Gita Press and the Making of Hindu India (51 page)

Occasionally,
Kalyan
would reassure its readers not to be afraid of the new ideology. Karl Marx, it said, was a sagacious mind who propounded communism on observing the inequality in the world. Principally,
Kalyan
argued, communism wanted to establish what should ideally exist in any society, so there was nothing to be afraid of: ‘India of sanatan dharma has no reason to worry if it imbibes communist values because the ideal that communism wants to establish already exists in our religious and saintly traditions in a purer form.’
¹²³

Gita Press’s approach to communism was thus based on moral superiority, claiming that a more refined manifesto of an equal society existed in the Gita. However, it was not prepared for the new direction the government was about to take, when, at its 1955 session in Avadi (near Madras), the Congress ‘resolved to establish a socialistic pattern of society’
.
¹²⁴
The Avadi session’s most notable feature was not the ‘speed with which the government acted’ but the ‘change in the atmosphere’. The presence of Vinoba Bhave in Avadi—he had not attended Congress sessions for a long time—provided the moral endorsement of the party’s plan of implementing the tenets of socialism and its ‘progressive shift to Left’.
¹²⁵

The government’s subsequent stress on the public sector and nationalization of industry raised the hackles of Gita Press, a product of Marwari philanthropy. This move towards state control of resources and business was an attack by an adversarial Congress government on the concept of profit that had been advanced as moral justification in the pages of
Kalyan
. Nardev Shastri questioned the Congress version of socialism.
¹²⁶
He expressed concern that through nationalization the state would become even more powerful: ‘Government already has the resources of power. Would it not go berserk if economic resources come under its control?’ Shastri’s prescription was simple: ‘In India only the socialism of Vedic times, as recommended by saints and sages, can be popularized.’

In its overenthusiasm to showcase the failure of the socialist economy,
Kalyan
published an anonymous article that had first been written in Marathi.
¹²⁷
The article said the communist idea of distributing wealth equally among citizens would leave everyone a pauper, as proved by the fact that the per capita national income and wages of workers were among the lowest in the Soviet Union compared to other countries. The article claimed that the controlled economy of the Soviet Union was another form of monopoly capitalism, since the ruling class controlled the land and other modes of production. Further, communism fed war and therefore encouraged the defence industry—while the United States spent 6 per cent of its production on defence, Soviet Union spent 18 per cent. It was also shown that compared to Soviet Union, the US spent Rs 19 more per capita on education, Rs 140 more on social security and insurance and Rs 370 more on social welfare. ‘Thus it is proved that, despite having an opposite goal, a controlled economy like Russia has created an economic structure that can put capitalism to shame.’ A comparative analysis of the prices of essential items between Washington and Moscow again proved that the Soviet capital was a more expensive place to live in. The article, unlike others, advocated communism as an alternative, but with a different economic model to the one the Soviet Union had adopted.

In 1959, when Kalyan brought out its annual
Manavta Ank
, it actually carried an article in favour of communism. C. Nesterenko, a Russian writer on philosophy, outlined the moral principles of communism, arguing that in a socialist society there was a perfect blending of public good and private interest.
¹²⁸
For a citizen of the Soviet Union, the country’s success was considered personal success. He said every citizen got the collective help and support of the society. For Nesterenko, the best example of communist morality was the way individuals came together and turned 355,000 hectares of fallow land cultivable and helped in establishing over 10,000 public enterprises. His myth of morality in the Soviet Union would get exposed in subsequent years, based as it was on a fragile foundation of fear. But in
Kalyan
he did not miss an opportunity to declare the supremacy of communism and its endeavour to create a society based on collective good.

Nesterenko’s paean to communism was an aberration for Gita Press. In the late 1960s, as the government came down heavily on the cow-protection movement, Gita Press saw the state action as a reflection of its leftist leanings.
¹²⁹
Leftist ideology,
Kalyan
said, considered madira (alcohol), maans (meat), machhli (fish), mudra (money) and maithun (sex) as liberating agents, and the Congress, though attacking the communists, had itself turned leftist. ‘What communists desire to do is being done by the government. Today if communism is on the rise in this country, the policies of the government are to be blamed . . . Communism has no measure of equality, no definition of equality and morality.’

