Asia Social Forum : Institutionalization of Dissent

It was a gathering of unprecedented size. Fourteen thousand activists from India and 700 from abroad gathered at Hyderabad from Jan.2 to 7 of this year for the first meeting in this continent of the World Social Forum. The Asian Chapter of the WSF witnessed a vast range of voices from feminists, environmentalists, dalits, anti-communal and anti-globalisation activists, a hosts of NGOs and even such pro-establishment reactionaries as the ex-president of the country, K.R.Narayan.

Present also was a wide spectrum of grass-roots activists, activists from the slums, countryside, tribals, red-light-areas, universities, print media, various social-reformers, Gandhites, human rights groups, theatre/cultural groups, progressive artists; and activists from Japan, South Korea, Philippines; and not to mention the Green Peace, who now help run the German imperialist state.

A leading force of the entire show appeared to be the CPM — a party that is faithfully implementing the World Bank/IMF/WTO policies in West Bengal and in the other States where they have been in power. Some other leading elements were a few frustrated drop-outs from the Naxalite movement, now seeking refuge in the NGOs.

Yet, the thousands present had come to voice their discontent against Globalisation and its impact on India, in the form of acute economic deprivation, Hindu communalism, environmental destruction, etc. Also there was strong opposition to US war-mongering and the impending war on Iraq. There were debates, discussions, conferences, displays of art, bookstalls with literature, cultural performances, rallies, etc. reflecting the mood of dissent prevalent there. Not surprisingly, many all-India dailies either blacked out the event or gave it insignificant coverage. The Times of India did not so much as mention a word, except two days after it got over, to report on the missing Hussain painting. Though an event of this size was ignored, the meeting of big business that was going on simultaneously in Hyderabad, got daily coverage.

No doubt, conspicuous by their absence on the ASF platforms, were those forces advocating uprooting the entire anti-people system through a revolutionary alternative. In fact, during the ASF, in another part of Hyderabad, the Forum Against Imperialist Globalisation (FAIG), had organized a 10,000 strong rally and meeting calling for an end to imperialist globalisation. (See Box)

The main theme of the WSF, and so of this function, was "another world is possible". "Another world", in itself should be an alternative to the present day world, dominated by imperialism. One would expect that such a huge gathering of diverse forces would debate over the destruction of the old world to establish something new on its rubbles. A new world is not possible unless it destroys the old one. The new cannot be part of the old, within the framework of the old laws. When academics, theoreticians and top social activists assemble at a place one would expect a synthesis of practice and theory on a higher level. But this did not happen at the Hyderabad conclave. To prevent matters going to their logical conclusion, an atmosphere was created of ‘all is well’, ‘everybody is right’, ‘we agree on this, we agree on that’, etc. This lack of real debate, and a sought of goody-goody atmosphere all around, stops arguments half-way and mars the intellectual pursuit of truth.

FAIG Rally

The FAIG Rally appeared as the real platform of the fighting anti-imperialist forces present at Hyderabad. Over 10,000 people gathered in the rally and meeting. It was a contrast to the debates going on elsewhere. Some genuine people from the ASF joined the rally, but the leaders kept away. Militant slogans were shouted, not only against the US war-mongers but also against their stooges in India like Naidu, the Hindu fascists, etc. This rally comprised of all those who focused not merely on Globalisation but imperialism; and they clearly stated that imperialism could only be defeated by replacing it with socialism.

Unfortunately the WSF’s "another world" is a vague, undefined concept. So, when globalisation was debated nobody said that this globalisation is part of the imperialist system, and that an alternative world can only be built without imperialism. Once one comes to this conclusion, debate would then begin with, say, the Green Peace leaders, as to why they should be part of the State on which German imperialism stands; and as to why they stand with the globalising German imperialists and criticize only the US ones. Or take the example of those working amongst prostitutes, that while they rehabilitate a few, hundreds more join the profession. A debate would then take place as to why this stream keeps swelling, and what measures are needed to stop this endless chain? Or the debate whether ‘social activism’ is concerned only with the effect and not the cause? Is reform, and the endless rehabilitation of individuals, the real alternative world, while the system remains intact and goes on churning out thousand more destitute, for each person rehabilitated by the hosts of NGOs.

