|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Asia
: Indian
subcontinent
Stalinism and the rise of the Hindu-chauvinist BJP
By Keith Jones
26 May 1998
The political fallout from the Indian government's detonation
of five nuclear devices underscores the urgency of Indian workers
adopting a new perspective to counter the Hindu-chauvinist BJP
and the Indian bourgeoisie's "new economic policy,"
which subjects India's human and natural resources to ever-more
direct and rapacious imperialist exploitation.
With some success, the BJP has used the nuclear tests and the
consequent confrontation with the U.S. to incite jingoism, don
an "anti-imperialist" garb, and strengthen its hitherto
shaky grasp on power. According to Frontline, a newsmagazine
that is a staunch critic of the BJP and the current government,
"To say that the aftermath of the test was euphoric would
be a considerable understatement."
One of the BJP's objectives is to whip up support for the military,
so that it can mount more vigorous counter-insurgency operations
against the Pakistani-backed secessionist movement in Kashmir
and separatist movements in India's north-east.
But the BJP's militarism and anti-Pakistan rhetoric are principally
directed against the working class and other opponents of its
right-wing agenda. Confrontation with Pakistan is an elaborate,
although potentially bloody, spectacle that serves to channel
social tensions against an external "enemy" and divert
attention from unpopular socio-economic policies. Moreover, by
projecting itself as the defender of the nation, the BJP hopes
to be able to paint all opposition to its regime as "anti-national."
Already, BJP spokesmen are accusing the Stalinist parties, the
Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the Communist Party of
India, of "misplaced loyalties" for not joining the
rest of India's political establishment in hailing the nuclear
tests.
The conflict that has erupted with the Clinton administration
has enabled the BJP to tap into popular anti-imperialist sentiment,
the better to obscure the historical record of the Hindu chauvinists.
Under British-rule, the principal Hindu communalist organizations,
the All-India Hindu Mahasabha and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
(RSS) opposed the Congress-led mass mobilizations for fear that
the British would respond by showering favors on the Muslim political
elite. In the decades following independence, the RSS and the
BJP's predecessor, the Jana Sangh, pressed for better relations
with Washington and Wall Street.
While basking in its new-found anti-US posture, the BJP-led
government has in fact taken a spate of decisions over the past
two weeks aimed at placating foreign investors, including handing
out oil exploration blocks and mineral leases and providing additional
guarantees to power project developers. According to press reports,
the budget that the BJP-led government will deliver less than
two weeks from now will gut subsidies for fuel and fertilizer
and step up the privatization of public sector enterprises.
The Indian ruling class, for its part, is urging the Vajpayee
government to use its new-found popularity to intensify the assault
on the working class and oppressed masses. "If a nuclear
weapon has long been part of the BJP's agenda," declared
an editorial in the May 25 issue of India Today, "so
has an economy which exemplifies the spirit of free enterprise.
It is now time to make this second promise a reality as well.
True, this calls for some tough decisions -- but the Government
cannot seek a better cushion than the prevalent mood....
"India's vulnerabilities are well known: excessive bureaucratic
control, an irrational revenue structure, too few people paying
too large a share of the taxes, wasteful subsidies, a money-guzzling
public sector, and so on. To take care of any of these would be
to anger entrenched lobbies and court public anger. This is why
successive governments have only tinkered with the problem. Given
his post-Pokhran [i.e. post-nuclear test] good will, Vajpayee
now has a chance to do better. He may not get another opportunity.
Sadly, nor may India."
The Indian bourgeoisie is not oblivious to the danger that
the BJP's militarism could draw India into foreign policy adventures
and that its Hindu chauvinism -- its battle-cry of "one people,
one culture, one nation" -- could provoke social unrest that
would further undermine the Indian state.
But with its traditional political instrument, the Congress
Party, having lost it mass base and the Indian political system
having fractured into a myriad of regionalist and caste-based
parties, important sections of Indian capital calculate that the
BJP is, at present, the best-positioned to form a strong government
capable of pressing forward with privatization, deregulation,
the cutting of social spending, price-controls and subsidies and
the scrapping of land ceilings. Not only does the BJP's Hindu
chauvinist ideology provide it with a measure of unity and discipline
lacking in many of the other bourgeois formations; its close ties
to the RSS -- a centralized, mass-based "volunteer"
organization that promotes martial training and has long-been
associated with communal violence -- means that it has at its
disposal a shock force for use against a movement of the working
class.
The removal of all restrictions on the exploitation of the
subcontinent by the transnationals will spell ruin for tens of
millions of workers, peasants, agricultural laborers, artisans
and small traders. The pivotal question is what perspective will
animate the inevitable opposition movement.
The role of the Stalinist parties
That the Hindu-chauvinist BJP has been able, even if only temporarily,
to exploit anti-imperialist sentiments must be cause for sober
reflection. Above all it is necessary that Indian workers critically
appraise the role of Stalinism.
The CPI and CPI (M) have for decades maintained that imperialist
oppression binds together the antagonistic social classes that
comprise Indian society and that the working class must support
the "progressive" or "anti-imperialist" sections
of the national bourgeoisie.
The latest consequence of this perspective was the issuing
of a statement by the Politbureau of the CPI (M) calling "all
sections of the people" to "unitedly reject any intimidatory
tactics directed against India" -- in effect for unity with
the BJP government. Previously, the CPs supported the Congress
"national project," which sought to secure the position
of the national bourgeoisie through high tariffs and import substitution.
