Politics always has a measure of social reformation which can gradually turn into a huge initiative. Now the fact is bringing the question of justifiability in social reformation.
In conventional politics, reformation for society does not even exist in downtrodden regions. Society always shares disparity among people. The disparity could be measured in people’s status or people’s notions. The variability of people’s position has not been discovered yet but it has been
profoundly featured in the structure of social status. In spite of solving the disputes between people, contradiction takes the centre of attraction where people are thinking that they are different from each other. Collective thoughts start to claim segregation among each other. People start to form respective groups which are convenient for each person’s requirement respectively.
Now, bringing reformation to society has been subjectively nominated to people’s livelihood. Through this way ideologies gain their significance. Ideologies have created a centre of attraction towards its selective people’s interest. In the exact way, Maoism creates its huge and dynamic propaganda towards the socio-capitalistic implementation. At the recent political study, many people claim that exploitation is the sole reason for creating this rigid ideology. Mao Zedong had been manipulated by social disturbances which were carried out by the capitalistic government.
Let’s move on to the simulative Naxalite society with the influence of Maoism.
Naxal, Naxalite and Naksalvadi are distinctive terms used to refer to different Communist guerrilla communities in India, mainly associated with Communist Party of India. To be perfectly honest, Maoism is not similar to Marxism. As per Karl Marx’s statement, Marxism is not a constant theory, it relies upon the level of thinking in each year, each decade in social circumstances. Vladimir Lenin created its own form of Marxism which is completely known as Marxism-Leninism which varies from status of contemporary social structures.
Social structure is clearly based on the equation of base ( Commonalities ) with superstructure ( State ). If there is an unbalanced equation of these two factors then mode of production is not sustainably handled by the state. The common answer will have the negative form. Utilitarian polity is the most desirable and sustainable policy as it directly connects human psychology with the distribution of equal production. Marxism in its advanced level announced to have reformation, as it certainly revolves around human transition.
Whereas Naxalism is a way or the platform for thinkers carrying out hardcore procedure, Naxalism is propagated by Neo-Marxism in order to protect modernity. Marxism clearly denounces the process of neo-capitalism with equal process of encouraging socio-capitalism.
Mrinal Sen’s Kolkata in 1971 clearly manifests Naxalism to produce its oppressive attitude towards government. The simulative case is the relationship with man and animal in a forest. Naxalism always wants to be in the limelight and thinking for collective benefits. Now those benefits are for their own path which can be clearly distinguished from normal people’s benefit.
As the village associations show their place in the Naxalite movement, agrarian rights are not depicted as simple and accessible for the residents of villages. Villages are taking the prime places for urging reformation for collective rights.
Many Marxist analysis claimed that Naxalism is coming from injustice in the production of primary goods. However, Marxism is derived from exploitation of farmers by feudal lords. Marxism clearly shows the ancient form of reformation where commonalities are demanding rights from those bodies which are not in control of government bodies.
The difference between Naxalism and Marxism is clear in the case of current circumstances which shows the primary origin of statuses, which show the root of causes. These two origins show contrast between Marxism and Naxalism, in order to provide equilibrium of Marxism with Naxalism, social reformation by base and superstructure is not only taken into the consideration of proper and justifiable production but also taking the marginalised and trivialised people into the limelight to mitigate their problems with proper justifiable measures.
