Poverty of Philosophy - Through the eyes of a well-wisher of revolutionary change

Saumyarit Chowdhury

Many of us must have come across Kobad Ghandy's book "Fractured Freedom" and the debates associated with it. We should have come across those. But how, that is also very important. Because in this atmosphere of Social Media and Whatsapp University, after one come across such things it becomes really difficult and mysterious to find how far it is exactly related to the main issue. However, in any way or the other, we are taking for granted that all of us have some idea about  the book and the debate it aroused. Although I feel most of us have not gone through the main book in depth. If someone has not read the book , yet interested in the ongoing debate, it is better to read the book first.  

But applause does not sound with one hand. The controversy came from the opposite direction. Recently, on 26 November 2021, the political party CPI (Maoist) announced in a press release that it had expelled Kobad Ghandy, asupposed  former Politburo member and veteran Maoist leader. This book is one of the reasons behind such a strong decision. Why? What is in the book that forced them to expel one of their (as claimed) senior political leader? Let's take a closer look at this debate. Maybe some of the element for our own thinking and research can be matched from this discussion. But I will say it again. In order to get a real taste of these debates, we must read the original book. 

Although it was a privilege to read the original  book, I did not have the privilege of seeing the political statements of the CPI (Maoist). I have no scope to verify its authenticity. I have collected the summary of the statement of the CPI (Maoist) party from an article by Snigdhendu Bhattacharya published on thewire.in on 3 December 2021. The title of the article is ‘For Maoists, Kobad Ghandy’s Mafia Reference in Book was the Last Straw’. From this article it has been possible to collect various allegations of Maoist group against Kobad.  

There are also types of allegations. It is not one dimentional.  The first type of allegation is related to  party decorum— that is, of the CPI (Maoist) party, he did not follow the rules and regulations of the party etc. Honestly, I'm not very interested in this. Not interested because there is nothing new in these allegations. Anyone who is expelled from the party, usually any communist political organization, brings these allegations against them. So I would not have to discuss these allegations, unless there were some weird contradictions and a funny twist. Now,  it is necessary to discuss. Let's see what these allegations are! 

One) Kobad has violated the constitution, democratic centralism, ideology, etc. of the CPI (Maoist) party.

Two) He has brought false allegations against the Maoist party.

Three) Since his arrest, he has repeatedly lied that he is not a Maoist.

Four) Kobad comes from an upper middle class family. He joined the party as a representative of the national bourgeoisie. He has grown up among corporates and so on.

Five) He is trying to satisfy the ruling class.

Six) He is opposing dialectical materialism dogmatically. There is quite a left-wing adventurous tendency in his language, on the contrary, there is right-wing opportunism in practice. For this activity, there is a tendency of forming  factions within the party.  

How difficult! You yourself are saying that the man has been saying since the arrest that he is not a member of the Maoist party! The fact he is. Since his arrest in 2009, the state has filed cases against him in six state courts, identifying him as a member of the CPI (Maoist). Kobad has strongly opposed the allegations. Interestingly, the state has failed to prove this allegation in all the six states. What is the urgency of the CPI (Maoist) party today to prove what the state has not been able to for more than 10 years?  What the court cannot prove they are trying to do so by giving statement to  the media! 

Well, let's assume that Kobad Ghandy  has been lying for so long and on the contrary, the ruling class and the CPI (Maoist) are telling the truth, but even then, the word constitution-democratic centralism of the party does not suit the CPI (Maoist).Well, before the expulsion of Kobad Ghandy, did they go through the stages of  show cause, suspension, etc., according to the general idea of discipline of the communist organizations? And it is an unknown mystery whether it falls into any kind of communist discipline by throwing him like a sacrificed animal in front of the state by making a statement in the media. Kobad Ghandy  has been associated with the communist movement for more than four decades, leaving behind the position of the upper middle class/corporate class from which he came. If he is supposed to be a member of the CPI (Maoist), then he has joined the party from that position and has played his important role. But today suddenly the smell of class started coming out from the body of Kobad Ghandy and suddenly the Maoists discovered enemy's home in the tiger's den!  It is such that factions are rising in the middle of the party and the party leadership is being forced to match the tune of the ruling class, to identify and put a stamp on Kobad Ghandy.  