The much-idealized ‘debate’ promoted by such a forum, is unfortunately restricted and confined to an agenda within the existing status quo. The problem with the organizers is their ideological trappings — a combination of social democracy and social reform; represented at Hyderabad by the domination of the CPM/NGO combine. Besides the ‘free debates’ are never really that free as the WSF has a clear-cut Charter, that defines its agenda, and selectively chooses the speakers; while the CPM is itself a highly autocratic and bureaucratic organization, that is part of the Indian establishment.

No doubt there would have been a great number present who genuinely wished for an alternate world; and were committed to some social cause or the other. But, the organizers determined the show, fixing the speakers, organizing the subjects for debate, and making sure that the very structure itself did not go beyond the limits it set. That is why, even though this event was held in Andhra Pradesh, whose Chief Minister is one of the most notorious in the world for his extra-judicial killings of, not only Naxalites, but even lawyers, doctors and journalists and other intellectuals, by both his police and fascist gangs, yet not a word was mentioned against this. Besides, this same Naidu government is one of the most slavish tools of imperialist globalisation in the country, faithfully (and aggressively) implementing all the dictates of the IMF/WB/WTO combine and cringing before the imperialists. Five days of discussion on ‘justice’ and anti-globalisation all over the world, and not a mention against the policies of globalisationand state-terror, existing under their very nose!!

Does not silence mean consent? Chandrababu Naidu’s rule matches that of any of the worst despots throughout the world. His implementation of imperialist-dictated policies through his numerous ‘Vision’ statements, is common knowledge. Did those present, not know these facts; or was it more convenient to look the other way? His fascistic repression is nothing but part of his fanatical pro-globalisation policies, to make AP safe for big capital. Though the ASF specifically targeted globalisation, was not one of the 14,000 present able to draw this link between Naidu’s pro-globalisation policies and his fascist terror. One then begins to wonder why Hyderabad was chosen for this event, from the hundreds of cities that exist in Asia. Was it geared to impact on the strong revolutionary movement in the state, and draw the intelligentsia away from it? One cannot say, but certainly their silence on the Naidu government, raises a number of doubts, particularly as the event was held in his much flaunted info-tech headquarters.

But then to understand the real role of the ASF and its mother body, the WSF, one has to go much deeper to look into its ideological basis, its funding, and the process of its formation.

On the first day of the event, Jan.2, 03, ‘Prajashakti Special Issue’ (a daily tabloid brought out by the CPM during those 5 days) outlined the WSF’s Charter of Principles. This was drawn up in June 2001, five months after the founding meeting in January at Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Point 4 of the Charter says: "The alternative proposed at the WSF stand in opposition to a process of globalisation…….". But, it presents the vague alternative (which is none really) that "globalisation in solidarity, will prevail as a new stage in world history". In point 10, it defacto states that it is opposed to socialism and communism, when it states, "The WSF is opposed to all totalitarian and reductionist views of economy, development and history and to the use of violence as means of social control by the State". It promotes the fake democracy that exists, only with a hu-man face, when it adds, "It upholds...the practices of real democracy, participatory democracy, peaceful relations…".

While strictly closing its doors to communists and those fighting armed struggles, it allows the backdoor entry of reactionary leaders of existing governments and parties. To do so Clause 9 says: "Neither party representations nor military organizations shall participate in the Forum. Government leaders and members of legislators who accept the commitments of this Charter may be invited to participate in a personal capacity". So, a whole lot of big-wigs of the CPM are invited in their personal capacity to the Hyderbad meet.

It clearly states that the WSF is a mere forum for debate (clause 11 of the Charter), and to make absolutely sure that it has no direction for struggle, Clause 6 states: "The participants in the Forum shall not be called on to take decisions as a body, whether by vote or by acclamation, on declarations or proposals for action that would commit all, or the majority, of them and that propose to be taken as establishing positions of the Forum as a body". The Forum further defines itself as a "an open meeting place for reflective thinking, democratic debate of ideas, formulation of proposals, free exchange of experiences and interlinking for effective action, by groups and movements of civil society…….. building a world order centred on the human person". So, it is only for debate, and then to go home to blissful peace! Besides it specifically debars "organizations that seek to take people’s lives as a method of political action". What about the millions of lives taken each day by hunger, starvation and state violence; and why does it not define exactly what this building a world order centred on the human person, exactly is? Or is it nothing but utopian trash to dupe the gullible, yet sincere crowd attending the event!!

