Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal (A Sub-Himalayan Tract) Edited by Publish by Global Vision Publishing House Sukhbilas Barma

Naxalbari Peasant Uprising, 1967

Santosh Rana

NAXALBARI is a small village in the West Bengal border under district. Very few people in India had heard the name of Naxalbari before 1967. But today Naxalbari is a name that is known not only all over India but throughout the world. It has become the symbol of revolution, the symbol of changing the social order and the symbol of the oppressed against the oppressor. The peasants in Naxalbari rose in revolt in the summer of 1967 against the landlords and mahajans (usurers). At that time the United Front Government was in office in West Bengal. The Chief Minister was Ajay Mukherjee, an ex- congress man. The CPI(M) was a major constituent of the United Front Government. The peasant uprising was led by the local unit of the CPI (M) and its frontal organization, the Krishak Sabha. The CPI (M) had all along been campaigning for “land to the tillers”. The Naxalbari uprising put them to an acid test. Will they side with the peasants? In that case, they would have to lose the governmental power. Or they might side with the landlords and suppress the rebellions of peasants with state

Santosh Rana: He was one of the activists associated with the movement and one of the early builders of the organization in West Bengal. 166 Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal power. The CPI (M) took the second option. Harekrishna Koner, Minister and a reputed peasant leader from Bardhaman and widely recognized as a champion of cause of poor peasant against landlords,went to Naxalbari to have a talk with the peasant leaders of the locality. He tried to convince the local leadership to abandon the path of rebellion but he failed .The United Front Government unleashed a reign of terror killing 11 women on 25th May, 1967 at Prasadu jote by police firing. This day, the 25th of May, is observed every year as the Naxalbari Day throughout India.

Reasons behind the Uprising and its Impact Naxalbari was not an isolated incident. It was the focus of peasants, revolt against inhuman caste-feudal agrarian relations all over the country. At the time of independence, the peasants were given the assurance that the tillers would be the owners of land in independent India. But in the 20 years after independence very little was done to end the feudal exploitation over the peasants. Zamindary abolition and Land Ceiling Acts were passed in a half-hearted manner with enough loopholes so that the peasants remained in perpetual bondage of landlords and money lenders. It is this objective condition which turned Naxalbari into a great event. The movement in Naxalbari proper would not sustain in face of severe state repression but the spark of Naxalbari ignited many more areas of peasant revolt. In West Bengal, the next uprising took place in another isolated border region, Gopiballavpur in Midnapur District bordering Bihar (now Jharkhand) and Orissa. I had the experience of organizing and participating in that peasant revolt. In November, 1969, thousands of peasants rose in revolt, forcibly harvested the paddy owned by the land-lords, seized their guns, tried them and their land was distributed among Naxalbari Peasant Uprising, 1967 167 landless and poor peasants. A similar uprising took place in Baharagora Thana of Singbhum district and Debra Thana of Midnapur district. In 1970, the movement spread like a fire in the whole of Birbhum district in West Bengal. The fire of Naxalbari was not confined to West Bengal. It spread to Andhra Pradesh, Bihar,Assam,Tripura and in later years to all States in India. It suffered great reverses. Many of the leaders were killed or confined in jails. But state repression could not extinguish the fire of rebellion among the peasants. Now in the beginning of 2007, i.e. 40 years after the Naxalbari uprising, the Home Department of Central Government admits that the Naxalite movement led by various factions of has spread to 160 districts all over India. Charu Majumdar of Siliguri was the chief theoretician of the Naxalbari movement. He was a member of the undivided C.P.I. and in 1964 he joined the CPI(M) at the time of its formation. He had long experience of working among the peasants and the tea-garden workers. In his theoretical framework, Indian Society was semi-colonial and semi- feudal. The State was led by comprador big bourgeoise who were in collusion with imperialism and feudalism. The task of the revolution was to overthrow imperialism and feudalism and establish a new democratic state and society. All imperialist and comprador capital are to be confiscated and land to be distributed on the basis of ‘Land to the tiller’. In order to overthrow the State, the revolutionaries would have to work among the peasants in the deep countryside and build up bases of armed struggle. A revolutionary army would be formed from among the workers and peasants and it would fight a protracted people’s war against the state. 168 Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal

Formation of CPI (ML) Charu Mazumdar had come to the conclusion that the CPI (M) had turned into a revisionist party that would side with the imperialists and domestic reactionary ruling classes against the peasants and workers and therefore he concluded that a revolutionary party of Marxist–Leninists should be formed. On the basis of this understanding, the CPI (ML) was formed on 22 April, 1969 with Charu Mazumdar as General Secretary.The formation of the CPI(ML) was a turning point in the history of India’s Communist movement. It correctly characterized the Indian Society and semi-colonial and semi-feudal and new democratic revolution as the stage of revolution. It also correctly understood the nature of the Soviet State as social imperialist in 1968.

Shortcomings of the Movement However, it had great shortcomings. To emphasize the role of armed uprising in the revolutionary transformation of society it wrongly undermined the role of mass organization, mass struggles and other forms of struggle including the Parliamentary struggles. In a vast country like India, the situation is uneven and one cannot expect uniform development of revolutionary situation. The party leading the revolution must flexibly change its tactics according to situation. In China, there was no Parliament to make use of. But in India, the Parliamentary system has been working with fair degree of stability. One cannot copy the Chinese experience in an altogether different situation. Another great mistake was the lack of proper understanding of the Indian Society. This Society is divided into castes, arranged hierarchically with the Brahmin at the top of the pyramid, and the untouchables, tribals and Naxalbari Peasant Uprising, 1967 169 minorities at the bottom. The middle layers enjoy various levels of privileges and suffer discrimination in accordance with their distance from the top or from the bottom. Caste based division of labour is the order of Indian feudalism. In order to achieve democratization of society the caste-feudal social order has to be smashed. For this, it is not sufficient to have a programme of ‘Land to the tiller’. It is also necessary to have a system of reservation in jobs and education and such other programmes for the Dalits, Adivasis, minorities and other backward classes so that people from all communities may have a representation in all walks of social activity. Indian society cannot advance without this democratic transformation. Let us examine the situation in North Bengal. Historically, this tract was inhabited by the Kamtapuri speaking people. Later on, the Nepalis came to Darjeeling, the Adivasis were brought as tea garden labourers and Bengalis from Southern Bengal entered the area in large numbers. Today North Bengal is inhabited by four distinct cultural identities, the Kamtapuris, the Bengalis, the Adivasis and the Nepalis. But it is a small group of upper-caste Bengalis and a very small group of Marwari Banias who have established the hegemony over the region. Overwhelming majority of the government employees, teachers and professionals like doctors, pleaders and engineers are upper caste Bengalis. The Kamtapuris are poor peasants, agricultural labourers or rickshaw pullers in towns. The Nepalis and Adivasis are coolies in the tea- gardens who live in abject poverty and hunger. The Kamtapuris have a distinct language of their own but the West Bengal Government refuses to recognize it as a language or to introduce education in Kamtapuri. Similar is 170 Socio-Political Movements in North Bengal the condition of the Adivasis. They too are denied the right to education through their mother language. The Nepalis have, of course, won the battle for education through their mother tongue and some sort of autonomy through a bitter struggle. For democratization of society in North Bengal, it is necessary to implement such measures that ensure the right of Kamtapuris and the Adivasi languages and their participation in all spheres of social activity including the decision-making positions. Land reform alone can not solve these problems. The main deficiency of the Naxalbari movement was failure to understand these specific characteristics of Indian Society. In later years some groups of CPI(ML) have tried to deepen their understanding of Indian Society and have included issues like reservation for SC/ST/OBC and minorities, equality of status and opportunities to all languages and nationalities, a federal set up with multi- layered autonomy along with the issue of ‘Land to the tiller’ and other anti-imperialist programmes. The Naxalite movement is today divided. There are several organizations claiming to carry forward the legacy of Naxalbari and CPI(ML). There are differences among them regarding the strategy and tactics of the revolutionary movement. However, they have basic unity on some fundamental issues and they join hands with each other on peoples’ issues. If they are able to forge a unity and integrate with the concrete Indian situation, they can build a powerful movement and advance the cause of social progress.

REFERENCE Personal experience and views of the author an activist of Naxalite Movement.   