Australian National University THESES SIS/LIBRARY TELEPHONE: +61 2 6125 4631 R.G. MENZIES LIBRARY BUILDING NO:2 FACSIMILE: +61 2 6125 4063 THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY EMAIL: library,[email protected] CANBERRA ACT 0200 AUSTRALIA USE OF THESES This copy is supplied for purposes of private study and research only. Passages from the thesis may not be copied or closely paraphrased without the written consent of the author. KERALA 1947-57 A STUDY OF SOME SIGNIFICANT FACTORS LEADING TO THE COMMUNIST VICTORY IN 1957 by MARY T.N. VARGHESE Being a thesis presented to the History Department, Australian National University, for the Degree of Master of Arts. May 1970. CONTENTS 1. Introduction. 2. Chapter One: 'Political Instability1. 3. Chapter Two: 'Casteism and Communalism’. 4. Chapter Three: 'The Agrarian Problem'. 5. Chapter Four: 'Communist Tactics'. 6. Conclusion. 7. Appendix. 8. Bibliography. 9. Maps. INTRODUCTION In 1957, the State of Kerala, the southernmost of the Indian States in the Indian Union, made world history by becoming the first State to vote a Communist Government into power by democratic means and constitutional procedure. The success of the Communist Party in Kerala raised several interesting and significant possibilities and questions. The progress of Communism in India and indeed anywhere in Asia, assumes a special significance in a complex situation that affects international as well as national affairs. In emotive terms, in the stubborn tendency to see all things in black and white, in terms of 'democracy* vs 'totalitarianism*, the success or failure of Communists and Communist Governments, is viewed with extreme concern. This concern becomes all the more urgent when it is focused on India, the largest democracy in the world, and to many the hope of democracy in Asia. More important however, is the question of how and why this State, which boasts the highest literacy rate in India, and is one of the most enlightened of Indian States in terms of standards of education, voted in a Communist Government. This action by an electorate that is unusually politically conscious in terms of awareness of issues, (i) and by a people noted for their individuality, is significant. Since the inception of India as a sovereign nation in 1947, the (2) party in power has been the Indian National Congress. So overwhelming (1) Nehru once referred to the Malayalis (i.e. people of Kerala) as *a nation of intellectual anarchists' I (2) Referred to either as the I.N.C., the Congress, or the Congress Party. - 2 - has been the support given to this Party, and so lengthy its term of office, that India has been practically governed by one-party rule* A viable opposition, particularly at the State level, was almost non­ existent, Congress being almost like a vast monolith on the political scene. If Acton*s dictum on the corrupting effects of power is valid, then one can perhaps apply it to the Congress Governments which have tended, especially at the local level, towards corruption, inefficiency, disunity and factionalism. Fortunately for India*s party system, and for Congress itself, the beginnings of an effective opposition were starting to make themselves felt by 1957, and at the State level even (3) presenting a challenge to the monopoly of Congress rule, in many cases the challenge coming from the Communists. Thus the enquiry into how the Communists won is necessarily also an enquiry into how Congress behaviour had weakened its hold over Kerala. This study is therefore not a comprehensive account of the Communist movement in Kerala. Severe limitations in the nature of source material would exclude such an examination. While aspects of its early history and strategy are considered, and where significant, elaborated upon, this thesis emerges as an analysis of Kerala after 1947, leading up to the events of 1957, the emphasis being laid on why the Communists were able to win, and why Congress lost. It is concerned less with Communism (3) In the 1967 general election, Congress lost control in 8 of the 17 States and had to form coalitions or go into opposition. - 3 - per se in Kerala, and more with the long term conditions in the area, from 1947 onwards. 