💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › bhagat-singh-to-young-political-workers.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 22:26:09. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: To Young Political Workers
Author: Bhagat Singh
Date: 2nd February, 1931
Language: en
Topics: India, workers, letter
Source: Retrieved on 2020-05-05 from https://libcom.org/library/young-political-workers-bhagat-singh
Notes: Bhagat Singh’s address to young political workers, written one month before his execution. Notable is his warning that national liberation could result in simply the replacement of the raj by the new national bourgeoisie.

Bhagat Singh

To Young Political Workers

DEAR COMRADES

Our movement is passing through a very important phase at present. After

a year’s fierce struggle some definite proposals regarding the

constitutional reforms have been formulated by the Round Table

Conference and the Congress leaders have been invited to give this

[Original transcription is unclear — MIA Transcriber]…think it desirable

in the present circumstances to call off their movement. Whether they

decide in favour or against is a matter of little importance to us. The

present movement is bound to end in some sort of compromise. The

compromise may be effected sooner or later. And compromise is not such

ignoble and deplorable an thing as we generally think. It is rather an

indispensable factor in the political strategy. Any nation that rises

against the oppressors is bound to fail in the beginning, and to gain

partial reforms during the medieval period of its struggle through

compromises. And it is only at the last stage — having fully organized

all the forces and resources of the nation — that it can possibly strike

the final blow in which it might succeed to shatter the ruler’s

government. But even then it might fail, which makes some sort of

compromise inevitable. This can be best illustrated by the Russian

example.

In 1905 a revolutionary movement broke out in Russia. All the leaders

were very hopeful. Lenin had returned from the foreign countries where

he had taken refuge. He was conducting the struggle. People came to tell

him that a dozen landlords were killed and a score of their mansions

were burnt. Lenin responded by telling them to return and to kill twelve

hundred landlords and burn as many of their palaces. In his opinion that

would have meant something if revolution failed. Duma was introduced.

The same Lenin advocated the view of participating in the Duma. This is

what happened in 1907. In 1906 he was opposed to the participation in

this first Duma which had granted more scope of work than this second

one whose rights had been curtailed. This was due to the changed

circumstances. Reaction was gaining the upper hand and Lenin wanted to

use the floor of he Duma as a platform to discuss socialist ideas.

Again after the 1917 revolution, when the Bolsheviks were forced to sign

the Brest Litovsk Treaty, everyone except Lenin was opposed to it. But

Lenin said: “Peace”. “Peace and again peace: peace at any cos t— even at

the cost of many of the Russian provinces to be yielded to German War

Lord”. When some anti-Bolshevik people condemned Lenin for this treaty,

he declared frankly that the Bolsheviks were not in a position to face

to German onslaught and they preferred the treaty to the complete

annihilation of the Bolshevik Government.

The thing that I wanted to point out was that compromise is an essential

weapon which has to be wielded every now and then as the struggle

develops. But the thing that we must keep always before us is the idea

of the movement. We must always maintain a clear notion as to the aim

for the achievement of which we are fighting. That helps us to verify

the success and failures of our movements and we can easily formulate

the future programme. Tilak’s policy, quite apart from the ideal i.e.

his strategy, was the best. You are fighting to get sixteen annas from

your enemy, you get only one anna. Pocket it and fight for the rest.

What we note in the moderates is of their ideal. They start to achieve

on anna and they can’t get it. The revolutionaries must always keep in

mind that they are striving for a complete revolution. Complete mastery

of power in their hands. Compromises are dreaded because the

conservatives try to disband the revolutionary forces after the

compromise from such pitfalls. We must be very careful at such junctures

to avoid any sort of confusion of the real issues especially the goal.

The British Labour leaders betrayed their real struggle and have been

reduced to mere hypocrite imperialists. In my opinion the diehard

conservatives are better to us than these polished imperialist Labour

leaders. About the tactics and strategy one should study life-work of

Lenin. His definite views on the subject of compromise will be found in

“Left Wing” Communism.

I have said that the present movement, i.e. the present struggle, is

bound to end in some sort of compromise or complete failure.

I said that, because in my opinion, this time the real revolutionary

forces have not been invited into the arena. This is a struggle

dependent upon the middle class shopkeepers and a few capitalists. Both

these, and particularly the latter, can never dare to risk its property

or possessions in any struggle. The real revolutionary armies are in the

villages and in factories, the peasantry and the labourers. But our

bourgeois leaders do not and cannot dare to tackle them. The sleeping

lion once awakened from its slumber shall become irresistible even after

the achievement of what our leaders aim at. After his first experience

with the Ahmedabad labourers in 1920 Mahatma Gandhi declared: “We must

not tamper with the labourers. It is dangerous to make political use of

the factory proletariat” (The Times, May 1921). Since then, they never

dared to approach them. There remains the peasantry. The Bardoli

resolution of 1922 clearly denies the horror the leaders felt when they

saw the gigantic peasant class rising to shake off not only the

domination of an alien nation but also the yoke of the landlords.

