I wrote this piece so people who don't know much about Burma's politics can understand a bit of introduction. Burmese people in general including the working class and the peasant class hates the words like "socialism" and "communism". They're skeptical of leftists. There are solid reasons behind it. I tried to write it from an anarchist perspective without simping for any groups as much as I can. This is not an academic article. I just write it so people who would like to have a introductory read on the subject.
To understand how socialism as an ideology and communism (Marxism-Leninism) as an authoritarian as well as totalitarian system gets hated by the working class and the peasant class themselves in Burma, we will have to be educated enough about the historical context of Burmese politics. Burmese working class and the peasant class didn’t have the privilege to daydream an utopia where they could be free of capitalist class as of now. This dream of an utopia by the working class and the peasant class where they could be free of capitalist class is currently met with a barrier called “the military junta” with its socialist political heritage of “Burmese way to Socialism”.
Short to the point, Burma currently have over 135 ethnic groups which are officially recognised by the state prior to the 2021 coup. Most of these ethnic group have their own nationalist agenda and the desire to form sovereign states, independent of (from) so called Burma. That was since before the independence where British ruled and exploited all the people across the region.
The earlier opposition to the British colonialism came mostly from traditionalist Buddhist nationalists. Civil Society Organisations like Young Men's Buddhist Association played a vital role in struggling against the British colonialism. YMBA split in 1918 as the leadership wanted to keep their struggle more apolitical but the younger memberships wanted to get involved more into politics.
In 1923, a journalist named Khin Maung Gyi translated the “Das Capital”. However, the name he gave to the book is “nationalistic spirit”. Later, an author called U Shin wrote articles about communism and socialism in his journal called “Naypyitaw Journal”. Galone Sayar San, the architect behind the Saya San Rebellion of 1930–1932 in British Burma, who was executed by the British colonial empire, also left some left-wing literature in his personal library as well. Dr. Thein Maung, who also attended the conference of “Quit India” movement also brought back some left-wing literatures into Burma too.
Some members of YMBA, who are traditionalist Buddhist nationalists from Burma such as YMB Saya Tin, and some others founded an organisation called “Dobama Asiayone (We Burmans Association)” around 1930s. Almost every member of Dobama Asiayone called themselves with the title “Thakin”. “Thakin” simply means “non-slaves to whites” and gave them a sense of pride that they’re equal to the “whites so called masters”. The socio-economic conditions of the time was that “white people especially the British people” were the main oppressors whereas the Indian officers represents the police force and the military forces (the tools of the oppressors). At first, “Dobama Asiayone” held the traditionalist Buddhist nationalist agenda that equated every single white person and every single Indian people as the evils. Taking whites and Indians as oppressors, they have to unite all the indigenous ethnicities into a collective identity. They call that collective identity as “Dobama (we Burman)”. Even though “Dobama” sounds exactly like “Burmese”, it has different meaning. “Burmese” represents the people only from Burmese ethnicity. However, “Dobama” represents all the people across all ethnicities living in the region. Gradually, “Dobama Asiayone” became more and more educated and progressive, started to analyse the class structure. However, it would be fair to say that a fraction of Dobama Asiayone still holds the reactionary nationalistic politics. On the other hand, progressive Thakins such as Thakin Ba Thaung (who translated Animal Farm), Thakin Soe (founder of CPB and Red Flag CPB), and Thakin Aung San (the father of the nation), started to form a progressive fraction. The progressive fraction becomes stronger. This led to a split, with the older leaders being opposed to the left-wing leanings of the new leadership. As much as the progressive fraction becomes stronger, the working-class activists and trade unionist leaders such as Thakin Ba Tin (Comrade H. N. Goshal) who is an ethnic Bengali (Indian origin) trade unionist leader and Thakin Kha who is an ethnic Gurkha (Indian origin) trade unionist leader as well as countless number of Indian origin ethnic people joined Dobama Asiayone. They transcended the narrow ethnic nationalism and subscribed themselves to a collective identity of “Dobama Asiayone”, under which they struggled for the national liberation from the British imperialism, colonialism and the capitalist exploitation. To learn more about Dobama Asiayone, a basic introductory in English can be found in this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thakins).
Utopian Socialists (Non-Marxian Socialists)
Since around 1939, progressives from Dobama Asiayone were searching for a proper ideology to weaponize themselves against the British colonial empire. At first, they were attracted by the guilt socialism (Narodniks style) that takes the utopian class struggle of taking the poor peasants as revolutionary and the rich traders as the oppressors. Later, they got introduced into Marxism-Leninism (Stalinism) via Indian communist leaders and those who travelled Japan, China and so on.
