India – bsCEM: STATEMENT AGAINST RED TAGGING OF bsCEM AND OTHER REVOLUTIONARY ORGANIZATIONS
We hereby share a statement published by bsCEM on their Instagram on October 3.
Once again an ideological attack has been unleashed against the revolutionaries. One Mr. Azad has written a “press statement on North Coordination Committee(NCC)”, where he has thrown a number of allegations on the revolutionaries of Northern India. He also tried to portray affiliation of bsCEM and MAS to NCC CPI(Maoist). He has tried to vulgarize the struggle waged by our organisation and various other revolutionaries, especially in Northern India, by distorting history, raising allegations of being dictatorial (Neo-Nazis), stating ideological struggle against revisionism as extremism and violence, and with various arguments reiterating the state’s propaganda. First of all we must ask about the “legitimacy” of Mr Azad. We found this statement from the social media wall of an older, and known liquidator Sumit. Therefore, we need to know what kind of organisation/party does Mr.Azad associate with, what is his political line? The text which Mr. Azad has used is a ditto to that of N Ravi’s Facebook statement on MAS burning the “Dastak” Magazine. Is such a resemblance entirely co-incidental? Or is it N Ravi, who has written this statement against the revolutionary forces struggling against the most dangerous enemy of the Indian New Democratic Revolution at present, i.e., Opportunism-Liquidationism-Revisionism? One has more then one reason to doubt it, unless clarified by N Ravi himself.
Mr Azad found not even a single argument to contradict the MLM political line and therefore tags them as people indulged in their own “sadistic appetites”. He presents the revolutionaries of north only as people coming from bourgeoisie — privileged background exhibiting “remarkable talent for appreciating the spirit of liberation on paper.” Wonder who are his “confidantes of academic circle of north India”, might be Seema and Vishwavijay or some other liquidator or is it the state itself, who knows?
BHAGAT SINGH CHHATRA EKTA MANCH (bsCEM) Bhaago Matt, Minim Ko Badlo
However, Mr Azad wants to deligitimise the Maoists in North by pointing out their class background (which is frivolous). But with such logic, one could put comrade Engels under this same category and state his political work as a tool of satisfying “sadistic appetites”. It is irrelevant from whatever class one comes, but only relevant thing is – does he or she has proletarinized oneself or not? The current material conditions are such that the revolutionary movement is going through a severe setback, could be stated as the severest one in the movement’s history yet. At this juncture, the party has lost hundreds of comrades in hands of liquidating forces within and outside the party. Without the help of these traitors the state could never have achieved such a huge success in annihilating the revolutionaries to such extensive level. With every news of surrender by one or more renegades, there would follow the news of one or more dead or arrested revolutionaries.
Such unfolding of events in the revolutionary movement resulted into an understanding in larger revolutionary sections that Opportunism-Liquidationism-Revisionism is one of the greatest threats to the movement today. Therefore, all the genuine MLM organisations such as ours took the responsibility on their shoulders, wasting no time to expose these elements, and isolate them from the revolutionary masses. Numbers of opportunist and liquidationist elements were exposed in the past few years and their political existence was thrown into the Dustbin of revolutionary history. Coming across such a rigorous struggling attitude of revolutionaries, which Comrade Lenin has taught us through the struggle against the liquidators and otzovists, when he struggled against the peace-maker and revisionist Trotsky and various opportunist elements to revive the party from the deepening crisis, the ground under the feet of these opportunists was pulled off. They were filled with fright and anxiety to loose the “throne” which they have built with years of self-serving work in the name of revolutionary activism. The sharp ideological struggle against Sumit-Sahil in Haryana has crushed their sexual opportunist “throne” as we have seen, same happened with Darshan Pal and Raju in Punjab, Gopal Mishra in Delhi and the head of these opportunists, Balraj.
