[Marxism] India: On the issue of Third Front,

new wave new.wave.nw at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 08:32:30 MDT 2009


Dear Nada,

I must appreciate that you have raised a question of extreme importance-
what about peasantry in India. Firstly, we understand by the
'peasantry' -the rural petty bourgeois mass. Secondly, it is very clear that
there cannot be a political fornt of working class even with 'petty
bourgeois, urban or rural'. This would directly lead to polititcal position,
which is essentially class conciliationist. The two class political
organisation would result into complete fiasco from the revolutionary point
of view. However, this should not create a confusion to our clear perception
that the rural peasantry, especially poor peasanty, is the most important
lever to agrarian revolution in India. It would play a decisive role in
catapulting the working class to power. In any case, working class has to
lead the peasantry behind it, if it has to take power in struggle against
the capitalists, backed by the landlords. However, the working class can
only lead the peasantry by carrying out the political tirade, in the
cities, against the common enemies, and by consolidating the partisan
struggles of peasantry around this axis of struggle in the cities. This is
how the agrarian revolution would advance under the leadership of urban
working class-the industrial proletariat. There is no point in making a
'front' with peasantry, as in final anlysis, it essentially constitutes the
petty bourgoeis layers of rural areas and thus retains all political traits
of conservatism, which are extremely harmful for a political organisation
whether a party or a front, which bases itself upon the most advanced class
of our times-the industria proletariat.

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:31 AM, nada <dwaltersMIA at gmail.com> wrote:

> I posted the CP (M-L) Liberation position because it simply gave a very
> interesting counter-point of view to the *CPI/CPI-M*, not really your
> own blog. I haven't a clue who you represent or what you stand for,
> really. Thus it to respond what the CP (M-L) *doesn't* stand for is
> hardly the point, it's their analysis of the CPI/CPI-M/Congress front
> that I find interesting.
>
> Secondly, while the CP (M-L) is, as you state, maybe, with regards to
> "peoples" vs "working class" (and what about the 1 billion peasants,
> might I ask?) it clearly has played a critical role to the left of the
> the two 'official' CPs who run several states in India.
>
> David
>
> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/new.wave.nw%40gmail.com
>



-- 
New Wave
new-wave-nw.blogspot.com



More information about the Marxism mailing list