She goes by the handle @sarkar_swati on twitter and koo.
He goes by the handle @maidros78 on twitter.
He goes by the handle @dikgaj on twitter.
In this article, we examine the propensity of the Communists to give intellectual and political cover to the imperialists and Islamists against the Hindus. Further, we trace how the CPI was completely under the thumb of the Communist party of Great Britain (CPGB) with the leading lights of the CPGB completely controlling the CPI. We examine the impact of the Soviet-British relations on the path charted out by the CPI, and how it was given instructions on the path to follow by the CPGB, without any inputs from the CPI itself. We point out that there is not a single freedom movement in which the CPI participated. Further, we show how the CPI repeatedly betrayed the freedom struggle, not only by remaining aloof, but also often by sabotaging the freedom struggle by recruiting potential revolutionaries and leading them away from the freedom struggle, all the while pretending to be anti-imperialist. In short, the CPI was the vanguard of the imperialists, subverting the resistance. We show that there is not a single revolutionary of note who continued his fight against the British after joining the CPI.
Communism and Nationalism – The Twain Can Never Meet – The Saga of Indian Freedom Fight
In the second article of the series, we examine the ideology behind communism and discuss whether it can ever co-exist with nationalism. We trace the communist ideology to 19th century Europe, discuss its origins and its assumptions, and the religious inspiration behind this irreligious ideology, along with the limitations of the vision of its founders. We point out that Marx and Engels rejected nationalism, Lenin insisted that the only hope of liberation for the colonised countries was through the rise of the communist order, and how communism demanded that all colonised countries abjure nationalism and join the communist order. We examine the writings of MN Roy, the father of Indian communism, and how he disparaged nationalism and all Indian nationalist leaders, and insisted that the struggle was between the Indian proletariat and the British state, and not between the British and Indian peoples. In particular, he cautioned the Indian proletariat in accepting the the nationalist struggle or trusting the Indian upper classes. He also came up with the theories that race and caste were connected, and insisted on an international working class solidarity to fight the British state. Yet, in reality the global proletariat remained divided on nationalist lines and the interests of the proletariat of different nationalities collided. Thus the British proletariat never responded to calls to join the Indian proletariat in their fight against Britain or British capitalism. We also note that the communists de facto embraced a racist hierarchy whereby the colonizing countries were meant to lead the colonized countries. This seeded the handover of the Communist Party of India to the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB). The CPGB pushed policies that benefited them, rather than the CPI, much less India. All these ensured that the communists were on the wrong side of history in every single nationalist struggle against the British.
In the third article of the series, we examine the views of Subhas Bose and Nehru towards communism and nationalism. In particular, we compare their views on nationalism and internationalism, reasons for liberating India, what constituted the freedom struggle, and the goals of the freedom struggle, and class war, comparing the communist positions on these. We show that on each of the above issues, Nehru’s views were a derivative of communism, or were very closely allied to it, while Subhas Bose’s views were either opposed or disdainful of the positions taken by the communists.
In the fourth article of the series, we examine the wellspring of Subhas Bose’s faith for his freedom struggle. We show that his Indian nationalism had deep spiritual and civilizational roots ensconced in Hindu thoughts. He ascribed Hindu spirituality to the natural landmarks of India, We find Bose deeply attached to the environment of Bengal, which was dearest to his heart. He deified India, following the footsteps of Swami Vivekananda, Bankim Chandra and Aurobindo Ghose. He was a product of Bengal Renaissance in that sense. As advocated by Swami Vivekananda, the fountainhead of his inspiration was Indic civilization and history. He held that his contemporary India was a direct continuation of took her ancient and sublime past in which he took enormous pride. He rejected European claims of civilizing India, of bestowing nationhood on India, and was not bound by the Eurocentric interpretation of India’s history. He was convinced that the political unity of India stemmed directly from her ancient civilizational past. He also traced to ancient India the roots of the cherished political and social concepts of his time, namely 1) democracy, 2) statecraft, 3) revolutionary movements 4) humanism and equity 5) communal ownership of property, 6) socialism, 7) municipal development. He was passionate about the history of India and delved deep into the history of his home-province, Bengal. This concept of Indic nationalism was shared by an overwhelming majority of the revolutionary freedom fighters, in particular while they were revolutionaries. Finally, although he was rooted in the civilizational past of India, he did not believe that those times ought to be recreated. He did not want India to live entirely in her history and wanted to adopt and integrate useful modern concepts as well.