Poor Man's Party
Dr. Ba Maw, a well-known politician founded a party called “Poor Man's Party”, with his own guilt socialist ideology called “Poor Man's Ideology”. To learn more about “Poor Man's Party”, a basic introductory in English can be found in this Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Man%27s_Party).
Later “Poor Men’s Party” merged with “All Burma Students Association” and formed a political party called “Dobama-Sinyetha Asiayone” that can be briefly translated to “We Burman Poor Association”. The party was also known as “Freedom Bloc”. They started to have some exposure with Marxism around this time. “Freedom Bloc” was founded by influential and popular figures like Aung San, (known as the father of the nation in the future), U Nu (the first prime minister of the nation in the future), Thakin Than Tun (the chairman of the Communist Party of Burma in the future), and Thakin Mya (he was assassinated along with Aung San and considered as one of the most important Martyrs of the nation in the future). In 1944, the party was dissolved.
Communist Party of Burma (Marxism-Leninism)
The Communist Party of Burma was founded in 1939 by two fractions of leftists. One fraction includes Burmese leftists such as Thakin Aung San (known as the father of the nation in the future), Thakin Soe (who was considered as the most intelligent Marxist in Burma), Bo Let Ya, Thakin Bo, and Thakin Ba Hein. The other fraction is the Bengali and Indian communists such as Thakin Ba Tin also known as H. N. Goshal (who later was purged by his own comrades from CPB during the cultural revolution), and Amar Nag (a Bengali communist member of Communist Party of India). Since the birth, the Communist Party of Burma followed the ideological doctrine of Browderism (Earl Browder’s Stalinism) endorsed by The Communist Party of India.
Burma Socialist Party (Democratic Socialism)
Burma Socialist Party was an affiliate of Asian Socialist Conference and worked closely with Socialist International. The party published The Socialist Front Weekly Journal. The party initially relied on support from affiliated mass organizations such as the Workers' Asiayone, Peasants' Asiayone, Women's Asiayone, etc.
The details about Burma Socialist Party can be read via a research thesis paper named “A history of the Burma Socialist Party (1930-1964)” which was written by Kyaw Zaw Win from University of Wollongong. The paper can be assessed via the link (http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1106&context=theses).
Japanese invasion of Burma
Thakin Aung San who was the first General Secretary of CPB tried to travel to China in hope of getting contact with Communist Party of China around 1940s. However, somehow, he reached to Japan and “The Legendary Thirty Comrades from Burma” studied the military courses under Japan Imperial Empire. The year 1942 to 1945 were the times Japan Imperial Empire invaded Burma.
Thakin Aung San’s fraction had this analysis that Japan’s fascism was going to liberate Burma from the colonial British empire. However, in contrast, Thakin Soe who was the theoretical leader of CPB, authored a manifesto called “Insein manifesto” and declared that Japan’s fascism is more dangerous than British’s colonialism. In other words, Burma Independence Army took the pro-fascist position and CPB under Thakin Soe’s leadership took the anti-fascist position.
Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League
AFPFL is a league (political alliance) that mainly consists of political groups such as “Communist Party of Burma”, “Burma National Army”, and the socialist People's Revolutionary Party (PRP). The original name was not AFPFL, it was AFO (Anti-Fascist Organisation).
Around 1940s, Communist Party of Burma was led by Thakin Soe as the second General Secretary. The first General Secretary was Thakin Aung San, who later distanced himself from the communists and founded Burma National Army. People's Revolutionary Party was led by socialist leaders such as Kyaw Nyein, Thakin Chit and Ba Swe. To understand the later political turmoil of Burma, in-depth knowledge of Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League is needed. I would urge the readers to read the details of AFPFL via this Wikipedia link for introductory knowledge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Fascist_People's_Freedom_League).
Welcoming British over Japan
At first Japan Imperial Empire seems to be nice towards Burmese people. Gradually, fascism spoke itself. As a result, AFPFL had to collaborated again with British colonialism to push back against Japan Imperial Empire.
Thakin Soe lost his positions in both AFPFL and CPB for his love affairs. Thakin Soe was defensive and justified his love affairs and hostility towards monogamy with the text of Engels. However, he was denounced and denied to get the positions back. As a result, Thakin Soe founded another communist party with the name Communist Party (Burma) which is more popular with the name Red Flag Communist Party of Burma. A significant amount of membership from Communist Party of Burma followed Thakin Soe’s lead.