In the case of the CPI, this support included endorsing the imposition
of martial law by Indira Gandhi during the 1975-77 "Emergency".
Imperialist oppression does not weld the classes of India together,
rather it exacerbates the conflict between them. After a half-century
of independent bourgeois rule, India is marked by enormous and
ever-widening social inequality, with capitalist exploitation
interwoven with caste oppression, bonded labor and other vestiges
of feudalism. Similarly, Indian nationalism does not reflect a
common opposition to imperialism that transcends class divisions.
It is the ideology of the national bourgeoisie.
Millions of Indian workers and peasants fought against British
rule for they recognized it was the apex of a system of exploitation
and viewed independence as a means toward realizing their democratic
and social demands. Even today the anti-imperialist sentiments
of the masses may find distorted expression through nationalism.
But Indian nationalism has historically served to bind the working
class and oppressed masses to the leadership of the bourgeoisie.
It obscures the real nature of the historical antagonism between
the Indian bourgeoisie and imperialism, that what the national
bourgeoisie seeks is merely greater freedom to exploit the Indian
masses.
If the BJP has been able to exploit Indian nationalism, it
is largely because the CPs, schooled in the nationalist-Stalinist
perversion of Marxism, have promoted the idea that Indian nationalism
is a non-class ideology and argued that because the tasks of the
democratic revolution are yet to be completed, the struggle for
socialism and the independent political struggle of the working
class are not yet on the historical agenda.
The bitter history of India in the twentieth century proves
the exact opposite. While the Stalinists uphold the Indian Republic
as a bulwark against imperialism, its establishment represented
not the realization, but the betrayal of the anti-imperialist
movement that convulsed India in the first half of the twentieth
century. Anxious to get its hands on the reins of power and terrified
by the post-World War upsurge of the working class and oppressed
masses, the Indian bourgeoisie accepted a settlement with British
imperialism in 1947 under which the subcontinent was divided along
communal lines and the most burning tasks of the democratic revolution
-- national unification and the eradication of landlordism and
caste oppression -- were aborted.
Born of the betrayal of the democratic aspirations of the masses,
the Indian capitalist state, no less than the other states founded
in South Asia in 1947-48, has served as an incubator for chauvinism
and communalism. It is one thing to oppose the BJP's efforts to
staff the state with RSS cadres and oppose all attempts to roll
back democratic rights; it is quite another to maintain, as have
the Stalinists parties, that communalism can be fought through
the "secular" Indian state, alliances with all manner
of regionalist, caste-based and outright gangster-politicians,
and anti-democratic constitutional provisions like Presidential
Rule.
Over the past decade, the Stalinist parties have moved still
further to the right. They have embraced the bourgeoisie's "new
economic policy" and joined in the rewriting of government
policy to placate foreign capital both at the Center, where they
were the principal ideologues and strategists of the United Front
government, and in the states where they form the government --
West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura.
The BJP is a serious menace to the working class and oppressed
masses. But if the bourgeoisie directly uses it to intimidate
the working class, the Stalinist trade union, party and state
functionaries use it indirectly -- telling workers that to counter
the extreme right they must support all manner of bourgeois parties
and accept the reorganization of India's economy under the auspices
of Indian and international capital.
The counting of the votes in elections last March for the 12th
Lok Sabha [parliament] had scarcely begun when CPI (M) General
Secretary Harkishen Surjeet announced that his party was ready
to support a Congress government led by Sonia Gandhi. To the Stalinists'
chagrin, the Congress Party chose not to try to form the government.
Reflecting the present calculations of the bourgeoisie, it instead
opted to offer "constructive support" to the BJP-led
coalition, while standing in wait to provide the bourgeoisie with
an alternative regime should the BJP falter.
As for the Stalinists' erstwhile allies in the United Front,
they have been, if anything, even more fulsome than the Congress
in their praise of the BJP government's nuclear policy. As one
journalist observed, "The non-Left parties of the United
Front have actually been ahead of the Congress in backing the
nuclear forward policy, with ex-Prime Minister Gujral zealously
claiming for himself and his government a significant part of
the credit for the explosions ..."
The Stalinists claim that communalism must be defeated before
any struggle against the national bourgeoisie's "new economic
policy" can be undertaken. In fact, the two are inseparable.
The more the national bourgeoisie functions in direct partnership
with imperialism, the more it must seek to use communalism, caste-politics
and chauvinism to divert the opposition of the masses.
The fight against communalism and militarism is inseparable
from the raising of a program to unite the workers and oppressed
of all religions and national-ethnic groups -- that is an anti-capitalist
program founded on the principle of social equality. The Socialist
Labour League, the Indian organization in political solidarity
with the International Committee of the Fourth International,
fights for the working class to break from the parties of the
bourgeoisie and place itself at the leadership of the growing
opposition to India's subordination to the dictates of international
capital.
Genuine freedom from imperialism and genuine democracy, including
the liquidation of caste oppression and landlordism and the democratic
unification of the peoples of South Asia, can only be achieved
in struggle against the national bourgeoisie and through the establishment
of a workers and peasants government in alliance with the socialist
struggle of the international working class. The true ally of
the Indian masses in the struggle against imperialism is not,
as the Stalinists have claimed, the national bourgeoisie, but
rather the international working class.
Also in German
See Also:
Tensions mount between India and Pakistan
[26 May 1998]
Mounting regional tensions, domestic
political crisis
Behind India's nuclear bomb testing
[16 May 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |