BOOK REVIEW 77 cannot be substituted one for the other as they stand on a different footing. A clear and careful study would reveal that most of the demands raised and voiced by several bourgeois and petty-bourgeois parties, though they assume national trappings, are really class demands born out of the class rule and exploitation of the bourgeois-landlord regime and its bankrupt path of capitalist development. (Note-Paras 7&8) In the case of our present-day Indian Union this slogan (right of self-determination) is neither directed against imperialism as was the case before political independence nor against any particular oppressor nation since such a nation is absent in that form. In the sphere of state structure the Communist Party of India (Marxist) stands for a People's Democratic India which will be a voluntary union of the peoples of various nationalities of India. Equally is the Soviet experience from implementing the Marxist policy towards education and language in a multi-national state. Lenin wanted the free mixing of the children of nationalities in uniform schools in each locality. He was opposed to seggregation of schools according to nationality as it would worsen the conditions of backward nationalities. Marxists must strive "to create the fundamental democratic conditions for the peaceful coexistence of the nations on the basis of equal rights .... under real democracy it is quite possible to ensure instruction in the native language in native history and so forth without splitting of Schools according to nationality." No doubt Lenin's teachings on the subject is guided by the same basic principle of unconditional equality for all nationalities and struggle against absolutism on privileges for one or several nationalities. In India, too, the bourgeois-landlord way of imposing a particular language on Indian people has met with stiff resistance and has only divided the Hindi speaking and non-Hindi speaking nationalities. Hence recognition of equality of national languages is the way to reduce national tensions. Mazumdar has faithfully reproduced Lenin's teaching on the National Question and its application in Soviet Russia. He is reticent however on the question of the Sino-Russian border dispute and on the initial hesitation of the Soviet leadership to render unqualified support to the Bangladesh Liberation movement. K R S NAIR