Left-Infighting before independence (within AFPFL)
Once the Japan Imperial Empire is out, CPB under the leadership of AFPFL used the parliamentary politics against British Imperial Empire. CPB under the leadership of Thakin Than Tun and Thakin Thein Phe accepted the “Dominion status” declared by British Imperial Empire for Burma. CPB under the leadership of Thakin Than Tun and Thakin Thein Phe agreed to pay “Compensation for war” by Burma towards British Imperial Empire despite Burma being colonised by British Imperial Empire.
Red Flag Communist Party of Burma refused to join AFPFL and started to hold the far-left positions against the social democratic politics of AFPFL. CPB at the time was under the influence of Earl Browder, so was called as “White Flag Communist Party of Burma” by the “Red Flag Communists”. “Red Flag Communist Party of Burma” started the armed struggle against the British Imperial Empire. Thakin Soe published a book called “The dangers of Dominion status” and organised communists. Red Flag Communist Party of Burma declared the war for total independence with no “Compensation for war” towards British Imperial Empire and insisted the “Compensation for war” to be paid by the British for colonising Burma. Red Flag Communist Party of Burma denounced Communist Party of Burma as Browderist revisionists.
Among AFPFL, there are two ideologically driven political parties and one non-political military group. People's Revolutionary Party holds parliamentary democratic socialist politics and Communist Party of Burma holds Marxist-Leninist one-party totalitarian and authoritarian politics. Apparently, they didn’t get along with each other.
CPB has its proxy trade union called All Burma Trade Union Congress which was led by a communist party member named Thakin Ba Hein. BSP has its proxy trade union called Trade Union Congress (Burma) which was led by Ba Cho, an influential socialist writer (who will be assassinated along with Aung San at 1947 commemorated Martyrs' Day). Here, it’s important to note that both of these trade unions are not led by the genuine working-class people, but by some political leaders. Thus, it explains something about the lack of syndicalist working-class unions at that time.
When Aung San accepted in September 1946 the British governor's invitation to lead the Executive Council and became the de facto premier of Burma, the communists accused him of having sold out to the British and settled for a "sham independence".
In July and September 1946, the ABTUC, under the leadership of Thakin Than Tun, organised a series of strikes against the "repressive measures" of the AFPFL government. As a result, Thakin Than Tun lost his position at AFPFL for his disagreement with other fractions of AFPFL (that of BIA - Thakin Aung San). His position was replaced by the General Secretary of Burma Socialist Party named Kyaw Nyein. In November, the CPB was officially expelled from the AFPFL.
In January 1947, Aung San and other AFPFL leaders negotiated in London the independence for Burma. Kyaw Nyein, the General Secretary of the ruling political alliance AFPFL and the joint General Secretary of the Burma Socialist Party (BSP) was an advisor to Aung San in the London Talks with Prime Minister Clement Attlee on Burma's independence in January 1947.
General elections for a constitutional assembly were held in April 1947, which the AFPFL won amidst an election boycott by the opposition, taking 173 of the 210 seats and running unopposed in over fifty constituencies. Aung San headed the constitutional assembly and was set to become Burma's prime minister, but was assassinated together with six other members of his cabinet on 19 July, a date commemorated as Martyrs' Day. U Nu succeeded Aung San as leader of the AFPFL and Premier of Burma. Burma declared independence from Britain in January 1948.
Post-independent Left infighting (AFPFL vs CPB)
Kyaw Nyein served as the first post-independence Minister of Home Affairs and in September 1948 assumed additionally the positions of Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister in the cabinet of Prime Minister U Nu. That triggered the communist counterparts as a democratic socialist Kyaw Nyein, their rival and a lot of socialist party members managed to hold the positions.
Communist outbursts occurred concurrently in Malaya, Indonesia, and South India; these events were all caused by decisions made during the Asian Communists' summit in Calcutta in February 1948, which were in line with the Cominform's "Zhdanov" stance. Kyaw Nyein was aware of it and he wrote it in an article he published on “The Atlantic” at 1958. To read more about this, this Wikipedia page has some information (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conference_of_Youth_and_Students_of_Southeast_Asia_Fighting_for_Freedom_and_Independence). In June 1948, Stalin also sent Zhdanov to the Cominform meeting in Bucharest. Its purpose was to condemn Yugoslavia. Communist Party of Burma which always have been following the leadership of the international communist parties since its birth again followed another decision set by Asian Communists' summit in Calcutta which inherently was the order of Zhdanov via Cominform.
