DEAR COMRADES
Our
movement is passing through a very important phase at present. After a year's
fierce struggle some definite proposals regarding the constitutional reforms
have been formulated by the Round Table Conference and the Congress leaders
have been invited to give this [Original transcription is unclear -- MIA
Transcriber]…think it desirable in the present circumstances to call off their
movement. Whether they decide in favour or against is a matter of little
importance to us. The present movement is bound to end in some sort of
compromise. The compromise may be effected sooner or later. And compromise is
not such ignoble and deplorable an thing as we generally think. It is rather an
indispensable factor in the political strategy. Any nation that rises against the
oppressors is bound to fail in the beginning, and to gain partial reforms
during the medieval period of its struggle through compromises. And it is only
at the last stage — having fully organized all the forces and resources of the
nation — that it can possibly strike the final blow in which it might succeed
to shatter the ruler's government. But even then it might fail, which makes
some sort of compromise inevitable. This can be best illustrated by the Russian
example.
In 1905 a
revolutionary movement broke out in Russia. All the leaders were very hopeful.
Lenin had returned from the foreign countries where he had taken refuge. He was
conducting the struggle. People came to tell him that a dozen landlords were
killed and a score of their mansions were burnt. Lenin responded by telling
them to return and to kill twelve hundred landlords and burn as many of their
palaces. In his opinion that would have meant something if revolution failed.
Duma was introduced. The same Lenin advocated the view of participating in the
Duma. This is what happened in 1907. In 1906 he was opposed to the
participation in this first Duma which had granted more scope of work than this
second one whose rights had been curtailed. This was due to the changed
circumstances. Reaction was gaining the upper hand and Lenin wanted to use the
floor of he Duma as a platform to discuss socialist ideas.
Again
after the 1917 revolution, when the Bolsheviks were forced to sign the Brest
Litovsk Treaty, everyone except Lenin was opposed to it. But Lenin said:
"Peace". "Peace and again peace: peace at any cos t— even at the
cost of many of the Russian provinces to be yielded to German War Lord".
When some anti-Bolshevik people condemned Lenin for this treaty, he declared
frankly that the Bolsheviks were not in a position to face to German onslaught
and they preferred the treaty to the complete annihilation of the Bolshevik
Government.
The thing
that I wanted to point out was that compromise is an essential weapon which has
to be wielded every now and then as the struggle develops. But the thing that
we must keep always before us is the idea of the movement. We must always
maintain a clear notion as to the aim for the achievement of which we are
fighting. That helps us to verify the success and failures of our movements and
we can easily formulate the future programme. Tilak's policy, quite apart from
the ideal i.e. his strategy, was the best. You are fighting to get sixteen
annas from your enemy, you get only one anna. Pocket it and fight for the rest.
What we note in the moderates is of their ideal. They start to achieve on anna
and they can't get it. The revolutionaries must always keep in mind that they
are striving for a complete revolution. Complete mastery of power in their
hands. Compromises are dreaded because the conservatives try to disband the
revolutionary forces after the compromise from such pitfalls. We must be very
careful at such junctures to avoid any sort of confusion of the real issues
especially the goal. The British Labour leaders betrayed their real struggle
and have been reduced to mere hypocrite imperialists. In my opinion the diehard
conservatives are better to us than these polished imperialist Labour leaders.
About the tactics and strategy one should study life-work of Lenin. His
definite views on the subject of compromise will be found in "Left
Wing" Communism.
I have
said that the present movement, i.e. the present struggle, is bound to end in
some sort of compromise or complete failure.
I said
that, because in my opinion, this time the real revolutionary forces have not
been invited into the arena. This is a struggle dependent upon the middle class
shopkeepers and a few capitalists. Both these, and particularly the latter, can
never dare to risk its property or possessions in any struggle. The real
revolutionary armies are in the villages and in factories, the peasantry and
the labourers. But our bourgeois leaders do not and cannot dare to tackle them.
The sleeping lion once awakened from its slumber shall become irresistible even
after the achievement of what our leaders aim at. After his first experience
with the Ahmedabad labourers in 1920 Mahatma Gandhi declared: "We must not
tamper with the labourers. It is dangerous to make political use of the factory
proletariat" (The Times, May 1921). Since then, they never dared to
approach them. There remains the peasantry. The Bardoli resolution of 1922
clearly denies the horror the leaders felt when they saw the gigantic peasant
class rising to shake off not only the domination of an alien nation but also
the yoke of the landlords.