It is there that our leaders prefer a surrender to the British than to

the peasantry. Leave alone Pt. Jawahar lal. Can you point out any effort

to organize the peasants or the labourers? No, they will not run the

risk. There they lack. That is why I say they never meant a complete

revolution. Through economic and administrative pressure they hoped to

get a few more reforms, a few more concessions for the Indian

capitalists. That is why I say that this movement is doomed to die, may

be after some sort of compromise or even without. They young workers who

in all sincerity raise the cry “Long Live Revolution”, are not well

organized and strong enough to carry the movement themselves. As a

matter of fact, even our great leaders, with the exception of perhaps

Pt. Motilal Nehru, do not dare to take any responsibility on their

shoulders, that is why every now and then they surrender unconditionally

before Gandhi. In spite of their differences, they never oppose him

seriously and the resolutions have to be carried for the Mahatma.

In these circumstances, let me warn the sincere young workers who

seriously mean a revolution, that harder times are coming. Let then

beware lest they should get confused or disheartened. After the

experience made through two struggles of the Great Gandhi, we are in a

better position to form a clear idea of our present position and the

future programme.

Now allow me to state the case in the simplest manner. You cry “Long

Live Revolution.” Let me assume that you really mean it. According to

our definition of the term, as stated in our statement in the Assembly

Bomb Case, revolution means the complete overthrow of the existing

social order and its replacement with the socialist order. For that

purpose our immediate aim is the achievement of power. As a matter of

fact, the state, the government machinery is just a weapon in the hands

of the ruling class to further and safeguard its interest. We want to

snatch and handle it to utilise it for the consummation of our ideal,

i.e., social reconstruction on new, i.e., Marxist, basis. For this

purpose we are fighting to handle the government machinery. All along we

have to educate the masses and to create a favourable atmosphere for our

social programme. In the struggles we can best train and educate them.

With these things clear before us, i.e., our immediate and ultimate

object having been clearly put, we can now proceed with the examination

of the present situation. We must always be very candid and quite

business-like while analysing any situation. We know that since a hue

and cry was raised about the Indians’ participation in and share in the

responsibility of the Indian government, the Minto-Morley Reforms were

introduced, which formed the Viceroy’s council with consultation rights

only. During the Great War, when the Indian help was needed the most,

promises about self-government were made and the existing reforms were

introduced. Limited legislative powers have been entrusted to the

Assembly but subject to the goodwill of the Viceroy. Now is the third

stage.

Now reforms are being discussed and are to be introduced in the near

future. How can our young men judge them? This is a question; I do not

know by what standard are the Congress leaders going to judge them. But

for us, the revolutionaries, we can have the following criteria:

and the extent of the right of participation given to the masses.

These might require a little further elucidation. In the first place, we

can easily judge the extent of responsibility given to our people by the

control our representatives will have on the executive. Up till now, the

executive was never made responsible to the Legislative Assembly and the

Viceroy had the veto power, which rendered all the efforts of the

elected members futile. Thanks to the efforts of the Swaraj Party, the

Viceroy was forced every now and then to use these extraordinary powers

to shamelessly trample the solemn decisions of the national

representatives under foot. It is already too well known to need further

discussion.

Now in the first place we must see the method of the executive

formation: Whether the executive is to be elected by the members of a

popular assembly or is to be imposed from above as before, and further,

whether it shall be responsible to the house or shall absolutely affront

it as in the past?

As regards the second item, we can judge it through the scope of

franchise. The property qualifications making a man eligible to vote

should be altogether abolished and universal suffrage be introduced

instead. Every adult, both male and female, should have the right to

vote. At present we can simply see how far the franchise has been

extended.

I may here make a mention about provincial autonomy. But from whatever I

have heard, I can only say that the Governor imposed from above,

equipped with extraordinary powers, higher and above the legislative,

shall prove to be no less than a despot. Let us better call it the

“provincial tyranny” instead of “autonomy.” This is a strange type of

democratisation of the state institutions.

The third item is quite clear. During the last two years the British

politicians have been trying to undo Montague’s promise for another dole

of reforms to be bestowed every ten years till the British Treasury

exhausts.

