist), the major partner of the government did not hesitate to use brutal state repression to combat peasant uprising in Naxalbari.
The parliamentary line to change an existing society is the direct corollary of the “peaceful transition”, the revisionist line promoted by Khrushchev. Therefore, in order to understand the recent development in Nepal, the following article has immense importance. The history of international communist movement is the history of two line struggle. We have to decide which side we are on.
The article is collected from “Spring Thunder Over India--anthology of articles on Naxalbari”, published (1985) by Radical Impression, Kolkata, India. Emphasis is added over some section of the article.--Editorial Board]
The regime in the State of West Bengal which was dissolved by order of the New Delhi Government on 21.11.67 was one of the nine so-called "non-Congress State Governments" set up following the fourth general elections in India last February. These "non-Congress State Governments" were brought into existence with a great deal of ballyhoo, and the traitor Dange clique and the revisionists in the Indian Communist Party boosted them as "democratic" and "people's" regimes established through parliamentary election. But like the rest of the State Governments., in India, they were nothing but instruments of reactionary rule.
The fourth general elections were held at a time when the Congress Party, the chief instrument of the Indian landlords and bureaucrat-comprador bourgeoisie, was beset with difficulties both at home and abroad. In the course of its 20 years rule, the Congress Party, having fully revealed itself before the Indian people as reactionary and traitorous, has lost the magic of its deception. During the election campaign, Indira Gandhi, Morarji Desai, K. Kamraj and many other Congress leading figures were on many an occasion given a rough reception by angry masses who attacked them with stones, bricks, shoes and flower pots. Indira Gandhi herself got a bleeding nose. These were the "votes" cast by the Indian people for the Congress Party.
The Indian reactionaries and their bosses, US imperialism and Soviet revisionism, had realised for some time that it was next to impossible for them to rely on Congress alone to keep firm hold over the entire country. So, in those States where Congress control had been seriously weakened, they propped up the Swatantra, Jan Sangh and other reactionary parties, rajas and politicians as well to form "non-Congress Governments". By giving an appearance of "democratic" multi-party rule, they hoped that the reactionary rule could be preserved. In areas where the people's movement was in high tide, the Indian reactionaries especially felt the need for revisionists of the Indian Communist Party to hoodwink the people.
The reactionary government therefore released a number of Indian revisionists from prison before the polling date so that they could take part in the elections and become MPs or ministers. The Indian Communist Party revisionists on their part badly needed a few post, in the "non-Congress State Governments" to demonstrate the "feasibility" of "peaceful transition"
Thus after the "general elections" while the Congress Party remained in control of the Central Government, by the end of July, "non-Congress Governments" were established in 8 out of the total 16 ( Kashmir not included ).
Since assumption of office, the officials of these "non-Congress State Governments" pretending to be concerned with the welfare of the people, have pat forward slogans designed to deceive and have adopted reformist measures for winning popular favour and stabilizing their rule.
US imperialism and Soviet revisionism, the bosses of the Indian landlords and bureaucrat comprador capitalists, loudly applauded this farce of "democracy". US Ambassador Chester Bowles praised the result of the elections as testifying to the vitality of Indian "democracy". US grain continued to be supplied to the "Communist Government" of Kerala State. New Times, a mouthpiece of the Soviet revisionists, extolled the State Governments of West Bengal and Kerala as comprising "Leftist and Democratic Parties".
Official circles in New Delhi have revealed that it is the intention of US imperialism and Indian monopoly capital to form a "multi-party government", in New Delhi, too, for the purpose of deceiving the people if the Congress Party can no longer maintain its rule from the Centre.
Our great leader Chairman Mao penetratingly pointed out in 1947 that Chiang Kai-Shek's "reorganising the one-party government into a multi-party government" only showed the bankruptcy of Chiang's political trick which were failing as fast as he played them. The trick played by the Indian reactionaries at present are no less despicable and clumsy than those of Chiang Kai-Shek.
