otto's war room banner

otto's war room banner

Sunday, June 20, 2021

India- A tribute to Professor G.N. Saibaba one of the best sons of our land today



 By Harsh Thakor

I am writing this tribute to Jailed Professor G.N.Saibaba, commemorating the third anniversary of the attack on the Urban intellectuals in Mumbai. Professor G.N. Saibaba is in my view today the best son of our land today.  It is hard to visualize a physically impaired person face and resist the iron feet of oppression with the same magnitude.

Professor G.N. Saibaba is the voice of the very oppressed people of India be it, tribals ,peasants, workers, intellectuals, students or minorities. I can never forget times I have spent with him; however short. Saibaba was a figure who crystallised genuine revolutionary democratic resistance, like no one else. Rarely can one meet a person or activist of such a demeanor. Saibaba in and out of jail walls has illuminated the spirit of a revolutionary at it's most superlative height .Arguably no voice in the nation, made the rulers in the Centre  shake or tremor as much as Sai's. The inner spirit that shimmers within him and radiates is the manifestation of the energy which makes  a revolutionary  a truly spiritual person. Arguably he is India’s boldest crusader ever against proto-fascism.

His captivity within jail walls is the most defining point of penetration of proto-fascism at unprecedented levels. Saibaba is without doubt one of the nation's most brilliant intellectuals, having great mastery on Indian economics and crystallisation and consolidation of Neo-fascism worldwide.

What I am curious about is why the state today wishes to entrap Professor Saibaba within prison walls. After all he is not a leader of a Maoist guerilla squad or a militant of the JKLF. No doubt he was part of an affiliate that extended sympathies or solidarity towards the Maoist movement, but that in now way entails charges of sedition. Probably Saibaba confronted or embarrassed the pro-fascist BJP at its very core or doorstep more than any one. His arrest in May 2014 possibly defines a new era in Indian proto-fascism with the spark turning into a prairie fire with the incarceration of urban intellectuals three years ago. I ask myself are democratic revolutionary activists more of a threat to the repressive social order than those waging a war in the forests of Bastar. In the history of India considering he is handicapped on a wheel chair, no democratic activist has been framed or fabricated to such a degree, similar to the British treating Bhagat Singh as seditious and a criminal. A new turn has taken place in the tilt towards fascism with even civil rights or non Maoist activists framed like Anand Teltumde, Father Stan Swamy  and Gautam Navlakha.

I admired his deep understanding on why India was still a semi-feudal society and not turned capitalist. He defended the essence of the formulation of 1947 Independence by Suniti Kumar Ghosh as fake in 'India and the Raj:

At the very root he confronted dogmatism and welcomed intellectuals who wished to integrate caste question and movements with the Communist movement and Marxist ideology.

Saibaba could connect the Communist movement or link it in many spheres whether on nationality question, fascist attacks, on minorities, on movements of workers and peasants and attacks on it, on imperialist hegemony or expansionist ambitions etc. Few activists ever confronted the large scale repression on the masses of Kashmir and their right to self -determination with the magnitude of  Sai, who would bang every nail in a wall towards its cause. Few comrades ever were better masters in rekindling revolutionary democratic spirit, from the depths of despair.

In confronting Operation Greenhunt he invested every ounce of his energy, exposing the fascist designs of the state through patronising penetration of Corporates to loot the tribals. He took up the cudgels of the minorities like few crusaders travelling all around the country to project their turmoil and organising conventions. In Adivasi protests like in Nyamagiri Saibaba raised his bold voice in support.

In 1997 his role played a very important part in the success of the convention of the All India people's resistance forum on the fake nature of Indian Independence after 50 years, in Mumbai. To me it was landmark event in the history of the revolutionary movement with diversity at it’s largest scale, touching on every front. No Seminar in India better illustrated that 1947 independence was merely a transfer of power and in such depth portrayed the agrarian revolutionary movements in Bihar, Dandkaranya  and Andhra Pradesh or the nationality struggles in Assam and Kashmir.

In 2004 in Mumbai Resistance Saibaba played an important role in shaping the convention. No doubt it was landmark event, being the 1st of it’s kind.

Saibaba was the major pivot in the success of the nation wide All India Peoples Resistance forum campaign exposing barbaric state repression in Andhra Pradesh and Bihar, in 1999, which was the 1st ever event of it's kind. Rallies and hall meetings were organised in Hyderabad, West Godavri , Vishakapatnam, Bellamkonda Guntur in Andhra Pradesh; district Sangrur, Gurdaspur,Jalandhar, Rampura Phool, Faridkot in Punjab ,Patna, Aurangabad, Buxar and Bhagalpur, in Bihar; Delhi, Assam, West Bengal, Maharashtra and Gujarat. It concluded with a grand event at Guntur, with thousands of people thronging on the city. In sum 50 solidarity programmes were staged in this campaign as declared in the report by Saibaba. I can’t forget the manner and degree in which it aroused the feelings of people in sympathy with the opressed. No All-India programme perhaps before ignited the spark against state sponsored repression, engulfing such a wide area or penetrating such depth in the masses. Though deputy secretary and not formal secretary it was Saibaba who morally led the Revolutionary Democratic Front. Or controlled it’s operations.

In the gravest of situations with repression in highest magnitude of intensity Saibaba steered the ship, enabling the All India People's Resistance forum and later the Revolutionary Democratic Front to shimmer the torch of liberation. What was most commendable was in spite of facing fascistic repression a series of state level conferences were held of the revolutionary Democratic front in Uttarakhand, Punjab and Jharkhand. From 2011-12, in preparation for the central conference in Hyderabad. It was also commendable that where inactive or suppressed the Revolutionary Democratic Front created solidarity fronts of other organisations to keep the fire of revolution burning. He had a great role to play in the success of the 2nd conference of the All India People's resistance forum in Sangrur in 2000 and the 1st conference of the Revolutionary Democratic Front in Hyderabad in April 2012. I was greatly impressed that in spite of grave restrictions and massive effort by the rulers to block participants the event took place, with delegates from Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand, Punjab, West Bengal, Maharashtra and Uttarkhand. To me it was one of the most memorable events in India’s revolutionary history.

