94 SOCIAL SCIENTIST
anti-capitalist outlook, and came very near the working class ideology. But unfortunately, he died early. This was really the logical destination of the earlier movement which could have been fulfilled if the working class movement had^been mature enough.
All this was really a process of various sections of Indian society awakening to their immediate surroundings and, gradually, by devious ways, finding their way into the common stream against imperialism, for freedom and democracy. Many were left out but the process was the major development of the entire period. During its course the intelligentsia steeped in bourgeois values, often connected with landed interests also, was rising from various sources, castes and communities and gradually merging together to take a common stand against the masses—on the question of agrarian revolution of abolition of castes and untouchability, on the question of working class and capitalism, of anti-imperialist democratic revolution. That is why we find these mergers allianccs,and so on at the top, with the masses l&ft in lurch. The process of colonial exploitation at the same time was leading to the formation of new classes at the bottom, the working class, the agricultural workers and a pauperised peasantry—-creating a common danger for all vested interests. The non-Brahman movements its growth and fall cannot be understood m isolation fmm this process, and out of the context of the struggle against the bdtetltaf oVStt^ Ther atrtftor* with her many non-class ideas about plural society, elitist conflicts and colonial structure reduces this process to group conflicts, fails to notice the new classes—the industrial bourgeoisie and their spokesmen arising from the struggle—divorces the understanding of the movement froin its connection with basic feudal and semi-feudal agrarian relations, and is unable to explain why the cultural revolution should merge in the Congress. She underestimates the uige of the national patriotic struggle and accepts the reasoning on many occasions of the rion-Brahman leaders who stayed away from the correct path to collaborate with the* British.
Her remarks and estimates on the Communist movement and its failures and successes are mainly based on the opinions of those who always attacked the Communists and also bypasses -fact-s. Its spite of this, the author has made several penetrating dbser^ations on the non-Brahman movement, understood its phases, and drawn correct comparisons between its various leaders. She has, further, given the biogra^-phical sketches of the earlier leaders which show how these tncn coming from the^common stock rose to great heights in unfurling the banner of rebellion against the Brahman dominated society.
B T RANADIVE