Lula Cringes before IMF

The much promoted pioneer of the social-democratic alternative of the World Social Forum, has, as expected, begun to toe the IMF line — that too barely a month after coming to power. For all the pro-poor rhetoric Lula da Silva, now President of Brazil, has launched vicious attacks on social spending for the poor. The announcements came barely a fortnight after the third international jamboree of the Word Social Forum, inaugurated by him, with much fanfare, at Porto Alegere.

As reported in The Economist (Feb.15, 2003), the Finance Minister of the Workers’ Party (PT) announced the plans of the new government, on how they plan to contain the fiscal deficit as per the instructions of the IMF. This plan was presented on the eve of the IMF-review of the $30 billion IMF loan to Brazil. {Brazil has a bankrupt economy, with the public debt amounting to $250 billion (60% of GDP) and a foreign debt of $165 billion. As part of the bail out package, the US passed a $30 billion IMF loan to Brazil in Aug.2002 — on the eve of the elections that brought the PT to power — which was over and above the previous $15 billion loan already given}

The Plan: a massive hike in the prices of petrol and diesel to raise revenues; a cut in the increase in the wages of government employees, resulting in an actual fall in their real wages; a massive cut in social welfare spending by as much as $3.9 billion over the budgeted figure; the ministry of cities to lose 85% of its budget; and, worst of all, a drop in expenditure by as much as 90% on drought relief. Even measured against the previous years spending by the earlier right-wing government, this so-called left-wing President, has actually cut real spending on social sectors like health and education — overall social spending is to fall from 2.4% of GDP in 2002 to 2.2% in the current year.

On the eve of May Day, Lula came out with another major ‘gift’: he proposed a drastic cut in pensions of retired employees of the public sector. The proposals are now before the parliament.

So, Lula has, now achieved what the earlier right-wing government was unable to push through. Under a barrage of hypocritical rhetoric, and ‘left’ posturing, he is pushing in some of the most rabidly anti-people measures that could make him a favourite of the IMF. The capitulation is so complete that has been a result in his own party, with thousands coming out on the streets in protest.

Those of the World Social Forum and their offshoots like the Asia Social Forum, Please Note!!!

In other words, its very own Charter has turned the WSF into a useless, sterile body for endless debates. Now, if we look at the origins of this body, we find that the idea was conceived after the historic struggle at the WTO Seattle meet, when the anti-globalisation movement began to grow from strength to strength virtually laying siege to all meetings of the G-8, European Council, IMF and World Bank. The gigantic rallies, which grew in size with each successive event, had reached such a stage that the imperialist gangsters were beginning to find it impossible to even hold a meeting; with each meeting being turned into a defacto war camp. Though these rallies too were dominated by NGOs, anarchists, etc., with no real alternative (and so with serious limitations), they, at least, were involved in militant struggles and clashes with the police. The WSF conveniently now seeks to remove these rallies from places of confrontation, into innocuous gatherings, and also re-place struggles at the front, with puerile debates away from the struggle areas.

As the anti-globalisation movement was growing in momentum, the idea of the WSF was born in meetings taking place in Europe in 2000. Some Brazilian and French organizations and NGOs launched the idea of a parallel Forum, to the World Economic Forum that takes place every year in Davos, Switzerland. The first WSF was founded at a meeting in Porto Alegre, Brazil at the initiative of the French organization ATTAC (Action for Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens) and its Brazilian counterpart organizations, the COB (Organising Brazilian Committee). The latter acts as the International Secretariat of the WSF, and comprises a number of organizations linked to Lula’s Workers Party (PT). Porto Alegre was chosen as the venue, as the Rio Grande do Sul State (of which Porto Alegre is the capital) was then governed by a social -democratic coalition, led by the PT. Now, of course the PT is in power in Brazil and the country’s president, Lula, immediately after attending the third WSF meeting this January, flew direct to Davos as a chief invitee to the imperialist gathering.

The International Council is comprised of some 80 organisations, including ATTAC, Latin American Council of Social Sciences, Samir Amin’s World Forum of Alternatives, Social Forum of Genoa, important organizations linked to the Catholic Church, the French/Brazil part of the Trotskyite Fourth International (Revolutionary Communist League) and the Communist Refoundation from Italy. The PT’s social-democratic trend, linked to their European counterparts, is the predominant force in the International Secretariat of the WSF. Thousands of NGOs make up the bulk of the masses.