As I said before, I am less interested in this subject. My main area of interest is ideological questions. Undoubtedly, the CPI (Maoist) has raised some important questions by accusing Kobad Ghandy  of ideological deviation. I will put those questions in front of you, at the same time I will also put before you some of the ideological aspects that have emerged from the writings of Kobad Ghandy. But the issue will not be treated as a response to allegations made by the CPI (Maoist).  Debates will continue regarding those  questions  and answers,  but in order to have some advantage in that work, I will try to present to you what I felt, the main ideological points raised by Kobad. But first of all, I will take a look at the allegations made by the Maoists.  

One) Kobad has completely deviated from Marxism-Leninism and Maoism.

Two) He abandoned the dialectical and historical materialism, the principles of Marxism, and the notion of class struggle.

Three) Anarchist tendencies can be seen in him.

Four) He has got stuck in the mud of  bourgeois idealism. 

Five) Chose the path to happiness through mysticism.

Six) He is trying to import despair into the revolutionary camp.

Seven) He has published books in the interest of the ruling class and in tune with the ruling class. 

Eight) He wants to divert the masses from the path of seizing state power through struggle, just like Bernstein.

That's all. I will not comment on how acceptable or unacceptable these are. Rather, I would urge the reader to read Kobad's original text, especially the third chapter of the book "Fractured Freedom". Kobad's ideological views  have found a place there. Now let's talk a little bit about what Kobad's main ideological points  are.

....

Throughout his book, and especially in the third chapter, Kobad presents an insight. That realization is very important, because from that realization, Kobad's current political and ideological discourse has begun to take shape. By the way, this realization is probably not of  today. This realization led him to write the series "Questions of Freedom and People's Emancipation" in 2012-13. That is, when the international and Indian communist movements have fallen into a terrible shock. When Kobad got involved in politics, from that time  the movement receded by a thousand times. That realization driveshim to look for the reasons for this failure. Because in today's world where inequality is most prevalent, why are communist movements so miserable? Based on this observation that communist movements are suffering from cornering and disorientation, he seeks to find problems. He also looked for ways to understand the problem and how to remedy it. In his writings, he describes what he felt while trying to find the problem. One may disagree with the question related to the problems he is identifying, but the question is whether they are also acknowledging the crisis of the communist movement and whether they are looking for alternative problems and solutions to those problems.I think this perspective should be kept in mind when judging Kobad's views. In that case two views or more than that can conflict and can go through the process of  conflict-struggle-unity with each other,  but  the purpose will be constructive.

However, Kobad also has this perception about  India. The plight of the communist movement  hereis not insignificant  either. Kobad points out that in the mid-nineties, both the parliamentary and the revolutionary left were supposed to be at the highest levels in India. Since then, the more energy neo-liberalism has accumulated, the more fragile the situation has become for both the streams. At present, everyone is in a situation where their backs are almost against the wall. Why this happened and how to get out of it is the subject of his research. It does not seem that he has stopped that work in prison. On the contrary, it seems  the search for his answer started from the realization that he had reached in Tihar Jail. As an observant spectator, he tried to grasp the various aspects of the decline of the communist movements in India even in his prison days. Sitting in jails in Visakhapatnam, Telangana or Jharkhand, he continued to search for information through Naxalite prisoners and ordinary prisoners. And that in an uninterrupted way. In his search for that information, he used the information he had learned to find the cause of the misery of the communist movement. These observations and perceptions can be understood by looking closely.

Let's talk about his perception of the Maoist movement in Jharkhand.  Kobad noticed that the Maoist prisoners in the Jharkhand jail did not want to talk about the history of their village or region. Their intense reluctance to do these things.This tendency is even more pronounced among the personnel who were part of the military structure.

Moreover, he has seen that the jails in Jharkhand are run by mafias. Money plays a role in everything. This picture of Jharkhand is quite different from the rest of the states in the country. And the jailed Maoists have become a part of that system, not opposed to this unethical system of prison management.

Another thing he has heard from the jail inmates is that when a Maoist leader of the same caliber as he was as publicized by media after his arrest;  came to the jail in Jharkhand, he  would have  a bag of money with him. Their standard of living is totally different. Kobad'ssimple standard of living earns him respect from the other inmates.

In fact, his experience with the Maoists in Jharkhand is probably not very good. He also said that the Maoists in Jharkhand were very different from the ones he had seen and read before inBastar and other regions. Here the experience doesn't match that  previous good experience.

Could'nt the importance of the problem have been realized from his critical observation without pushing the unreasonable question of why Kobad saw it, why he wrote it, why he preached it?  Even if what he has observed is not a holistic picture of the Maoist movement in Jharkhand, if it is a fragmentary picture, is that not a cause for concern for the Maoist organization?

