Freedom First

Summary

Freedom First No. 82 (March 1959), the monthly journal of the Democratic Research Service edited by V. B. Karnik, is a Cold War-inflected liberal miscellany combining domestic agrarian polemics with international commentary on communism. The centrepiece is M. R. Masani’s “The Wrong Road,” a sustained attack on the Congress government’s Nagpur resolution on joint cooperative farming, which he argues is collective farming in disguise and a step toward Soviet-Chinese-style regimentation of the peasantry. The issue’s unsigned Notes section surveys communist manoeuvring in the Arab world, the political crisis in Burma, India’s population problem, and a Congress rift in Andhra Pradesh. International contributions include Ignazio Silone on the Pasternak/Doctor Zhivago affair, an anonymous report on newly approved Soviet criminal-law statutes, Harry Goldberg (condensed from American Federationist) on the communization of China’s peasantry into people’s communes, and an unsigned analysis of shifting communist strategy toward Nasser and Arab nationalism. The issue closes with two book reviews (of Maulana Azad’s India Wins Freedom and A. D. Gorwala’s Not in Our Stars) and a quotations column, “With Many Voices,” plus the statutory ownership statement naming V. B. Karnik as printer, publisher, and editor.

Essays

The Wrong Road

By M. R. Masani

M. R. Masani’s “The Wrong Road” opens the issue with a polemic against the Nagpur Congress resolution’s plan for joint cooperative farming. Masani distinguishes genuine cooperation (credit, marketing, or input-sharing cooperatives that leave the peasant owning and cultivating his own land) from what he calls disguised collective farming of the Soviet-Chinese type, in which pooling land into a big farm eliminates real property rights regardless of the label attached. He argues the proposed “share in proportion to land contributed” is a fiction that will collapse into a claim that landowners are unearned “functionless owners,” leaving them with nothing but a worthless paper title. He marshals comparative wheat and rice yield statistics (USA, USSR, UK, Denmark, Japan) to rebut the claim that bigger farms raise production, cites the reversal of collective farming in Yugoslavia and Poland, quotes Aneurin Bevan’s warning to India against the Chinese path, quotes Charan Singh on the psychological limits of voluntary joint farming, and cites Jayaprakash Narayan’s own admission that the Koraput gramdan experiment failed because peasants want to farm their own land. Masani concludes that forced joint farming would require coercion and violence, would increase rural unemployment, and would divert the country from constructive tasks like irrigation and better seed; the article is continued and concluded on page 11, where Masani rebuts the Prime Minister’s charge that critics of cooperative farming are misleading the peasantry, invokes the National Sample Survey’s 1954-55 landholding statistics, and closes by naming Rajagopalachari, Jayaprakash Narayan and K. M. Munshi as among the patriotic critics of the scheme.

• Distinguishes genuine cooperation (credit, inputs, marketing) from Soviet-Chinese-style collective farming disguised as ‘joint cooperative farming’
• Argues the Nagpur resolution’s promised property rights for pooled land are illusory (‘a scrap of paper’)
• Uses comparative wheat/rice yield statistics across USA, USSR, UK, Denmark, Japan to argue small farms already out-produce large ones
• Cites Yugoslavia’s 1957 abandonment of collective farming and Poland’s liquidation of 80% of its collective farms as evidence of failure
• Quotes Aneurin Bevan warning India against following the Chinese cooperative path, and Charan Singh on the limits of voluntary joint farming given human nature
• Cites Jayaprakash Narayan’s admission that the Koraput gramdan experiment failed because peasants wanted their own land
• Warns that enforced joint farming would require coercion and violence and would increase rural unemployment rather than reduce it
• Concludes (in the page-11 continuation) with 1954-55 National Sample Survey landholding data and defends Rajagopalachari, Jayaprakash Narayan, and K. M. Munshi as legitimate critics, not deceivers of the peasantry

The Lesson Of Pasternak

By Ignazio Silone

The unsigned “Notes” section covers four short topics. “Communist Machinations” describes the deteriorating relationship between Moscow and Cairo, noting Khrushchev’s attack on Nasser for arresting Iraqi and other Arab communists, and interprets Soviet rhetoric about pan-Arab unity as a divisive tactic aimed at exploiting the split between Baghdad and Cairo. “Situation in Burma” analyses General Ne Win’s resignation as Prime Minister over his inability to hold elections by the promised deadline, assessing the balance of power between the ‘Stable’ and ‘Clean’ factions of the AFPFL and arguing Ne Win should remain in office to preserve stability until free elections can be held. “Population Problem” reports on the sixth International Conference on Planned Parenthood held in New Delhi, quoting Sir Julian Huxley’s warning that India’s population growth is ‘explosive’ and could mean ‘political and social disaster,’ and calls for government investment in cheap contraceptives and a public propaganda campaign. “Rift in Andhra” discusses defections from the Congress Legislative Party in Andhra Pradesh, warning that the resulting instability could be exploited by the Communist Party of India to make Andhra ‘fall a victim to communist subversion’ after Kerala.

• Communist Machinations: traces the cooling of Moscow-Cairo relations after Khrushchev’s Congress speech accused Nasser of being ‘reactionary’ for arresting Arab communists
• Frames Soviet rhetoric about pan-Arab unity as a deliberate strategy to divide the Arab world and prevent unified resistance to communist penetration
• Situation in Burma: analyses Ne Win’s resignation over his failure to secure free elections by the promised date, and the AFPFL’s ‘Stable’ and ‘Clean’ faction alignment
• Argues Ne Win should stay in power roughly six months to a year to preserve stability pending elections, despite his government not being fully democratic
• Population Problem: reports Julian Huxley’s warning at the New Delhi Planned Parenthood conference that India’s population growth rate is ‘explosive’
• Calls on government to fund research into cheap, safe contraceptives and mount a public propaganda campaign for birth control
• Rift in Andhra: reports Congress defections in Andhra Pradesh being welcomed by CPI leader Basava Punniah as strengthening ‘democratic forces’
• Warns that the Andhra Congress rift could let communists consolidate power there in the way they did in Kerala

What’s Happening In China?

By Harry Goldberg

Ignazio Silone’s “The Lesson of Pasternak” reflects on the international storm over Boris Pasternak’s persecution in the USSR and his forced rejection of the Nobel Prize for Doctor Zhivago. Silone argues that the global outcry demonstrated the existence of a transnational community of writers and artists (‘Weltliteratur’ in Goethe’s phrase) whose solidarity transcends national boundaries, and defends Western intellectuals’ right to intervene in what might appear to be another country’s internal affairs when the freedom of art itself is at stake. He excoriates the Moscow Writers’ Union’s campaign against Pasternak as more shameful than the Spanish Inquisition (‘an assembly of 800 writers condemning a novel without having read it’), speculates that Khrushchev, alarmed by international reaction, quietly restrained the harsher Zhdanovist elements, and closes by reading Pasternak’s own conciliatory letter to Khrushchev with sympathetic skepticism, noting its emphasis on native soil (recalling the Blut und Boden trope) sits oddly against the internationalism of Russian Communism’s own founders. Silone concludes that Doctor Zhivago will survive all polemics as literature’s revenge against dictatorship.

• Frames the global outcry over Pasternak’s persecution as evidence of a transnational community of writers (‘Weltliteratur’) larger than any single nation
• Defends Western intellectuals’ right and duty to intervene when the freedom of art and the dignity of writers as a class are at stake
• Condemns the Moscow Writers’ Union’s 800-strong condemnation of a novel none of them had read as more shameful than the Spanish Inquisition
• Speculates that Khrushchev, alerted to the scandal’s international repercussions, quietly moderated the campaign against Pasternak
• Reads Pasternak’s letter to Khrushchev with sympathy but skepticism, noting the coerced-sounding repetition of ‘freely, without violence’ disclaimers
• Notes the irony of Pasternak’s native-soil rhetoric given the internationalist tradition of Russian Communism’s own founders
• Predicts Doctor Zhivago will outlast the political attacks made against it and its author

Communists And The Arab World

An unsigned report, “Soviet Criminal Law,” summarises new statutes approved by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR reforming the framework of Soviet penal law, published in Pravda on December 26 after having circulated in draft form since the previous June. The piece describes reforms since 1953 (sentencing only by regular courts, shifting the burden of proof toward the prosecution, facilitated appeals) alongside continuities (the death penalty retained for treason, espionage, sabotage, terrorism, and banditry; maximum imprisonment reduced from 25 to 15 years but remission rules tightened; age of criminal responsibility raised from 12 to 16 except for serious crimes). It notes political offences remain harshly treated: a new law on state crimes retains the death penalty for treason including simply fleeing the USSR or refusing to return from abroad, and criminalises ‘anti-Soviet propaganda’ including dissemination of ‘slanderous rumours’ and banned literature.

