Q4.

Discuss the emergence of communist movements in India and its contribution towards
the freedom struggle.

Introduction:

The dominant narrative about the Indian freedom movement is that Mahatma Gandhi and the
Indian National Congress were the prime agents who drove the British from India. There also
exists another strong though marginal narrative—usually pushed vigorously by the RSS and
family—that multiple other factors contributed to India’s freedom from British rule. This
counter-narrative is driven by the desire to discredit and delegitimize the Congress and the
“Gandhi-Nehru” legacy, which played a very crucial role in shaping popular accounts of the anti-
colonial struggle.

There are other narratives; about Subhas Chandra Bose and his INA, the famous mutiny of the
Royal Indian Navy and the post-war mass upheavals, etc. All in all, the post-war situation
developed in such a way that governing India became increasingly difficult for the British and it
had no option but to quit India, sooner rather than later.

Lost between all these narratives is the role played by the communist groups and the
Communist Party of India (CPI) in the freedom struggle. The role is evident in party documents
and acknowledged in academic works and journals, but the part played by communists is
largely absent from popular public memory.

The fact that the Communist party did not participate in the Quit India Movement in 1942—
which is often falsely equated with the non-participation of the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha—is
rather well-known. What is not known is that their reasons for not participating were
completely contrasting. Moreover, the position of the Communist party on the Quit India
Movement must be understood in the context of its position on the anti-colonial struggle
before Quit India and it must be compared with that of the Hindu Mahasabha and the RSS.

For this it is important to get a sense of the 1920s and the different stages of Communists’
struggle against the British Raj.
Important points:

1. The Peshawar Conspiracy Cases (1922-1927): These were initiated in five phases by the
British government against 40 to 50 muhajirs, who had formed the CPI in 1920 in
Tashkent. Tashkent was a part of the Soviet Union and these leaders gained political and
military training there and at the Communist University of the Toilers of the East in
Moscow. The muhajirs were mainly Khilafatis who intended to go to Turkey to fight the
British, but they met MN Roy in Tashkent and with him laid the foundation of the first
Communist Party of India. They were charged under section 121-A, and accused of
fermenting “a proletarian revolution against the British imperialist oppressors to restore
freedom to the masses”.

2. The Kanpur Communist (Bolshevik) Conspiracy Case (1924-25): This was initiated against
communist leaders—many of whom had come from the Tashkent group and others
were peasant and worker activists from different parts of India—like Shaukat Usamni,
Muzaffar Ahmed, SA Dange, MN Roy, Muzaffar Ahmad, Singaravelu Chettiar, Ghulam
Hussain and others. According to the British Government, these leaders were working
“to deprive the King Emperor of his sovereignty of British India, by complete separation
of India from imperialistic Britain by a violent revolution” and they were slapped with
section 121-A.

3. The Meerut Conspiracy Case (1929-1933): This was the most significant trial which
established the Communist Party of India as a party of the peasantry and working class.
Several Trade Union leaders from across India were arrested along with three
Englishmen associated with the Communist International and put on trial for organising
a strike among workers of Indian Railways and Textile industry. The leaders were
Shaukat Usmani, SA Dange, Muzzafar Ahmed, Sohan Singh Josh, PC Joshi and Philip
Spratt among other. They were slapped with section 121-A. The Meerut trials followed a
wave of trade union activity, organisation and strikes in major industrial centres of India
in late-1920s as a result of the Great Depression.
THE CASE OF QUIT INDIA:

Ever since its formation, the CPI declared complete independence of India as its goal. This
reflected in its pamphlets, booklets and manifestos. The Communist party adopted this position
almost a decade before the Congress did. The CPI followed the Marxist-Leninist philosophy and
advocated that real independence meant the establishment of a socialist state and abolition of
all conditions of exploitation and oppression. They not only identified the British as the enemy
of Indian people but also the Indian landlord and capitalist classes, whose wealth was created
by the exploitation of the toiling masses. Therefore, their main thrust was on organising
peasants and working classes across India against the British and Indian capitalists and
landlords.

On the other hand, the Hindu Mahasabha and the RSS never declared any anti-British agenda.
They never declared achieving India’s independence from the British as their goal. Instead, they
collaborated and worked closely with the Raj and gained many favors. Both the Mahasabha and
the RSS did not budge from this position even in 1947. The former condemned the Quit India
Movement as “sterile, unmanly and injurious to the Hindu cause” and the second chief of the
RSS even categorized anti-Britishism as reactionary! He asked the Hindus not to participate in
the freedom struggle. Golwalkar said: “Hindus, don’t waste your energy fighting the British;
save your energy to fight our internal enemies that are Muslims, Christians and Communists.”

Today, the position of the communists with respect to Quit India looms so large that it becomes
the sole vantage point to imagine and discuss their role, pushing aside their contributions. But
contrary to this popular view, the communists were in the thick of the freedom struggle since
the very inception of their movement. For their desire for complete independence, they led
multiple struggles which frustrated the British (as well as Indian ruling classes) and eventually
led to their exit on 15 August 1947.