An open call to the members of PCC CPI(ML) and the Communist Revolutionaries
[The proposal approved unanimously by the Central Committee of PCC CPI (ML)]
At the highest level of the PCC CPI (ML) party, in accordance with the decisions taken at the Party-Congress in 2017, we started a sincere effort on the question of the unity of the Indian communist revolutionaries. There were certain political considerations behind the PCC’s unity efforts. Although it was not possible in the early stages of the process to give a definite form to that understanding, a clear idea of its components was presented to all. This is how we identified these elements.
(1) It is undeniable that at the end of the 1960s or the beginning of the 70s, when world capitalism entered the crisis, after the initial stage of awakening as a spark of left-revolutionary politics worldwide, the left and working class movement continued to retreat for a long time. In the womb of this retreat, various kinds of confusion and distortions began to take root in communist politics. However, that period of crisis in the politics of social change is also sometimes seen as a useful element, because crisis is also the harbinger of new ideas. The present objective situation is creating an atmosphere of revolutionary unity by removing confusion for the purpose of subjective resurrection.
(2) J. A. Hobson in 1902 coined a new popular term to describe the phenomena of his age: imperialism. Rudolf Hilferding introduced into Marxist theory the idea of a ‘latest phase’ of capitalism, characterised by the formation of monopolistic enterprises which abolish capitalist competition, fusion of bank and industrial capital leading to the formation of finance capital, which is seen as the ultimate form of capital, subordination of the state to monopolies and finance capital, and finally, emergence of an expansionist policy of colonial annexations and war. In continuation of Hobson and Hilferding, Lenin approached the question of imperialism from the viewpoint of a revolutionary strategy under which the working class might win power and political tactics on the movements that were developing in various countries. Lenin formulated the concept of imperialist chain as he emphasized on Marxist theory of state and the political power. What counts is not simply economic development but the overall power of each state that is a link in the chain. The imperialist chain involves the material, domestic and international, precondition for proletarian revolution and this is the theory of weak link. The long-term neo-liberal restructuring of the world capitalist system has added many new features in the global scale. In the light of these new features, it is necessary to formulate the collective conception of the revolutionaries in determining the revolutionary strategy of the working class and the political tactics of the class struggle, on the basis of which the revolutionaries will unite.
(3) There is a consensus among the majority of the revolutionary parties about the rise of fascist forces in the country and especially in India, although there are some differences in defining the nature of fascism. Acceptance of the fascist upsurge is a prerequisite for determining the real situation within the unity of motion of the contradictions of fascism and revolution. The need for fascism appears to the ruling class only when the oppressed no longer want to be exploited in the old way and the ruler is no longer able to maintain the old way of rule – this element is simultaneously one of the conditions for revolution. In India, the rulers have been partially successful in carrying out a passive social revolution to disable the toiling masses. On the contrary, to implement the subjective agenda of the active revolution of the working people, subjective preparation is necessary and one of the elements of that preparation is unity among the revolutionaries.
(4) The main condition for the split and unity among the revolutionaries is the objective or situational element. When reformative work emerges as the main political task, it naturally sets the possibility of disintegration within the revolutionaries in the backdrop of a situation of intense divisions in the social milieu, despite the fact that revolutionary ideology act in favour of unity and cohesion. On the contrary, when the revolutionary struggle appears in reality as the main political task, the urge of unity intensifies.
But for the class-struggle in the direction of party democracy and the “the emancipation of working class is conquered by themselves”, the idea on democracy remains as one of the prime driving forces towards unity and disintegration. In a class-divided hierarchical society; economics, politics, social policy, human life and culture all exist in a changing institutional structure. And organization means preconceived and predetermined centrality. The question of the democracy of the bourgeois parties is predetermined by the class-divided society and state system and the bourgeois class organised in the spirit of the exploiters. No such driving force is predetermined for the working-class parties in a class-divided society. Therefore, it is a prime condition of unity to conduct a continuous struggle for democracy against the predetermined and predefined centralism that the formation of the revolutionary party gives rise to. And that condition can be fulfilled by building unity on the basis of “concrete analysis of concrete situation” and by sustaining the struggle of divergent views on various other theoretical questions and by creating the opportunity for the working class to direct its own organization towards the emancipation of the working class, which in itself is a protracted class-struggle.
(5) It is natural for the revolutionary parties in India to manifest variations in the accumulation of experiences and in their articulations due to the regional variations and spatial limitations of their practice. To build revolutionary unity, it is necessary to be sensitive to that diversity.
On the basis of these above elements of understanding, the PCC entered into unity talks with a number of communist revolutionary groups. These include (i) CPI (ML) ND (ii) CPI (ML) Class Struggle (iii) CPI (ML) Red Star (iv) MLRI or MKP. Talks with the first two parties went a long way. The CPI (ML) Class Struggle, though briefly disassociated from the discussions in the middle, later returned to the discussion. Positive exchange of views took place in a cordial atmosphere with the other two parties. But as a whole, during this long discussion, we encounter some harsh realities that add new substance to our perceptions. This new realisation can be summarized as follows.