Kobad, however, seems to be repeatedly pointing to a measure throughout this critical period of observation, and that is the qualityof  politicization of cadres. "Keep politics in command" -he  just tried to judge the problem by the standards of that historical statement.

Kobad has made such an impeccable observation about the movement in the Narayanpatna-Kandhamal-Niyamgiri area of the Andhra-Orissa border area and the failure of the movement. He came to know about these incidents from Chadha Bhushanam, a Naxalite leader while he was in Visakhapatnam jail. In that experience, a historical outline of the mass movement and then the collapse of the movement in the face of state repression has emerged. His observation is that the strong repression has alienated the Maoist squad a lot. They are either wandering around like roving rebels, collecting money from contractors for their own existence, or they have become completely alienated. He said similar incidents had taken place in Telangana and Jharkhand as well as in the region.For this observation, he has been accused of matching the tunes of the ruling class. But what seemed important to me was that Kobad's critique of this observation was not only critical of the politicization of the cadres, but also of the militant economist tendencies of the Maoist movement. Prior to his martyrdom in 1999, Comrade Shyam, a member of the Central Committee of the CPI-ML (PWG), had identified in his writings the militant economist tendencies within the organization. Later, though not very strongly, the question of militant economist tendencies came up again and again in the Maoist movement. Kobad, however, points to that dangerous tendency through his observations.

Whatever it is, come back to what ideological questions Kobad has raised. Before I go into that discussion, let me give you another idea of Kobad's own. This point  is the realization that hundreds of flowers could not  develop. The perception that is needed todayis  to allow hundreds of flowers to grow. By reading this portion of his writing  this is what I realize. In page 236,  second para of ”Fractured  Freedom” he writes—

“The very concept of dialectics encompasses democracy and without it there can be no development and growth of ideas. Discussion of conflicting views is the basis of creation of new thoughts, essential for creative growth. After all, we do know that it is the ‘unity and struggle of opposites’ that results in development. In the realm of organization this would entail: starting with a level of unity, then a struggle between conflicting views, finally arriving a higher level of unity. In the realm of thought it would need an atmosphere of allowing conflicting views to clash and thereby arriving at a higher level of knowledge. Today much of the ossification in parties and organizations is probably due to the lack of such a process in the development of new ideas. In fact, new ideas in Marxist circles are often seen as dangerous, and the person is either labelled, targeted or isolated. This approach does not help growth, particularly at a time when there have been enormous changes in society and most movements for change are either marking time or reiterating.” 

Surprisingly, this realization may also seem to be in tune with the state or the ruling class from the point of view of the revolutionary communist camp. But Charu Majumdar himself, quoting Stalin when defining revolutionary workers in his historic first document, showed that "a revolutionary worker is one who can analyze events on his own initiative and take action accordingly." 

.....

One thing is floating in the air that Kobad said  the question of the freedom and emancipation of the individual will come first and the question of the freedom and emancipation of the whole will come later. Or did he seek to solve all problems through prophetic-spiritual meditation? But what do you suggest as an alternative to Kobad to solve the problem? 

Undoubtedly, Kobad emphasizes on the transformation of the person in his thoughts. He felt that the necessary programs for the transformation of society and system, which were already on the list of communists, should be accompanied by the project of building people with new values for the new society.But he never said that it is necessary to do that first and then to start a revolution, but he thinks that it is very important to bring about these changes consciously among those who are engaged in the work of social change. He felt that the struggle to acquire the qualities that a revolutionary worker should possess as a communist revolutionary must begin at the same time as changing the outside world, and that is the view he expressed. And he is not the first to say these words.

While telling about Comrade Bethune, Mao Tse Tung said—"Comrade Bethune's spirit, his utter devotion to others without any thought of self, was shown in his boundless sense of responsibility in his work, and his boundless warmheartedness towards all comrades and the people. Every Communist must learn from him. There are not a few people who are irresponsible in their work, preferring the light to the heavy, shoving the heavy loads on to others and choosing the easy ones for themselves. At every turn they think of themselves before others. When they make some small contribution, they swell with pride and brag about it for fear that others will not know. They feel no warmth toward comrades and the people but are cold, indifferent and apathetic. In fact such people are not Communists or at least cannot be counted as true Communists ..." .Not only that, but a few steps further, Mao Zedong also said, "We must learn the spirit of absolute selflessness from him. With this spirit everyone can be very useful to the people. A man's ability may be great or small, but if he has this spirit, he is already noble-minded and pure, a man of moral integrity and above vulgar interests, a man who is of value to the people." Kobad wants to create such an image through the 'Anuradha' model of how communists should be. It is not possible to achieve the goal of revolution without tackling the conflict between changing the world and changing oneself.

