No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2014
The complex and frustrating problems which any Indian government must face makes the existence of a strong opposition almost inevitable. The fact that the Congress Party has been able to maintain such a strong position is as much due to the divisions and weakness of the opposition as to its own skill. The success of the Congress has been due in a large degree to its ability to take advantage of the caste and linguistic groups which play a key role in Indian politics.
Similarly, the communists have been effective only when they have recognized these non-ideological factors in the Indian political equation and have used caste or regional loyalties to their advantage. In Kerala, where the communists were able to form a government, the party's strength rests mainly on the support of two influential castes, the Nayars and the Ezhavas. Similarly, communist strength in Andhra is based on the support of the Kamma caste, which is one of the two main political forces in the state. Where the CPI has been unable to gain the support of a major caste or linguistic group, it does not constitute a major political force. In Maharashtra, for example, much of the communist leadership is Brahmin, and since there is a strong anti-Brahmin feeling in the state, CPI strength has been limited.
1 See Harrison, Selig S. India: The Most Dangerous Decades, Princeton, 1960, for a good discussion of caste and politics in Indian communism.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 The best overall treatment of the history and development of Indian communism is Overstreet, Gene D. and Windmiller, Marshall Communism in India, Berkeley, 1960.Google Scholar See also Kautsky, John Moscow and the Communist Party of India, Cambridge, Mass., 1956.Google Scholar
3 Communist Party of India ‘Programme of the Communist Party of India,’New Age, 13 (10 January 1965), p. 10.
4 Quoted in J.M. Kaul, ‘The Split in the CPI,’India Quarterly, 20 (October‐December 1964), p. 385.