His moral support and guidance played a great role in the Democratic Students Union in Delhi, flourishing. Saibaba's great balance and composure combined with organisational capabilities played a major role in RDF able to steer it's boat in the stormiest of seas. It was Saibaba who lit the spark for may a revolutionary democratic programme in Delhi of the Committee for release of political prisoners like in April 2013 protesting the hanging of Islamic political prisoners, like Fazal Guru and Mohammad Kasab.

Saibaba had deep conviction that India had turned into a fascist state in the same light as China did under Chiang Kai Shek. He asserted that fascism would take a different kind of form in third world countries and quoted late Comrade Zhou En Lai. Unlike many in the Maoist camp Saibabba correctly made no distinction between what was earlier Mao Zedong thought and now called Maoism. He staunchly expressed the fact that they were one and the same which I appreciated.

Saibaba was great admirer of the Communist Party India(Maoist) but would also express admiration towards other groups like the C.P.RC.I.(M.L) and later the Communist Party India (Marxist-Leninist)New Democracy. He held professor Anand Teltumbde in great esteem, as well as the journal 'Aspects' of RUPE.I can't forget his admiration for late Comrade Arvind, in spite of his adhering to path of Socialist revolution, and not new democratic,.

Sai gave maximum moral support to the Peoples Union for Democratic Rights, Delhi as well as the Civil Liberties committee of Telengana and Andhra Pradesh.

He showed great open mindedness when he praised the books on History of Indian Communist movement by the Tarimela Nagi Reddy Memorial Trust.

Under his tutelage, journal Jan Pratirodh was regularly published that portrayed the fascist repression and people's struggles. It was one of the finest and most illustrative magazines within the revolutionary democratic camp.

In spite of earlier belonging to the stream or trend of the C.P.I.(M.L) Peoples War Group, Saibaba praised the contribution of the erstwhile Maoist Communist Centre in equal esteem, claiming that at one stage it was stronger than the erstwhile Party Unity Group and PWG together. He even took me to meet hospitalised late Sushil Roy, who was one of the founders of MCC.

Saibaba expressed great admiration for late Comrade Harbhajan Sohi in so tenaciously defending Marxism-Leninism Mao Tse Tung thought till the very end, and greatly admired the work of the CPRCI (ML) in confronting Operation Green hunt. He was also a great admirer of the work of the Malakangiri Zilla Adivasi Sangh in Orissa praising its mass line perspective and being armed to confront class enemies.

With unflinching determination he condemned and waged a moral war against the barbaric arrest of democratic activist as a well as treatment within prison walls. No activist in hall meeting was more impactful in exposing how colonial form of oppression still exists. I cant forget his most touching speech at the CDRO All-India contention in Delhi in 2016 in September, where he touched upon the ascendancy of fascism, at the very backbone. He even congratulated the bravery of the Civil Liberties Committee in Telengana for exposing the horrors and fake nature of the staged encounters.

I was amazed to read the report of activities of the Revolutionary Democratic Front in the 2012 conference in the secretary's report. A huge number of programmes were successfully staged braving fascist forces and repression. like the RDF conference itself. The most significant aspects were highlighting the saffron communal terror and barbaric repression in Kashmir. I hope all democrats read the report of the RDF programmes. Today the organisation is unofficially banned everywhere apart from Punjab.

After his arrest a series of campaigns and conventions were stage all over the nation, particularly in Delhi, Punjab and Telengana. What was heartening and positive that sections participated from many different revolutionary streams as well as the effort of Civil liberties groups like PUDR, Delhi and CLC, Andhra Pradesh and Telengana.

However Professor Saibaba in my view did have his flaws. He could hardly demarcate from the erroneous categorization of Comrades Nagi-Reddy and DV Rao as advocates of stage theory or economist line. I also feel he could not gauge the weaknesses in the theory and practice of the C.P.I.(Maoist) and it's early constituents in terms of military line or practice within mass organisations. No doubt one must support his defence of the contribution of the Maoists as the leading revolutionary force. Saibaba to me, was not able to completely grasp or practice the building of a genuine revolutionary democratic organisation or front mobilising the working class, peasantry, agricultural labourers and other sections. He could not effectively confront the sectarian trends within the revolutionary democratic front that advocated boycott of parliamentary elections or converting it into a forum to support the revolutionary armed struggle in India. Saibaba could hardly see the positive side of Gautam Navlakha as a writer and activist, and was very critical of his stand on Lalgarh and overall work.

He also to an extent did not grasp the weakness in terms of proletarian content of nationality movements. It is my strong view that after the formation of the Revolutionary Democratic Front in 2005, the democratic tradition or broad base of the All India People's resistance was lost .The criticism in Journal 'Peoples Resistance' which is the organ of the AIPRF in April 1996 of why comrades like late Khagen Das left it is a must read in assessing sectarian dynamics and massline. AIPRF stood up for defending mass movements and not giving slogans for armed struggle and election boycott. Comrades like Khagen Das wished to convert it into a virtual party outfit or forum. The revolutionary Democratic Front revealed weakness on the urban front. This very weakness of building such broad based movement to sprout that has paved the path for proto-fascist arrest of urban intellectuals like Saibaba himself.

It is debatable whether he was correct about the practice of the Rahul foundation belonging to the Communist League of India stream ,which he analysed as promoting Ngoisation of Marxism. Saibaba also felt that on the agrarian  front the C.P.RC.I,(M.L) was practicing economism. He praised the CPRCI(ML) theoretically ,but differed on question of practice. In sum Saibaba could not completely grasp the proletarianary revolutionary development within the Communist Revolutionary camp of being splintered, and over estimated the role of the C.P.I.(Maoist).To me he reflected weakness on grasp of mass line and evaluating the C.P.I.(Maoist) as the re-organised party, rather than a component of a revolutionary stream. He did grasp the essence of the massline of the Communist Party Re-Organisation Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist), particularly in regard to integrating with mass movements of workers and peasants.

