Sunday, May 25, 2008

Celebrate 41st Anniversary of the Great Naxalbari Upsurge

Today, 25th May, 2008 is the 41st anniversary of great Naxalbari upsurge. Naxalbari was not mere resistance of peasantry against the feudal system—it was the outcome of the two line struggle of the communist movement in India. The great Telengana movement was betrayed by the revisionist leadership of the CPI. But, they cannot destroy the revolutionary inspiration of the people for a fundamental change in the Indian society. Against the Trotskyite-Titoist-Khrushchevite revisionist line, against the parliamentarian line of Indian communist leadership, the revolutionaries inspired by the great debate and great proletarian cultural revolution of China under the leadership of Com. Mao waged a two line inner-party struggle (initially within CPI, then in CPI(M)), which resulted great Naxalbari movement. The single spark in Naxalbari soon took the shape of prairie fire.

Since then Naxalbari is not just a name of a small village of north Bengal—it is the name of the correct revolutionary politics. However, in the last forty years revisionist trends have also been emerged within the revolutionary camp. Most of the revisionist trends emerged in the form of parliamentary line—different groups have appeared in the parliamentary politics calling it as a tactics, then deviation from the line of Naxalbari become clear on the question of the state character, the stage of Indian revolution and other fundamental points.

Since 2000, a different trend under the influence of Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) has been developed in the revolutionary camp of India. This trend has some definite features; it negates Com. Stalin and puts Com Mao against Com Stalin; cannot see the crisis of imperialism and therefore negates the formulation of Com. Lenin that “Imperialism is the highest and moribund stage of capitalism.” Essentially it denies the possibility of victory of socialism in a particular country in the present context. It therefore puts forward the revisionist line of Trotsky-Tito and Khrushchev in different package. Interestingly and shamelessly, while advocating the line of these well known revisionists, RIM and its followers claim it as the teaching of Com. Mao and as the third and the highest stage in the development of Marxism—in their words, “Maoism”. In Nepal we see the outcome of their revisionist line in the practice.

On the occasion of 41st anniversary of Naxalbari, we call for a fierce ideological struggle against the revisionist line of RIM and their followers in the revolutionary camp of India.

Editorial Board
Red Barricade

Red Salute to Naxalbari.
Red Salute to the martyrs.
Long live Marxism-Leninism-Mao thought.
Down with imperialism, comprador capitalism and feudalism.
Down with revisionism.

What People Can Accomplish Through Election?

This question seems vital today as in Nepal, CPN(M) is going to be in power through parliamentary election. We are aware of the CPN(M)’s claim that they had been waging people’s war for ten years for the aim of new democratic revolution. Now, CPN(M) leadership, looks very happy, pretends that they have accomplished whatever they aimed for. It obviously raises couple of questions. Firstly, what was their aim? Secondly, if their aim could be accomplished through parliamentary election then what had been the point of shedding blood of the Nepalese people through people’ war? It would have been better to struggle for a fair parliamentary election. At least it could have saved the lives of people.

Therefore, the standpoint of CPN(M) needs analysis a bit.

If their aim was new democratic revolution, then it is quite clear that whatever CPN(M) could accomplish is not the new democratic revolution. Revolution is something which deals with the production relation. If the production relation remains the same as before, then it is something else than revolution. We are aware that the contradiction between Nepalese people and the imperialism, comprador capitalism (and expansionism) and feudalism constitute the principal contradictions of the Nepalese society. Therefore, abolishing the class enemies and thereby changing production relation can only bring the fundamental change in Nepal. It includes the revolutionary land reformation and confiscation of imperialist-comprador capitals. Interestingly, Prachanda has now become the advocate of the running of imperialist and comprador capitals in Nepal. So, they are not going to bring any fundamental change in terms of principal contradictions of Nepal. The only difference it can make is the removal of the king. Imperialism-expansionism-comprador capitalism and feudalism will be untouched as they have been before. Therefore, the victory of CPN(M) in election will not bring any revolution in the Nepal.

Some can still argue that CPN(M) may exert its power while it will be in the ministry and gradually bring the fundamental change. In practice it never happened in the world and theoretically it is against the teaching of Com. Mao. The idea of bringing change through parliamentary election is nothing but a form of the ‘peaceful transition’, the revisionist line promoted by Khrushchev against which Communist Party of China under the leadership of Com. Mao waged a two line struggle. Accepting the idea of bringing fundamental change through parliamentary election is the direct negation of the teaching of Com Mao.

Still the victory of CPN(M) in the election is significant. It confirms that the people of Nepal want a fundamental alteration in the system. As the CPN(M) had been waging armed struggle, people have been hoodwinked by the idea that victory in election is the same as concentrating power of the people’s committee all over the country through new democratic revolution.

