Casting a dark shadow <http://www.inkthemagazine.com/2011/06/318/>

   - June 2, 2011 5:43 pm
   - editor <http://www.inkthemagazine.com/author/editor/>
   - 0 Comments <http://www.inkthemagazine.com/2011/06/318/#comments>

*An 80-year-old man still dreams of a better tomorrow, of a society without
class and caste. It is what he set out to build as a young man, what made
him one of the founder’s of the Peoples War Group. But the enemy was within,
caste put you in your place in the revolution. Today K G Satyamurthy says
his life is a ‘terrible joke’*

*Text and Photograph by Asha Menon*

Comrade SM is 80 and looks it. He knows the end is near, but he finds it
difficult to be at ease. He has spent nearly all his life trying to create a
world that is more equitable and more fair, but now he feels an emptiness
that is hard to escape. “I want to create an equal world,” he had once told
a police interrogator, as a young revolutionary in his thirties. Today,
after having given half a century to that dream, “My life has become a
terrible joke.”

His eyes seem far away. He can still remember his wife, in a blue sari,
waving him goodbye as he went off to help usher in a revolution that never
came. The biggest enemy, he now realises, was neither the state nor the
reactionaries. It was a phantom that nobody, not even the comrades,
acknowledged. Even he had overlooked it in his early years as a
revolutionary. It was the ancient enemy—caste, a subject that is anathema to
the communists, but something that seems almost part of an Indian’s DNA and
shows itself virtually everywhere.

Today, K G Sathyamurthy, or Comrade SM, is wheelchair-bound and lives with
his daughter Sridevi, an engineer at a steel plant in Vishakapatnam. “My
daughter,” he says, proudly pointing to her, “she takes care of me, not the
party.”

SM speaks in a whisper. His 17-year-old grandson, from his elder son, lives
with the family to mind him.

SM lost his health to years of life on the run and in the jungles. Sreedevi,
52, is conflicted over her father’s politics. “He leaves when he is well and
returns when he falls sick. Last time, when his party called and asked me to
pick him up from Guntur, I did not go for a few days. When he was leaving
that time, I had told him not to. He is diabetic and I knew they could not
take good care of him in the jungle (where classes and meetings happen). But
he was insistent, and left. He came back paralysed from the waist down. Even
today, he keeps telling me that he will go back. All he thinks about is his
party and the people. We come last.” Helpless anger and pride inflect her
voice. She can’t stop a smile.

But he does not let his daughter clear away the tomes of Marx and Mao that
crowd his shelf, perhaps the only bookshelf in the neighbourhood that
carries such works.
<http://www.inkthemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011-05-08-19.24.11-f.jpg>

K G Satyamurthy, better known as Comrade SM in his daughters’s fl at in
Vishakhapatnam

Comrade SM lives today in a place that would be the epitome of all that is
bourgeois. The identical housing blocks in the expansive steel plant
township are all painted in pastel shades. Everyone has a sensible, private
vehicle. Sreedevi’s friend once told her that the township looks like
Tirupathi in the morning, with its surrounding hills, and a “naxal area” in
the night because of the desolation. But his thoughts are still around the
battles that can be fought and won. He still hopes, though it seems
increasingly forlorn.

*The beginning *

It was all so different in 1967, when the “spring thunder” rumbled across
the skies. Satyamurthy was an English teacher at Fatima School in Warangal,
north Andhra Pradesh, where the legendary Kondapalli Seetharamiah was
teaching Hindi. They quickly became friends. Kondapalli shared his
disillusionment with the mainstream Marxist parties with his new friend.

Life as a teacher was comfortable. Sridevi remembers that he earned Rs
1,000. “When I started working, that was my first salary,” She muses. But
for Satyamurthy teaching was not enough. He wanted to see a new, equal world
and to be part of the making. He began to attend the meetings held by left
leaders in small, discreet groups.

The year was 1969 and the Telangana agitation was at its height. “People
were asking those who came from Andhra to leave and quit stealing their
jobs. We had to go,” remembers Sridevi. “My father decided to part ways with
us. We were sent away to live with our grandfather.”

Her mother was supportive of his efforts. “She told him, ‘I will take care
of the children, you do something for society’,” says Sridevi. And so he
morphed into the famous Comrade SM, co-founder of the People’s War Group,
along with Seetharamaiah, in 1980.

