--classstrugggle-flipmag CS Sep-2018 MKP | Page 18

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