permanent fronts and fora with these parties.
Organizing such forum will disrupt our own initiative
and struggles. The revolutionary party shall exhibit
adequate alertness to unite in the joint struggles and
to come out of them after our purposes is fulfilled.
Our attitude towards five points explained by
CPI(M-L)
s Out party is in full agreement with the first point in
page two.
s Second point in second page cited, “can we think
that some striking form of capitalist exploitation and
the use of modern machinery in agriculture in some
states had put an end to the methods of feudal
exploitation”.
We do not feel till today that the forms of capitalist
exploitation are strikingly open enough in some
states. It is not our party opinion that our country
turned as a capitalist country. It is also our opinion
that as long as semi feudal-semi colonial nature of
our country remains impact it will not transform into
an independent capitalist country. It is not our
opinion that our agriculture turned into capitalist
agriculture. Like that we do not feel that
exploitative forms in agriculture came to an end
with the entry of modern machinery item. The land
is not decentralized from the clutches of feudal
forces. The landless people are not getting land
in a considerable amount from the landlords. The
land is exchanged among the family members of
landlords their relatives and field labourers and
had been and has been protected. The people who
became landless have been suffering untold
miseries as another sector i.e. the industrial sector
did not record the growth and providing no
livelihood, ultimately they depended on agriculture
itself. We feel as the role of machinery has
increased in cultivation the necessity of agriculture
labourers is not abolished.
s In the third page “we think that the feudal economic
social, political and cultural traditions are surviving
depending on each other”. We are in full
agreement with this.
In the third page you have cited about the deeply
entrenched forms of feudal system. We have no
major difference on this. But in our opinion the way
how the imperialists created the comprador
capitalists should also have been cited. Our party
opines that there is no alternative way except new
democratic revolution to root out the deeply
entrenched system.
s “... we must say that it remains a fact that there
are differences in the communist movement and
question of Indian people establishing the state
power of toilers over throwing a rule of fuedalism,
18
imperialism and compradar bourgeoisie on the
basis of proliterian idealogy-Marxism, Lenism, Mao
Tsetung thought likewise there are differences
between the progressive forces reformers, the
courses of movement and the force of communist
movement...cannot we see to idealogical and
political differences objectively and as they are;
make an earnest attempt we debate them in a
healthy and democratic atmosphere basing on the
fact and experiences and strive to overcome them
instead of allowing the differences to reduce into
mutual slandering and branding there by harming
the interest of working class and other toiling
people?”. In a suggestive way the CPI(M-L) Central
Committee probed this question. We may give
patient and polite answer to progressive forces,
reformists and the other agitators, those who do
not know much about this theory. But we don’t know
who are the “communists” cited by this party. If they
are fighting the two revisionist parties they should
be criticized tooth and nail, according to great
teacher Lenin teachings. We feel that there is no
much space for polite methods here. Our party feel
that all revolutionaries must follow the method that
had been followed by Mao and Communist Party
of China(CPC) during Great Debate, while
criticizing the revisionists.
s The Key note of CPI(M-L) probed another
question, “where the communists stand in relation
the manifesto of the communist party-which is the
fundamental programatic document for the
revolutions in the world”. There were no revisionists
in the communist movement when comrades Marx
and Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848.
It explained only about class struggles. It did not
explain about the country and the forms of class
struggles to wage. Marx-Engels drew lessons from
Paris commune and more enriched the manifesto.
During the Russian revolution great teachers Lenin
and Stalin proved that the bourgeoisie democratic
revolution should not the led by the bourgeois
leadership like in the past. Great teacher Mao
developed the theory of Lenin in a backward
country and provided “theory of new democratic
revolution” to Asia, Africa, Latin American countries.
In regard to manifesto many kinds of revisionists
parading in the name of ‘communist’ are cling to
the ruling classes and travelling hand in glove with
the ruling classes. The revolutionaries that are fully
upholding Mao thought are connected with rural
areas, mountains, adivasis, dalits and weaker
sections and seriging day and night to carry forward
the theories enshrined and taught through the
manifesto.
Class Struggle