This statement can be clearly seen in many other important writings of Mao Zedong, even in military essays.

And Kobad Ghandy has even drawn the example of Bastar on the question of development of this individual. I feel,  in this question, he brought to the fore the development work that was done among the women in Bastar. In page 221, second para of “Fractured Freedom” he writes—  “Of course, I had the example of Anuradha before me. A source from which one could learn many things about social activists. Also, her experiences in Bastar, and the way she recounted how they built the individuality, personality and self-confidence of even the most backward Adivasi women were no doubt enlighting.” Although the CPI-Maoist did not directly acknowledge the importance of these qualities, Kobad did not forget to mention that there had been a tacit acceptance of these qualities. This I feel because in page 233, second para of “Fractured Freedom”, Kobad writes—“…one positive aspect is that an Anu-prototype could gain recognition and also a leadership role in her organizational environment, which may not have been possible in other organizations. It was therefore a tacit acceptance (though not vocal) of these positive attributes.” And above all, Kobad wants to make everyone aware of the importance of the subject by quoting from Karl Marx. In Third thesis of Feurbach Marx writes¬— “Historical materialism helps in understanding the world; proletarian revolution is the means of changing it. In the course of doing so, the proletariat would, in the process of remaking the world, also remake itself. In other words, in the process of remaking society for the better, revolutionaries also remake themselves better human beings.”  Marx did not say that first the world will change then the people will change automatically but he said person who are  participating in the process of changing the world will change during the process itself.  

Now let us look into the alternative project given by Kobad. In page 220, second para of “Fractured Freedom”, Kobad  said— “…I began thinking that till today no other economic system has appeared that is more just and sustainable than the communist project. Yet, due to its failures worldwide there is need for some rethinking. I felt that no doubt the seeds have to be maintained, but one has to ensure that the flowers don’t wilt and fruits don’t turn sour. For that the seeds probably need to be nurtured with much greater care than they were in the past. Primarily, the saplings, I concluded, should be nursed; 

Firstly, in an environment of freedom. 

Secondly, it should be built with a new set of values, as, say, epitomized by the Anuradha-model.

Thirdly, It should have as it’s goal universal happiness” 

In other words, it is not true that Kobad is negating  the current project. He says that in addition to addressing all the important aspects of the current project, some new aspects should be added to the project. Question of independence / democracy to be addressed.  Good value project, which we discussed earlier. The third is universal happiness or the pursuit of happiness for all (Unlike the Universal Happiness that the W.T.O. or other imperialist organizations speak of, it is quite different and unrelated). But why is he giving a stress to set this universal happiness as one of his goals? As reason behind this Kobad  says in page 234, second para of “Fractured Freedom”—" If the organization seeking radical change keeps ‘happiness’ as their central goal, it will get reflected in day-to-day associations, in leaders’ attitude to cadres, in approach to the masses, women, Dalits, everywhere; bringing with it a fresh breeze of freedom, democracy and the good values..”

In other words, in order to solve the internal problems of the present communist camp, he saw it as a way to solve the problem. And here Kobad is probably bringing back an important question in the communist camp. The question is, what exactly is Maoism? What are the specific characteristics of Maoism? He, as I see it, sees Maoism in a broader philosophical context, because there is a strong representation in favor of transforming people internally. For example, Mao Zedong thinks that the internal contradiction  is the main one between the internal and the external contradiction, and not only that, the greatest revolution in the history of human civilization has been the "Great Cultural Revolution".

In his 2012-13 essay "Questions of Freedom and People’s Emancipation", he wrote, “And so it was with China. As they were unable to successfully imbibe the values of goodness, the masses began trading the old path to happiness. Probably, after the revolution they sought to bring about change too rapidly for which the people were not yet mentally ready. This is the both in the realm of the economy as also in the sphere of people’s thinking. Obviously, people’s consciousness, having just emerged from a backward feudal background, was not yet ripe to accept the commune-type organization (without private property), nor the selfless values sought to be imposed during the cultural revolution. 