Still I suggest all cadres to read all of Professor Saibaba's interviews where he has projected the neo-or proto fascist nature of the pro-Hindutva state to the very core. Most illustratively he explains the predominance of semi-feudalism and why it is the principal contradiction. Saibaba also analytically highlights the importance of understanding the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in light of the revolutionary movements today. His defence of the Maoist party is analytical. I hope all democrats read the journal 'Jan Pratirodh'  and read earlier issues of English magazine ‘People’s Resistance.’

One of the most touching occurrences in modern times has been the presence and voice of his wife Vasantha Kumari  in public meetings. Rarely have women displayed more courage or displayed spirit of coal burning in a furnace as Vasantha, how most courageously relegated the personal aspect and put the confrontation with proto-fascism in the forefront. A life story of how she met and grew up with Sai as a partner is heart touching.


We stand on the opposite side of arrogant-imperialist capitalists such as Mike Pompeo

By Steve Otto

Most weeks I look in The (Sunday) Wichita Eagle for article ideas. Many weeks I find nothing. But there are weeks when I find plenty to write about. Today I discovered a whole page of ideas. They were all written from a conservative point of view.
To start with we had Mike Pompeo,[1] who is now...uh...well, nothing. He wrote an entire article and the best part of it is when he admitted that The New York Times called him "worst Secretary of State in history." And they were right. His article is called Don't back down in our fight for American values. In this, he intends to fight against the progressive left and he never plans to wear down. That's not surprising. This country is full of really bad ideas and he is a major proponent of such bad ideas. What he refers to as American values are actually bullying other nations (AKA imperialism) and the worshiping of really rich people, mostly $millionaires and $billionaires here in this country (AKA capitalism).[2] 
In this fight, which he is determined to carry out, he wrote:

"Our resistance to the Left's socialism and the woke cancel culture is a worthy fight, especially as they try to cancel us."

What he is telling us is nothing new. From Richard Nixon, to Ronald Reagan and now to the gone but not forgotten Donald Trump, I have had a full life-time of struggling against these ass holes and I'm sure they will never stop trying to poison the minds of the young.
I'm also sure that Pompeo does not just include democratic socialists and real Marxist when he uses the word "socialism." He uses a lot of terms that I hear being used by members of the right all the time, such as cancel culture. Most right-wingers make no distinction between President Joe Biden, Former President Barack Obama and the real socialists of this country. Most of us on the left do not consider centrists such as Biden, to be leftist and definitely not socialist. (at this point I am also including democratic socialists as socialists mainly because they call themselves that and the claim to want real socialism, unlike most Democrats and liberals who embrace capitalism.) He is also write that we on the left want to cancel him and his achievements. Again from his own writing:

"America the  most exceptional nation the world has ever known, and we can never give an inch. Especially now that the Biden Administration is actively undoing the good work we did."

At times he is right. Many Democrats and others in office, are trying to cancel the damage he and his former boss, Trump, have made. I also know that Biden will not cancel some of the worst actions of former president Trump. For example he does not plan to cancel the crippling sanctions on Venezuela (the topic of another of The Wichita Eagle article, "Maduro has only himself to blame in Venezuela").
Those sanctions are crippling his economy and that hurts EVERYONE living there. Those kind of sanctions are cruel, unnecessary and this country uses them to try and bully foreign leaders into submission. These sanctions are used all over the world and are the most damaging to poor third world, underdeveloped countries. Not all of this countries enemies are socialist, but our leaders and pro-imperialist and pro-capitalist legislators (which is most of them today and until a few years ago was nearly ALL of them over the past 30 years). For example Trump put almost complete sanctions on Iran, which is Islamic, but not really socialist.
One advantage our pro-capitalist leaders love about sanctioning Venezuela is that they can say to the socialists of this country; "see what happens when you chose socialism. The economy is a mess and we can all blames socialism." They like to say that about Cuba. But I have been to Cuba[3] and my experience has taught me to know better. The country functions well and the main problems they have, economically, is that the US has sanctioned them to death. They even ban US citizens from traveling there. The Pastors for Peace(IFCO) group that I went with got around that ban by flying out of Mexico.
And that brings me to a letter to the editor someone wrote about Vice President Kamala Harris's visit to Guatemala. It wasn't the opinion of the letter writer that got my attention. I used to follow the Revolutionary movements in Guatemala, the guerrillas known as URNG. That was an umbrella group that included four basic armies, The Guatemalan Army of the Poor, The Guatemalan Party of Labour, The Organization of People in Arms and The Rebel Armed Forces. As with guerillas in other Latin American countries, they excepted a cease fire in 1996 and a program that allow them to function as a political party. The fighting from some of these groups began in 1960. But little has been gained since the end of the war. Guatemala today is a very poor basket case of a nation. As is the situation in El Salvador, the poverty in these nations is extreme and with no real way to struggle politically, many people take part in violent gangs.
For the people living in these countries there is a sense of hopelessness. And so many come to the US hoping to have some kind of a future. The real solution to the poverty in those countries is to develop some kind of industry and the development of a living wage. Trump simply tried to build a wall and focused on keeping these poor people out. Conservatives like to call these people illegal and blame them for breaking the law. They also like to blame Democrats for their lack of enthusiasm in keep illegals out. But in reality the Democrats do little more than just ignore those people.
For the last century the US has developed a kind of Apartheid like system. People living above the Mexican border (US and Canada) live as first world people. People below that border live as third world people and most live in extreme poverty. The US has never made any real effort to change that, in fact they have worked to keep those people as poor and underdeveloped as possible.
To my knowledge there are no US elected politicians who have spoken in favor of serious development to get those people out of the desperate poverty they live in. That has to be part of the solution and at present it is not even being discussed.
So we on the left must continue to fight for a better tomorrow. I don't see that as anti-American values. Anti-capitalism—YES! Anti-imperialism—YES! We don't need to be arrogant. We can value living in harmony with each other.