He visited villages, organised squads and wrote poetry under the pseudonym
Shiv Sagar. His literature inspired many people, including Varavara Rao. The
Virasam leader later published all of Shiv Sagar’s poetry in the magazine he
headed and also published all his books. SM steadily grew in the party. At
one point there was a Rs 25,000 reward on his head. In 1972, when it was
still in CPI (ML), SM was mistakenly pronounced dead and in 1974, arrested
by deceit.

The police interrogator was known for his toughness, but SM did not falter.
“Why do you want to waste your life? You are young,” asked the inspector.

“I want to form an equal society and eliminate poverty.”

“But that is what Indira Gandhi promises, too,” came the argument.

SM replied: “But I don’t believe in this government.”

No one would have sensed the doubts that he had begun to harbour, not even
his family, who met him in jail, four years after he had left them. Even
here, in the pure heart of revolution, SM was beginning to notice casteism.

“I am a Mala, an untouchable. Whenever I went for a bath, someone would
leave something valuable in the bathing area to see if I stole it. They
thought it was a caste habit and I guess they were testing me,” says SM. He
did not react, trusting that the revolutionary culture would eliminate it in
time.

He waited in vain. He could hear the echoes in the indulgent laughter of
upper-caste squad members when the other castes and tribals performed their
cultural programmes or sang, or in the daily assigning of tasks.

“The squad commander would ask people their caste and assign jobs on that
basis,” says Sridevi. SM saw a dhobi asked to wash clothes and a barber by
caste asked to shave comrades.

In 1977, KS (as Seetharamaiah was known) was arrested and SM headed the
party. “When KS entered the meeting room with committee members, everyone
rose in a jiffy. But when I walked in, I could see they were hesitating. Is
it ok to stand for a Dalit?”

Then, there was his apparel. SM had always been simple but people noticed
that the state secretaries dressed more elaborately than this national
leader. “He’s a Dalit, how can he know,” was someone’s guess, with a short
laugh. But SM was not amused.

“When KS was in jail, people started coming to me and telling me about the
caste discrimination they faced. They were proud of me, but they were afraid
to challenge the leadership.” SM started talking about BR Ambedkar’s
teachings and caste discrimination in the party.

“SM said the party should encourage Dalit leadership,” says Ashok (name
changed), who was part of a Naxal party front. “Dalits do not have access to
education or resources and it should be the party’s responsibility to groom
them as leaders, but the exact opposite was happening.”

SM also noticed that qualities generally considered essential for leadership
were particular to certain castes. For example, leaders often need to be
aggressive. “People from our caste are generally less so. Over the
centuries, they have been conditioned to obey, so they are quickly consigned
as cadre, not commanders.”

In 1986, SM stopped receiving messages from the party. “For four years, my
father could not contact the party, because they abandoned him. He could not
come out, fearing arrest,” says Sridevi. SM was given shelter by the Tamil
Nadu and Mahashtra wings of the party.

In 1990, at a press conference held by Virasam (Viplava Rachayitula
Sangham), SM declared his identity in public. “He was not arrested,” says
Sridevi. “Later, a few police officials told me that he is only a
philosopher, what harm can he do?”

In May 2004, a press release given by PWG to a section of the press, said SM
and a few others like Pilla Venkateswara Rao had surrendered for monetary
benefits from the government. SM was furious because his aversion to money
was well known. Sreedevi says people in the party used to mock him for not
knowing how to handle money. “My mother handled all the finances and she
gave him spending money. I never understood his aversion.” Varavara Rao,
too, does not refer to this accusation but instead says there were
accusations that SM was trying to divide the party along with the Tamil Nadu
state secretary.

In the same year, 2004, PWG merged with the Maoist Communist Centre, which
was born in the mud and grime of caste politics in Bihar. It is said that it
has its beginnings in 1967, in a little village called Ekwar in Bhojpur
district, where Jagdeesh Mahato organised the tillers of the oppressed
castes to fight the landlords. When it grew in notoriety in 1980s, the chief
victims were the caste villains — Bhumihar, Rajputs and their henchmen,
politicians and policemen. The upper-castes organised private armies, like
the Ranvir Sena. Even SM believes that MCC has a better understanding of
caste. “They try to recruit leaders from every caste.”