Actual events begin to unfold in such a way that the unity of the revolutionary party and the unity of the revolutionary mass and class organization are complementary to each other, but the question arises as to which is the prerequisite or the main one. The long retreat of left-revolutionary politics has given rise to the psychological inertia in the left-revolutionary leader-worker circles, and while the new revolutionary youth does not compensate for the lack of that vitality, however much the transitional conditions prepare the ground for a new left-revolutionary upsurge, the spatial fix of mental inertia ((inertia of rest)), according to the Newtonian law of motion, turns the idea of “revolutionary unity” into competitive opportunist behavior. That is why the release of mass-initiative and the general mass-platform and unity of the revolutionary mass and class organization (Merger) appeared as a prerequisite. Our experience was not only from within the PCC, but from within the revolutionary camp as a whole. Just when our understanding and trust in each other have come a long way in the unity talks, a big blow has come to it through an apolitical game of “split and unity.” A small faction of the PCC formed a new party called “Massline” “as an initiative of “revolutionary unity” with Prajapandha, a breakaway faction in Khammam and some other districts of Telangana state from ND, and RI, a breakaway faction from Redstar”.
For the sake of “revolutionary unity”, it is necessary for us to make a partial and temporary assessment of this newly formed party called “Massline”. The evaluation of a party is determined not only by what is written in the document, but fundamentally by the role it plays in the real political context. The question of revolutionary unity is an obligation of a definite political reality, which has been mentioned at the very beginning of this call of the PCC. This position of political compulsion shows that the question of democracy is one of the main questions that the revolutionary camp must overcome in order to make unity a reality. Both small groups that left ND and Redstar said about their exit that they had no political conflict with the main party, but they did not get the democratic space. As the question of democracy is a protracted class-struggle within a party, orchestrating split on the ground of inner-party democracy in the name of “revolutionary unity” appears to be just an alibi. The small section of the PCC leadership had no say, they were only looking for partners from a competitive opportunist mentality under the guise of revolutionary unity, and they jumped at the opportunity. When the question of revolutionary unity is a political agenda, such behavior does not identify the revolutionary entity. So we consider the newly formed “Massline” “party as not belonging to the revolutionary camp for the time being, but we will keep our eyes on their future transition.
In the context of the current national and international political situation and the possible development of mass uprisings in the near future, it is the need of the hour for the comrades of the PCC to unite politically and at the same time build greater revolutionary unity. Among the reasons for the rise of fascist forces in the Indian political scene are (1) the protracted neoliberal restructuring, (2) the social movement for the construction of the Ram temple, and above all (3) the decline in the workers’ and leftist movements. Fascism is changing its character in line with the ongoing changes in the real international and political situation. In this circumstances, political vision, sensitivity and flexibility are necessary to determine the revolutionary strategy and tactics by constantly evaluating the situation, and therefore it is necessary to conduct lively united discourse and praxis. .
When the BJP came to power in 2014, neo-liberalism was still the consensus policy adopted among the global bourgeoisie, although the American sub-prime crisis of 2007-08 eroded confidence in neoliberalism, but after the Covid disaster, there was a tendency to break out of the Washington Consensus, the global financial monopolies. That trend began to take root in the context of the decline of America’s influence as an imperialist power and the challenge of the China-Russia Axis. While war is an inevitable consequence of the continuation of imperialist politics, the dynamics of the conflicts of labor and capital throughout the system, and the conflicts of capital and nature inherent in them, determine the likelihood of war. That is, the situation of the balance of power of labor and capital throughout the system in the context of the struggle for labor affects the imperialist political decision to accelerate or delay the war, while the situation of natural disasters also affects the decision to wage war, because there is a general uncertainty in the question of the reconstruction and rejuvenation of capitalism. At present, the world imperialist camp seems to have adopted a strategy of long-term limited war. The conflict between labour and capital and the conflict between nature and capital is intensifying, and in its womb, the nature and struggle of all other exploitative social relations in the Indian context are also taking definite and acute forms. It is important to define it. In today’s world, the lack of a communist alternative has given the bourgeoisie a place of comfort, while the mass uprisings that are gradually emerging are threatening the bourgeoisie’s rule.
From the dynamic nature of the Indian fascist forces, it is clear that the Indian state is adopting a new strategy of balancing between the two imperialist Axis powers, which is different from the strategy of the BJP government of 2014 or 2019. As a result of this policy of balancing act, all the camps of the native and comprador bourgeoisie are expecting the support of the state. On the other hand, the bourgeoisie has not found a new way out of the acute crisis of unemployment and inequality or over-production that has gripped the whole system. This dualistic and dialectical aspect of the situation has made the whole system more and more fragile by imposing all the burdens of the crisis on the working people, and the danger of fascism also lies in the possibility of collapse in the face of a mass uprising. In such a situation of upheaval, it has emerged as an urgent duty to ensure the subjective presence of revolutionary forces. That urgent task can be fulfilled by joining the mass movement and developing the mass movement and the workers’ movement at the initiative of the revolutionaries and rallying to a united revolutionary party with democracy as its content.
In this context, the PCC calls on all its members to join the endeavour for collective political discourse and exchange of opinion and on all revolutionary leaders and activists to join the united mass movement, the workers’ movement and the united party.
10.03.2024
General Secretary
PCC CPI(ML)
NAYA GANATANTRA 
Leave a comment