Iron discipline does not preclude but presupposes criticism and contest of opinion within the Party. Least of all does it mean that discipline must be “blind”.”
? Joseph Stalin
The ouster of Ritabrata Banerjee has again brought Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPM) into limelight and prime time discussion after a long time. People may have forgotten for which seditious reasons the Communist Party was made a point of discussion last time. Nowhere in the debates, Ritabrata had been seen defensive as there were no serious charges to slap on him. The decision to expel him from the Party was taken in a state secretariat meeting on September 13. A statement issued by Surjya Kanta Misra, CPM West Bengal State secretary, stated that “As per Article 19 (13) of the Party’s constitution, Ritabrata Banerjee has been expelled from the Party for grave anti-party activities.” As per the Article 19, clause 13 of the constitution of CPM, “In exceptional circumstances, Party Committees in their discretion may resort to summary procedure in expelling members for grave anti-Party activities.” The gravest of “grave” anti-Party activities, as per the charges against Ritabrata, include using an Apple Watch and a Mont Blanc pen!
Suspended from the Party for such flimsy reasons, Ritabrata had appeared in a television channel for an interview, to react against the allegations levelled by the CPM leadership. Following the interview, the Party expelled him from the primary membership without seeking any explanation. It was already expected that Ritabrata would be expelled from the Party soon as suspension period of three months was about to end. But, still there were no concrete evidence against him enough to punish him with ‘the capital punishment’ in the CPM book, i.e. expulsion. Since he was ousted from CPM allegedly for his ‘lavish lifestyle’, Ritabrata poses a valid question against his party, why the leadership is not taking action against former central secretary Prakash Karat and his wife Brinda Karat who go on overseas sabbaticals every year. If it is a part of austerity, an essential quality should be maintained by the CPM cadres? Or as George Orwell once wrote, are some animals more equal than others?
The Sword of ‘Discipline’
Against this backdrop, it is worth relooking the past of the CPM to know whether comrade Ritabrata’s case is an exception or rule. Inner-party discipline is an essential instrument of a Communist Party to maintain the monolithic character of its rank and file, with which the Party holds its members, the so-called lumpen proletariat together. Unlike various democratic parties, Communist parties use the Leninist organisational principles to oppress the voice of dissent and expel the critics, revisionists in the Communist parlance. Following the line adopted by its international counterparts, CPM has also extensively wielded the sword of ‘discipline’ on the democratic voices raised from within the Party all down the line. The history of the Communist parties of India bears testimony to the very undemocratic way the Party apparatus has been functioning since its inception in Tashkent in 1920.
Article XI of the constitution of CPM defines the duties of Party members which a comrade ought to follow. Sarcastic though it may seem, among the duties are: “To practice criticism and self-criticism with a view to helping each other and improving individual and collective work.” and “To be frank, honest and truthful to the Party and not to betray the confidence of the Party.” The above clauses may leave one bust a gut laughing and wondering how a Communist can continue in the Party by upholding the aforesaid duties. For comrades, it is a question worth pondering over whether it is possible to implement Article XI in their life and continue to be a frank, honest and truthful CPM cadre? Ex-comrade feels both cannot go hand in hand, either you can be a truthful and honest human being or a Party cadre with shutting your all senses to the outside world. The actual number of Party cadres who have been fallen prey to the disciplinary actions so far remains obscure. Among the victims who are known to the public ranging from MN Roy to Ritabrata Banerjee.
Victims of Disciplinary Actions
The Communist Party of India had a rare privilege to have its founder to be subjected to disciplinary action. MN Roy, considered as the founder of Communist Party of India, as believed by CPM, was also a delegate to the Communist International. Roy was perhaps the only Indian Marxist thinker who made genuine contributions to the stream of Marxian thoughts, while his successors confined to writing footnotes to the works being done in the West. Roy was a towering figure, a renowned thinker even outside the country. But later, owing to the ideological differences with Joseph Stalin, a new promise to the Fascist ideology, Roy was forced to re-examine his political beliefs and recalibrate his ideological position from Marxism to Humanism. In the late 1930s, Roy was found praising progressive leaders like Subhas Chandra Bose, an eyesore to the Indian Communists. Following a spate of such ‘anti-party’ activities, Roy was expelled from the Comintern. He believed that it was mainly because of his “claim to the right of independent thinking”. Disillusioned by Marxism and hypothesis of Class Struggle, Roy proposed a new Radical Humanism which was more close to Gandhian thoughts as well as Indian stream of thought.
When Indian Communist Party split following Indo-China War, both sides accused each other of being revisionary and reactionary. Revolutionaries became reactionaries overnight! Another notable example is of Nripen Chakraborty. Having an experience of six decades as a forefront leader of the Communist movement in India, former Tripura CM Nripen Chakraborty was expelled from the CPM in 1995 for exercising his duty according to the party constitution; for criticising corrupt practices under the Jyoti Basu Government in West Bengal. A few years before his death, he was readmitted into CPM so that he could die as a comrade, not as an ex-comrade.
Veteran parliamentarian and former Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee was a victim of the CPM’s high-voltage drama of withdrawing alliance with the Congress in 2008. The party reckoned Chatterjee as a mere Party member despite his non-partisan role as a Speaker of the Lok Sabha. His name was also included on the list of comrades and told to vote against the Government. However, Chatterjee didn’t concede to the Party line. Ignoring the party”s instructions, he decided to continue as the Speaker of the House, acting in this capacity during the confidence vote. Following the vote, the CPM expelled him from CPM “for seriously compromising the position of the Party.” For Somnath Chatterjee, it was a testing time as to whether he should follow the Indian Constitution or the Party’s constitution. He opted to stick to the former but for the CPM, in practice, the Party constitution is always above the Indian Constitution, albeit it is stated otherwise, in principle, in their own constitution. The then West Bengal secretary Biman Bose put it in right words, “Chatterjee may have acted according to the Indian Constitution but the party constitution is supreme in the case of party members!”