[1] Formerly he was a representative for the US 4th district of Congress, head of the CIA and Secretary of State. 

[2] To understand my contempt for capitalism see: Facebook won't print it – but the question remains – would I really kill for the revolution?

[3] See:

Cuban travelogue—socialist system examined—“meet the President”—Part 1

Cuban travelogue—Cuba’s system examined—“Coop farm, Rock music, The cult of personality”—Part 3

Cuban travelogue—Cuba’s system examined—“racism, freedom of speech and homosexual rights”—Part 4

Cuban travelogue—Cuba’s system examined—“Health care and religion”—Part 5

Socialism does not offend me and it should not offend anyone accept the greedy trolls of the capitalist right

The new Constitution and the future of Cuba

Friday, June 18, 2021


By Harsh Thakor

Why inspite of 54 years since Naxalbari uprising today the party and revolutionary movement remains splintered-Harsh Thakor?

In spite of 54 years since the epic Naxalbari uprising and formation of the Communist Party India (Marxist-Leninist) (CPI (ML) the movement is hardly moving in the direction to re-organise the party. 

A series of conflicting and opportunist trends and theoretical weaknesses are crippling the development of an organised movement. This is disheartening when fascism of the Hindutva variety has reached a height as never before.

Firstly, there is still lack of clarity on the aspect of the principal contradiction and the main mode of production. A protracted people’s war concept has not been devised in accordance or with respect to the unique characteristics of India. Many still fail to understand the importance of feudalism being the principal contradiction and not capitalism, imperialism or the comprador bourgeoise. Two, sections within the communist revolutionary camp has revised the formula to principal contradiction being "alliance of imperialism and feudalism'', the other "between" comprador bureaucrat bourgeoisie and masses, between "capitalism and masses" and "with neo-colonialism". All these fail to understand that feudalism is still the chief prop and imperialism and capitalism can accentuate or intensify only by the sharpening of contradiction between feudalism and broad masses. The only section of the non Maoist camp with clarity on this question is the Communist Party Re-Organisation Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist). The CPI (ML) New Democracy and the CPI (ML) led by Viswam classify "alliance of feudalism and imperialism as principal while CPI (ML) Red Star classifies neo-colonialism as principal. Maoist Communist League of India sections feel principal contradiction is with capitalism. Even the C.P.R.C.I. (M.L) is unable to characterise or define the true nature of feudalism in India as distinct from China earlier.

The Maoist trend in spite of immortal sacrifices fails to evaluate subjective factors prevailing or rectify practice of leading or working within mass organisations. Even if removing necessity of upholding Maoism in practice mass organisations are still treated like front organisations, without being awarded sufficient democratic identity. After the recent action of killing of  22 Jawans  launched in Bastar in April I got  a most insightful response from Comrade Nimol Mazumdar .

 Some observations:

“A. tactically they took the operation in the wrong time. When there is a large mass movement going on in one part of the country, which is largely peaceful, this kind of action can give the government legitimacy to frame and violently overthrow the protest. These actions could have also given the  Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) a lifeline in the state elections. Even if we don't think that BJP can be defeated through electoral means, one should not give them undue advantage in the electoral arena. But thankfully none of the above two incidents have happened yet.

‘B. Even in regards to protracted war, we must look back at exactly what dividends the tactical counter offensive campaigns (tcoc) are paying to the Maoists. Are their mass bases increasing? Are they infiltrating through the army ranks? Are they opening more liberated zones? I don't think any of these things are happening. “

C. “The Maoists have shrunk a lot in the last decade, they have lost a large chunk of their space in the east of India. They need to reconsider their strategy and tactics. “

D. “Their have been many intellectuals and cadres of the party who have been arrested. The party had failed to launch even a successful mass movement against those arrests. All this shows their weakness in grabbing the issues at hand.”

E. “In a war, killings can happen, but we must have a propaganda wing strong enough to make waves through the masses and justify the actions. The Maoists presently lack that. Thus this yearly tcoc is going in vein every year. People are forgetting every year's action within a couple of months.”

Although doing serious mass work in urban areas and playing a major role in publishing Marxist-Leninist-Maoist[1] literature unfortunately the Rahul Foundation Communist League of India group, staunchly defends its classification of India as a capitalist society and refuses to even support democratic struggles of the landed peasantry in Punjab terming, them as demands of the 'Kulaks' and antagonistic to the rural landless labour. It had a similar stand to the rallies of Adivasis in Maharashtra and all-India morcha of farmers in Delhi. It has done most commendable work in organising the textile workers in Ludhiana winning important demands or wages and permanency and pursued consistent political education. Still it displays a tendency of placing too much emphasis on intellectual study and seminars and not sufficient work to build class mass organisations, which they mainly deploy for propaganda. No doubt they have some of the sincerest-activists who are above all politically enlightened but often because of sectarianism fail to integrate with the broad revolutionary movement. In their view now there is no use in organising workers in factories as they are so scattered and it has to be done in the bastis (slums) of the workers. It also sees no relevance in joining the struggles or doing work in the organised labour class. No doubt there are some of the most creative work they have done amongst steel roller and transport workers in Delhi, particularly in initiating political education classes but still feel there is defective understanding in practice. Sadly today it is even participating in parliamentary election setting up candidates. Ironically in the Delhi farmers agitation it classed the peasants as Kulaks and a reactionary class, antagonistic to the agricultural labourers.

The other Communist League of India faction CLI (RC) group places more emphasis on revolutionary mass work rather than propaganda but because of wrong theoretical understanding on mode of production cannot play an overall positive role. The most positive tendency of the CLI off the Ramnath section in Punjab that leads the Inquilabi Kendra and plays an important role in mass revolutionary struggles and political protests. It analyses Punjab to be capitalist which is erroneous but still supports peasant struggles against suicides, for loan waivers and for remunerative prices. Today it guides the Bharatiya Kisan Union(Dakaunda).