H. N. Goshal, who was considered as the main theorist of the Communist Party of Burma, published a political analysis called “Goshal Thesis”. “Goshal Thesis” can be read via this link (https://archive.org/details/h-n-goshal-on-the-present-political-situation-in-burma-and-our-task)
Basically, he was calling for a mass strike with united front from below. In other words, Goshal said that the party should continue to be present in the cities and that people should organize nationwide strikes and public demonstrations in Yangon. For some fringe reasons, the whole communist party of Burma, interpreted “Goshal Thesis” as Maoist guerrilla warfare even though H. N. Goshal himself voted against the Maoist guerrilla and endorsed the mass strike at the Central Committee meeting.
Kyaw Nyein and Ba Swe who had socialist contacts all across the world and who also had contacts with some Yugoslavia communists, somehow was informed of the “Goshal Thesis”. Kyaw Nyein brought a copy of “Goshal Thesis” and showed it to U Nu. As U Nu considered it as treason against AFPFL government, U Nu ordered the arrest of the leaders of the Communist Party of Burma for inciting rebellion against the multi-party parliamentary social democratic government with the hope of one-party authoritarian Stalinist regime.
In 1948, the CPB went underground the following March after U Nu ordered the arrest of its leaders for inciting rebellion. Some other groups also soon dropped out of the AFPFL to join the rebellion, not only the White-band faction of the People's Volunteer Organisation (PVO) formed by Aung San as a paramilitary force out of the demobbed veterans, but also a large part of the Burma Rifles led by communist commanders calling themselves the Revolutionary Burma Army (RBA).
Here, it’s important to note the hypocrisy of the Communist Party of Burma. Communist Party of Burma until “Goshal Thesis” was archived by some international library and brought back to Burmese population by some Trotskyist academics, always denied the existence of “Goshal Thesis”. Communist Party of Burma publicly denied the existence of “Goshal Thesis” till 2010s until some Trotskyist academics brought “Goshal Thesis” back into Burma. Some CPB sympathiser translated “Goshal Thesis” with his own interpretations and added his own foreword as if the “Goshal Thesis” was a conspiracy. The motive would be to avoid the historical evidence of CPB starting the ugly, counter-productive and almost half a century long civil war in Burma.
Post-independent Left infighting (within AFPFL)
In March 1949, at the height of the communist insurgency, Kyaw Nyein and five fellow socialist ministers resigned from the government under unclear circumstances. Ne Win (future theorist of Burmese way to Socialism) had entered a cabinet meeting alleging that he had struck a deal with the communists who were ready to join the government under the condition that all socialist ministers resigned. Kyaw Nyein and the other socialist ministers stepped aside but demanded that Prime Minister U Nu should remain the head of government. However, Ne Win failed his attempt to bring the communists back to the government.
Since the independence, there were several left infightings going on within AFPFL. Given the fact that AFPFL used to consist of three political groups, namely Burma Socialist Party, Communist Party of Burma, and Burma National Army, yet, as of post-independence, only two groups are left and AFPFL under U Nu’s leadership holding the government position, AFPFL apparently holds social democracy as their ideology.
Burma Socialist Party becomes the sole ideological party among AFPFL despite the presence of some independent politicians like U Nu and some military personnels.
AFPFL as of now have two fractions now. U Nu and his independent fraction who believed in evolutionary Marxism and social democracy who don’t belong to both Burma Socialist Party and Burma National Army, yet holding the leadership position and that of Kyaw Nyein’s fraction who believed in democratic socialism.
In 1948 the name of the People's Revolutionary Party was changed to 'Burma Socialist Party'. In 1949, it became the 'Union of Socialist Party'. From 1950 onwards it was again called the 'Burma Socialist Party'. At the May Day rally of 1950, TUC(B) demonstrators had carried large portraits of Karl Marx, Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong.
In the speech at the rally, Thakin Lwin publicly declared that TUC(B) followed the 'communist party line' and said that the organisation should join the WFTU. He harshly condemned the policy of the Burmese government of accepting British financial aid. But it doesn’t mean that he decided to form alliance with CPB. He also denounced the White Flag Communist Party, Red Flag Communist Party and Josip Broz Tito as 'deviationists'. TUC(B) vice-president and AFPFL Member of Parliament Thakin Hla Kywe lashed out at the governments support for the Korean War in September 1950, the AFPFL decided to suspend the TUC(B) from the AFPFL. Following this, trade union leaders of TUC(B) from Burma Socialist Party broke with the Burma Socialist Party and formed the Burma Workers and Peasants Party in December 1950. The BWPP considered itself a Marxist–Leninist party. It considered the AFPFL government as servants of imperialism. However, unlike the White Flag and Red Flag communist parties the BWPP worked as a legal political party. The party was sometimes nicknamed as 'Red Socialists'.