It is
there that our leaders prefer a surrender to the British than to the peasantry.
Leave alone Pt. Jawahar lal. Can you point out any effort to organize the
peasants or the labourers? No, they will not run the risk. There they lack.
That is why I say they never meant a complete revolution. Through economic and
administrative pressure they hoped to get a few more reforms, a few more
concessions for the Indian capitalists. That is why I say that this movement is
doomed to die, may be after some sort of compromise or even without. They young
workers who in all sincerity raise the cry "Long Live Revolution",
are not well organized and strong enough to carry the movement themselves. As a
matter of fact, even our great leaders, with the exception of perhaps Pt.
Motilal Nehru, do not dare to take any responsibility on their shoulders, that
is why every now and then they surrender unconditionally before Gandhi. In
spite of their differences, they never oppose him seriously and the resolutions
have to be carried for the Mahatma.
In these
circumstances, let me warn the sincere young workers who seriously mean a
revolution, that harder times are coming. Let then beware lest they should get
confused or disheartened. After the experience made through two struggles of
the Great Gandhi, we are in a better position to form a clear idea of our
present position and the future programme.
Now allow
me to state the case in the simplest manner. You cry "Long Live Revolution."
Let me assume that you really mean it. According to our definition of the term,
as stated in our statement in the Assembly Bomb Case, revolution means the
complete overthrow of the existing social order and its replacement with the
socialist order. For that purpose our immediate aim is the achievement of
power. As a matter of fact, the state, the government machinery is just a
weapon in the hands of the ruling class to further and safeguard its interest.
We want to snatch and handle it to utilise it for the consummation of our
ideal, i.e., social reconstruction on new, i.e., Marxist, basis. For this
purpose we are fighting to handle the government machinery. All along we have
to educate the masses and to create a favourable atmosphere for our social
programme. In the struggles we can best train and educate them.
With these
things clear before us, i.e., our immediate and ultimate object having been
clearly put, we can now proceed with the examination of the present situation.
We must always be very candid and quite business-like while analysing any
situation. We know that since a hue and cry was raised about the Indians'
participation in and share in the responsibility of the Indian government, the
Minto-Morley Reforms were introduced, which formed the Viceroy's council with
consultation rights only. During the Great War, when the Indian help was needed
the most, promises about self-government were made and the existing reforms
were introduced. Limited legislative powers have been entrusted to the Assembly
but subject to the goodwill of the Viceroy. Now is the third stage.
Now
reforms are being discussed and are to be introduced in the near future. How
can our young men judge them? This is a question; I do not know by what
standard are the Congress leaders going to judge them. But for us, the
revolutionaries, we can have the following criteria:
1. Extent of responsibility transferred to the shoulders
of the Indians.
2. From of the Government institutions that are going to
be introduced and the extent of the right of participation given to the masses.
3. Future prospects and the safeguards.
These
might require a little further elucidation. In the first place, we can easily
judge the extent of responsibility given to our people by the control our
representatives will have on the executive. Up till now, the executive was
never made responsible to the Legislative Assembly and the Viceroy had the veto
power, which rendered all the efforts of the elected members futile. Thanks to
the efforts of the Swaraj Party, the Viceroy was forced every now and then to
use these extraordinary powers to shamelessly trample the solemn decisions of
the national representatives under foot. It is already too well known to need
further discussion.
Now in the
first place we must see the method of the executive formation: Whether the
executive is to be elected by the members of a popular assembly or is to be
imposed from above as before, and further, whether it shall be responsible to
the house or shall absolutely affront it as in the past?
As regards
the second item, we can judge it through the scope of franchise. The property
qualifications making a man eligible to vote should be altogether abolished and
universal suffrage be introduced instead. Every adult, both male and female,
should have the right to vote. At present we can simply see how far the
franchise has been extended.
I may here
make a mention about provincial autonomy. But from whatever I have heard, I can
only say that the Governor imposed from above, equipped with extraordinary
powers, higher and above the legislative, shall prove to be no less than a
despot. Let us better call it the "provincial tyranny" instead of
"autonomy." This is a strange type of democratisation of the state
institutions.
The third
item is quite clear. During the last two years the British politicians have
been trying to undo Montague's promise for another dole of reforms to be
bestowed every ten years till the British Treasury exhausts.
We can see what they have decided about the future.
Let me
make it clear that we do not analyse these things to rejoice over the
achievement, but to form a clear idea about our situation, so that we may
enlighten the masses and prepare them for further struggle. For us, compromise
never means surrender, but a step forward and some rest. That is all and
nothing else.