• New Soviet penal statutes (Principles of Criminal Legislation and Principles of Criminal Procedure) approved by the Supreme Soviet, published in Pravda on December 26
• Reforms since 1953 include sentencing only by regular courts, burden of proof shifting toward the prosecution, and facilitated appeals
• Death penalty retained for treason, espionage, sabotage, terrorism and banditry; maximum imprisonment cut from 25 to 15 years but remission eligibility tightened
• Age of criminal responsibility raised from 12 to 16 except for the most serious crimes; under-18s and pregnant women exempted from death penalty or deportation
• Political offences remain harshly treated: fleeing the USSR or refusing to return from abroad now itself constitutes treason
• ‘Anti-Soviet propaganda,’ including spreading ‘slanderous rumours’ and banned literature, remains a serious crime alongside ‘mass disorders’

Review: India Wins Freedom (by Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad)

By V. B. K.

Harry Goldberg’s “What’s Happening in China?”, condensed from American Federationist, describes the 1958 ‘communization’ of China’s roughly half-billion peasants into fully collectivized people’s communes, which by the time of writing had absorbed nearly all peasants outside the previous, less total, farm-collective system. Drawing on Tillman Durdin’s New York Times reporting, Goldberg details the communes’ abolition of individual and family property, wage-based (rather than share-based) remuneration used as a tool of political control, the replacement of family life with communal mess halls, housing and nurseries, and the communes’ militarized, all-encompassing management of agriculture, industry, trade, banking, schools, hospitals and the militia. He argues China’s regimentation exceeds anything even the Kremlin attempted, driven by the leadership’s obsession with rapid industrialization (e.g., a claimed doubling of steel output), and warns that this total mobilization is oriented toward external expansion, not merely internal control, citing Mao Tse-tung’s 1940 remark that ‘neutrality is only a term for deceiving people’ and a 1957 Chinese Youth Journal article rejecting peaceful coexistence as impossible.

• Describes the 1958 communization of China’s peasantry into people’s communes, launched in April and claimed 90% complete by year’s end
• Draws on Tillman Durdin’s New York Times reporting to detail communes’ abolition of private plots, tools, and livestock in favour of collective ownership and fixed wages
• Documents the dismantling of family life: communal mess halls, communal housing, nurseries for children, and old-age homes for the elderly
• Notes communes are organized ‘along military lines’ and integrate agriculture, industry, trade, banking, education, health and the militia under unified Party control
• Frames the wage system as a tool of political pressure, allocated ‘according to labour and political attitude’
• Argues the drive is fueled by an obsession with rapid industrialization, citing an announced doubling of steel production in one year
• Warns the totally regimented society is oriented toward external expansion, quoting Mao Tse-tung’s 1940 remark that neutrality is ‘only a term for deceiving people’ and a 1957 Chinese Youth Journal rejection of peaceful coexistence

Review: Not In Our Stars (by A. D. Gorwala)

By N. M. K.

The unsigned article “Communists and the Arab World” examines whether the communist line in the Arab world is shifting from alliance with nationalist leaders like Nasser toward more direct reliance on Communist Parties. It reviews attacks on Nasser in Unita and l’Humanite following his crackdown on communists in the UAR, situates this within a broader Soviet reassessment (since a September 1953 policy of courting ‘national bourgeois’ leaders) of whether nationalist bourgeois leadership can be trusted to lead anti-imperialist struggles, and concludes that Soviet directives are now warning that a nationalist movement’s bourgeois leadership risks compromising with imperialists. The piece argues that, in the long term, Soviet interests are better served by a weak and divided Arab world than a strong unified Arab state, and suggests the USSR may be covertly encouraging factions in Iraq and Syria that oppose a Nasser-led merger, indicating a possible shift toward more active support for Arab Communist Parties even while maintaining cordial state-to-state relations with Nasser.