Kyaw Nyein returned to U Nu's cabinet in 1951 and set up the Ministry of Cooperatives, which he handed over to U Tun Win in 1954 to create the Ministry of Industries. In 1956, he became Deputy Prime Minister of National Economy to oversee and coordinate the industrialization of Burma. The idea of Kyaw Nyein as "the brain of Burma's drive to socialism" was to build an industrialization of import substitution under government supervision and nationalize enterprises. But unlike some of his BSP colleagues, he was a moderate socialist who was less dogmatic and progressively eschewed the traditional socialist nationalization strategy in favour of a mixed economy.
U Kyaw Nyein: a third camp democratic socialist
Here, it’s important to understand the ideological background of Kyaw Nyein. Kyaw Nyein was the founder of “Asian Socialist Conference” which was a Pan-Asian multinational socialist organization. The membership of Asian Socialist Conference includes Burma Socialist Party, Socialist Party of Egypt, Praja Socialist Party, Socialist Party of Indonesia, Mapai from Israel, Leftist Socialist Party of Japan, Rightist Socialist Party of Japan, Progressive Socialist Party of Lebanon, Pan-Malayan Labour Party, and Pakistan Socialist Party.
The fraternal guests and observers at the conference were: Socialist International, British Labour Party, British Labour Party, SFIO, Swedish Social Democratic Party, International Union of Socialist Youth, Congress of Peoples Against Imperialism, League of Communists of Yugoslavia, Nepali Congress (India), Algerian People's Party, Kenya African Union, Tunisian Destour Party and Uganda National Congress.
The ASC proposed the formation of a 'Third Force' in world politics and adopted a resolution that called for support of democracy, condemning capitalism, communism and imperialism. Kyaw Nyein met with intelligent and democratic socialists like Milovan Đilas at the conference. Kyaw Nyein shared the idea of “League of Communists of Yugoslavia” which considered Soviet as a social imperialist and the western world as the western imperialist.
Here are some papers on “Asian Socialist Conference” that are worth reading.
- https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/C4EF4E3F636464212E96EFD7DA7701C5/S0020859021000250a.pdf/defining_asian_socialism_the_asian_socialist_conference_asian_socialists_and_the_limits_of_a_global_socialist_movement_in_1953.pdf
- https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-00915R000500160003-6.pdf
- https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/30386/1/Shillam_203011639_Thesis.pdf
- https://studenttheses.universiteitleiden.nl/access/item%3A2659645/view
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365081809_The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Asian_Socialist_Conference_1952-1956
Kyaw Nyein also wrote his articles in socialist magazine such as “Labor Action”, which was an independent Trotskyist magazine where people like Leon Trotsky, and Hal Draper. Kyaw Nyein was well known for his ideology called “Third campism” which is really similar to the ideology of people like Sean Matgamna and Max Shachtman.
An article featuring the discussion between Kyaw Nyein and Dr. Lohia was featured in Labor Action, September 13, 1954. The paper can be downloaded via the link (https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/laboraction-ny/1954/v18n37-sep-13-1954-LA.pdf).
Kyaw Nyein called Soviet’s social imperialism as neo-imperialism and the western imperialism as “imperialism”. He considers both as dangerous types of colonialism. He said and I quote “Soviet type of imperialism is, perhaps, even more degrading and even more dangerous, because it’s more ruthless, systematic and more blatantly justified in the name of the world communist revolution.” He also said and I quote “To us socialists, this one is a devil and the other a deep sea. We should not only reject them, we should combat them, we should try to escape from them”. Later, he argued to analyse the dialectical development of Soviet’s neo-imperialism as a new phenomenon as traditional Marxist analysis only offered the lights to the dialectical development of capitalism and its highest state, the imperialism.
As the head of the socialist party, the minister of cooperatives, and the primary organizer of the Asian Socialist Conference, Kyaw Nyein led a civil-military delegation to Belgrade in July 1952, ushering in a period of constructive relations between Yugoslavia and Burma. The two nations found themselves in a comparable situation at that time. After being shunned by Stalin and left out of the Eastern Bloc's economic system, Yugoslavia was looking to form new partnerships. Burma, under Kyaw Nyein’s leadership, was also looking for an alternative that’s different and independent of the western’s capitalism and the Soviet’s bureaucratic collectivism. President Tito's 1955 tour to India and Burma is regarded as one of the most important and consequential for Yugoslav foreign policy, setting the nation up to lead the Non-Alignment Movement. I can see records in Burmese that Kyaw Nyein was awarded the Order of the Yugoslav Star in 1955 but in English record, it’s saying it was awarded to a lawyer from Burma called Ba U in 1955.