We can see what they have decided about the future.

Let me make it clear that we do not analyse these things to rejoice over

the achievement, but to form a clear idea about our situation, so that

we may enlighten the masses and prepare them for further struggle. For

us, compromise never means surrender, but a step forward and some rest.

That is all and nothing else.

---

HAVING DISCUSSED the present situation, let us proceed to discuss the

future programme and the line of action we ought to adopt. As I have

already stated, for any revolutionary party a definite programme is very

essential. For, you must know that revolution means action. It means a

change brought about deliberately by an organized and systematic work,

as opposed to sudden and unorganised or spontaneous change or breakdown.

And for the formulation of a programme, one must necessarily study:

Unless one has a clear notion about these three factors, one cannot

discuss anything about programme.

We have discussed the present situation to some extent. The goal also

has been slightly touched. We want a socialist revolution, the

indispensable preliminary to which is the political revolution. That is

what we want. The political revolution does not mean the transfer of

state (or more crudely, the power) from the hands of the British to the

Indian, but to those Indians who are at one with us as to the final

goal, or to be more precise, the power to be transferred to the

revolutionary party through popular support. After that, to proceed in

right earnest is to organize the reconstruction of the whole society on

the socialist basis. If you do not mean this revolution, then please

have mercy. Stop shouting “Long Live Revolution.” The term revolution is

too sacred, at least to us, to be so lightly used or misused. But if you

say you are for the national revolution and the aims of your struggle is

an Indian republic of the type of the United State of America, then I

ask you to please let known on what forces you rely that will help you

bring about that revolution. Whether national or the socialist, are the

peasantry and the labour. Congress leaders do not dare to organize those

forces. You have seen it in this movement. They know it better than

anybody else that without these forces they are absolutely helpless.

When they passed the resolution of complete independence — that really

meant a revolution — they did not mean it. They had to do it under

pressure of the younger element, and then they wanted to us it as a

threat to achieve their hearts’ desire — Dominion Status. You can easily

judge it by studying the resolutions of the last three sessions of the

Congress. I mean Madras, Calcutta and Lahore. At Calcutta, they passed a

resolution asking for Dominion Status within twelve months, otherwise

they would be forced to adopt complete independence as their object, and

in all solemnity waited for some such gift till midnight after the

31^(st) December, 1929. Then they found themselves “honour bound” to

adopt the Independence resolution, otherwise they did not mean it. But

even then Mahatmaji made no secret of the fact that the door (for

compromise) was open. That was the real spirit. At the very outset they

knew that their movement could not but end in some compromise. It is

this half-heartedness that we hate, not the compromise at a particular

stage in the struggle. Anyway, we were discussing the forces on which

you can depend for a revolution. But if you say that you will approach

the peasants and labourers to enlist their active support, let me tell

you that they are not going to be fooled by any sentimental talk. They

ask you quite candidly: what are they going to gain by your revolution

for which you demand their sacrifices, what difference does it make to

them whether Lord Reading is the head of the Indian government or Sir

Purshotamdas Thakordas? What difference for a peasant if Sir Tej Bahadur

Sapru replaces Lord Irwin! It is useless to appeal to his national

sentiment. You can’t “use” him for your purpose; you shall have to mean

seriously and to make him understand that the revolution is going to be

his and for his good. The revolution of the proletariat and for the

proletariat.

When you have formulated this clear-cut idea about your goals you can

proceed in right earnest to organize your forces for such an action. Now

there are two different phases through which you shall have to pass.

First, the preparation; second, the action.

After the present movement ends, you will find disgust and some

disappointment amongst the sincere revolutionary workers. But you need

not worry. Leave sentimentalism aside. Be prepared to face the facts.

Revolution is a very difficult task. It is beyond the power of any man

to make a revolution. Neither can it be brought about on any appointed

date. It is brought can it be brought about on an appointed date. It is

brought about by special environments, social and economic. The function

of an organized party is to utilise an such opportunity offered by these

circumstances. And to prepare the masses and organize the forces for the

revolution is a very difficult task. And that required a very great

sacrifice on the part of the revolutionary workers. Let me make it clear

that if you are a businessman or an established worldly or family man,

please don’t play with fire. As a leader you are of no use to the party.

We have already very many such leaders who spare some evening hours for

delivering speeches. They are useless. We require — to use the term so

dear to Lenin — the “professional revolutionaries”. The whole-time

workers who have no other ambitions or life-work except the revolution.

The greater the number of such workers organized into a party, the great

the chances of your success.

