In Conversation With Kavita Krishnan on Her Exit From the CPI(ML)L

She says that she notices obvious traits that the far-right Modi regime shares with the 'socialist' Stalin regime.

Kavita Krishnan. 

(Photo: Chetan Bhakuni)

"Somewhere along the way after the big, inspiring anti-war movements, the Western Left, including both anti-Stalinist and Stalinist, formations fell prey to lazy analyses of the world, flattening out a complex world into a simple one where everything bad could be blamed on 'US imperialism' and 'neo-liberalism'," Kavita Krishnan says while speaking to The Quint after she requested to be relieved of her posts and responsibilities within the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation.

She stresses "the need to recognise the importance of defending liberal democracies," and "that it is not enough to discuss the Stalin regime, USSR, and China as failed socialisms but as some of the world's worst authoritarian regimes that serve as a model for authoritarians everywhere."

She also asserts that for their "fight for democracy against fascism and growing totalitarianism in India" to be consistent, they "must acknowledge the entitlement to the same democratic rights and civil liberties for people across the world, including subjects of socialist totalitarian regimes."

The Central Committee has accepted her request, but Krishnan has been facing relentless trolling from the left, for apparently betraying their cause. The trolling and the abuse merely proves her point, that the left, as she tells The Quint, tends to "take formulaic positions on movements: choosing the side that is against the capitalist states like the United States rather than standing with people resisting despots, fascists, and imperialist invasions."

On the Timing of Her Exit

Accounts of Stalin's atrocities against his own people, or against the Ukrainians, have existed for decades. So, why did Krishnan decide to do what she did at this particular point in time, and not in the many years of her association with the CPI(ML)L?

Krishnan says that the party "had adopted a position in 1992 acknowledging the grievous effect of Stalin’s 'metaphysics' (or one-sidedness) on 'inner party and socialist democracy'. This resolution seemed 'balanced' in the sense that it also acknowledged his contribution to building socialism and defeating fascism."

In the resolution that she is talking about (attached below), the party acknowledges that during Stalin's rule, "inner-party democracy as well as socialist democracy in society suffered from gross distortions."

"While I felt the term 'metaphysics' was and strangely arcane way of referring to state crimes against people," Krishnan continues, "I took the critical portion of the statement as permission to speak critically of Stalin’s recriminalization of abortion and homosexuality, and purges of Bolshevik leaders."

But what really changed her mind "was that the opening up of Soviet archives in Ukraine in 2014 [that] resulted in new books published 2017 onwards."

"As I read Lynne Viola's book on Stalinist Perpetrators (based on archives of trials of the Stalinist police that killed millions of peasants in Ukraine and sent millions off to gulags) my outrage at these horrific accounts rose. Then the Ukraine war happened – and to counter misinformation rampant on the Left, I began to read Charles Clover on the rise of Russian nationalism, then moved on to many of Timothy Snyder's books and talks. I also read Laurence Rees on the Stalin-Hitler pact; have begun reading Halik Kochanski on Poland and Poles in WWII."

Krishnan explains that after reading in detail about how the Stalin regime treated dissidents, peasants, and national minorities, she could not help but notice the obvious traits the far-right Modi regime shares with the 'socialist' Stalin regime.

"Falsely accusing communist leaders of Jewish origin of being Hitler's agents and of conspiring in a terrorist plot to kill Stalin; branding peasants 'kulaks' and dissidents 'counter-revolutionaries' and 'Nazi agents' as a pretext to execute or incarcerate them – these were immediately reminiscent to me of the Bhima Koregaon case while the use of the terms 'kulak'/'Nazi' etc for dissenting voices is much like the use of terms like 'Naxal' and 'urban Naxal' for critics of the Modi regime today."

'Not a Rehash of an Old Script'

When asked about allegations regarding why she was reigniting conversations of the past, Krishnan says, "After my statement, many Trotskyites in India and the West have said things like 'We knew this long ago, what took you so long to realise Stalinism is bad?' Likewise, my own comrades here in India kept asking me why I was raising issues settled long ago when Mao defended Stalin against Khrushchev while admitting Stalin’s mistakes. But in fact I believe that the issues I’ve raised are not a rehash of an old script."

They have, she argues, "arisen out of contemporary problems in which left formations are more often than not, found on the side of despots and even outright fascists on a variety of recent flashpoints. The global left for instance tended to back Bashar al-Assad (and Vladimir Putin) in Syria, even denying civilian massacres by them in the name of anti-imperialism. They tend to take formulaic positions on movements: choosing the side that is against the US rather than standing with people resisting despots, fascists, and imperialist invasions."

The left's problem of taking formulaic positions is being witnessed with respect to the Ukraine war as well, she argues, "with most of the global left including anarchists, Trotskyites and Stalinists as well as popular leaders like Corbyn all either openly siding with Putin or paying lip service to 'peace' and opposing Russia's war, while legitimising key elements of Putin propaganda that blame the war on NATO, call the elected Ukrainian Government 'Nazi' and suggest that Ukraine ceding land or sovereignty to appease Russia could end the war.

Krishnan then goes on to criticise the left's takes on the communists sitting in Beijing.

"Much of this left also rationalises or plays down China's incarceration of Uyghur Muslims in concentration camps in the name of 'war on terror.' Hardly any left groups anywhere in the world have organised protests supporting Uyghurs, or have written and spoken advocating for Uyghurs. Instead they, including anarchist and Trotskyite intellectuals and groups, seem to take their 'line' from Vijay Prashad of the CPI(M) who openly shills for China and defends the mass incarceration of Uyghurs as a necessary 're-education' to help them achieve 'development' and 'catch up' with the rest of China."

Why the 'Sorry State of the Global Left'

Krishnan flagged two possible reasons for what she called the "sorry state of the global Left."

"First, the anti-Stalinist Left in Europe and the US tended to deny the socialist character of the Stalin regime and the Soviet Union as a way of distinguishing themselves from domestic Stalinist parties and of avoiding any close engagement with the 'problem' posed by that regime. As a friend recalls, new recruits in a Trotskyite faction receiving this bit of wisdom: 'A lot of people worry about what happened in the Soviet Union. But we have a theory which proves its state was capitalist. So there is no need to worry. Simples'."

State capitalism has been described by authors as a combination of state-controlled economic planning along with elements of free-market competition. Capitalism co-exists with a varying degree of government control of the market. The People's Republic of China led by the Chinese Communist Party is one example of a state capitalist regime.

"But this kind of neat formula (which CPIML also now considers applying to China) sidesteps the need to acknowledge the actual forms of harm done by such regimes. For instance such anti-Stalinists very often do not acknowledge Ukraine's experiences as a Soviet colony; and thus do not really respect Ukraine's right to wage a people’s war of self-defence against the Russian invasion," Krishnan adds.

The second and linked problem, she argues, is "that somewhere along the way after the big, inspiring anti-war movements, the Western left, including both anti-Stalinist and Stalinist formations, fell prey to lazy analyses of the world, flattening out a complex world into a simple one where everything bad could be blamed on 'US imperialism' and 'neo-liberalism'."

"This framework," she continues, "led the left, as I mentioned, to opposing efforts to push western countries into acting to prevent Assad and Putin from massacring the Syrian resistance; denying the Srebrenica massacre; advocating for Trump over Hillary Clinton; ignoring the incarceration of Uyghur Muslims; and even supporting Brexit. Ukraine is the latest instance of this bankrupt politics."