The trend that has destroyed the very citadel or foundation of Naxalbari and  acting most against the revolutionary mass line today is the CPI (ML) Red Star group. No doubt it is a  progressive organisation in it’s own right and well-meaning and flashed its pages of journal Red Star, morally against neo-fascism. However Red Star group has resorted to complete open party functioning and dismantled the centralist or Bolshevised structure of the party. Under influence of its erroneous evaluation of India becoming a neo colony it has rejected the concept of new democratic revolution and advocated united front with many liberal leftist forces. It supports peasant struggles or protests only from an anti-imperialistic perspective and fails to expose the true enemies of the peasantry. In practice it tails the revisionist left parties. Through its advocation of patriotic democratic front. No doubt for a period it did some very commendable work and most determinedly guided the Bhangar tribal movement, but eventually they made a major compromised practice although they do not formally support candidates of revisionist parties or opposition parties, they are virtually the same as CPI (ML) Liberation. It has also launched a vendetta against the Communist Party India (C.P.I(Maoist) classifying them as terrorists or narodniks. Evaluations of India as a neo-colony has Trotskyite[2] overtones, even alleging mistakes of Lenin, Stalin[3] and Mao in evaluating it. It’s method of party building too violates essence of Leninism.

The CPI (ML) led by Viswam accepts India as semi-feudal and commits itself to New Democratic Revolution. However, although sincere in its objective and attempting to be least sectarian, tends to with revisionist parties often calling them for seminars or joint meetings or rallies. However, they hardly demarcated with the politics of the left parties and there was a criticism to parts of their 10-point agenda by the CPI (ML) New Democracy Chandanna faction, highlighting aspect of unity with left democratic forces. Leaders of CPl spoke on this very platform against communal fascism and economic oppression which was eclectic.

The most progressive sections in the non-maoist camp are the CPI (ML) New Democracy, the PCC-CPI (ML) and the CPRCI (ML). Quantitatively New Democracy group is the largest and taking the biggest initiative in the country to oppose the rising neo-fascism in India through seminars, protests and rallies. Although ecclectic in formulation the determination of the PCC group to resist the fascist trend and be part of organised movements without sectarian approach in Bengal is admirable.

The mantle of the legacy of principled struggle against open banner of the party was carried on by the CCRI that later merged into the CPRCI (ML). Today the most correct approach towards principled re-organisation outside the boundary of the Maoist camp is by the Communist Party Re-Organisation Center of India (ML).

The Communist Party Re-Organisation Centre of India (Marxist-Leninist) or  CPRCI(ML) is theoretically the soundest organisation, particularly on practice in elections upholding that active political campaign is the correct tactic today and not that of 'active boycott' or 'participation'. In it’s view subjective conditions do not prevail today to undertake armed struggle with the state of the party  weak and splintered. It still has the largest following and most qualitative practice of mass line in states of work like Punjab or arguably even Orissa. And earlier working class section in West Bengal. But there is no adequate development of its trend nationwide through building mass organisations. Sadly it brings out no regular party organ or has any online blog or website. To publish its statements. Secretism  is it’s chief hindrance, publishing no open party publications  or never publicly displaying revolutionary literature. It has also made no critical analysis or review of the caste system. It failed to initiate mass political programmes on 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution and 50 years of Naxalbari. In my view more than sectarian tendencies of the C.P.I.(Maoist) or right deviationist tendencies of other streams ,it is the failure of the development of the proletarian revolutionary line of the C.P.R.C.I.(M.L)  that has not given any effective pivot ,binding force or citadel to the Indian Naxalite camp. Comrade Hindol Majumdar made a most articulate and sound analysis.

Quoting Comrade Hindol Mazumdar “When it comes to CPRCI(ML) I can guess many of their comrades are at Tikri Border, however their silence even after almost a year of protest is very strange. Given a chance, I'd like to participate and work with them to understand where the problem is taking place. In my opinion, the secret party organization makes sense. But your party shouldn't be so secret that the prospective cadres do not even know the party's name! That will only act as a hindrance. It can also be understood as your inability at taking the job of party building seriously. Even a secret party organization should come out with their analysis, with their propaganda, with their campaign, posters etc regularly, that is the only way we can assess their stance, only way we can say whether the party is veering towards economism/left wing infantile behaviors.”

 “However, the Delhi famers agitation is  a golden opportunity for CPRCI(ML) comrades, to take the leadership of the party building process and the overall CR Movement in India. If they miss it, it'll take five to ten years for another one of this chance to emerge at any part of the country. The MUST focus on party building right now, they must focus on drawing other CR groups and strengthening and reinforcing the process.”

“Almost no open activity that is their biggest drawback. Mass organizations cannot be the be all and end all to revolutionary politics.”

“I think they are missing someone like Harbhajan Sohi. I have only known him from your articles, but I think some of their leadership must get involved with party building in a national scale full time.”

Today there is a trend in the movement which openly projects the party banner to the masses and emphasise importance of mass organisations. It is linked to groups participating in the Parliament without sufficient development of the vanguard party. Such groups participate on party plane in mass fronts which weaken the democratic identity of the mass organisations. Often in the past this trend disrupted the essence of unity of revolutionary mass organisations. In recent programmes in Punjab commemorating 50 years of naxalbari, 100 years of the Russian Revolution and condemning Gadchiroli massacre a revolutionary group, the CPI (ML) New Democracy came out with the open party banner. The revolutionary groups of the different trends opposed the proposal of the CPRCI (ML) in organising the programme in joint forum of intellectuals representing the revolutionary mass papers and not of revolutionary parties or mass organisations. No doubt one should applaud the activists of those groups for launching successful programmes but prematurely mass organisations were mobilised for such forums. Such trends were also predominant when commemorating the Chinese Revolution and defending ideology of Socialism when Social -Imperialism crashed in Eastern Europe and USSR. Such trends of open party were also dominant in programmes upholding centenary of the Russian Revolution by CPI (ML) Class Struggle at national level in Vijayawada and at regional level in a joint forum in Patna. In the commemoration joint front programme in 50 years of Naxalbari CPI (ML) New Democracy even though the largest mobiliser openly waved its party banner and so did the CPI (ML). Fascinatingly in Patna for October Revolution programme ND group did not join the forum but in the Marx bi-centenary felicitation participated.