To proceed systematically, what you need the most is a party with

workers of the type discussed above with clear-cut ideas and keen

perception and ability of initiative and quick decisions. The party

shall have iron discipline and it need not necessarily be an underground

party, rather the contrary. Thought the policy of voluntarily going to

jail should altogether be abandoned. That will create a number of

workers who shall be forced to lead an underground life. They should

carry on the work with the same zeal. And it is this group of workers

that shall produce worthy leaders for the real opportunity.

The party requires workers which can be recruited only through the youth

movement. Hence we find the youth movement as the starting point of our

programme. The youth movement should organize study circles, class

lectures and publication of leaflets, pamphlets, books and periodicals.

This is the best recruiting and training ground for political workers.

Those young men who may have matured their ideas and may find themselves

ready to devote their life to the cause, may be transferred to the

party. The party workers shall always guide and control the work of the

youth movement as well. The party should start with the work of mass

propaganda. It is very essential. One of the fundamental causes of the

failure of the efforts of the Ghadar Party (1914–15) was the ignorance,

apathy and sometimes active opposition of the masses. And apart from

that, it is essential for gaining the active sympathy of and of and

organising the peasants and workers. The name of party or rather,* a

communist party. This party of political workers, bound by strict

discipline, should handle all other movements. It shall have to organize

the peasants’ and workers’ parties, labour unions, and kindred political

bodes. And in order to create political consciousness, not only of

national politics but class politics as well, the party should organize

a big publishing campaign. Subjects on all proletens [Original

transcription is unclear — MIA Transcriber] enlightening the masses of

the socialist theory shall be wit in easy reach and distributed widely.

The writings should be simple and clear.

There are certain people in the labour movement who enlist some absurd

ideas about the economic liberty of the peasants and workers without

political freedom. They are demagogues or muddle-headed people. Such

ideas are unimaginable and preposterous. We mean the economic liberty of

the masses, and for that very purpose we are striving to win the

political power. No doubt in the beginning, we shall have to fight for

little economic demands and privileges of these classes. But these

struggles are the best means for educating them for a final struggles

are the best means for educating them for a final struggle to conquer

political power.

Apart from these, there shall necessarily be organized a military

department. This is very important. At times its need is felt very

badly. But at that time you cannot start and formulate such a group with

substantial means to act effectively. Perhaps this is the topic that

needs a careful explanation. There is very great probability of my being

misunderstood on this subject. Apparently I have acted like a terrorist.

But I am not a terrorist. I am a revolutionary who has got such definite

ideas of a lengthy programme as is being discussed here. My “comrades in

arms” might accuse me, like Ram Prasad Bismil, for having been subjected

to certain sort of reaction in the condemned cell, which is not true. I

have got the same ideas, same convictions, same convictions, same zeal

and same spirit as I used to have outside, perhaps — nay, decidedly —

better. Hence I warn my readers to be careful while reading my words.

They should not try to read anything between the lines. Let me announced

with all the strength at my command, that I am not a terrorist and I

never was, expected perhaps in the beginning of my revolutionary career.

And I am convinced that we cannot gain anything through those methods.

One can easily judge it from the history of the Hindustan Socialist

Republican Association. All our activities were directed towards an aim,

i.e., identifying ourselves with the great movement as its military

wing. If anybody has misunderstood me, let him amend his ideas. I do not

mean that bombs and pistols are useless, rather the contrary. But I mean

to say that mere bomb-throwing is not only useless but sometimes

harmful. The military department of the party should always keep ready

all the war-material it can command for any emergency. It should back

the political work of the party. It cannot and should not work

independently.

On these lines indicated above, the party should proceed with its work.

Through periodical meetings and conferences they should go on educating

and enlightening their workers on all topics. If you start the work on

these lines, you shall have to be very sober. The programme requires at

least twenty years for its fulfillment. Cast aside the youthful dreams

of a revolution within ten years of Gandhi’s utopian promises of Swaraj

in One Year. It requires neither the emotion nor the death, but the life

of constant struggle, suffering and sacrifice. Crush your individuality

first. Shake off the dreams of personal comfort. Then start to work.

Inch by inch you shall have to proceed. It needs courage, perseverance

and very strong determination. No difficulties and no hardships shall

discourage you. No failure and betrayals shall dishearten you. No

travails (!) imposed upon you shall snuff out the revolutionary will in

you. Through the ordeal of sufferings and sacrifice you shall come out

victorious. And these individual victories shall be the valuable assets

of the revolution.

LONG LIVE REVOLUTION