Living Martyrs of Intolerance
There are many such examples in Kerala and Bengal, where CPM is or was in power. In West Bengal, Benoy Choudhury, former land reforms minister in West Bengal had minced no words when he accused his own Government of being a “Government of contractors”. Despite being a senior leader, he was mercilessly silenced and snubbed. Veteran CPM leader and former Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan’s fate was also more or less similar. He became a popular figure in Kerala politics after his relentless crusade against corruption, often against his own fellow comrades. Pinarayi Vijayan, the current Chief Minister and the then Party secretary, is one of the prominent leaders who felt the heat of VS’s anti-corruption campaign. The tussle between both the leaders went so far as to the brink of an open verbal dual on party forums. Since Pinarayi was the blue-eyed boy of Prakash Karat, the then general secretary of CPM, his position in the Party remained intact whereas VS was expelled from the CPM politburo under the pretext of his age. It is interesting to note that, VS Achuthanandan, who along with other comrades were jailed for supporting China during the Indo-China war in 1962, was censured by the leadership when he had mooted an idea of donating blood to the Indian army personnel. Achuthanandan’s suggestion led the Communist Party to a critical ideological conflict again which was uncalled for, whether to support the fatherland China or India!
KR Gowri Amma and MV Raghavan were the other two prominent leaders of CPM in Kerala. If Gowri Amma was a de facto leader of common people in southern Kerala, MV Raghavan aka MVR enjoyed a sway over the Party cadres in the north. MVR had played a key role in grooming a young leadership in northern Kerala, who shifted the focal point of politics from ideological realm to physical violence in the 1980s in Kannur. He was kicked out of the CPM for proposing an alternative political line to forge an alliance with the Muslim League and Kerala Congress to recapture the power in the State. In fact, it was not a taboo for CPM as it had already formed an alliance with the Muslim League in 1967. But EMS and other leaders who had an antipathy towards MVR for his miraculous rise as a leader, utilised this opportunities to finish him. Later, MVR formed a party called Communist Marxist Party and contested the CPM till his death. The story of KR Gowri Amma was a big deceit, a copybook example of casteism rampant among upper caste CPM leaders including EMS Namboodiripad. In the 1990s, CPM went to face the election with a slogan projecting KR Gowri Amma as the chief ministerial candidate. Hailing from a backward community, she was a popular face among the public. But after the victory, the party leadership was not willing to fulfil the promise as it would have set a wrong precedence. Because, till then, the party leadership was dominated by upper caste leaders who shared power equally among them. Disenchanted by the treachery of the leaders like EMS, scorned Gowri Amma fiercely raised the issue in the Party forums. She was mercilessly thrown out of the CPM. Following the incident, she floated a new political party, Janadhipathya Samrakshana Samithi aka JDS.
Jagmati Sangwan, a central committee from the Haryana CPM was the general secretary of the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) when she was shown the door. Interestingly, she was expelled for “gross indiscipline” from the Party a day after her resignation! She was isolated in the Party over apprehension on the CPM-Congress alliance in the West Bengal Assembly elections in 2016. She was of the opinion that the decision to ally with the Congress was a
“violation” of the Party’s
“strategic-tactical” line.
Trotsky and Camus
If we look beyond boundaries, two big names, which we cannot afford to ignore, are famous Soviet leader Leon Trotsky and French thinker and writer Albert Camus. Trotsky, the natural successor of Vladimir Lenin in the race for power, however, was removed from all positions of power and later banned from the Soviet Union with the advent of Joseph Stalin. Even in exile, Trotsky remained a leader of the anti-Stalinist opposition group until he was assassinated by a Stalinist agent. Albert Camus was a member of the French Communist Party but unlike many of his contemporaries like Jean-Paul Sartre, he could not overlook the brutal violence unleashed by the Fascist regime of Joseph Stalin. His critical views and political stances earned him a title of Trotskyite. Later he was expelled him from the Party. Camus then became associated with the French anarchist movement and continued as a vocal critic of Stalinism throughout his life.
Analysing the examples, the easy conclusion that can be drawn is that CPM is a Party which has taken
disciplinary action against the victims, while culprits are assured of protection under Party’s constitution. Wherever the CPM tasted the political power, it had plagued with corruption, abuse of power and cronyism. Whenever a corruption charge is raised in the Party, it is not the culprit but the whistleblower and witness get fired, as if following some stone-age religious canon: not the rapist but the victim shall be stoned to death! The case of TP Chandrasekharan, a loyal cadre and the State joint
secretary of the youth wing of CPM, is an archetype in this regard. As a result of raising his concerns against the growing cronyism in the CPM and ideological deviation in favour of Capitalism, he was removed from the primary
membership of the Party. He formed a new party and
contested CPM in their bastion that ended up as a Waterloo for CPM. The metamorphosis of loyal Party cadre into a revisionist and then further into reactionary, had no penalty according to the Party’s constitution. Hence, the demigods of Kannur CPM whom Ritabrata Banerjee referred to in his revelation, meted out capital punishment to TP Chandrasekharan. With the disfigured face carrying the marks of 51 cuts, the rebel Chandrasekharan is the real martyr of CPM’s way of implementing Iron discipline which the indomitable leaders Lenin, Stalin and Mao stood for. And it also divulges the innate inner-contradiction
underlying in an undemocratic-fascist ideology when it is forced to fit in a democratic outfit. n
Leave a Comment