The other crucial factor for setback in the majority of the groups was adopting tactics of participating in parliamentary elections without the establishment of the re-organised vanguard party. This is what led to CPI (ML) Liberation group turning reformist, Red Star virtually out of the communist revolutionary camp and Kanu Sanyal's Class Struggle group on its periphery. Without the adequate laison participation broke the backbone of the components of the revolutionary stream who entered into a series of formal or unofficial alliances with bourgeois parliamentary or revisionist parties. Such embracing of parliament blunted their class struggles from sharpening and made them more and more a part of the parliamentary process like the Orthodox official left parties. Often such groups in their propoganda morally stated that India had genuine bourgeois parliamentary democracy and upheld candidates of bourgeois opposition parties as genuine anti-ruling class democrats!

The most progressive contribution by any intellectual has been by Anand Teltumbde who is synthesis the dalit or caste question with the Marxist Movement. In that light the writings of Comrade Vir Sathidar were too very progressive. Even Comrade Ajith(Murali) has made a great contribution in his analysis of Brahmanical fascism. Teltumbde very boldly expressed his grievances of mechanical understating of Indian situation and wishing to copy the Chinese experience in toto. He expressed how much still infection of old Charu Mazumdar line still persists and how the caste question is still grossly neglected. In  Kozhikode in June 2017 he presented  a paper which every cadre must read. In 2017 seminar on 50 years of Naxalbari organised by Virasam late Vir Sathidar presented a most positive paper on integrating the caste struggle which I recommend for all to study. Tooth and nail he wished to reconcile Naxalite movement with dalit uprising. One welcome trend is the adherence of many a Marxist intellectual into making caste factor an integral part of the revolutionary democratic movement.

A most progressive happening in the last 25 years has been the regularity of the publication of "Aspects of India’s Economy” of the Research Unit for Political economy which has in most classical or dialectical Leninist depth defined the neo-fascist economic policies of the ruling parties and nefarious designs  o break the very back of their struggles. No journal has so illustratively analysed the semi-feudal nature of Indian economy. 

Authors like Amit Bhattacharya have done great historical research work in books like ‘Storming the Gates to Heaven’ , but given one-sided glory only to the Maoists and praised or covered  no other trend. Arundhati Roy, even  in if not Marxist has crystallised sparkle of Naxalbari in the age of neo-fascism, as very few have done. Bernard De Mello wth remarkable consistency has given Naxalbari the cutting edge, in spite of aberrations of failing to understand semi-feudal nature of India.

I also credit fronts like Bhagat Singh Chatra Morcha of Uttar Pradesh in initiating ‘Go to Village Campaigns’, educating peasants on the aspects of agrarian revolution and fascistic social order. It has with Inquilabi Chtra Morcha  undertaken many  a cycle rally condemning saffron and Brahmanical fascism.

To me the understanding of the contribution of the Cultural Revolution in China  is still  ecclectical with groups either treating Maoism as a separate entity from Leninism or the Maoist CCP as Lin Biaoist. Indian revolutionary groups have been unable to assess what reverted the Cultural Revolution to turn China into a bourgeois state. Not enough has been learnt from the Chinese Cultural Revolution on the democratisation of a Bolshevik party  or why people’ s organisations were dismantled or received a setback, preventing the people from keeping  a check on the Communist Party. There is also an eclectic current embracing post-modernism within Maoist sections, embracing Louis Althusser or Alan Badiou or upholding even writers like Joshua Moufawad Paul  and his work ‘Continuity and Rupture .’

I feel there is a glaring weakness in taking Naxalbari politics to the working class or, working as political fractions. There has been no development of the Chinese thesis of capturing the cities from the countryside, with such vast penetration of mechanisation. A proper self-criticism has not been made of why working class struggles were defeated  in Kanoria Jute Mills, Nellimarla  rice mill or even setback in Chattisgarh mines or displaced textile workers in Mumbai. A strategy has not been developed of capturing the Unions from below or building democratic structures from underneath.

When the fascist forces are tightening their grip to their greatest height and the tentacles of globalisation sharpening day by day the capacity of the revolutionary forces to organise is diminishing day by day. Revolutionaries have to innovate methods of struggle which can overcome the obstacles or traverse the barriers. Even if recognising or upholding the Leninist vanguard party concept it must not be done mechanically and work must be done to build it from below. A classical Leninist party to me is not the order of the day. It’s urgent to develop the Leninist or Maoist party to incorporate more revolutionary democratic elements and integrate with more mass movements at large. One cannot blindly emulate the Soviet or Chinese experience. Emphasis must be placed on building the party from below and not from above. For the Trade Union movement the writings of Antonio Gramisci have considerable relevance. Intellectuals must analyse a forum whereby principled ideological struggles of communist revolutionaries could take place. The method of working as fractions within yellow Trade Unions and capturing bourgeois unions is a very complex subject with the great changes that have taken place in urban areas. Revolutionaries have to imbibe lessons from Shankar Guha Nyugi in organising mine workers in Chattisgarh. The most common trend was the detachment of the proletarian politics and economist approach by groups all over India. The struggles of airport workers in the 1990's Mumbai, Jute workers in Kanoria in 1995 and rice mill workers in Bobbili are ideal examples.