*Constant revolutionary*

After he left the PWG, SM experimented with various philosophies to
annihilate caste. He started a Marxist-Leninist Centre with U Sambasiva Rao.
The two believe the Indian democratic revolution cannot succeed unless Marx
and Ambedkar come together. They believe the answer lies in a group formed
of castes who form the working class. Karthik Navayan, a lawyer and Dalit
activist, gives an example.

“Shankar Rao, an MLA and a crorepati, went to inaugurate a temple. After he
left, the upper castes washed the place with cow urine. They were poorer
than him.” A revolution would need to liberate a person both socially and
economically. Therefore, a rich Dalit would still be considered as a cadre
for a Marxist-Ambedkarite party.

For a while, SM associated with the Bahujan Samaj Party. But his
revolutionary politics was not welcome. So SM launched the Bahujan
Republican Party (BRP) in 1996.

“The political stand was to bring together SC/STs, bahujan and other
minorities and fight elections. They had a militant and some semi-legal
wings,” says Ashok, the Dalit activist. “There was always the fear of
attacks from landlords and other upper-caste leaders once you are
politically active. So people need to protect themselves.”

It was a peculiar situation. In order to participate peacefully in the
democratic process that the Constitution guarantees them, they needed a
militant wing. This is a formula that keeps repeating itself in Dalit
revolutionary parties.

The BRP, which lasted till 2006-2007, did not win any seats. “I don’t know
why, but no Dalit party ever makes it on its own,” says Ashok.

SM was also closely associated with Veeranna, who left the CPI (ML)
Janashakti to train Dalits and other oppressed castes as leaders. But none
of his experiments led to a successful integration of caste and class
identities.

*Radicals who left*

Many of the lower castes abandoned revolutionary politics, believing it to
be indifferent to caste. Ashok, for instance, is now working with a
non-governmental organistion. His immediate reason for leaving Janashakti
was the expulsion of SM. He believes SM was driven out because he discussed
caste.

His own brother Anil (name changed) was squad member for 10 years, but left
because he believed the lower castes were treated badly. He felt the
leadership would always remain with the upper castes, who would be safe in
the cities while the fighting and dying was done by the other castes.

<http://www.inkthemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011-05-08-19.25.26-f.jpg>

As for Ashok, he does not discount the party’s contribution to the Dalit
cause. “They helped more than anyone else,” he says. “But I left because of
the routine argument — Dalits are not allowed into certain ranks.”

*The party’s answer*

Varavara Rao dismisses these contentions. “When KS was arrested in 1977, SM
was asked to take charge of the party. From 1982 to ’84, SM was secretary of
the CPI-ML central committee, so how can one promoted to such a senior level
accuse the party of caste discrimination? It was his personal failure to
guide the party that resulted in his expulsion.

“SM was a good Bhavuka (rough translation, philosopher). But when people
went to him with real problems he would quote poetry and say things like ‘no
matter how many big trees fall, the wind will never stop’. The truth is, SM
failed when he was asked to lead.”

According to the Virasam leader, SM had given up his political programme as
a revolutionary in 1990. “When he came out in the open, SM said the PWG has
no political programme and that it is only an economic struggle.”

*People from our caste are generally less so. Over the centuries, they have
been conditioned to obey, so they are quickly consigned as cadre, not
commanders *

* —Comrade SM*
*
*

Then, SM committed the cardinal sin, by asserting an identity based on caste
and religion. “He started saying he is first a Dalit, then a Christian and
then a Marxist,” says Varvara Rao. “How can that be? You are born into a
caste and religion, but by consciousness you become a revolutionary. When
you are a Marxist, you have already given up caste or religion, which was
never your choice.

“I am not saying there is no caste in the party,” says Rao. “The party
recognised that the essential problems in revolutionary movement in India
are two — parliamentary politics and caste.”

In fact, during the Mandal agitation, he says, the party decided that if
there was an opening within the party for a leader and the contenders were a
Dalit, woman and an upper-caste, preference would be given to Dalits and
women.”

If all the contenders were equally articulate, with raised revolutionary
consciousness, the criterion wouild be identity-based preference.

Rao says the problem of caste-based leadership is raised only by educated
Dalits. “You don’t find this in the villages where the struggle is being
waged.”

He believes that Dalit organisations fail on two counts — not addressing the
land issue and fighting within the constitutional framework.

“Can you show me any Dalit organisation fighting for land issue?”

Dr Anand Teltumbde, a prominent Dalit intellectual, agrees. But he says it
is only a surface reality. “Caste is the foundation with infinite cracks and
hence movements based on it are destined to fail.” He believes levels of
oppression should be the binding factor, not caste.

Rao cites the Bahujan Samaj Party to show electoral victory is not the
answer. “What good did it do for the Dalits of UP? Real political power will
come by capturing the state, and that is the limitation of all caste
parties. They have to start with the land question. If you approach only
through the vote, you merely change the address and not the system.
Overthrowing the state should be through occupation of land.”

“In villages, ownership of land can change the production relations. Once
that is changed, as in Jagityal (Andhra Pradesh), non-brahminical, non-upper
caste hegemony will come.

“We don’t underestimate the grievance of any identity movement, but the way
they have chosen will not work. We need to unite all identities in a class
struggle,” says the poet.

“The party encourages inter-dining and inter-marriage, but bourgeois ideas,
built over thousands of years cannot be removed easily. Marxism is young. It
is only 150 years and it never had enough time to rule because the regime
always collapsed before cultural transformation took place.”

As an idea of class-based struggle that could change caste equations, he
cites an idea he mooted to PALA, a cultural organisation for radical left
politics. “I told them every organisation takes people into the temple, so
you organise a parallel movement, a people’s movement in which you occoupy
land belonging to religious organisations. In Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, the
biggest landlords are religious mutts. The Naxal party did that in
Rayalseema where people occupied devarmanya or inam lands.”

*Mao made leaders of the people who had to be liberated. The upper castes do
not need a revolution, the lower castes do, so they should lead. If madigas
are the commanders they will decide whether they should fight or not. If the
upper castes decide without consulting them you lose your followers in time*

*Dalit militants*

But Batulla Sidheswar, state secretary of the Communist Party of United
States of India (Madiga Mahajana Kramika Vimukti Sanga), believes
participating in elections can raise the revolutionary temper among Dalits.

“In the 70s, there were two factions of the CPI-ML, one of Chandrapulla
Reddy and the other KS. While the first believed in elections, the second
only trusted armed struggle. But neither gave importance to caste.”

Sideshwar says, “Without addressing caste, why should Dalits join the
revolutionary movement? How is it different from other upper-caste parties?”

The answer, to him, is in Marxism. “Karmiki karana kavali,” he says in
Telugu. “The capitalist must become a worker. It is called declassification.
In India we have caste, so we need to need to ‘decasteify’ also. Even Kanshi
Ram said that. Become a chamar. Don’t look at society from the Brahmin’s
perspective but through the madiga’s (untouchable’s) eyes who gives respect
to the other.

He does not think caste is consciously practised in the Naxal parties. “An
upper-caste man takes classes because he is comfortable with the terms. Then
a lower-caste commander wonders how he can contribute because he cannot do
that. He remembers his skill as a barber or a washerman, and thinks he can
contribute with that. But the party must have upper-caste people who say ‘I
will wash the vessels or clothes and you take classes’. This is possible
only if they incorporate caste into the politics.”

Sideshwar cites the example of the Chinese revolution. “Mao made leaders of
the people the people who had to be liberated. The upper castes do not need
a revolution, the lower castes do, so they should lead. If madigas are the
commanders they will decide whether they should fight or not. If the upper
castes decide without consulting them you lose your followers in time.”

Then, too, today’s youngsters have so many opportunities that they are not
impressed with calls for armed struggle, says Sideswar. So his party
believes in integrating elections and militant methods. “We had squads,
about 12 of them from 1995 to 2005. Even I received training. But after
Veeranna was ‘encountered’, all of them were either killed or they
surrendered.

“Revolution only comes through armed struggle. But if you call us to vote we
will go. If at the polling booth we are not allowed to vote we will choose
armed struggle.”

They field candidates in elections to give people a choice. “If your enemy
is in the dirt, you will have to get into it and fight him. You can’t afford
to be repelled by it.”

He says that once people are politicised and are willing to vote for
revolutionaries, the upper caste, upper class state will not stay silent.
They will not let the people vote and upset the power structure. Then there
will be armed struggle, which will lead to the final overturning of the
state.

The people must also be powerful enough to wage an armed revolution. “Kanshi
Ram said that a vote is light and a weapon, heavy. How can you ask people
who can’t drop a vote to wield a weapon? If you lose votes, you only lose an
election. If you lose an armed struggle, you lose lives. It cannot be taken
lightly.”