Here an allegation has been made on us of being extremists. Mr. Azad had said “The most hideous manifestation of this extremist behaviour occurred recently with the public burning of copies of the progressive periodical `Dastak'”. Not only this he has equated us with Neo-Nazis for burning “progressive” literature. It shown the act of burning `Dastak’ as an unconventional and most heinous crime of history, perhaps, more than throwing Jews and Communists into the gas chambers. Over here this statement represents a great example of an opportunist at work, it is here we see them sitting on two stools, it is here we catch them red handed. Mr Azad has walked miles on the turf of opportunist analysis of history to present the case of their `advocate’ clients as victims that conveniently ignored the revolutionary history of taking strong actions against the ruling class literature.
In China during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution hundreds of reactionary books and other literature were destroyed. After the October Revolution in 1917, the Soviet Union, started by Comrade Lenin, and continued under the leadership of Comrade Stalin, led the campaign to establish the Socialist Realism and had banned a great number of reactionary literature. Not only in the proletarian revolution but in all the history of struggle of new against the old such actions of people and their leaders are very common. Would Mr. Azad ask Dr. B.R.Ambedkar to go into a “healthy debate” with Manusmriti? Would he state him as “hideous extremist”? In the anti-feudal history of the world the revolutionaries had always burnt the account books of ruling class usurers. Would you call a debate between them to settle the accounts between peasants and the usurers? Similar is the case between Seema-Vishwavijay and revolutionaries. For a revolutionary there is nothing to debate with the liquidators and traitors, but only to expose them and burn them into ashes, especially their literature.
Here an allegation has been made on us of being extremists. Mr. Azad had said “The most hideous manifestation of this extremist behaviour occurred recently with the public burning of copies of the progressive periodical `Dastak'”. Not only this he has equated us with Neo-Nazis for burning “progressive” literature. It shown the act of burning `Dastak’ as an unconventional and most heinous crime of history, perhaps, more than throwing Jews and Communists into the gas chambers. Over here this statement represents a great example of an opportunist at work, it is here we see them sitting on two stools, it is here we catch them red handed. Mr Azad has walked miles on the turf of opportunist analysis of history to present the case of their `advocate’ clients as victims that conveniently ignored the revolutionary history of taking strong actions against the ruling class literature.
In China during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution hundreds of reactionary books and other literature were destroyed. After the October Revolution in 1917, the Soviet Union, started by Comrade Lenin, and continued under the leadership of Comrade Stalin, led the campaign to establish the Socialist Realism and had banned a great number of reactionary literature. Not only in the proletarian revolution but in all the history of struggle of new against the old such actions of people and their leaders are very common. Would Mr. Azad ask Dr. B.R.Ambedkar to go into a “healthy debate” with Manusmriti? Would he state him as “hideous extremist”? In the anti-feudal history of the world the revolutionaries had always burnt the account books of ruling class usurers. Would you call a debate between them to settle the accounts between peasants and the usurers? Similar is the case between Seema-Vishwavijay and revolutionaries. For a revolutionary there is nothing to debate with the liquidators and traitors, but only to expose them and burn them into ashes, especially their literature.
Opportunists like you (Mr Azad) never learn from history. You teach us to debate like Comrade Charu, but refuse to learn by yourself. What we did is actually the legacy of Comrade Charu. Comrade Charu threw out the photo of Dange from the party office to weed out right opportunism and build a revolutionary party, we burnt `Dastak’ forwarding the task of revival for the revolutionary movement, by crushing the right opportunism. Also, on the other hand, numbers of comrades have asked them to answer their questions on social media, which they have only answered in a salty manner and never tried to engage in any real political debate. Seema and Vishavijay, fond of their job, instead sent notices of 50 lakhs to those who exposed them and pointed out their Opportunism-Liquidationism. Should we consider it as a letter of debate rebuttal? Comrade Lenin taught us only an opportunist can ask to have “healthy debates” with another opportunist and that’s what we smell from you.