Kyaw Nyein also led a high-ranking Burmese delegation to Israel in December of 1952. He saw Israel as a friendly nation led by a social democratic party, and he was intrigued by the nation's experience in producing weapons and cooperative communities like kibbutzes. After his visit, Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett went to the Asian Socialist Conference in Rangoon in 1953, and Israel selected David Hacohen as its first ambassador to Burma, establishing diplomatic ties between the two nations.
U Nu (The architect of political Buddhism)
U Nu, unlike Kyaw Nyein, was a reformist social democrat who believes in evolutionary Marxism. However, given the fact that Kyaw Nyein’s political advancement and influences got spread across the anti-Stalinist left wing fractions such as Trotskyists, Titoism, and democratic socialists, U Nu also tried to combat Kyaw Nyein politically.
However, U Nu didn’t try to extend his influence on Marxist circle. He focused more on the traditionalists, nationalists and Buddhist elements of the local population. U Nu hosted the Sixth Buddhist World Council in Yangon in 1954. As Prime Minister, U Nu spent large amounts constructing a pagoda and other religious facilities in preparation for the council. U Nu argued that his modernisation goals were superior to those of capitalist and communist models of that time (“communist” then meaning like the USSR) because these were only concerned with the material conditions of human life, whereas his reforms aimed at spiritual rejuvenation of the people. Both capitalism and communism were deemed morally repugnant by U Nu, the former for encouraging the profit motive and the latter for advocating violent revolt and authoritarian rule. In contrast to these two types of modernity, U Nu envisioned a path for Burma along which moral renewal combined with improved material conditions would bring the Burmese closer to spiritual elevation, resulting in the attainment of nibbāna, or the ideal Buddhist state of “freedom from desire.” U Nu was also critical of the Marxian evolutionary view of social development. He delivered a lengthy speech to the All-Burma AFPFL Conference in January 1958 which is widely regarded as a final moment in U Nu’s separation from Marxism (even from evolutionary Marxism). As a result, U Nu was outcasted from AFPFL and AFPFL became fully led by Burma Socialist Party under the leadership of Kyaw Nyein and Ba Swe.
The Split of AFPFL
U Nu called for left-wingers with conservative values (red-brown alliance) to form a fraction called “Clean AFPFL”. The AFPFL under Burma Socialist Party was called “Stable AFPFL”.
The left-wing parties such as the Burma Workers and Peasants Party, and the People's Peace Front and the right-wing parties including the Justice Party and the New Mon National Party collaborated to form a united front called National United Front. The followers of Communist Party of Burma endorsed National United Front through Burma Workers and Peasants Party (Red Socialists) and National United Front helped U Nu to survive a motion of no confidence tabled against his minority government by Ba Swe and Kyaw Nyein.
Since the Communist Party of Burma endorsed the U Nu side via NUF, the military (Burmese Army) under U Ne Win and their affiliated family members publicly assisted with the election campaigns of Burma Socialist Party fraction of AFPFL.
While Kyaw Nyein endorsed the multi-party parliamentary democratic socialism, U Nu endorsed the syncretism of evolutionary Marxism, capitalism, and Buddhism as his political values. U Nu started to persuade people using traditionalist and social conservative values of using religion and moral values. U Nu promised to declared the Union of Burma as “Buddhist state”, which will essentially remove the secularism from the country. A lot of left-wingers with conservative and traditionalist values within NUF has left NUF and joined U Nu’s clean AFPFL. U Nu even wrote a lot of books on religious mysticism and religious moral values prior to the election.
U Nu’s fraction of AFPFL was renamed as the Union Party (Burma). The Union Party (Burma) won the election with NUF holding some seats in parliament in 1956 Burmese general election. Communist Party of Burma welcomed the government. U Nu declared the Union of Burma as “Buddhist state”, removing the secularism from the country. Basically, U Nu started to play red-brown populism (fascism) of recruiting left-wingers with conservative and traditionalist values.
The details of the split can also be found in a book by a Burmese left-wing journalist who worked at Guardian at that time. The book can be assessed at: https://libcom.org/article/split-story-sein-win.
The division inside the ruling party caused the government to become unstable, and in the end, Ne Win, the chief of staff of the armed forces, established a military caretaker state. Following eighteen months, general elections were called by the caretaker administration. Kyaw Nyein lost his seat in parliament and Nu's party defeated the Stable-AFPFL.
Burmese way to socialism
Even though U Nu won the power, he won with the help of red-brown alliance type of populism. U Nu didn’t have tangible economic plan nor the plan for the international relation. The public's perception of the elected government remained unchanged: it was dishonest, incapable of governing the nation, and unable to reestablish peace and order in a Burmese society where crime rates were constantly rising.