Teltumbde, who leans towards class struggle, sounds impressed by
Sidheshwar’s politics. “I do not disagree with the proposition that
parliamentary politics is not to be completely discarded.” But he does not
agree that revolutionary parties should themselves participate in
parliamentary politics. “What I would want is that they have sufficient mass
base which would impinge on the parliamentary politics and project
revolutionary viewpoint to the larger masses.”

Teltumbde blames this “unfortunate duality” of caste and class on the early
communists, who tried to fit in the social reality of India into moulds
borrowed from Europe. “If they had not internalised the meaning of social
classes as the objective reality, they would not have excluded caste as
something belonging to a different universe.

Take for instance Lenin’s definition of class: ‘Classes are large groups of
people differing from each other by the place they occupy in a historically
determined system of social production, by their relation (in most cases
fixed and formulated by law) to the means of production, by their role in
the social organisation of labour, and, consequently, by the dimensions of
the share of social wealth of which they dispose and their mode of acquiring
it’. (Vladimir I. Lenin: ‘A Great Beginning: Heroism of the Workers in the
Rear: ‘Communist Subbotniks’ in Collected Works, Volume 29; Moscow; 1965; p.
421).

“Even if this definition had been followed by Indian communists, caste would
have been incorporated within the class analysis and the duality would not
have been born. But instead of that they followed the kind of classes
conceived by Lenin in Russian society. This error has done incalculable harm
to the revolutionary project in this country. Therefore, it is vital for us
to comprehend this historical error with utmost honesty.”

However, he does not see organising around caste as the answer. “The caste
movements can never, repeat never, lead to the emancipation of oppressed
people, neither from their caste nor from non-caste oppression.” Teltumbde’s
answer is to base it on oppression.

“Orient the Dalit movement towards class, shunning the sectarian caste idiom
and join hands with similarly placed people of the other castes; wake up to
their crises of living and take up issues stemming from them for their
struggle and dampen the identitarian projection.”

As for the left, he has some simple words of advice. They should “see that
without annihilation of caste they can never realise the project of
revolution. If the Left, armed with requisite conviction (and not mere
projections for electoral calculations or swelling their cadre to appeal to
Dalits) join the hands of Dalits at this point to avenge casteist crimes,
they would slowly gain confidence of Dalits.”

In other words, he too is talking about an internal change of attitude,
something that precipitated Comrade SM’s exit, without quite admitting as
much.

While Veerana gave rise to a radical alternative to mainstream revolutionary
parties, even his idea could not survive the divisive power of caste. Its
power in moulding and mutating the most extreme revolutionary movements
cannot be denied.

*Ravana’s Dussehra*

What does the old revolutionary say? Cultural revolution is central to
solving the caste-class contradictions. He believes that cultural
transformation must lead the revolution.

This is where he is at odds with people like Varvara Rao who believes:
“Politics should lead and cultural revolution must be carried out along with
it.” That is, the capture of a state must come first and whether a Dalit
achieves that goal or not is only secondary.

The Marxists believe that by changing the production relations, caste can be
eliminated. Sideswar does not agree. “It’s not only about economics. We need
to understand the beginning and the history of things.”

Caste divisions, according to him, “destroyed the inherent unity (of
society) and so now, the state run by the upper-castes is clueless about its
citizens.” Veeranna’s party cadre would subvert festivals to relook at
history. For example, while Dussehra is usually celebrated as the death of
Ravana, party members would commemorate the death anniversary of an
indigenous king.

SM has never stopped criticising the Naxal leaders for failing the oppressed
castes. In May 2005, he blasted Varavara Rao for sending letters against
Kalyan Rao and balladeer Gadar to the naxal leaders. If that letter had not
been sent the merger of PWG and Maoist Central Committee, would have seen
the the two occupying top positions in the new party and discrimination
against Dalits would have been exposed.

There is a question SM asks repeatedly, unknowingly, during the interview.
“Why did the party expel me?” Sometimes Sridevi wonders how he did not make
it, like the other leaders.

She told him, once, in exasperation, “You have failed. ’He merely said no’.”

He can still hear the distant roll of ‘spring thunder’ though it’s been a
long time since it first sounded. “The revolution will come,” he says,
listening intently to the evening news.

-- 
B.Karthik Navayan, Advocate
http://karthiknavayan.wordpress.com/
https://sites.google.com/site/karthiknavayan/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB.

Reply via email to