The opportunists who we’ve exposed always resorted to these similar arguments and tagged the revolutionaries as dictatorial all the time. On among them is Sumit, who is at the forefront of sharing this document. The overjoyed opportunist Sumit jumped right into this campaign against revolutionaries. This petty opportunist who portrayed himself as a big revolutionary but was never able to formulate even a single article, finds shade under the liquidating writings of other opportunists. Taking advantage of the weak state of the Maoists, even the most feudal person like him attempts to charge Maoists with such allegations. This is the typical characteristic of the opportunists and liquidators as Comrade Lenin described given their petty bourgeoisie class character. They keep their head down and pretend to adhere to the correct political line in good times but as soon as they find the influence of the movement a little faded they bring out their liquidating arrows to give the blows to the revolutionaries and their structures and happily join the ruling class state apparatus.
These opportunists are trying to depict revolutionaries as extremists and dictators. This is nothing but an attempt to delegitimize revolutionaries among the general masses. Mr Azad went to the extent of declaring us a extremists as it characterized our statement as “violence” on individuals. All these opportunists, adhering to post-modern thought and filled with such kinds of arguments where they state every kind of act to discipline (democratic-centralism) as an act of power. Through such arguments they frame us as extremists. Mr Azad compares a revolutionary party, facing major repression, with a fascist party (Nazi) who was holding the state power and equates the acts of defence for their revolutionary line with acts of repression on democratic forces. This is what Seema and other such traitors love to do the most, to propagate such theories, flowing from, and justified by post-modern thought.
One has to understand that such individuals have never come to defend those who suffered in hands of opportunists such as Seema, they never showed themselves when BSM exposed their feudal-imperialist practices but jumped right in when they got little chane to defend their “bhaichara”. They haven’t discussed about the contents of the magazine which was burnt. It was a magazine who worked with state collaborator anti-people Kobad, which propagated post-modern garbage into the people, and worked as an anti-revolutionary magazine. Therefore, what these opportunists are doing here is rubbing each others back and finding every way to tag the revolutionaries as extremists or something else by which they can gain back their authority.
Unity Between Whom?
“The essential unity between mass movement and civil right struggles is being destroyed” states Mr Azad. Certainly only one could ask for such unity at the time of crisis who “have been betraying the essence of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist thoughts”. In the period of crisis Comrade Lenin gave the call to build an illegal party and not mass movements and civil right struggle. Compromising the ideological struggle which has to take place to build a strong political central structure to lead the revolution, for reformist work of civil rights activists is not the conduct of a true Marxist. During the dark times of Bolsheviks, Comrade Lenin set an example by struggling against various groups such as Golos, Robochaya Dyelo, Ypreodists, Otzovists and alike. Lenin was for principled unity and not an unprincipled compromise between various factions to let all of them continue their opportunist work. It was Trotsky who led the “Unity” phrase-mongering and was exposed by Lenin.
Whoever calls for unity without struggling on the ideological aspects of the political line of the revolution is nothing more than the successor of Trotsky whereas those who strive for principled unity are only the true and “sole custodian” of the revolutionary ideology. Like comrade Lenin was during the struggle against liquidators, like comrade Mao was during the struggle against the wrong left opportunist line and as was comrade Charu against the right opportunism of Dange. As it would be NCC by defeating all the opportunists of the day.
By such a call of preserving unity when the opportunists and liquidators from all around attacking the correctly formulated political line, is an attack on the revolutionary movement. By the argument of Mr Azad, one could also justify building unity with people like Sonu and Devuji, who have out-rightly betrayed the revolution. Do we see them too as democratic forces and not struggle against them? Do we conduct table talks with those who led the martyrdom of hundreds of Maoists and revolutionary masses? Such is the essence of this unity argument of this opportunist-liquidationist and a frivolous document.