Taste of power in a neocolonial type semicolonial-semifeudal country, gradually converts revisionists into fascists. The experience of Left-Front government in three different provinces of India in post-Naxalbari period once again shows the correctness of the line of Naxalbari. In near future, people of Nepal will see the same; how a fiery party gradually gets tamed to serve the interest of the class-enemies and finally turn into fascists.

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Free Binayak Sen Campaign

Her Excellency Mrs. Pratibha Patil May 9, 2008

His Excellency Dr. Manmohan Singh
Prime Minister

His Excellency Mr. Hans Raj Bhardwaj
Minister of Law and Justice

His Excellency Mr. Shri E S L Narsimhan
Governor of Chhattisgarh
Chhattisgarh State

The Honorable Dr. Raman Singh
Chief Minister
Chhattisgarh State

The Honorable Mr. Ramvichar Netam
Home Minister
Chhattisgarh State

The Honorable Mr. Shivraj Singh
Chief Secretary
Chhattisgarh State

We, the undersigned Nobel Laureates, congratulate you on the prestigious international honour that will be bestowed for the first time on a citizen of India. As you are no doubt aware, the Global Health Council (GHC), the world’s largest membership alliance of public health organizations and professionals, has selected Dr. Binayak Sen of Raipur, Chhattisgarh to be the recipient of the 2008 Jonathan Mann Award for Global Health and Human Rights. We write to request that Dr. Sen be enabled to receive the award in person at the GHC's Annual
Conference in Washington, D.C., on May 29, 2008.

We also wish to express grave concern that Dr. Sen appears to be incarcerated solely for peacefully exercising his fundamental human rights, in contravention of Articles 19 (freedom of opinion and expression) and 22 (freedom of association) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights—to which India is a state party—and that he is charged under two internal security laws that do not comport with international human rights standards. We are pleased to learn that Dr. Sen’s trial has, after numerous delays, now begun. While the judicial process involving our professional colleague moves forward, we respectfully request that Dr. Sen be freed from incarceration on humanitarian grounds to receive his award and to continue his important medical work.

Yours sincerely,

Chemistry 2003

Economics 1972

Physics 1997

Chemistry 1996

Chemistry 1988

Physiology or Medicine 2000

Physiology or Medicine 1977

Physiology or Medicine 1965

Physiology or Medicine 2000

Chemistry 1996

Economics 2004

Chemistry 1986

Physiology or Medicine 2006

Chemistry 1986

Physiology or Medicine 1993

Chemistry 1995

Chemistry 1997

Physiology or Medicine 1993

Physics 1964

Physiology or Medicine 1989

Chemistry 1997

Physiology or Medicine 1981


Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Article from Peking Review

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."

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Starvation and Superprofit: Two Sides of the Same Coin

PRICE PINCH- A man brandishes a knife while others carry old currency notes during a demonstration against record-high inflation on Monday in Mogadishu, Somalia. At least five demonstrators were killed when security forces fired at crowds protesting against rising food prices.—AFP

Source: The Statesman, May 6, 2008.

MNCs profit out of crisis

Geoffrey Lean
LONDON, May 5: Giant agri businesses are enjoying soaring earnings and profits out of the world food crisis which is driving millions of people towards starvation, The Independent on Sunday reveals. And speculation is helping to drive the prices of basic foodstuff out of the reach of the hungry.
The prices of wheat, corn and rice have soared over the past year driving the world’s poor ~ who already spend about 80 per cent of their income on food ~ into hunger and destitution.
The World Bank says that 100 million more people are facing severe hunger. Yet some of the world’s richest food companies are making record profits. Monsanto last month reported that its net income for the three months up to the end of February this year had more than doubled over the same period in 2007, from $543m ((pounds sterling)275m) to $1.12bn. Its profits increased from $1.44bn to $2.22bn.
Cargill’s net earnings soared by 86 per cent from $553m to $1.030bn over the same three months. And Archer Daniels Midland, one of the world’s largest agricultural processors of soy, corn and wheat, increased its net earnings by 42 per cent in the first three months of this year from $363m to $517m. The operating profit of its grains merchandising and handling operations jumped 16-fold from $21m to $341m.
Similarly, the Mosaic Company, one of the world’s largest fertiliser companies, saw its income for the three months ending 29 February rise more than 12-fold, from $42.2m to $520.8m, on the back of a shortage of fertiliser. The prices of some kinds of fertiliser have more than tripled over the past year as demand has outstripped supply. As a result, plans to increase harvests in developing countries have been hit hard.

The Independent
Source: The Statesman, May 6, 2008