[First instalment of the English translation of the valuable speech delivered online in Bengali by Comrade Provash Ghosh, General Secretary, SUCI(C), on 19 July 2021 in memory of Comrade Mubinul Haider Choudhury, Founder of Bangladesh Samajtantrik Dal–BASAD (Marxist) and a life-long revolutionary, who passed away on 6 July 2021 in Dhaka due to multiple diseases at an age of 87, was published in the Proletarian Era dated 15 November 2021.. The second instalment is published here. Responsibility of translation error and inadequate expression, if any, lies with the Editorial Board of Proletarian Era.]
Comrade Haider shouldered any assigned responsibility happily
I have seen whatever task was assigned to him by the Party in this country, he never raised any question about that being arduous, difficult or painful and hence difficult to shoulder. He never refused to undertake any responsibility. While he was in India, he developed Party organizations in many new places here. He built up trade union movement in Khidderpore area of Kolkata and recruited a good number of new students and youths in the Party. He had a significant role in development of the movement of the goldsmiths amongst whom we had no organization earlier. He had also developed anti-communal movement with which he associated many intellectuals, not only of West Bengal but of other states as well. He built up youth movement and youth organization here. Again, when he was sent to Delhi where the Party had no organizational base earlier, he moved around Delhi, Haryana and Western UP to find new contacts and brought them to Comrade Shibdas Ghosh for discussion. Thus Party organization sprouted in those states. Comrade Haider was very brave. Let me narrate one incident of 1962. Assembly elections were then being held in the Birbhum district in West Bengal. Through struggle, Comrade Protiva Mukherjee then had earned the respected name of ‘Didimoni’ (elder sister) among the poorer section of the masses. She was our candidate from Suri constituency. The jotedars (landed gentry) there were die-hard anti-SUCI (C). The situation was such that if any of us had tried to enter any locality, they could have murdered us. Comrade Haider was in-charge of election in two Panchayats known as Damdama and Purandarpur. Majority of the residents of Purandarpur were Hindus whereas Muslim population was dominant in Damdama. One day, Comrade Shibdas Ghosh called me and told that Comrade Haider was mercilessly beaten in Purandarpur.
He was pricked with speers. Somehow, he could escape from being murdered. He asked me to go to Purandarpur. But Comrade Haider was very much against my going there. He told Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, ‘Provash is physically weaker than me. They would kill him. Please do not send Provash’. But Comrade Shibdas Ghosh convinced him and sent me to Purandarpur. Comrade Haider was asked to stay at Damdama only. But he came to meet me in Purandarpur at the wee hours of night. I asked him, ‘‘Why did you come here’’? He said, ‘‘if something happens to you, then’’? I told him, ‘‘you are not supposed to come here’’. But he was bent upon not leaving me alone. After the first day, he again came on the next day. Out of love and affection for me, he risked his life to come there. He did not listen to my advice. Comrade Nihar Mukherjee was then at Suri to oversee elections in the Birbhum district. I informed Comrade Nihar Mukherjee that if Comrade Haider continued to visit me like this, his life would be endangered. Thereafter, he could be persuaded not to come like that. Later, in West Bengal, the police on occasions had been chasing and mercilessly beating the participants of a democratic movement. We were also in those movements. Comrade Haider guarded me all along to ensure that I was not assaulted by the police. He himself took all the beatings. There are many other incidents which were illustrations of his immense courage and boundless affection for me.
Arduous struggle of Comrade Haider for building up a true communist party in Bangladesh
I want to discuss one more question. There are some questions among a few in Bangladesh about formation of a revolutionary party there. It is to be borne in mind that building up a Marxist party is no easy a task. Comrade Lenin had founded a model Marxist party in Russia. Comrade Stalin had saved it. Comrade Mao Zedong had founded a Marxist party in China. And we firmly believe that Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had founded a genuine Marxist party in India. Comrade Haider went to Bangladesh with the objective of forming a true Marxist-Leninist party there. Comrade Shibdas Ghosh gave him the responsibility of developing someone of that land as leader of that party. Comrade Shibdas Ghosh told him, ‘You should not be the leader because you are going from India’.
