Ideology Of The Naxalite Movement example essay topic

Introduction It was exactly 35 years ago in 1967 that a minor clash between a police force and a group of armed peasants took place in an obscure corner of West Bengal. But it unleashed a force of events, which escalated over the years into a political movement that derived its name from that area and brought about far-reaching changes in India's socio-cultural scene. Today it evokes a variety of strong emotions ranging from admiration to denunciation, cutting across the political lines of the established parties. The movement itself is also hard pressed by new challenges and endemic splits. Yet, we cannot deny that even after three decades of its tortuous and self-divisive and often self- destructive odyssey, the movement that started in Naxalbari and now known as Naxalite movement, still remains a force to reckon with. What is peculiar to the Naxalite Movement is not its physical occupation of and administrative control over land, but its abiding appeal among the dispossessed and underprivileged rural poor in certain parts of the country.

The movement asserted the demands of the poor and landless peasantry in a way that shook the then atrophied Indian political scene. It sensitized the rest of our society to their desperate efforts to escape the intolerable conditions of economic oppression and social humiliation. Ideology Ideology is a set of ideas that form the basis of an economic or political theory or a particular group or person who holds them. Every movement has its own ideology. To know the ideology of the Naxalite movement we will have to study the nature of the movement first. Naxalism arose from certain basic factors-social injustice, economic inequality and the failure of the system to redress the grievances of large sections of people who suffered and continue to suffer.

Here the idea is to create a classless society, which is free of any kind of inequity. Although land redistribution occupied the central stage of the movement, we should bear in mind that it is just an issue of the movement, which was popular at that point of time. The ultimate aim is to eradicate exploitation. The leaders behind the movement had a belief -"those who by economics judge every struggle by the amount of paddy seized or the size of land peasant received. They never judge by the yardstick whether the fighting consciousness of the peasants had increased. The fighting consciousness of the peasantry should be directed against the state machinery and the feudal class; without destroying the two no land reforms could be possible, since they stood against the interests of the landless and poor peasants".

One more important component of the ideology is the use of armed struggle. But we need to understand that it is just only a means to achieve a broader objective. As the upper classes are in a very dominant position, it is not possible to uproot them except through armed struggle. So Naxalite resort to violence only when realize that it is indispensable to the movement. So violence is just only a means and not the end itself. Again Naxalism should not be looked only for the benefit of agrarian peasants.

It is something that transcends agrarian reality and relates to whatever field where there is inequality. So the Ideology behind the movement can be stated in the following points o India's liberation could be achieved along China's path. o An arm struggle is the only way out. o Bringing a new social order, free of social inequality and class disparity. Naxalbari Movement - The Beginning Political Situation in West Bengal: Naxalite movement derives its name from Naxalbari, a small place in Siliguri subdivision of Darjeeling district of West Bengal. It all started in 1967 after the first non-congress government came into power under the name of United Front Government. The dominant forces in the government were the leftists. The main forces were CPI and CPI (M).

They represented the aspirations of the marginalized and poor. The minister in charge of Land Revenue was Harekrishna Konar who was a veteran peasant leader. In an interview with his party mouthpiece Gana shakti, he made his intentions clear about the quick distribution of surplus land and he further asked for peasant initiative and organized force. What he did not realize was that the aspirations of the poor peasantry were already on a high note and his invitation escalated them further. As the later developments showed they went far beyond his expectations. Although there were no doubts about the intentions of the leftists in the government about the redistribution, the path to achieve the goals was not that simple.

There were some constraints before government. To name a few first they were not sure about how to recover the land from the landlords. Second the landlords could take the help of law to delay the seizure of land and thus postpone the redistribution for an indefinite period. Third was the working of the bureaucracy. There were some instances of even defying the orders of the ministers. As a result of these obstacles, the government could not implement the land reforms quickly.

The CPI (M) was in a difficult situation because it was in the power so it could not totally do away the legal and official procedure and on the other hand the aspirations of the peasantry had to be satisfied. Everyone was not happy with government policy of redistributing the land through legal process. One of such prominent figures was Chart Majumdar who was attacking Harekrishna Konar on three accounts. The first point was that he submitted to the bureaucrats and feudal gentry. The second point was that there might be disputes among the peasants who acquired the land through legal process and those who got it through forceful means.

The third point was that the peasants who would acquire the land through legal process might eventually become a complacent middle farmer. Developments at Naxalbari: In this light a peasants' conference was held under the auspices of CPI (M) at Naxalbari and it gave a call for ending the monopoly ownership of land by landlords, organization and arming of peasants to destroy the resistance of landlords. Among the sponsors of the conference were Kanu Sanya l and Jan gal San thal who later became prominent leaders of the.