A 'Desi’ Take: How Lenin Influenced Our Independence Movement

We live in an India where the ethos of nationalism is taught by the Right-wing forces, which had seldom participated in the patriotic independence movement. Today, the ideological heirs of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the ones who stood aloof during the anti-colonial movement, claim to define patriotism—and in doing so, they often demonise Marxist thought and dismiss figures, such as Lenin, as “foreign” or even “anti-national.”

This isn’t new. The Right-wing’s hostility toward Marxism goes back to the 1940s. But thinkers like S.G. Sardesai and Rahul Sankrityayan had already dismantled these shallow arguments long ago. Unfortunately, their rebuttals rarely reach today’s mainstream discourse. Even students of history often remain unaware of how deeply figures, such as Lenin, shaped India’s freedom movement.

On Lenin’s birth anniversary (April 22), it’s worth taking a closer look at how this revolutionary from distant Russia became a symbol of hope and clarity for many in our part of the world.

Those who describe socialism, Lenin and Marxism as ‘videshi’ must understand that the people who defined our ‘swadesh’i or Indian patriotism were inspired by the October Revolution and Lenin.

Lenin wasn’t just the architect of the Soviet Union or a philosopher who carried forward Marx’s legacy—he was also a fierce critic of imperialism. He diagnosed it not just as a military conquest or looting, but as a sophisticated system that drained the wealth of colonised nations under the guise of “free markets” and “foreign investments.”

To reduce Lenin to a dictator is to miss how his ideas inspired generations of anti-colonial fighters—not just in India, but across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. It’s not an exaggeration to say that rejecting Lenin wholesale is, in some ways, rejecting parts of the intellectual foundation of the freedom struggles across the Global South.

In the US, Black liberation leaders, such as  W.E.B. Du Bois, Huey Newton, Kwame Ture, and Angela Davis were deeply influenced by Lenin’s writings. His books were required reading in the study circles of the Black Panther Party. Even poet Langston Hughes once said that Lenin, unbothered by borders or barricades, seemed to walk with the oppressed across the globe.

Historian Bipan Chandra writes in his book, India's Struggle for Independence: "They were able to see that colonialism no longer worked through crude tools of plunder and tribute and mercantilism but operated through the more disguised and complex mechanism of free trade and foreign capital investment. The essence of 19th-century colonialism, they said, lay in the transformations of India into a supplier of foodstuffs and raw materials to the metropolis, a market of metropolitan manufacturers, and a field of investment of British Capital.”

Colonialism operated in the form of a free market and foreign capital investments, moving away from mercantilism. It was widely believed that there was no alternative to this free market. And here’s where Lenin’s ideas struck a chord. In a world devastated by economic crises, the Soviet Union appeared oddly stable—resilient, even. For freedom fighters in India, this raised a radical question: Was there another way to organise society? Could there be an alternative to both colonial exploitation and capitalist greed?

Lenin didn’t just provide theory. Through the Communist International, he offered solidarity and support to anti-colonial struggles worldwide. His landmark text, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, became a key reference in India’s own political discourse.

At the founding conference of the All-India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), Lala Lajpat Rai declared: “Capital has drained the blood of humanity and brought it under its feet. Imperialism and militarism are the twin children of capitalism. All three are inextricably linked.” This was no fringe view. It reflected a larger awakening in colonised societies—that capitalism and colonialism were two sides of the same coin, and that thinkers like Lenin had helped expose this truth.

In 1908, Lenin wrote about the arrest of Bal Gangadhar Tilak and described it as “the despicable sentence that the English jackals passed on the Indian democrat.” It must be remembered that Lenin’s solidarity to Tilak came during period before the formation of the USSR.

Tilak also admired Lenin in a speech he delivered at Nashik in 1906. He spoke about Russian methods of agitation and proclaimed that “we must learn” from the people of Russia. Shyamji Krishnavarma wrote in his paper “Indian Sociologist” in 1907 that Russian methods of agitations must be adopted by our people to bring British government to its senses.

The fight against imperialism and the search for a path beyond colonial domination became central discussions in the early 20th century. Lenin’s essay ‘The National and Colonial Question’, presented at the 1920 Congress of the Communist International, addressed how colonial powers could be defeated. This document wasn't just read by communists across the world, but also by freedom fighters and liberation movements from colonised nations.

In India, under the leadership of figures like S.A. Dange, Muzaffar Ahmad, and Singaravelu Chettiar, various communist groups started taking shape across the country. By 1925, the Communist Party of India was officially founded in Kanpur. Even after the CPI’s formation, the influence of the Russian Revolution continued to echo in Indian politics. In 1936, when the AISF (All India Students Federation) and the All India Kisan Sabha were formed, the impact of the Bolshevik Revolution was visible in both. Socialist ideas began to take root both inside and outside the Congress.

So, what did the leading figures of India’s freedom struggle say about the Soviet Union and the Bolshevik Revolution?

On November 5, 1928, Mahatma Gandhi wrote in the magazine, Young India: "It is my firm conviction that nothing lasting can be built on violence. Yet, it cannot be denied that behind the Bolshevik ideal lies the pure sacrifice of countless men and women who gave up everything for their cause. An ideal sanctified by the sacrifices of souls like Lenin’s can never be in vain."

Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister, praised the Russian Revolution in his book, The Discovery of India, writing: "The Soviet Revolution propelled society forward with a great leap. It lit a flame that cannot be extinguished, and laid the foundation for a new civilization. I have no doubt about that."

Nehru deeply admired the Soviet Union and Lenin. His first visit to the USSR was in 1927, coinciding with the 10th anniversary of the October Socialist Revolution. He was especially drawn to books like Ten Days That Shook the World by John Reed and Lenin’s Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism.

In Nehru’s own words: "It was during the time of Lenin’s great October Revolution that we, in India, began a new phase of our struggle for freedom. Lenin’s example greatly influenced us."

The influence of the Russian Revolution extended even to Kashmir. Sheikh Abdullah, the ‘Lion of Kashmir’, was inspired by the Bolshevik Revolution and asked Indian communists to draft a manifesto for a “New Kashmir.” This document included specific charters for the rights of farmers, workers, and women.

In the introduction to the 1944 “New Kashmir” programme, Sheikh Abdullah wrote: "True freedom is born from economic emancipation — a fact that Soviet Russia has demonstrated not only in theory but in practice and development."

Peer Giyasuddin, writer, journalist, and former minister in Jammu & Kashmir, writes in his book: "Communists began working in Kashmir from 1936. They closely collaborated with the National Conference Party. Leaders like K.M. Ashraf, B.P.L. Bedi, Fazal Elahi Qurban, and Ajoy Ghosh were frequent visitors to Kashmir. In 1937, K.M. Ashraf inaugurated a student organization in Nehru Park, where Marxist literature—especially Lenin’s biography—was distributed."

In 1941, when Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union, Kashmiri communists launched an anti-fascist front. G.M. Sadiq became its president and Peer Giyasuddin its convener. Sadiq later became the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir.

Even revolutionary freedom fighter Bhagat Singh read a book on Lenin before he was executed. According to his biographers, Chaman Lal and Gopal Tagore, Bhagat Singh and his comrades observed Lenin’s Memorial Day from prison. Ajoy Ghosh and Dhanwantri, who later became key CPI leaders, were with Bhagat Singh in jail at the time.

B.R. Ambedkar also acknowledged the Soviet Union as a model worth considering for underdeveloped nations. His work “State and Minorities” advocated for adopting socialist models of the USSR without abolishing parliamentary democracy. The proposal for a constitutional state socialism and his admiration towards Stalin remain a historic fact. Though Ambedkar rejected Marxism, he never dismissed it completely. Despite the criticisms he levelled against the USSR in the book, Buddha and Karl Marx, he proclaimed that Marx is a residue of fire, small but very important.

Ambedkar concludes the book by acknowledging class struggle, the need to abolish private property, and the function of philosophy as the tool to reconstruct the whole world.

Let’s consider the critique that Lenin was an authoritarian or anti-democratic figure. Allegations of human rights violations against him are common. But it’s important to explore how African American thinkers and political leaders, who stood for human dignity and rights, perceived Lenin and the Soviet Revolution.

The Russian Revolution and the founding of the Comintern (Communist International) had a deep impact on anti-imperialist intellectuals and movements worldwide. The Comintern supported full independence for African nations—a stance praised by African American leaders like W.E.B. Du Bois and Marcus Garvey. Du Bois, who led the Pan-African Congress, saw the Soviet Union as a global ally.

In 1920, Lenin organised the Congress of the Peoples of the East in Baku, Azerbaijan. The Comintern’s 1922 conference strongly emphasised the link between colonialism and racism and adopted a Pan-African vision. It stressed the need for the communist movement to align with the struggles of the Black people in America, the Caribbean, and Africa.

Many key anti-colonial figures—Nelson Mandela, Amílcar Cabral, Frantz Fanon, Kwame Nkrumah, and Jomo Kenyatta—were inspired by the October Revolution. Kenyatta, the leader of Kenya’s freedom movement and its first President, studied in the 1920s at the Communist University of the Toilers of the East in Moscow.

Jamaica’s Garvey once described Lenin as “one of the greatest men in history.” Speaking at a memorial meeting after Lenin’s death in 1924, he said: "Black people mourn Lenin because Russia gave hope not only to the Negroes but to all oppressed peoples of the world."

The Soviet Union no longer exists. It collapsed for many reasons. But the USSR and Lenin should not be judged by today’s standards alone—they must be understood in the context of their own time. As Mandela once said, “If democracy works best under a one-party system, I will consider it. If it works better under multi-party systems, I’ll consider that too.”

Lenin wasn’t just a political leader who applied Marxism—he was a visionary who tried, as Marx once urged, to change the world. The campaigns against Lenin are as old as the Bolshevik Revolution itself.

To prevent the influence of Marxism, elite and pro-British papers had a misinformation campaign against the Soviets. Lala Lajpat Rai had come out against this propaganda campaign. Criticising them he wrote in the “Bandematram” of July 18, 1920: “When we read the attacks delivered by hypocritical nations against the Bolsheviks, especially in the columns of the Pioneer and the Civil and Miliary Gazette, it surprises us to find that there is no limit to the hypocrisy and falsehood indulged in by them.” In another article, he declared that Bolshevism is a genuine, authentic idea which could not be destroyed.

Let’s end with a quote from Bal Gangadhar Tilak: "Lenin stood for peace and justice for the oppressed. He became popular among the people and soldiers because he redistributed land to the peasants."

The author is an independent researcher. The views are personal.