After going to Bangladesh, he could not secure citizenship of that country for quite a long time. It was very risky to cross the border in those days. If he was caught, he could have either been jailed or hit by bullet of the border security forces. Very boldly and intelligently, he crossed the border on quite a number of occasions. We did not know these earlier. He never disclosed such things of his own. We came to know about such boldness and determined venture of his in course of some other discussions. Once both of us went to Haldibari in North Bengal bordering Bangladesh. He told me at that time how he once crossed Haldibari border. ‘On one side, there was the Indian military while on the other side was the Bangladesh military. I straightaway crossed the border without giving any chance to either of the security forces to suspect me’, said Comrade Haider. In the initial days, he used to stay in a big slum in Dhaka. How did I come to know that? He gave the book ‘‘On evaluation of Saratchandra’’ by Comrade Shibdas Ghosh to some students. One lady professor of English of Dhaka University was highly impressed by reading that book after procuring a copy from one of her students. She enquired wherefrom the student had got that book. When she came to know that the book was given by Comrade Haider, she came in a car to meet him. Comrade Haider told me, ‘I was then staying in a slum’. That professor learned about Comrade Shibdas Ghosh and expressed desire to meet him. But Comrade Haider told her that Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had demised. From his narration of this incident, I came to know that he was putting up in a slum. Otherwise, we could have never come to know that.
He had no self-conceit. He had gone from this country to a different country, got himself acquainted with many people there, contacted many of them, explained the noble ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought to them and tried to induct them in revolutionary movement. None of us shouldered such responsibility. From that perspective, he was unparalleled. Some of the leaders of the undivided CPI had stayed back in the then East Pakistan after partition of the country. But to initiate revolutionary movement in Bangladesh by going from India was a unique thing. I am not aware of any second example of this. None of us had to give such a test. Comrades of India are also aware of this. For this, I hold high respect towards him. Slowly, he initiated the process of building a true revolutionary party in Bangladesh based on Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought.
Let us recall the history of world communist movement as well as the history of First, Second and Third Internationals. Both great Marx and Engels were in the First International. But that International was dismantled within a few years. Great Engels built up the Second International. Great Lenin was a student of the Second International. But Lenin found before the First World War that the Second International had degenerated. There was a severe difference between Lenin and other leaders of the Second International. So, Lenin formed the Third International after Soviet revolution in 1919. Lenin had struggled hard for ten years to form a real revolutionary party. He started an ideological struggle within the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) from 1902 and formed the Bolshevik Party as the genuine communist party in 1912. There had been so many breakings and makings.
There can no doubt be any comparison whatsoever between Lenin and Comrade Mubinul Haider Choudhury. I am just dwelling on the history. Similarly, after formation in 1921, Chinese Communist Party (CPC) had repeatedly been victim of either right-wing or ultra-left deviation. Mao Zedong had struggled relentlessly to establish the correct revolutionary line. But he was cornered by the deviators. Finally, Mao Zedong came into leadership in 1934 and from then onwards the CPC was on the right track. These are all facts of history. Myself and other comrades of India had been working in a Party founded by Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. But Comrade Haider was neither Lenin nor Mao nor Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. Those who had raised some questions regarding formation of a revolutionary party in Bangladesh need to seriously ponder over this question. He had trust and confidence in those whom he had put in the forefront of BASAD. But later on, problems of individualism, populist trends and signs of bureaucratism began to surface in them. Even they began to raise questions about ideological centralism and Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought within the party. On the one hand, Comrade Haider was recruiting youths and students by conducting discussions based on Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought, while, on the other hand, the person whom he placed in the leadership and a circle around him began to deteriorate because of not rectifying their marked defects and deviations. Comrade Haider took some time to notice this gradual deterioration. Unless someone possesses very high standard of Marxist outlook, often it is not possible to identify the quantitative change.
When quantitative change reaches a nodal point, qualitative change occurs. The deviators understood that presence and role of Comrade Haider was a deterrent to their deviationist activities. But it was Comrade Haider who assembled all of them and placed them in leadership. So, they tried to see that the meetings of Comrade Haider which were attracting the students and youths towards the party did not take place. They advised Comrade Haider that instead of holding such meetings in different districts, he should concentrate to build up ‘Charan Cultural Centre’. Afterwards, they declared that they did not consider Comrade Shibdas Ghosh as an authority of international communist movement. So, Comrade Haider had to leave the party along with many more comrades and formed BASAD (Marxist) in 2013. At that time, he was quite aged and his health had broken. Yet, he untiringly conducted hard, painstaking struggle to build up a correct Marxist-Leninist party in Bangladesh till his last breadth.
Developing a revolutionary leader is not that easy
In this connection, I want to say another thing which BASAD (Marxist) has correctly observed. Comrade Haider did not get a competent compatriot. Some people have alleged that he failed to create anyone to be so competent. Is it so easy to create? What has been the role in history of Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin who were by the side of Lenin for so many days?
In pre-revolutionary days, Stalin got very little opportunity to be in close association with Lenin. Most of the time, he was in exile in Siberia. He met Lenin only in one or two conferences. Stalin was in Moscow only during revolution. So, it is not that if a great leader tries to develop anyone as a good revolutionary with utmost care, the person concerned would come up to his expectation. This is never so easy. Both external as well as internal contradictions are crucial factors in this regard. Internal contradiction determines what would be the form and nature of the change. At the same time, if external contradiction is not favourable, internal contradiction cannot mature. And there is a difference between man and other animals or any other inanimate matter in so far as workability of these contradictions are concerned. If a big leader counsels anyone, is it inevitable that the person would undergo a change by imbibing the essence of that advice? Because, in case of man, mind or cognition has a major role.
More heated is water by an external heating device, quicker would it turn into vapour. But if I try to change someone by educating him or her, will he or she change automatically? How far one would accept the advice, or even if one accepts, how much one would apply that in life, how much would one apply the learning in which case or sphere–these internal factors are of immense importance. When someone raises a question as to how could one in spite of being in close association with a great leader lag so behind or even degenerate, one fails to understand this basic truth, identify the root cause. While the endeavour of the leader should be in the right direction, it is equally important how the recipient responds to it; whether he or she has a mindset to imbibe the correctness of the leader’s advice and how much is his or her grasping ability. This is very important. Comrades need to understand this properly. Was Comrade Shibdas Ghosh created by any leader? He has drawn appropriate lessons from the life and struggle of all greatmen of the world, as well as all great movements. He had struggled covering all aspects of life as an ardent student of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin-Mao Zedong. In this regard, I believe that the initiative of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh to remould himself as a revolutionary was the prime factor. Same is true of Stalin and Mao Zedong. Otherwise, how could those in close proximity of Lenin degenerate so much? As a true disciple and follower of great Stalin, Comrade Shibdas Ghosh emerged as a giant Marxist authority and we are now holding aloft the banner of revolution as students of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. In spite of that, why no leader could emerge in Soviet Russia to stand by Stalin or succeed him as his trusted lieutenant? Next leaders who came in the leadership after Stalin’s demise had adopted crass revisionist line and engineered capitalist counter-revolution. That they would cause such a debacle could not be guessed even by a great leader like Stalin. The very Central Committee of CPSU which was constituted in its 19th Congress in presence of Stalin had begun attacking him after his demise under the leadership of Khrushchev with a view to undermining Leninism. When the 20th congress of CPSU was held in 1956 with Khrushchev at the helm, Comrade Shibdas Ghosh criticized the report placed by him in that congress and said that undermining Stalin and his authority would open the floodgate of revisionism-reformism round the world. He showed that attacking Stalin means to uncrown Lenin himself as Stalin was an authority on Leninism. Hence maligning Stalin would pave the way of counter-revolution. Comrade Mao Zedong, at the outset, could not identify the danger inherent in the Khrushchevite line spelled out in the 20th Congress. He supported the resolution of 20th Congress. Only he said that the positive qualities of Stalin outweighed his negative sides. After seven years, the CPC under Mao’s leadership admitted that the report of the 20th Congress was anti-Marxist. At the same time, those who were by the side of Mao Ze dong comprised Liu Shao Qui and Deng Xiaoping. A book titled ‘‘How to be a good communist’’ written by Liu Shao Qui was once a textbook in the communist movement. Deng Xiaoping was the General Secretary of CPC. But when Mao Zedong conducted magnificent Cultural Revolution, he was virtually alone. He was then quite old and suffering from Parkinson’s disease. He lost the power to speak. One member of CPC