HAVING
DISCUSSED the present situation, let us proceed to discuss the future programme
and the line of action we ought to adopt. As I have already stated, for any
revolutionary party a definite programme is very essential. For, you must know
that revolution means action. It means a change brought about deliberately by
an organized and systematic work, as opposed to sudden and unorganised or
spontaneous change or breakdown. And for the formulation of a programme, one
must necessarily study:
1. The goal.
2. The premises from where were to start, i.e., the
existing conditions.
3. The course of action, i.e., the means and methods.
Unless one
has a clear notion about these three factors, one cannot discuss anything about
programme.
We have
discussed the present situation to some extent. The goal also has been slightly
touched. We want a socialist revolution, the indispensable preliminary to which
is the political revolution. That is what we want. The political revolution
does not mean the transfer of state (or more crudely, the power) from the hands
of the British to the Indian, but to those Indians who are at one with us as to
the final goal, or to be more precise, the power to be transferred to the
revolutionary party through popular support. After that, to proceed in right
earnest is to organize the reconstruction of the whole society on the socialist
basis. If you do not mean this revolution, then please have mercy. Stop
shouting "Long Live Revolution." The term revolution is too sacred,
at least to us, to be so lightly used or misused. But if you say you are for
the national revolution and the aims of your struggle is an Indian republic of
the type of the United State of America, then I ask you to please let known on
what forces you rely that will help you bring about that revolution. Whether
national or the socialist, are the peasantry and the labour. Congress leaders
do not dare to organize those forces. You have seen it in this movement. They
know it better than anybody else that without these forces they are absolutely
helpless. When they passed the resolution of complete independence — that
really meant a revolution — they did not mean it. They had to do it under
pressure of the younger element, and then they wanted to us it as a threat to
achieve their hearts' desire — Dominion Status. You can easily judge it by
studying the resolutions of the last three sessions of the Congress. I mean
Madras, Calcutta and Lahore. At Calcutta, they passed a resolution asking for
Dominion Status within twelve months, otherwise they would be forced to adopt
complete independence as their object, and in all solemnity waited for some
such gift till midnight after the 31st December, 1929. Then they found
themselves "honour bound" to adopt the Independence resolution,
otherwise they did not mean it. But even then Mahatmaji made no secret of the
fact that the door (for compromise) was open. That was the real spirit. At the
very outset they knew that their movement could not but end in some compromise.
It is this half-heartedness that we hate, not the compromise at a particular
stage in the struggle. Anyway, we were discussing the forces on which you can
depend for a revolution. But if you say that you will approach the peasants and
labourers to enlist their active support, let me tell you that they are not
going to be fooled by any sentimental talk. They ask you quite candidly: what
are they going to gain by your revolution for which you demand their
sacrifices, what difference does it make to them whether Lord Reading is the
head of the Indian government or Sir Purshotamdas Thakordas? What difference
for a peasant if Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru replaces Lord Irwin! It is useless to
appeal to his national sentiment. You can't "use" him for your
purpose; you shall have to mean seriously and to make him understand that the
revolution is going to be his and for his good. The revolution of the
proletariat and for the proletariat.
When you
have formulated this clear-cut idea about your goals you can proceed in right
earnest to organize your forces for such an action. Now there are two different
phases through which you shall have to pass. First, the preparation; second,
the action.
After the
present movement ends, you will find disgust and some disappointment amongst
the sincere revolutionary workers. But you need not worry. Leave sentimentalism
aside. Be prepared to face the facts. Revolution is a very difficult task. It
is beyond the power of any man to make a revolution. Neither can it be brought
about on any appointed date. It is brought can it be brought about on an
appointed date. It is brought about by special environments, social and
economic. The function of an organized party is to utilise an such opportunity
offered by these circumstances. And to prepare the masses and organize the
forces for the revolution is a very difficult task. And that required a very
great sacrifice on the part of the revolutionary workers. Let me make it clear
that if you are a businessman or an established worldly or family man, please
don't play with fire. As a leader you are of no use to the party. We have
already very many such leaders who spare some evening hours for delivering
speeches. They are useless. We require — to use the term so dear to Lenin — the
"professional revolutionaries". The whole-time workers who have no
other ambitions or life-work except the revolution. The greater the number of
such workers organized into a party, the great the chances of your success.