Just having acquired the basic necessities of life together with education for the first time in generations and having so evolved their senses and desires the natural trend was for greater and greater enjoymentof the newly acquired pleasures, not the rigid sense of duity that the communist party sought to imposed. So, seeking to forcibly imposed selfless values during the cultural revolution through the impetuous Red Guards, the cult of Mao, and labor camps (May 7th schools) only created an appearance of conforming to dictates, not real change within the bulk of the people. 

Man cannot change his subconscious/conscious mind through imposition and force. It is only possible through a sense of awareness voluntarily acquired through a deep understanding that positive values alone can take us on the path to genuine happiness, not the instant pleasures of the day acquired through the new-found wealth of the populace over a generation of socialist construction. 

It is now obvious (in hindsight), that during the Cultural Revolution in China the bulk of the people merely suppressed their desires and wants in order to conform to the hysteria whipped up. And, once the opportunity arose, with Deng’s get-rich theory, the people’s suppressed desires/urges found a release in the form of acceptance. So there was little resistance to the new policies introduced by Deng. Not even the examples of Tachai and Taching (commune models in agricultures and industry), nor the limited resistance in Shanghai could stem the surge of support to Deng’s reversals. The rest, of course, is history as we witness in China today with the billionaire ‘princelings’ dominating the communist party leadership and its 80 million odd rank-and-file comprising a major share of a relatively priviledged middle class. 

Yet, it is not that human nature is basically bad and unchangeable. No doubt man’s negative values emotions etc are very deeply embedded through conditioning over centuries together with strong impulses generated from our early childhood days. Yet we have also seen that man’s thinking is not a fixed entity and the neuroplasticity of the mind allows change. In addition, we have also seen that the innate goodness in man has time and again sought to assert itself through history. 

The lesson to be learnt from the Chinese experience is that in man a seed of goodness has been covered by layer upon layer of poisonous weeds and is therefore unable to bear fruit so easily.”

Yes, the Cultural Revolution has failed, and Kobad has a clear idea of why it failed. He can feel from the teachings of Maoism that the inner change of man is a conscious endeavor. So without combining that work with revolution, it is impossible for all people to become 'new people' on the beautiful morning after a single revolution. History bears witness to this. Isn't  itthe teaching of Maoism to continue this struggle after the Cultural Revolution?

However, for those who think that Kobad is only asking for projects to build spiritually better people, Kobad explains the interrelationships and contradictions between economic activities and freedom-happiness, by bringing in the question of base and superstructure.  During reading this is what I feel. In page 232, third para of “Fractured Freedom” he writes, “…the economic structure must facilitate the evolution of happiness, freedom and good values in the superstructure; while the later must promote an economic base built in their image.” He also said that he will discuss this issue in detail later.

But Kobad's wave of thought does not just end  here. He has a keen eye on the ups and downs of the world order and all the new equations and possibilities that are being created. Kobad has been working tirelessly not only on Fractured Freedom, but also on this on his release from prison.  Finding the reason for the backwardness of the communists, looking for creativity, in the question of dealing with any crisis. Not following the Russian or Chinese path blindly,  Kobad seeks to procure thoughts from the thousand  years of anti-Brahmanical  struggle in Indian history to defeat Brahmanism, which is pressed like a rock on the chest of India. Not a blind copying but to Indianize and find solution in a new way in Indian context is what needed to be done by the Indian communists. For Indian working class always Brahmanism is a typical Indian feature and it is heavy obstacle in the path of revolution. To remove this the communists of India has to observe the 2700 years of historic resistance against Brahmanism.  Starting from Charvaks, the Buddhism-Jainism and such protesting religious sects, Bhakti and Sufi movement etc are challenging Brahmanism from a long time having a rich history.  Following the same tradition Jyotirao Phule, Ambedkar and Periyar are also continuing and advancing the anti Brahminical movement. Kobad kept a call to the communist to internalize this tradition and carry it forward. He has also noticed a steady flow of resources out from India since the British rule. Which is suffocating the economy of our country day by day and the water-land-jungle-people of the country are devastated by the  aggressive attack of this huge corporate capital. Kobad said, it is needed to sow the seeds of patriotism here against foreign plunder. Let the door of human mind be opened and let them join this resistance voluntarily-consciously-actively, this urge  has been expressed in his writings.

Although the "revolutionary" camp called him Renegade, the revolution needs him today. 

[The authors words are his sole responsibility.]