used to write down his advices based on his lip movement. Whom Mao had to fight against? The very Liu Shao Qui and Deng Xiaoping who once were his right and left hands. Mao gave the slogan ‘‘Bombard the Headquarters’’ during Cultural Revolution and called upon all to take up cudgels against the capitalist-roaders. In this struggle, a vast number of the young generation joined him virtually in an unorganized manner. Mao did not have any competent leader by his side. There is a teaching of Mao Zedong. If one commits a mistake and then openly admits it and rectifies oneself, one should be taken back in the party and given the right post. Deng Xiaoping admitted his mistake and Mao restored him in his earlier position. Here lay the greatness of Mao. But Mao could not realize the evil intent of Deng. After demise of Mao, this very Deng Xiaoping went against the spirit and prescripts of Cultural Revolution and opened the door for establishment of capitalism through counter revolution. That is what we are witnessing today. China has now been transformed into an imperialist country and challenging the US. Only it is carrying a ‘communist’ signboard. So being great communist leaders, both Stalin and Mao made some mistakes in their evaluation of their associates and could not create a proper compatriot. Yet, they are our revered leaders, teachers and giant authorities of Marxism-Leninism. In no way, their authority can be undermined. On the other hand, though they were stationed far away, their teachings had helped Comrade Shibdas Ghosh to develop as one of the foremost Marxist leaders and thinkers. Am I saying all these things on my own? No. I am saying these things based on Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought.
Comrade Shibdas Ghosh pointed out prevalence of mechanical thinking in international communist movement in 1948
Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had cultivated creative Marxism. Many of the people as well a good number of our new comrades do not know that during Second World War, the luminaries of the whole world like Romain Rolland and Rabindranath, were looking at Stalin with great expectation and faith. Rabindranath was then on his death bed. All of them believed that Socialist Soviet Union under the stewardship of Stalin alone could defeat the fascist axis. Exactly that had happened. Chinese Revolution was accomplished by defeating imperialism. Despite all such glorious achievements and tremendous progress of world communist movement, Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, way back in 1948, sounded a note of caution that a mechanical relationship as against dialectical relationship was prevailing between the international communist leadership and others in the socialist camp.
He further pointed out that the amount of emphasis given on organizational growth was not given on ideological struggle. To quote him: ‘‘…there is still a lack of firm solidarity on the basis of ideology and uniformity of thinking in the united revolutionary front of the people fighting for the above objective. The danger with which it is fraught cannot be averted by ignoring and glossing over it or by remaining blind to it.’’ (Self-criticism of the Communist Camp) If ideological standard is lowered, the dialectical relationship would cease to be in vogue resulting in a growing tendency to blindly follow the leadership, warned Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. This, he added, would engender crisis in future. Our Party was never pro-Moscow or pro-Beijing. Comrade Shibdas Ghosh never followed either of them blindly. Wherever they were correct, he supported them. But if it occurred to him that they were committing mistakes, he used to express his difference maintaining full respect for them. This is dialectical relationship.
We all today are students of great Stalin and Mao Zedong based on the teachings of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. We consider Comrade Shibdas Ghosh as their worthy continuer. Counter-revolution has taken place in both Soviet Union and China. World communist movement is in total disarray. Communist parties of France, Italy Indonesia and Philippines were once so strong. They had conducted so many struggles. Now they all are in shambles or disintegrated. Because all of them suffered from blind allegiance to international leadership which Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had fought against. The moment the world communist movement was divided between Moscow and Beijing camps, these communist parties of various countries were also split and then collapsed. But our Party did not break because of counter-revolution in Soviet Russia and China. We have been pained but our Party has not only been intact but is growing fast. There is no sign of frustration among our comrades. Because we are in a position to understand the root of all such problems as well as the remedial course thereof from the teachings of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh.