To proceed
systematically, what you need the most is a party with workers of the type
discussed above with clear-cut ideas and keen perception and ability of
initiative and quick decisions. The party shall have iron discipline and it
need not necessarily be an underground party, rather the contrary. Thought the
policy of voluntarily going to jail should altogether be abandoned. That will
create a number of workers who shall be forced to lead an underground life.
They should carry on the work with the same zeal. And it is this group of
workers that shall produce worthy leaders for the real opportunity.
The party
requires workers which can be recruited only through the youth movement. Hence
we find the youth movement as the starting point of our programme. The youth
movement should organize study circles, class lectures and publication of
leaflets, pamphlets, books and periodicals. This is the best recruiting and
training ground for political workers.
Those
young men who may have matured their ideas and may find themselves ready to
devote their life to the cause, may be transferred to the party. The party
workers shall always guide and control the work of the youth movement as well.
The party should start with the work of mass propaganda. It is very essential.
One of the fundamental causes of the failure of the efforts of the Ghadar Party
(1914-15) was the ignorance, apathy and sometimes active opposition of the
masses. And apart from that, it is essential for gaining the active sympathy of
and of and organising the peasants and workers. The name of party or rather,* a
communist party. This party of political workers, bound by strict discipline,
should handle all other movements. It shall have to organize the peasants' and
workers' parties, labour unions, and kindred political bodes. And in order to
create political consciousness, not only of national politics but class
politics as well, the party should organize a big publishing campaign. Subjects
on all proletens [Original transcription is unclear -- MIA Transcriber]
enlightening the masses of the socialist theory shall be wit in easy reach and
distributed widely. The writings should be simple and clear.
There are
certain people in the labour movement who enlist some absurd ideas about the
economic liberty of the peasants and workers without political freedom. They
are demagogues or muddle-headed people. Such ideas are unimaginable and
preposterous. We mean the economic liberty of the masses, and for that very
purpose we are striving to win the political power. No doubt in the beginning,
we shall have to fight for little economic demands and privileges of these
classes. But these struggles are the best means for educating them for a final
struggles are the best means for educating them for a final struggle to conquer
political power.
Apart from
these, there shall necessarily be organized a military department. This is very
important. At times its need is felt very badly. But at that time you cannot
start and formulate such a group with substantial means to act effectively.
Perhaps this is the topic that needs a careful explanation. There is very great
probability of my being misunderstood on this subject. Apparently I have acted
like a terrorist. But I am not a terrorist. I am a revolutionary who has got
such definite ideas of a lengthy programme as is being discussed here. My
"comrades in arms" might accuse me, like Ram Prasad Bismil, for
having been subjected to certain sort of reaction in the condemned cell, which
is not true. I have got the same ideas, same convictions, same convictions,
same zeal and same spirit as I used to have outside, perhaps — nay, decidedly —
better. Hence I warn my readers to be careful while reading my words. They
should not try to read anything between the lines. Let me announced with all
the strength at my command, that I am not a terrorist and I never was, expected
perhaps in the beginning of my revolutionary career. And I am convinced that we
cannot gain anything through those methods. One can easily judge it from the
history of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. All our activities
were directed towards an aim, i.e., identifying ourselves with the great
movement as its military wing. If anybody has misunderstood me, let him amend
his ideas. I do not mean that bombs and pistols are useless, rather the
contrary. But I mean to say that mere bomb-throwing is not only useless but
sometimes harmful. The military department of the party should always keep
ready all the war-material it can command for any emergency. It should back the
political work of the party. It cannot and should not work independently.
On these
lines indicated above, the party should proceed with its work. Through
periodical meetings and conferences they should go on educating and
enlightening their workers on all topics. If you start the work on these lines,
you shall have to be very sober. The programme requires at least twenty years
for its fulfillment. Cast aside the youthful dreams of a revolution within ten
years of Gandhi's utopian promises of Swaraj in One Year. It requires neither
the emotion nor the death, but the life of constant struggle, suffering and
sacrifice. Crush your individuality first. Shake off the dreams of personal
comfort. Then start to work. Inch by inch you shall have to proceed. It needs
courage, perseverance and very strong determination. No difficulties and no
hardships shall discourage you. No failure and betrayals shall dishearten you.
No travails (!) imposed upon you shall snuff out the revolutionary will in you.
Through the ordeal of sufferings and sacrifice you shall come out victorious.
And these individual victories shall be the valuable assets of the revolution.
LONG LIVE
REVOLUTION
2nd February, 1931
No comments:
Post a Comment