So the WSF is a fusion of social-democracy and NGO social-activism which seeks to diffuse the struggle against imperialist globalisation, vehemently opposes any form of violent opposition, negates the socialist alternative and promotes some utopian concepts of removing the evils within this imperialist system. Not surprisingly at the second WSF in Jan. 2002 at Porto Alegre, those invited included politicians, mayors and legislators, mainly from Europe, known to support the neo-liberal and imperialist policies of their governments. Ministers from France, Belgium and Portugal attended. During this meeting the Brazilian Trade Union Federation (CUT - one of the leading factors in the WSF), linked to PT, and the ATTAC sought, even by threatening to withdraw, to push a resolution equating US type terrorism with those fighting for national liberation. Its focus is against the US, while it is silent on the role of European imperialism. No wonder the WSF has vast sources of funds, allegedly infused by bodies like the Ford Foundation, UN outfits, and NGOs linked to the governments and imperialist institutions.

India is an important region on the NGO agenda, and so this mother of all NGOs has big plans for India. So much so that, in the coming year, it plans for the first time, to shift its annual meet out of Porto Alegre to India (probably Kerala).

Besides, after the Hyderabad meet, a hierarchical well planned non-party organizational structure is being built up, at the state level and down to the district, block, taluka and local level. The aims for "1,000 local committees, with a target of one lakh discussion groups across the country". It proceeds further to say that these discussion groups are not intended to stop at discussions. But it is not struggles that they will draw the masses into. They say, " the activists of the WSF India process will present their views and perceptions on the current economic and political process in the country that impinge on WSF themes and simultaneously engage in discussions with government functionaries from appropriate departments". In other words, they plan to build vast organizational networks in the country with the specific purpose of diffusing people’s struggles, and instead, to draw people into lobbying with the government for their demands. Have government functionaries and departments in India ever bothered about the people’s problems? Besides filling their own pockets by serving the powerful moneybags, and looting relief and social welfare funds, they are least concerned about the people. So, with this declared policy, the ASF will end up liaisoning with the local government officials, instead of fighting them. In essence, the ASF will end up as an adjunct of the state apparatus, to pacify the growing discontent of the masses and divert them into futile debates and discussions.

Each foreign/govt/big business-funded NGO involve a handful of people in some developmental work; lakhs of such organizations in the country seek to divert the masses from struggle, engaging them in some reform activity. While globalisation has reduced millions to poverty, and increased the gap between the rich and the poor to levels unheard of in the history of capitalism, these bodies act merely to dissipate the rising discontent of the masses and diffuse their anger at the moneybags. Even their ‘reforms’ barely give temporary relief to an insignificant fraction of the poverty stricken. Today nearly 3 billion people live on less than $2 per day. The richest 1% of the world’s population enjoy as much income as the poorest 57%. A mere 13,000 of the richest families in the US have as much income as 20 million households (i.e. over 10% of India’s population). And with the deepening recession all over the world such conditions are bound to deteriorate even further, when the capitalists/imperialists will seek to push the burden of their crisis on to the backs of the oppressed masses, particularly those of the backward countries. In future, mere survival will call for intense battles against the powers that be. And in these impending class wars the WSF-type outfits and the bulk of the NGOs will act as shields of the moneybags to ward off people’s wrath.

The March 5 to 7th 2003 meeting in Delhi is an indication of the type of conspiracy at play. An NGO (AIWEFA -All-India Women’s Education Fund Association) organized the three-day seminar to "foster links between the Government, NGOs and Corporates" under the auspices of the United Nations. The seminar entitled "Building Partnership Towards Achieving Development Goals in India" was attended by a three-member delegation of the UN, led by the Chief of the NGO Section (ECOSOC - department of Economic and Social Affairs) at the UN. 40 NGOs attended the seminar, the openly stated purpose being to draw a larger number of NGOs into the clutches of the UN to implement their development goals in the country.

It is an excellent set-up - one set of multilateral institutions of the imperialists hand-twist the backward countries to implement the policies of globalisation, leading to acute impoverisation of the masses and an end of all welfare measures; another set of multilateral institution of the imperialists promotes even the privatization of welfare through the NGOs, ploughing into them a small fraction of what the governments earlier spent on welfare. Here too, a large proportion of the funds go, not to the people, but to the high-flying life-styles of the NGO bosses.