1957 is the focus of interest, but it attempts to study it as part of what is seen as a continuing process in Kerala’s political development. The State of Kerala officially came into existence only on 1st November 1956, as a result of the re-organisation of States, when the former princely States of Travancore-Cochin (or T-C), (4) were joined with the Malayalam-speaking taluks of Malabar, formerly (5) part of Madras, to form a linguistic unit of Malayalam-speaking peoples. Travancore and Cochin were princely States which, though rules by hereditary maharajahs, were in the fore-front among the Indian States (6) in terms of progressive administration. As early as 1925, Cochin had a Legislative Council with an elected majority, and became the first of the Indian States to send elected representatives to the newly formed Constituent Assembly in 1946. Soon afterwards, its Maharajah granted full responsible government. Travancore too had a Legislature but with limited powers. In July 1947, the Maharajah of Travancore introduced full responsible government and a popular ministry was (7) installed. In July 1949, as part of the process of integrating the princely states with the Union, in preparation for the coming of Independence, Travancore and Cochin were joined together. In this new (4) Municipal districts. (5) Kerala is thus a distinctly *Malayali* entity since its boundaries are based on linguistic considerations. (6) See V.P. Menons The Integration of the Indian States (London 1956) p.275. Menon was the brilliant architect of the States* Re-organisation. (7) By the Interim Constitution Act, the first Constitution for the State of T-C was introduced on 24th March 1948, and for the first time a constitutional monarchy in the real sense was established in Travancore. Executive authority theoretically rested in the Maharajah, but was to be exercised on the advice of the Council of Ministers, responsible not to the Maharajah but to the Legislature. - R. Nairs Constitutional Experiments in Kerala (Kerala Academy of Pol. Sc., Trivandrum7 pp« 26-27. - 4 - State of Travancore-Cochin, the Maharajah of Travancore became the titular head with the title of Raj Pramukh, which was not to be a hereditary position, but one appointed by the Governor-General of India. At the inauguration of the new State, the Raj Pramukh and council of Ministers, composed of members drawn from the outgoing ministries of Travancore and Cochin and headed by the Chief Minister of Travancore, assumed office. The Legislative Assembly met for the first time on (8) 11th July 1949. By the States' Re-organisation Act of 1956, and the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act of 1956, Malabar was added to T-C to form Kerala State. It should be noted that although Kerala did not officially become a single political unit till 1956, the region is a distinct, cultural, linguistic, and ethnic unit, with common traditions and customs, and therefore the term has been employed in this study to (9) denote a whole region i.e. Malabar, Travancore and Cochin prior to 1956. Kerala has been regarded as a 'problem* State since 1947. There are several reasons for this. It has a land area of approximately 15,000 square miles, and on this small area it supports a population of nearly 16 million (i960 figure). It has the highest density of population in (10) India, and the large majority of this dependent on agriculture for a livelihood, either directly or indirectly. Thus the pressure on land (8) Ibid p.34. (9) Malabar consists of the districts of Cannanore, Kozhikode, Palghat; Cochin of Trichur and Ernakulam districts; Travancore of Kottayam, Alleppey, Trivandrum, and Quilon districts. (10) V.P. Menon pointed out this danger in 1949, when Kerala had 1,015 per sq. mile as against the Indian average of 281 - The Integration of the Indian States p.291. - 5 - is a major problem. In addition the high rate of literacy leads to a large educated section, unable to find adequate employment. Thus over­ population and land scarcity were already present as major factors of discontent. The political instability that has characterised the region is in no small measure largely derived from this background. The results of the 1957 elections were purely political only in its ultimate expression, in the sense that it led to the voting in of a government that affected the political fortunes of the State. The situation was influenced by and functioned within a complex inter-relationship of social, religious, economic and political factors, and hence must be understood against such a background. The argument presented is that the ingredients leading to 1957 were present from 1947 onwards, if not earlier, and were not only present but intensified throughout the period under review, so that the ultimate result was not so much a surprise but one might almost be tempted to say, inevitable. 1/Vhile the particular condition of Kerala in 1956-57, especially in an atmosphere of Presidential rule, imposed in the absence of a strong government, no doubt helped create a feeling favourable to an anti-Congress vote, it was more the result of a process begun long before. In seeking to understand how anti-Congress feeling developed in Kerala, and how the Communist Party was able to avail itself of this opportunity for victory, four main themes are studied. These do not of course provide all the answers, but they are centrally significant to any attempt to find an explanation for the events of 1957.