On March 2, 1962, less than two years after the caretaker government returned power to the AFPFL-government, Ne Win conducted another coup d'état with military assistance. Ne Win rose to prominence as both prime minister and chairman of the Union Revolutionary Council. Once Ne Win came to power, he had to reverse the political Buddhism stance U Nu created. Ne Win declared Burma as a secular nation again.
Following the March 1962 coup d'état, all political parties and other legislative democratic institutions were dissolved by the Revolutionary Council, which was headed by General Ne Win. General Ne Win’s coup was faced with 1962 Rangoon University protests. Ne Win’s government used military weapons against the students protesting them and destroyed the student union building with dynamite. The details of the coup can be read as an introductory text at this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Burmese_coup_d'%C3%A9tat).
1962 Coup was a turning point for Burmese politics. It changed the whole game. It pushed the old politicians to retire from the public. Revolutionary Council founded a political party called “Burma Socialist Programme Party” and declared All the political parties accept itself as illegal political parties. Previous influential socialist leaders such as Kyaw Nyein and a lot of (non-Maoist) communist leaders were taken into custody by Ne Win’s government since 1962. It was reported that Kyaw Nyein was treated as an animal during his prison time. Kyaw Nyein decided to commit suicide and somehow Ne Win was aware of the situations. Ne Win granted freedom of Kyaw Nyein after his suicide attempt from the prison.
The BSPP advocated a programme of the "Burmese Way to Socialism" which, according to Ne Win, incorporated elements of Buddhism, humanism, and Marxism. In both Burmese and English, a booklet titled "Special Characteristics of the Burma Socialist Programme Party" was released in January 1963. The pamphlet set the BSPP's philosophy apart from that of communist and "bourgeois" social democratic parties. The leaflet also said that, in contrast to Burmese communists, who it called "vulgar materialists," it did not consider the ideas of Marx, Engels, and Lenin to be "gospel," even though there was much to be learned from them. Subsequently that year, the BSPP expounded upon its ideology through a book titled The System of Correlation between Man and His Environment, which was published in both Burmese and English. The term "correlation" is often used to refer to this system (innya myinnya). The book promoted what became known as the "Burmese Way to Socialism" using vocabulary that was both Buddhist and Marxist.
The way how BSPP operates was really similar to how most Stalinist and Trotskyist parties operate. The introductory text can be accessed via this Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burma_Socialist_Programme_Party).
People suffered the realities of one-party authoritarian socialist regime Kyaw Nyein has been warning against since the independence. A lot of bureaucracy within their so-called correlation programs. People had to wait in long queue just to eat some rice, and some vegetables whereas the bureaucratic officers and their family members are rich.
During 1962 to 1970, there were several discussions between Communist Party of Burma, Red Flag Communist Party of Burma, Burma Socialist Programme Party, and the Red Socialists. A lot of mass migration between the parties occurs. A lot of members from Communist Party of Burma, Red Flag Communist Party of Burma, Burma Workers and Peasants Party, and other left-wing parties joined Burma Socialist Programme Party with the hope of BSPP becoming a one-party authoritarian Marxist-Leninist party. Even Communist Party of Burma was almost at peace with BSPP. However, BSPP demanded CPB to disband and merge its membership to join BSPP. That pauses the hopes of CPB. Later, CPB and its own leadership got overthrown by the ethnic people from the region. Those ethnic people from the region accused of Communist Party of Burma as some Burmese chauvinist trying to make good use of their hospitality for CPB’s political gain. Those ethnic people from the region formed an army called Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (one of those groups that led operation 1027).
Red Flag Communist Party became weak and Thakin Soe decided to surrender. Thakin Soe faced a lot of opposition from his own Red Flag Communist Party. However, a lot of red flag communists followed Thakin Soe’s lead. Thakin Soe reflected his own political beliefs and changed his ideology from local left communist kind of approach to Kautskyism (orthodox Marxism). Thakin Soe said and I quote “without the industrial workers, even if we continue to rebel with guerrilla tactics, we’re becoming war lords with parrot communists who are not even workers”. Thakin Soe was arrested by Burma Socialist Programme Party and got his reputation destroyed entirely through series of court debates being published across the state media as an example. Thakin Soe’s politics died after that.
There were series of strikes, protests, purges, and entryism practised against BSPP regime. Around 1968, BSPP government invited some communist party members who decided to join BSPP, some ex-government officials and some influential communist leaders as well as socialist leaders to form “Civil Unity Advisory Group”. Some “red socialist” leaders like Thakin Chit Maung, Thakin Lwin, Thakin Tin, and so on with some communist party (CPB) leaders with red flag communist party members joined the “Civil Unity Advisory Group”. Former ministers like U Nu, Kyaw Nyein and so on were invited too.