All the parties and politicians taking part in the "non-Congress State Governments" speak for the interests of the Indian landlords and bureaucrat-comprador capitalists. Although these reactionary parties display such words as "freedom" and "people" on their signboards, every one of them is pro-US and anti-China to the bone and rabidly against the people.
West Bengal where US and British capital in India is most concentrated reveals the fraudulent character of the "non-Congress State Governments". Harsh feudal exploitation exists to this day in the rural areas. However, in the working programme of the West Bengal "non-Congress State Governments", not a single word is said about countering or restricting the forces of foreign imperialism or the domestic monopolies and feudal forces. It only speaks vaguely of "working for the welfare of the people".
While mouthing fine words in its programme about "fighting unemployment" and creating new "employment opportunities" for the workers, the State Government encourages the domestic and foreign capitalists to ruthlessly exploit and enslave the workers and connives at their summary dismissal.
From early March to May 1, the workers, who have a rich revolutionary tradition, held 144 "besieging" (gherao) actions, and encircled the officer and homes of the capitalists. The State Government repeatedly sent police to suppress the workers with guns and tear-gas bombs. Openly clamouring for the right of the capitalists to receive "due police protection", deputy Chief Minister Jyoti Basu, went in person to conduct so-called "mediation" between the capitalists and the workers' and by suppression and deception helped the capitalists put down the workers' strikes. The bloody suppression of the peasants' revolutionary armed struggle in Naxalbari and other places in Darjeeling District exposed even more glaringly the real features of the West Bengal "non-Congress Government".
In West Bengal and other States where "non-Congress Governments" had been set up, the relation of production have remained the same as under Congress Party rule. Like their Congress predecessor, these State Governments endeavour to preserve and promote the interest of monopoly capital and the landlords. The Indian revisionists, after the elections, sanctimoniously declared that they would see to it that the State Government "protects the interest of the people". But did they strike down the exploiters—the landlords and monopoly capitalists—by force and violence? No. They have instead vilified the armed struggle of the peasants in Naxalbari and tried to assure the peasants that they can well trust the State Government which, so they said, can find a "democratic and peaceful solution" to the agrarian question and solve it "amicably and peacefully", and which can "meet the just demands of the peasantry". This is merely Gandhi's Doctrine of' non-violence plus revisionist hambug. When in power in Kerala in 1957, the Indian revisionists got out an "agrarian reform law" of a reformist character. Now, they do not even raise the slogan of agrarian reform. They are pre-occupied with making contacts with domestic and foreign financial magnates whom they are inviting to invest in Kerala, and this is simply an open license for the ruthless exploitation of the people.
The Indian revisionists have hypocritically assured the people that "in West Bengal and Kerala our ministers have refused to use the police to crush the workers and people fighting a just battle for their jobs and livelihood". However, when confronted with the people's revolutionary struggle, they could no longer conceal their anti-people and counter-revolutionary nature. Facts show that together with the bureaucrats of the Congress and other reactionary parties, they have piled up one blood debt after another to the Indian people, for which history will mete out to them due punishment.
The Congress Government can no longer fool the people, nor can the "non-Congress Governments"'. The Indian people have learnt from their own experience the real meaning of 'parliamentary democracy", "non-Congress Government" and "peaceful transition" publicized by the Indian reactionaries and revisionists.
Under the guidance of Mao Tsetung Thought, the revolutionaries of the Indian Communist Party have led the peasants of Naxalbari and other places to wage revolutionary armed struggles. This is an important sign of the awakening of the Indian people. They will eventually cast off the spell of Gandhism and revisionist humbug about "peaceful transition" to socialism. Sooner or later, they will make violent revolution to overthrow and smash the machinery of the reactionary government. This is a law of historical development.
Our great leader Chairman Mao Tsetung teaches "Revolutions and revolutionary wars are inevitable in class society and without them, it is impossible to accomplish any leap in social development and to overthrew the reactionary ruling classes and therefore impossible for the people to win political power."