Together with the NGOs, a leading factor (in fact the initiating factor) of the WSF has been the social-democratic parties of Europe and South America. So, we find the CPM playing a leading role at the ASF in Hyderabad. Many of its top intellectuals were conspicuous on many of its platforms. But, the CPM leader Brinda Kharat openly stated that they are not against Globalisation as such, but only seek to remove its negative aspects. The CPM parliamentarian, Somnath Chaterjee,is to be seen as a prominent member on many a delegation to imperialist forums. And, most important, the CPM government in West Bengal, faithfully implements World Bank/IMF/WTO instructions in the State they run.

What these NGOs and WSF-type bodies are seeking is the institutionalization of dissent. They thereby protect the system by turning it into a harmless impotent force. How is this achieved?

First it is ideological. They push a non-class approach and thereby cover up the reality of class contradictions in society. They are vehemently anti-communist, and while criticizing the present system, they have no alternative, except fairy-like utopias. They are fanatically against violence and ask the people to face the monsters that run this system through explanations, expecting a change of heart. They are isolationists, with each group only interested in the impact of globalisation on their particular field - be it women, dalits, tribals, the environment, etc. The ‘debate’ that takes place at such forums is rarely ideological - mostly confined to puerile repetitions of post-modernist formulations in the abstract. They refuse even to confront Marxist arguments and prefer to pretend that such things do not exist. At best they resort to their standard diatribes against all violence, ‘statism’, party hierarchy, etc. They tend to be highly empiricist, glorifying their so-called grass-rootism and micro experiences, and building theories around their limited worlds. It is like building castles in the air. In this schema there cannot be any fruitful ideological ‘debate’, but the mere pitting of one experience against another. This negation of ideology, and particularly Marxist ideology, is the most effective tool of these NGOs to prevent their ranks from going into the problems of society in depth and drawing conclusions from such analysis. So they have only a superficial view of imperialism, noticing some of its ill effects, which they feel can be reformed. They seek therefore to remove the symptom, rather than cure the disease.

The second role such bodies play, is the diversion of people from struggle. With such large movements taking place throughout the developed world, the imperialists are panic stricken. They need to divert it into channels that are harmless. More important, in the backward countries of the world, with globalisation having led to extreme impoverisation, militant and revolutionary struggles against the system are inevitable. So, the focus of such efforts is Latin America & Asia, where powerful armed-struggles are going on against the existing system. The WSF-type bodies utilize their vast resources to divert such struggles, in both the developed and underdeveloped countries, into peaceful channels. Those attending such gatherings like the ASF at Hyderabad get an impression of a major achievement in the fight against globalisation; when much more could have been achieved by, say, targeting multinationals in the country. But no such decision would be taken at such a forum. Nor would any decision be taken on how to combat the disastrous impact of globalisation on agricultural commodity prices in the country, and the resulting destruction of lakhs of farmers. And what about the ruthless destruction of indigenous industry, due to the TNC offensive in the country? Then there is not a word of discussion on the gigantic rise in unemployment and the killing of the aspirations of an entire new generation, due to the policies of globalisation in both the private and the public sectors. No debates on such topics, instead debates on issues like ‘Nation-state, Democracy & Exclusion’, ‘Peace & Security’, ‘Religious & Ethnic Identities: A Challenge to Democracy’ and numerous other unfocussed discussions, which lead nowhere. The atmosphere created at the venue of the ASF, no doubt, gives the participants a sense of achievement, but that is illusory.

Thirdly, such bodies in the backward countries seek to wean away the potential (and existing) progressive & democratic forces in the country, away from the revolutionary process; hindering the development of an effective United Front against the forces of reaction. They seek to isolate the revolutionary forces, and create a wedge between them and the other progressives and democrats. Having once achieved this, they then lead these forces into a blind path of mock opposition and puerile debate. Their vast source of funds also acts as a corrupting factor, giving participants an easy life and thereby blunting their struggling capacity. Once addicted to this life-style, they tend to avoid conflict and risk, and easily take to the path of the institutionalization of dissent. The ideologies of post-modernism, anti-statism, non-violence, etc., ideally act as moral justification for this NGO-style dissent. Once afflicted by this disease they keep at arms length from the revolutionaries. Through this process, a sizable section of the advanced elements of society, which could have joined the revolutionary process (as happened in the 1960s and 70s), either actively or in support, are effectively neutralized, pacified and made irrelevant in the struggle against reaction.