The 1960s were a period of intense churning in leftist ideology, leading to a split in the Communist Party of India and the formation of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) in 1964. Widespread violence by leftist groups, which started in West Bengal on the issue of food shortage, soon encompassed many issues—culminating in May 1967 in the Naxalbari incident. The unrest spread to Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and elsewhere.

In Bengal, the left violence of the 1960s was largely directed against Marwari traders and industrialists. Industrial disputes and labour problems became the order of the day as the left gained a stronghold in the state. ‘Between March and August 1967, 915 gheraos had been recorded, and by October, the Puja season, there was a sharp rise in the number of bonus disputes.’ However, ‘. . . despite various concessions to industrialists by the state government, they seemed chary of committing themselves to a course of investment and expansion, no doubt on the lookout for better terms and a more sympathetic government’
.
¹³⁰

As the Calcutta Marwari world closed ranks, their first port of call was Poddar in Gorakhpur. Marwaris, even if aware of the various nuances of leftist ideology, did not make a distinction between these. Various methods were discussed and devised to counter the anti-business rhetoric and campaign of the communists in general and Naxals in particular. Purshottam Dass Halwasiya, an activist of the Calcutta Marwari world, was at the helm of building this counter narrative.

Writing to Poddar, Halwasiya suggested the large-scale publication of cheap literature putting forth views on economic and social issues that would show the error of communist ideology. ‘This is one way to deal with the ideological struggle with the communists. They have done the maximum in popularizing communist literature. Therefore, we should distribute our literature at the lowest price.’
¹³¹
Explaining his plan to Poddar, Halwasiya said he had decided to enlist the help of ‘various disciplined departments of the RSS who could face up to the communist and anarchist elements’
.
He had not limited himself to RSS outfits like the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and Swastik Prakashan, but had also reached out to the Bharatiya Jana Sangh and organizations like the Calcuta Citizens’ Forum, Secondary Teachers’ Association and Syama Prasad Mookerjee Study Circle. He told Poddar that if necessary a new organization—Rashtriya Suraksha Samiti—would be formed. Halwasiya estimated ‘an expenditure of Rs 3–4 lakh’ on the entire exercise but expected that in the ‘prevailing circumstances in Calcutta organizing funds would not be a problem’
.

Soon the Bharatiya Sanskritik Suraksha Parishad (BSSP) was established with the basic goal of resisting violent and anarchist tendencies through cultural means. The BSSP’s tenfold supplementary mission was to encourage nationalist elements and ordinary citizens of states where law and order was in disarray due to anti-national violence; cooperate with nationalist organizations without getting involved in party politics; and popularize the tenets of cultural purity, sacrifice and public service.
¹³²

The BSSP included Poddar’s
Kalyan
article on the West Bengal situation in its propaganda literature. In this piece, Poddar regretted the rapid decline in the country’s divine tradition.
¹³³
The widespread and dreadful violence in West Bengal, from Calcutta to Siliguri, Poddar said, was a reminder of how our thinking on nationalism had become so narrow and limited that on the basis of language and boundary, people of other states were being attacked. He presented a grim view of society under Naxal siege in West Bengal, and the divisive tendencies in Assam and Maharashtra: ‘The entire society has gone haywire. Looting and arson are on the rise. There is no one to protect, to listen. Women are being humiliated. Buses, trains and shops are being burnt. A crowd can hold anyone to ransom. Schools are being attacked, students and teachers are getting killed. Since there is no one to stop this, it has resulted in closure of factories and rise in economic difficulties. It is difficult to procure items of daily need. In the name of welfare of the poor, the life of the poor is being made more difficult . . . many peace-loving people are thinking of migrating to other places. In Assam, there is general resentment against people of other states. In Maharashtra, the Shiv Sena is doing the same.’