Formation of BASAD (Marxist)
Coming back to what I was discussing earlier, Comrade Haider had formed BASAD. But when the leader whom he kept at the forefront had deteriorated and created a group within the party, Comrade Haider’s efforts to build a true communist party had failed. So those who raise question about such a sad experience need to understand that it is not that easy to read a person. After going to Bangladesh, Comrade Haider had come to Comrade Shibdas Ghosh three to four times till 1976. He sought advice of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh and did receive that. After demise of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, departed Comrade Nihar Mukherjee who succeeded him as the General Secretary of the Party was bed-ridden for a long time having been afflicted by various diseases. The leaders who were senior to us and are no more now as well as those belonging to our level used to decide everything collectively under his guidance. I had to disclose this today out of a particular necessity. During the tenure of Comrade Nihar Mukherjee, I was Secretary of West Bengal State Committee and remained engrossed with the work of the state Party. At that time, the CPI (M) government of West Bengal was adopting one after another anti-people policies like abolition of English and pass-fail system from the primary school level, allowing skyrocketing of price line and raising the electricity tariff by leaps and bound. The CPI (M) government had also opened fire on the workers and peasants and forcibly evicted the poor peasants from land with a view to handing over the same to the monopolists and Multinationals. In protest, we had then organized one after another movement. The criminal brigade of the CPI (M) had killed about 200 of our workers and leaders. So, for quite a long time, Comrade Haider could not receive necessary advice that he used to get from Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. Whatever little advice I could give him earlier as per my ability also eluded him because of my preoccupation as the West Bengal State Secretary. I only spoke in the founding convention of the new party, BASAD (Marxist) in 1913 as an invited guest. Another of the then leaders of BASAD (Marxist) requested me to go to Bangladesh in 2017. I told him how could I go unless your party asked me. At the request of that leader, Comrade Haider invited me to Bangladesh. I had a meeting with them. What I had discussed in that meeting is known to the comrades there. They have with them my speech. Comrades of India are not aware of that.
I am reading out a portion of that speech of mine. I told them: ” Your party is in the process of making. It has not yet assumed the character of a full-fledged party. The struggle for party building is on… So far I can make out and whatever understanding I could arrive at by interacting with your leaders, I have expressed to Comrade Haider. I have also stated that in your extended meeting. Some of the comrades have rightly said that it was necessary to meticulously analyse why BASAD could not develop as a genuine Marxist party… the first basis of unity of the newly formed party was whether to follow Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought or not.
Those who wanted to move ahead based on Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought, they had progressed with honesty, dedication, struggling mentality and deep emotion. You all and many others not present here are all in that stage. Secondly, your profound respect and emotion for Comrade Haider because of his revolutionary character, personality and views have initiated you into this struggle. Yet I would say that in absence of high Marxist consciousness and culture, this respect and confidence are to a great extent based on blind allegiance. At the outset, such is quite natural. But there is a difference between conscious respect and blind following. Thirdly, the bureaucratic functioning of the official leadership of BASAD, various traits of their character, their conduct and behaviour and various activities had caused disrespect for and loss of faith in them.
Dialectical relationship cannot develop unless one attains a higher revolutionary consciousness
It is not so easy to comprehend Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought. As you know, Kautsky, Plekhanov and Bernstein had read the works of Marx. So had Lenin. But the way Lenin had grasped Marxism, the others could not. Similarly Trotsky, Kamenev, Bukharin, Zinoviev and Stalin had all studied Lenin’s works. But there was a gulf of difference between Stalin and others in so far as assimilation of Lenin’s teachings was concerned. So where lies the difference? Difference lies in understanding. You need to cultivate Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought to realize its essence. I do not know how far this cultivation is being done in your new party. But from the various discussions I had with you, it appears that necessary struggle in this regard did not take place. Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had also said that any bright student can easily go through the Marxist classics, memorize them and give quotations or cite references from them line by line. But realization presupposes application in life of what one has learnt. That means change of life, a total change of culture comes by grasping Marxian science. Contradiction per se does not mean dialectical relationship. Conflicts and contradictions are galore in various walks of life and family. Mere argument and counter-argument also is not dialectical interaction. Contradiction based on dialectical process, philosophy of dialectical materialism does not happen overnight. It is not that one desires to have an interaction on understanding of dialectical materialism and can instantaneously start practising it. When one is able to change one’s life by grasping Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought, which cannot be acquired by conducting struggle alone. This is never possible merely by singular effort of any individual. This realization and grasping can occur only through collective struggle. A uniform outlook and higher culture grow through collective struggle following correct process. Comrade Shibdas Ghosh had taught that unless consciousness and culture of the party workers attain a higher standard, dialectical relationship cannot develop. And blind following harms the leader, the self and the party. Another aspect you need to understand very carefully. Most of you had worked in the old BASAD for a long period. Though you had joined BASAD having been attracted by Comrade Haider’s talks, character and living association, but the party was run by another leader, not Comrade Haider. So, for a long time, non-Marxist thought process, style of functioning and mutual relationship in the name of Marxism which was practised in the earlier party have crept in you all as forces of habit.
