2008-05-26 16:13
Hello Comrades
This letter is from former activists of the CPI(M) who till today feel that it is the CPI(M)
which stands out in the Indian political spectrum as a party with a difference and best
suited towards ushering in socialism in the long run.
The former activists are not necessarily involved in field activism at the present point due to their professional obligations, but they are involved in spreading the right message and explaining party standpoints in situations where party activists can not enter. We spend at least 10% of our day thinking and debating and talking about the party, sometimes between ourselves and more within groups of people who are not exposed to the general exposure of CPI(M).
The base reason for writing this letter is to convey our analysis, communicate our respect, express our anguish and bring in a different perspectives and views of the party's policies as we learn from the reflections of the general mass while we reason with them regarding CPI(M).
The immediate trigger for this letter is definitely the recent panchayet elections in Bengal. Our views, analysis or comments have been in shape long before the elections but we feel that it is a time to communicate the same in case it makes any difference in how the party as a whole reviews this performance.
Our Analysis: We strongly feel that this mandate does not necessarily mean a reversal towards the industrial policy followed by the left Front government. Apparently that is surfacing as a reason, but we feel that it's more related with the breakdown of the trust that used to bind the party and the people in rural belt. The mistrust can be traced to
1. Absence of vigorous movements on class agendas like health and education for rural people aimed at increasing their quality of life as a critical left alternative agenda of the communist party after successful land reforms and decentralization through panchayats. This has lead to the blurring of the fundamental difference in class outlook of CPI(M) and other reactionary political forces in the eyes of the poor people.
2. The need for employment generation through industrialization under a neo-liberal economic structure is a government agenda mandated by the current time scale, but that's the domain of the Left Front Government. Party forgot to differentiate its role as a protector of people's rights while allowing for the industrialization to happen with minimum infringement on the well being of the poor. The difference between the government agenda and the party agenda got brutally mixed up and added to the mistrust stemming from point 1 which has substantially depleted the party's credibility and class position in the eyes of the people.
3. A new chain of people who use the party for furthering their personal interest are seeing the industrialization initiative as a chance to further their personal interests. This middle rung can be seen as leaders in all areas and has dealt a severe blow and form the topping over points 1 and 2. This happened primarily as they couldn't find revolutionary content in the government's current agenda of industrialization, losing focus on the critical class agendas like health and education.
Our Respect: We feel this is the only party that has been clear in its policy initiatives and strategic position as far as industrialization is concerned. The revolutionary work that was carried out through the epochal land reforms and decentralization procedure is still ringing on the minds of the people, but this support is being taken for granted of late. The class struggle needs intensification and the party needs to clearly raise the flag by putting forward original communist party led movements aimed at the poor even while working with government and its all inclusive policies.
Our Anguish
The political theory of working within a difficult time with intensified attack from reactionary forces and a very strong capital is getting diluted due to two reasons.
1. Governments policies are being surprisingly replaced as party's policies with built up theorizations. All these theories have an unstated assumption regarding the perpetual need for the left front government.
2. A middle rung of leaders who are interfacing people with personal interests in mind and using these theories to hoodwink the party workers, leading to revisionist tendencies.
Our Perspective
We would like to stress on the following:
1. Governance is for the interest of all, specially aimed at the poor, towards a left alternative path which differentiates the left front government distinctly with other reactionary party led governments.
2. Party is furthering the interests of a specific class with the understanding that the struggle will finally benefit mankind as a whole.
3. The party has decided to enter in to governance more because it can intensify the class struggle and establish the critical difference between left and right run governments and to bring in the collective consciousness that bourgeois democracy has limitations, and so PDR is the way forward towards emancipation.
4. Government and the party may have to carry out certain policies out of different political compulsions as running a state government in a highly centralized political structure like India has its own disadvantages and inflexibilities. The cardinal error of identifying or theorizing such policies as party policies is enough to dilute the base of the party, again leading to revisionist tendencies.
Governments can die, party cannot. Party is supreme with its stated agenda of the PDR. Such inherent contradictions between the party and the government might eventually lead to quitting power but the ultimate objective of ensuring the PDR will gain because of intensified role of party and enhancement of credibility to the class who matters.
The party formed the government and is running it primarily to provide relief to toiling masses of the state. Simultaneously, the government is also the most important weapon and showcase (in the hands of party) for the long run protracted struggle towards People's Democratic Revolution. Ideological dilutions due to governmental compulsions take us to a position where the party has to rethink its so-called "strategies," particularly when the party's core mass base is in serious danger of erosion.
We would urge that our views be circulated and debated within the party not because we are correct in all contentions, but to throw in different dimensions in the debate, which (we are sure) the party is going to begin as a follow-up to the Panchayat poll results.
Amit Chatterjee
Saibal Bishnu