The Successors
In the history of proletarian revolution only those who took the correct and firm line came out as true and sole successors of MLM politics. Yes, there could be only one true successor of the revolutionary legacy. Mr Azad is afraid of this fact. Being an opportunist, he too wants the chunk of revolution like it is a piece of cake. Not only for himself, but he wants it for all those opportunist-liquidationists in his bhaichara, who once were part of the revolutionary movement. He wants to distribute the gains of the party between themselves like a true bourgeoisie. They think revolution as their private property which they have nurtured and now they want fruits of it. But revolution, proletarian, is nobody’s private property but a weapon which will smash the private property itself. Only those who can walk on the hard road of revolution take the correct political line. Those who desire to mould the revolution in accordance with their own interests are to be thrown into the dustbins of history. The current struggle which the revolutionaries are leading all over has already thrown many such opportunists into the dustbins of history and Seema-Vishwavijay are new additions into that list.
The statement concludes that no one can establish legitimacy by issuing statements. But history tells us that is how successors of the revolutionary movement are built. What comrade Lenin did was issuing statements, writing pamphlets, and educating cadres and we know him as the successor of Comrades Marx and Engels. What Comrade Charu did was write 8 documents and became the real successor of Marxism in India and establish the legitimacy of the Naxalbari Line. It is the autocratic feudal understanding of these individuals which led them to such conclusions.
These are the opportunists who want their little feudal regime wearing the veil of a revolutionary. They want themselves to be the authority at all times irrespective of how corrupt the political line they are practicing. Henceforth, they lose the ability to understand the importance of ideology. They forgot that this is the movement of class conscious proletarian and only those who firmly hold to the political line consciously built by the structures of the advanced detachment can be real successors of revolutionary politics and not those who work on the principle of “jiski lathi uski bains”.
Also we must understand that they resort to such arguments as they are afraid of the political line being established through statements and articles of revolutionaries. When they argue about getting into healthy debate, they seem incapable of providing even a single rebuttal to our statements as they have no scientific basis to back their arguments and only know phrase-mongering. Therefore, they propagate such illusions among the people that statements and articles are not to be released against activists as it breaks “unity”.
Apart from the OLR garbage, the audacity displayed by these traitors to take the name of a martyred comrade to gain legitimacy, proves how they wish to claim the people’s party and its martyrs to serve their own interests. The true revolutionaries all over the country and in the international sphere must understand that such a statement disguised in the name of the great revolutionary Comrade Azad is nothing but a great betrayal to his legacy. It is an outrageous attempt of anxious opportunists and liquidationists who failed to destroy the revolution from the inside. It is in the process of “Dimagi Naxal” campaign of the state that such propaganda is being done against the revolutionaries who are determined to establish the correct political line and weed out all the Opportunist-Liquidationist-Revisionist tendencies from the movement.
The opportunism of such forces can be understood from their arguments of “Overzealous or extremist ‘anti-revisionism’ ultimately ends up strengthening the hands of the assumed enemy” on the one hand but alleging affiliation of bsCEM and MAS with NCC, suggesting the state to inflict the white terror on these organisations. The state is desperate to crush those who are working to strengthen the revolutionary movement and develop leaders to lead the revolution. The arresting of our comrades in bogus Lucknow Conspiracy Case, Bastar DIG P. Sundarraj shifted to Delhi as NIA chief, Shah meeting CMs of Northern States, Modi coining the term “Dimagi Naxal” and at last the attack of liquidators in collaboration with the state is nothing more but an full on attack on the ideological struggle what the revolutionaries are leading today.
As a revolutionary student organisation guided by the scientific ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, we understand that the attack on the ideology and the proletarian party, and the red-tagging of our organisation are all interconnected. The ruling classes, fearing the revolutionary masses, are trying desperately to create confusion and spread doubts on the revolutionary ideology and on revolutionaries themselves. We affirm that we will fight Opportunism-Liquidationism-Revisionism, and struggle for a new democratic society.
HOLD HIGH THE RED BANNER OF MARXISM-LENINISM- MAOISM!
FIGHT AGAINST OPPORTUNISM- LIQUIDATIONSIM-REVISIONISM!
ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF NEW DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION!
BHAGAT SINGH CHHATRA EKTA MANCH (bsCEM) Bhaago Matt, Minim Ko Badlo