To free yourselves from those vices, you need to immediately release an arduous painstaking, relentless struggle, both individually and collectively. Otherwise, notwithstanding honesty, dedication and sacrifice, you will not achieve success in building up a real Marxist party. Another wrong notion is somehow existing among you that in order to identify the self with the party, one has to hold or retain in mind a particular leader. This thought is incorrect. You would get in the teachings of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh that one has to conduct an all-out struggle covering all aspects of life happily, unconditionally and unhesitatingly to be free from private property and private property mental complex to be identified with the proletarian class, revolution and party. Only then can one attain a higher communist character. In this process, identification with the party leadership would also grow. …I told Comrade Haider before this meeting that you are my friend, comrade-in-arms. But I have some criticism about you. He told me to say openly everything, whatever I have to discuss in this meeting. Here was his greatness.
This is a correct communist approach. What a height is needed to attain to say like this! He told me to place all my criticisms with an open mind. I respect this attitude. I shall say that before you. He is highly respected by me. I know at what age and with what experience and ability he came to Bangladesh obeying the advice of Comrade Shibdas Ghosh. He was then not a well-known leader or organizer in India. In Bangladesh, he had to conduct a very hard struggle. I cannot say with certainty that had Comrade Shibdas Ghosh sent me to shoulder this responsibility, I would have succeeded. I did not have to give this test. I tell this to all the comrades of India. And it is his greatness that he wants to know and learn something from me. In the same way, I also learn from him. Whenever I think of something, I tell him. Though I was not at all familiar with all the developments here. All these things have helped me a lot. He had to undertake the responsibility of building this new party when he was very sick and at the fag end of his life. It is very stiff a task to develop collective leadership. I did not initiate this struggle in India. It was Comrade Shibdas Ghosh who had developed collective leadership in our Party. I am only a part of that.
But here, Comrade Haider had to engage himself in that struggle when he became very old, was suffering from various diseases and virtually counting hours. This work is very difficult. For example, Marxism-Leninism-Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought is to be concretized in the concrete situation of Bangladesh as well. Only printing the literatures of our Party in India would not do. Bangladesh has some unique national characteristics and features though in many cases, those are similar to India. It is much more difficult to build up a party based on Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought in England or France. Since both India and Bangladesh were once within the same country , there is a unity in language and culture. From that perspective, many analyses and opinions of Indian Party would help you.
Again, you have certain particular problems and specific economic-political-cultural aspects. Taking all those into account, you will have to conduct a collective struggle to concretize Marxism on your soil based on correct application of Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought. In spiritual and cultural spheres as well as in the very mode of living, bourgeois thoughts are existing here in a specific form. The bourgeois thoughts prevailing in India and Bangladesh are not the same. The dominant religious mindsets of India and Bangladesh are different. Where and in whatever forms remnants of feudalism exist in India are not exactly similar to those in Bangladesh. You will have to identify all these differences. You would have to analyse in what form individualism is existing in your country. I don’t say that you have done nothing to understand the ideological base of freedom movement here, what was its sense of pride and what was the distinction between the compromising and uncompromising trends. Taking due cognition of all these facts, the task of the collective leadership is to provide a guide to action covering all aspects of life based on Marxism-Leninism-Comrade Shibdas Ghosh Thought.
Contradiction based on continuous interaction of ideas and exchange of opinions based on Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought involving all leaders and cadres within the party, would, in course of its resolution, develop a uniformity of thought and help in understanding what is in accordance with Marxism and what is contrary to Marxist thought. It means you all would then be habituated to think and analyse based on Marxism-Leninism-Shibdas Ghosh Thought. Here I am emphasizing on the word ‘habituated’. In the process of this struggle, you would be able to fight individualism among the leaders and cadres. What is uniformity of thinking? It means uniform understanding about Nazrul, Rabindranath, imperialism, fascism everything.
(To be Continued)