KPP, without clear principles, socialist or communist, and with a lead-
ership drawn from the emergent Muslim lower middle class, could easily
develop into a populist Muslim communal party. CSP members predicted
this change correctly, but could do nothing about it; ‘mass contact’ failed
to make major gains in Bengal.
Recent research suggests that the sharp distinctions between class
identities and community identities that political parties on the left tried
to draw were not altogether relevant to the people for whom they were
trying to draw them. In Bengal, there existed Kisan sabhasand krishak
and praja samities, with membership drawn from lower castes and Muslims,
but with leadership drawn from higher strata of society. The Krishak Praja
Party had emerged out of the organisation of the praja samitiesfor political
action. The Bengal Kisan Sabhawas dominated by communists. But
people working within the ‘kisanmovement’, as they often collectively
described it, in the mid-1930s, did not see a major distinction; they were
all working towards the uplift of the peasants. The immediate enemy was
the zamindarisystem as a whole; there was widespread support when the
abolition of the Permanent Settlement was discussed, but this was the
mainstay of the incomes of a number of Calcutta Hindu bhadralokwho
dominated the Bengal Congress. In the United Provinces, things were
different. When the abolition of zamindaricame up for discussion there,
many zamindarswere UP Muslims, the main support base of the Muslim
League; they could depict Congress government-led initiatives towards
land reform as anti-Muslim and therefore ‘communal’.
The Muslim League now charged the Congress with trying to
confuse the Muslim masses, among other things with its ‘mass contact
programme’. Nehru, for the Congress, explained the programme: ‘mass
contact’ was to increase the Congress’s appeal to all sections of society, but
it had been acknowledged by the Congress that it had not done as well
with Muslims as it could have done. This was unproblematic to acknowl-
edge at a time when the League could not possibly make a counter-claim
to represent most Muslims itself. The Muslim League and its ally the KPP
also accused the Congress governments of ‘atrocities’ against Muslims
in the Congress-ruled provinces, providing fuel to a polemical set of
exchanges. Nehru replied by offering to investigate these atrocities jointly
with the accusers, but invited them first to substantiate their claims; his
invitations were refused, with the League and the KPP continuing to
make dark allegations.92 ‘INEFFECTUAL ANGEL’, 1927–39