• Traces increasingly open attacks on Nasser in Italian (Unita) and French (l’Humanite) Communist Party organs following his arrest of Iraqi and Egyptian communists
• Situates this within a Soviet policy dating to September 1953 of courting ‘national bourgeois’ neutralist leaders in Asia and the Middle East with aid, regardless of their anti-communism
• Notes Soviet ideologists are now being told the national bourgeoisie is ‘unfit to lead the national liberation struggle’ because it may compromise with imperialists or turn anti-communist
• Argues Soviet long-term interests favour a weak, divided Arab world open to communist penetration over a strong unified Arab state under Nasser
• Suggests the USSR may be covertly encouraging Iraqi factions opposed to merger with Egypt and Syrian factions favouring closer ties with Iraq
• Notes continuing surface cordiality (Khrushchev’s New Year greetings to Nasser, Qasim and Nehru) even as the underlying strategic calculus shifts

With Many Voices

Under the standing “Review” heading, a reviewer signed V. B. K. assesses Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad’s posthumously published India Wins Freedom, calling it a disappointing autobiography that is essentially a bald record of Azad’s public activities without insight into the social forces shaping the era or Azad’s own personality. The review criticizes Azad for having remained Congress president and a Working Committee member for years despite disagreeing with the organisation’s positions on the war effort, the Quit India movement, and the Cabinet Mission Plan, contrasting his conduct unfavourably with M. N. Roy and Rajagopalachari who resigned rather than stay in positions they could not agree with. It faults Azad’s harsh, uncorroborated accusations against Sardar Patel (including partial blame for Gandhi’s assassination) and Azad’s claim that Patel and Rajendra Prasad were ‘entirely the creation of Gandhiji,’ arguing the description better fits Azad himself. A second, shorter review signed N. M. K. covers A. D. Gorwala’s Not in Our Stars (Jaico Publishing House), a collection of Gorwala’s newspaper columns on population control, foreign policy, and communist infiltration, praising Gorwala as a fearless, cogent critic of the government’s ostensibly non-aligned but Soviet/China-leaning foreign policy, and noting that a regular column of his was once suddenly discontinued under pressure from persons in authority.

• Reviews Maulana Azad’s India Wins Freedom as a disappointing, superficial autobiography lacking insight into personality or the social forces of the era
• Criticizes Azad for staying in the Congress presidency and Working Committee for years while disagreeing with the organisation on the war, Quit India, and the Cabinet Mission Plan
• Contrasts Azad unfavourably with M. N. Roy and Rajagopalachari, who resigned their positions rather than remain while disagreeing
• Faults Azad’s unfair, unrebuttable accusations against the late Sardar Patel, including partial blame for Gandhi’s assassination
• Argues Azad’s own eminence, like Patel’s and Rajendra Prasad’s, derived entirely from Gandhiji’s backing
• Separately reviews A. D. Gorwala’s Not in Our Stars as a cogent, bold collection of columns on population control, foreign policy and communist infiltration
• Praises Gorwala as a courageous, disinterested critic whose column was once suppressed under pressure from persons in authority

Essay 8

“With Many Voices,” the closing quotations column (epigraph from Tennyson), assembles brief press quotations from public figures on current affairs, including Justice Sinha on the danger of citizens breaking unjust laws, Home Minister G. B. Pant on India’s non-aligned aid policy, Khrushchev on uncommitted countries, Jayaprakash Narayan on the necessity of dictatorship for revolutionary change through state power, K. K. Shah crediting V. K. Krishna Menon with shaping the Avadi socialism resolution, Maulana Azad (from India Wins Freedom) on Krishna Menon’s bad advice to Nehru, General Ne Win on the corrupting effect of prolonged power, Pakistan’s ambassador Mohammed Ali, and A. D. Gorwala on the propitious conditions for communists with Krishna Menon at Defence and Indira Gandhi heading the Congress machine. The page also carries the statutory “Statement About Ownership and Other Particulars of Freedom First,” naming V. B. Karnik as printer, publisher and editor and the Democratic Research Service as owner, dated 1 March 1959.

• Compiles press quotations on Indian and world politics from figures including Justice Sinha, G. B. Pant, Khrushchev, Jayaprakash Narayan, and K. K. Shah
• Quotes Maulana Azad’s India Wins Freedom on Krishna Menon’s frequently poor advice to Nehru
• Quotes General Ne Win on the corrupting danger of prolonged power
• Quotes A. D. Gorwala warning that Krishna Menon at Defence and Indira Gandhi heading the Congress machine make conditions unusually favourable for communists
• Includes the statutory ownership statement identifying V. B. Karnik as printer, publisher and editor, and the Democratic Research Service as owner, dated 1 March 1959

---

Generated by the v1.5 extraction pipeline. Awaiting editorial review.