Fourthly, the WSF, with its anti-Americanism, and silence on the other imperialist powers could be used as a tool of the other imperialists, particularly of Europe, which is coming into increasing contention with the US. Thereby the forces involved in the WSF/ASF can unconsciously become a tool of inter-imperialist rivalry, and be manipulated in that direction. It must not be forgotten that in the 1970s and 1980s it was the Soviet imperialist that utilized similar progressive forces (like the national liberation movements of Africa) in its contention with the US imperialists during the peak of superpower rivalry. While there is no doubt that today’s sole superpower, the US imperialists, and it’s war-mongering, needs to be specifically targeted, one should beware falling into the trap of any rival imperialist power.

With such a counter-revolutionary role being played by these forces, it is no wonder that the social-democrats (revisionists) and the NGOs have ganged up in the WSF and the ASF. Such an alliance suits the ruling classes by tying the spontaneous dissent arising in a section of the lower ranks of the NGOs to the establishment ‘communists’, like the CPM, and keeping them away from the revolutionary forces in the country. This is, no doubt, a conscious ploy adopted both in Brazil as also in India. In India, Hyderabad was a suitable venue for this purpose, as the revolutionary Maoists, like the CPI (ML) (PW), have vast sympathy amongst the masses and intellectuals.

Yet, amongst the thousands present at such forums there would be large numbers of sincere people that genuinely desire change, but are getting entrapped in the cobweb spun by the revisionist-NGO combine of the ASF. These, would be the independent intellectuals, lower ranks of the NGOs and many of the non-funded (by government of foreign institutions) social organizations. There is the utmost urgency to expose the imperialist/comprador conspiracy behind such outfits and wean away the genuine elements from them. While not extending such bodies any form of legitimacy by participating in them, there is need to intervene and actively reach out to the sincere elements there and win them over to the politics of revolutionary change. Rather than debates, the revolutionary forces must jointly participate with these organisations in actual struggles, and in the process wean away the genuine elements from their corrupt leadership.

This can only be achieved by creatively exposing the politics of the ASF/WSF, their ground-level role, and presenting the revolutionary alternative in a manner that is not stereotype or dogmatic. Till now human thought has not conceived of a system other than socialism and communism that can replace the capitalist one. And here the WSF blurs the answer. The fundamental question of a practical alternative has to be grappled with. The line of demarcation between the two systems, capitalism and socialism, has to be clearly established, to cross the hurdle in thought as well as in activity. The question must be put forward in the clearest of terms without any mist or mysticism surrounding it. The great enthusiasm seen at the conclave has to find the real answers to sustain it. Those who knowingly try not to cross over the hurdle can remain where they are, but intellectual genuineness demands that the line must not be left undemarcated.

While explaining the alternative, cognizance must be taken of the setback in the Soviet Union and China, which is an important factor for these forces to distance themselves from socialism and communism. Falling prey to imperialist/NGO propaganda, the impression exists that as socialism is no longer a viable alternative, they seek something new through all their post-modernist theories. Besides showing that it is socialism that can be the only possible alternative to this rotten system, the flaws in the earlier experiments need to be touched on, so that people understand that the communist process is not a static alternative, but being continuously enriched with the new experiences.

It is only then that the revolutionary Maoists can beak the conspiracy of silence amongst this crowd and begin to make dents in the their sterile thinking and actions.

Many sincere and distinguished people attended the Hyderabad gathering and were impressed by the large turn-out against globalisation. They must realize that (and past history has shown) that the imperialists can never change their character through peaceful appeals. This is once again proved when we see the US proceeding with its war against Iraq, unconcerned about the giant anti-war rallies taking place throughout the world. War, ruthless exploitation, particularly of the backward countries of the world, etc. are not determined by a Bush or Blair alone, but by the internal dynamics and needs of the imperialist economies. And in periods of crisis, as exists today, they become all the more ferocious. It is these objective conditions that throw up the Bushes, Blairs and other conservatives and fascists. These demons are armed to the teeth and understand only the language of force. It is only a mass uprising of militant people’s forces throughout the world that can hold back the hands of these war-mongers and fascists. Pacifists may help create a congenial atmosphere, but they will not be able to effect the course of the future. It is important that those genuine people present at Hyderabad join together with the revolutionary forces to fight not only the war-mongers abroad, but also the reactionaries at home.