Theoretically the groups have to not mechanically copy the Chinese path of Protracted People's War. Today the revolutionaries can take abject advantage of the crisis of economic fascist crisis. The resurgence of peasant movement against suicides and for remunerative prices must be exploited to its full potential. Revolutionaries still have to formulate new strategies of organising the peasantry with the immense infiltration of imperialism and MNC's in agriculture. New strategies or methods have also to be devised on the urban front with the vastly different methods of production prevalent today which completely divide workers. The last named has a most critical insight on how the pure orthodox vanguard party concept has to be further enriched.

[1] Karl Marx, VI Lenin, (Владимир Ленин), Mao Tse-tung (泽东)

[2] Leon Trotsky (Лев Троцкий).

[3] Joseph Stalin,  (Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин/ იოსებ ბესარიონის ძე სტალინი).

Wednesday, June 16, 2021

Facebook won't print it – but the question remains – would I really kill for the revolution?

By Steve Otto

So recently I had problems with Facebook and my posting of opinions they did not like. Here is what I wanted to say:
"There are some $millionaires and $billionaires who I believe deserve to be dragged out in the street and shot in the face. Yes, that was done to a lot of people under the Communist Party of Kampuchea (AKA CPK or known by many as the Khmer Rouge, a name they got from Prince Norodom Sihanouk, of Kampuchea)."
The CPK did kill a lot of people and they were far less picky than I would be, if I had the authority to do that. I would have been very careful who I offed. They no doubt killed some innocent people. But a point I like to make is that not ALL those people killed were innocent. Some deserved what they got.
I don't know if I would ever really do that. But I do know there are those who really deserve it. For example, there are the Koch Brothers, David and Charles.  Then there is our very own "working class hero" Former President Donald Trump. And I know there are plenty others.
There are many Maoist, especially those who profess to be followers of Chairman Gonzalo, who firmly believe in that kind of revenge. And to some extent I believe Chairman Gonzalo actually did such things.
So while I can't express such views on Facebook, I can post them here. Again, I'm not sure if I could really carry out such a bloody edict. I've never seen an actual "people's war." Some conservatives have warned that a lot of us "paper Maoists" may not be able to really stomach such war fare. Maybe not. And maybe we will not know until we face such an event.
In the mean time, I can only fantasize what I really want to do to the bourgeoisie of the US. Whether or not I have the stomach for it, those ass holes really do deserve it.

Monday, June 14, 2021

The arrogant G7 super powers meet to decide the future of other people's countries

By Steve Otto

Nothing brings to light the impact of imperialism better than the G7 Summit. A group of seven countries get together to set the agenda for world politics. The G7 are a group of empire builders who run the world economy. They include the US, the worlds main imperialist power, the United Kingdom and Germany, the other two major imperialist powers of Europe.

Altogether, the G7 includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the United States. These countries decide what happens in a lot of smaller countries and only the people who live in the G7 countries are able to vote on these leaders that affect what the rest of the world will do. It is as true today as it was in ancient Greece when Thucydides (Θουκυδίδης) wrote of “The Million Dialog” : "The powerful do what they want, the weak suffer what they must."

Among the issues discussed this year, according to The New York Times:

Addressing the global vaccine shortage, (US President Joe) Biden cites ‘our humanitarian obligation, to save as many lives as we can.’

Here we see Biden asserting his imperialist leadership to rule the world by setting the various agendas.

Biden and (British Prime Minister Boris) Johnson renew a World War II accord, pledging to unite against new challenges.

And what kind of challenges? It is obvious that nothing nor no one dare challenge the rule of capitalism or its twin, imperialism. The two work together to make sure the world is safe for the so called "free market," which is actually the right of $millionaires and $billionaires to rule over the rest of us. That is also the right of large US and European corporations to rule the world unencumbered. Those who dare stand up to the small but powerful group will be labeled as terrorists and assassinated using drones and other types of weapons now used by the US in its so called "war on terrorism."

The two leaders agree: ‘We both married above our station.’

Here we see the cooperation between the US and the UK, two of the most imperialistic nations on earth, both presently and in the past.

Rising tensions in Northern Ireland are at the forefront as the leaders meet.

So here is an example of super powers meddling in the affairs of a smaller, weaker country.

In pictures: Cornwall’s Carbis Bay area, the site of the G7 summit.

The all important "photo op."

Biden kicked off his first presidential trip abroad with a warning for (Vladimir) Putin.

Yes Putin is an evil man, but he is a rival super power. He is also not as powerful as his rivals in the US and Europe.

On the ground: The U.K.’s Covid rules largely keep the traveling press corps confined to a hotel.

More and more, the western press learns "its place." They are being tamed to know when not to rock the boat or ask embarrassing questions. Not long ago Israel bombed their press offices and nothing was done about it.

What is the G7 summit, and why does it matter?

And that is the whole point of this article. We see an arrogant side to the world's most powerful imperialist countries.


Pix by BBC.

Saturday, June 12, 2021

Facebook proves, once again, to be nothing more than a bourgeois lackey


By Steve Otto

 Once again Facebook has decided to close me down for a comment I made. It supposedly violated their precious community standards, which is just another way of closing down speech they don't want on their precious site. I originally said I would like to round up the rich people who get all the great tax breaks and, like the Khmer Rouge, I  would love to take them into the street and shoot them.

I said, I probably would not do that, I was fantasizing, But they took my comment down and deleted it.

Then I complained that they did that and they deleted the complain and they suspended me for 24 hours. Sucks once again, Facebook can do what they want and their is nothing I can do.

More and more I really hate Facebook. And anyone who works on their censorship board is no more than a punk for the system. They are cheats and liars for the bourgeois system. I hate them passionately. I am going to look for another place to post things. Facebook is nothing more than a piece of shit and lackeys for the bourgeoisie.

Pix from Reason Magazine.

Monday, May 31, 2021

International Declaration: Kaypakkaya is a break with the bourgeois line and the birth of the proletarian line!

From the site of Communist Party of Ecuador – Red Sun/ Partido Comunista del Ecuador - Sol Rojo
To see this is Spanish click here.

Comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA, founder and theoretical guide of our Party, the representative of the international proletariat in Turkey, on the 48th anniversary of his assassination continues to guide us. We keep our comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA alive in our struggle for the New Democracy Revolution, Socialism, Communism and the People's War.

As the imperialist-capitalist system continues to crud, it maintains its parasitic colonialism around the world with blood, tears and pus oozing through all its pores. The economic-political crisis and the wars at the regional level are exacerbating the conflicts between the imperialists and further exacerbating the fight for greater division. The direct consequence of this situation are unjust wars, increased poverty, millions of so-called refugees, the growth of reactionary and fascist organisations and the spread of government violence. While on one side of the picture we are facing is this brutal order of exploitation and its consequences, on the other are the masses of people, the revolutionaries and the communists, who are fighting against all this reaction and barbarism and who are resisting all forms of aggression.

That is why the counterrevolutionary wave we are facing does not intimidate us. We know that when the masses carry a revolutionary political conscience and act in accordance with this conscience, the imperialists and their lackeys will be seen to be nothing more than 'paper tigers'. Time and again the history of the class struggle has shown that when the masses rise up with revolutionary conscience, there is no force that can resist it. In the historical context in which we find ourselves, this is precisely why ideological clarity and practical audacity are more necessary than ever. The masses need political organisations and practical guidance, endowed with this clarity.

On the 48th anniversary of the assassination of Comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA, we see once again how important it is to understand, capture and be inspired by the orientation of communist leaders, who have made historic progress in their lives. Comrades like İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA and other similar communists reflect not only the values of a country, but also values shared by the international proletariat and are part of our common history. Precisely for this reason, their teachings, their ideological positions and their political-practical audacity are considered part of the collective memory of the Communists. In our persistent struggles, they continue their historical role as guides.

The history of the class struggle can only be made with bold political and practical steps. Achieving a resistance or a contradiction and an alternative to the obvious, to the accepted, against the prevailing, the conventional, the taught thoughts and prejudices, the dogmas and the status quo is only possible, when we tear apart the "clothing" that the system of exploitation and plunder has "put" us in such a way that there is not the slightest shred of cloth left over us. If we carry the slightest piece of the system, it is difficult and, in the end, impossible to make a radical break with the system. It would mean that, in one way or another, we would join the existing system on an ideological or practical level. The fact that capitulation to the bourgeoisie - despite the high prices paid, in the various regions of the world, from the past to the present - continues to take place is proof of this. As an antidote to such ideological positions, comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA existed as an embodiment of total rejection of the given system. Their teaching and guidance have not ceased.

In all parts of the world there have been many revolutionaries and communists, each of whom has contributed significantly to the struggle for revolution and communism. Some of the various revolutionaries and communists who dedicated their lives to the struggle for revolution and for socialism, and who laid the bricks of the world revolution with their work, blood and soul, have assumed a special position with their historical ruptures, their political audacity and their ideological clarity. "Breaking the ice and opening the way," they have assumed the role of north star. These personalities, who emerged at the most critical moments in the history of the class struggle, built the future in the moments they lived through. And despite all the contrary efforts of his class enemies, his thoughts became and remain guiding, also as they are raised by the next generations. Comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA, in his short life in the history of class struggle, was the bearer of such a mission.


Like all other revolutionary and communist leaders, Comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA is a direct product of the class struggle. Through participation in all areas in which the class struggle of the country in which he lived deepened, he made the dialectical epistemology of "practice-theory-practice" the fundamental basis for the emergence of the ideological-political-organizational framework of the TKP/ML. At the same time, he thoroughly investigated international class struggles and ideological conflicts and built his thinking step by step based on all these issues. He became the representative of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in Turkey.

İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA is the resurgence of the persistent class struggle in Turkey based on Marxist principles. First and foremost, he is the ideological rupture and a rebirth. Because it differed intellectually and practically from all the petty-bourgeois, opportunistic, revisionist and parliamentary attitudes, which until then trafficked on behalf of the proletariat and the oppressed workers and claimed to act on their behalf. In this sense, he made breaks of principle. It is a rebirth, because not only did it distinguish itself from its predecessors and those that existed then, but it simultaneously built the path of true liberation from the proletariat and oppressed workers. In Turkey, it was he who drew the Red Flag, which was to fly in the calloused, destructive and building hands of the most revolutionary class, the proletariat, and hoisted in the bastions of the bourgeoisie.

İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA was a great scholar of the socio-political revolution in Turkey and of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the newest stage, which was reached in the historical progress of Marxism-Leninism through Comrade Mao. He achieved this through the theoretical, political and organizational line proposed by him. He took a historic step by pointing out the need for a leading and leading force in Turkey. He connected the inevitable flow of history and the dialectic of this flow with the point to which Comrade Mao has taken Marxism and concretized the path of revolution as The People's War. With the guidance of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution he formed the Party. Comrade KAYPAKKAYA developed a ruthless struggle against those understandings that took the theoretical products and accumulations of theoretical socialism in the form of a set of dogmatic or absolute formulations. While standing true to the roots of theoretical socialism, he developed enormous connections with these roots, connected the past with the present, and represents the litmus sign for the conquest of the future.

It is therefore - as it was yesterday, also today - a torch of the international proletariat, which is marching forward on the path of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. We have the honour of being the successors of this red torch of communism and the ideological clarity of Comrade İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA, his political and practical courage continue to guide us also on the 48th anniversary of his assassination.

- Communist chief İbrahim KAYPAKKAYA is immortal!

- Long live proletarian internationalism!

- Glory to the victory of the people's war!

- Glory to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!


Communist Party of Turkey / Marxist-Leninist

Communist Party of Peru

Communist Party of Brazil (Red Faction)

Red Flag Committee – FRG

Serving the people – Communist League of Norway

Committee for the Reconstitution of the Communist Party USA

Communist Party of Ecuador – Red Sun

Construction Committee of the Maoist Communist Party of Galicia

Communist Workers' Union (MLM) – Colombia