It is interesting to note Poddar’s inclusion of the right-wing Shiv Sena in his criticism.

One can safely assume that of the many new ideologies of the twentieth century, communism was considered by Gita Press the most threatening to the Hindu way of life. This assumption stems from the continued publication of Swami Karpatri Maharaj’s
Marxvad Aur Ram
Rajya
by Gita Press. Since the first edition in 1957, the total sales of the book have amounted to just 23,500 copies, an abysmally low figure for a publishing house that has sold millions of copies of the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Gita. However, seven editions have been printed, the last one in 2009, indicating that communism, though no longer the alternative it had sought to become, still rankles with the Hindu right.

Karpatri began writing the book in 1953 in jail after he was arrested for involvement in the Jammu and Kashmir Andolan (J&K Agitation) a joint initiative of Ram Rajya Parishad, Hindu Mahasabha and Jana Sangh. The book began as an article in Sanskrit, based on whatever Marxist literature was available in the jail. Before he could finish the article, Karpatri was released. On two subsequent incarcerations in a Banaras jail for participating in the movement to liberate the Kashi Vishwanath temple, Karpatri had better access to books on Marxism, and enlarged the scope of his commentary that soon took the form of a book. He continued to write sporadically after his release, and by 1956, the handwritten manuscript, though highly unorganized, landed in Gita Press. Janaki Nath Sharma, who was on the editorial staff of
Kalyan
and had also spent time in jail with Karpatri, was entrusted with the task of editing the text and proofreading the manuscript.
¹³⁴

Ultimately
Marxvad Aur Ram Rajya
turned out to be a treatise of 800-plus pages. Juxtaposed with each Marxian theory and principle was Karpatri’s alternative of Ram rajya. Karpatri chose a simplistic mode of writing. First he would cite heavily from Marx and then demolish his arguments through wisdom from Hindu religious texts. Of course, he never deviated from the assertion of not only the pre- existence of principles of equality in Hindu dharma, but also its moral and ethical superiority over communism.

Karpartri mocked Marx’s theory of class struggle and triumph of the oppressed. He was dismissive of the Marxian tenet of state ownership of land, industry and other assets and argued that it was against dharma and individual liberty and growth.
¹³⁵
Under the theocratic Ram rajya, Karpatri argued, an individual used his strength and ability to earn for his family, and secured his present and afterlife through acts of sacrifice, penance and charity. He was also not convinced with Marx’s description of the plight of the working class. Karpatri’s view was that the working class was not so oppressed and definitely not naive; in times of emergency, a motor mechanic or a rickshaw puller extracted undue payment from hapless customers. Karpatri also disputed the virtue of equal distribution of wealth, justified profit-making and questioned Marx’s prediction of class struggle.

Among several examples of Karpatri’s regressive views, the most offensive were his statements on women. The new concept of women workers and the liberty it provided them, a product of the industrial revolution, common to both capitalist and communist ideologies, was considered a threat to the Hindu social order where a woman was limited to the domestic sphere as daughter, wife or mother. Karpatri said Lenin had challenged the concept of pativrata nari (devoted wife); in Marxism, since everything was state-owned there was no need for a woman to be in a relationship with one man.
¹³⁶
As there were no laws of inheritance and private ownership of property, Karpatri said, a woman became like a bucket of water that could quench the thirst of many men. He went even further to state that, in order to facilitate multiple relationships, the Soviet Union had legitimized abortion. Karpatri said he could already see the impact of such international social trends on India, where the government was planning to introduce a divorce law to give women more independence. Scornful of both capitalist and communist societies for making women part of the workforce, Karpatri painted in contrast the ‘utopian’ Ram rajya under which there was no breach of gender turf—men working outside and women ruling the domestic world. In the world that the Ram Rajya Parishad promised, girls would be married off in their childhood so that they could rule the household and become queens of their domestic world.