“Civil Unity Advisory Group” was voted. There were four fractions. Ba Swe (former leader of Burma Socialist Party) and 18 people voted for a country with multiparty parliamentary democratic socialist country and mixed economy. Kyaw Nyein and other two members voted the same values with a few further steps of forming an unitary state without allowing the separatism. U Nu demanded to his power back at the “Civil Unity Advisory Group”. “Red socialist” leaders with some ex-CPB members voted for a country with planned economy, socialist democracy (Soviet style), and unity talk with the ethnic leaderships”. However, Ne Win, the leader of BSPP, was not satisfied with the advices from the “Civil Unity Advisory Group” and disbanded “Civil Unity Advisory Group”.
BSPP regime kept oppressing the people since 1962 to until 1988. Dissents were not pardoned. People were poor economically. So called “socialist utopia” was destroyed even for most communists due to the hunger and starving. The civil war started by CPB kept happening, causing refugee crisis and developmental crisis for the region. The businesses were nationalised, the properties (lands and so on) were nationalised, and practised the “Socialism in One Country” with isolationism in the name of anti-imperialism. Workers’ Union were attacked whenever comes to existence. The justification was that BSPP party itself is the party of the working class and the peasant, that owns the businesses. So, forming a union against the business owners mean the forming the union against the working class and the peasant class. So, forming labour unions and peasant unions were considered counter-revolutionary. Free speech was considered bourgeoise. Most communists were confused by the ideology of BSPP. It looks exactly the same like Stalinist countries. Thein Phe Myint, a founder of Communist Party of Burma was the best example. Since the birth of BSPP, Thein Phe Myint, once a leader of Communist Party of Burma denounced U Nu as a western backed reactionary, and condemned CPB as the Maoist deviation from the position of anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninist. However, he welcomed BSPP as the Soviet style Marxist-Leninist government with Burmese characteristics. However, since most communist leaders like Thein Phe Myint were confused at first, students were the first social class that revolted against the BSPP regime. BSPP used nationalism, isolationism, one party authoritarianism, and Bolshevik style totalitarianism as well as state planned economy as its values.
It even formed Student wing and so on. During cultural revolution, some Maoists tried to gain influence in Burma with the hope of starting a cultural revolution. BSPP pushed back, demanded the Chinese schools to get nationalised. It resulted the 1967 anti-Chinese riots in Burma. Before 1967 anti-Chinese riots in Burma, Communist Party of China seems to be more aligned with BSPP over CPB but after that, CPC assisted a lot to CPB. CPB as usual in turn became a proxy party of CPC again.
It's worth to read more about 1967 anti-Chinese riots in Burma via this Wikipedia link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_anti-Chinese_riots_in_Burma).
Around 1988, due to the emergence of charismatic leader named “Aung San Suu Kyi”, somehow, strikes became stronger and the resistance became uncontrollable. BSPP regimes decided to transform itself into a multi-party democratic government. However, it didn’t keep its promise.
Summing up
Since the independence, people from Burma suffered so called socialist and communist power hunger opportunists and hypocrites. Every single leader of Communist Party of Burma thought they’re the only ones who can fix the nation with iron-fisted Stalin styled one party authoritarian party. They only failed because people like Kyaw Nyein saw their plot ahead. People like U Nu even went too further. He created a political ideology which later was picked up by the military junta and its far-right ultranationalists “political Buddhism”. U Nu even demonstrated how red-brown alliance of so called communist united front with social conservative nationalists can be done. Ne Win, a military officer, who was a fellow supporter of Burma Socialist Party, betrayed the principle of its own democratic socialism and endorsed the iron-fisted Stalin styled one party authoritarian party and traumatised the people of Burma to the words “Socialism” and “Communism”.
With all these information available these days, I would argue people like Kyaw Nyein were indeed far superior in knowledge and morality as someone who defended the multi-party democratic socialism over iron-fisted Stalin styled one party authoritarian party of CPB and BSPP. However, BSPP also came into power under the radar of Kyaw Nyein’s Burma Socialist Party. Seems, Kyaw Nyein focused too much on the CPB. That could be possible that that’s how he missed the coup attempt of Ne Win, a threat developing immunity under him. To be fair, he was already out of power when Ne Win conducted the coup. I personally considered him of someone who defended the multi-party democratic socialism with his best. Some CPB sympathisers would claim Kyaw Nyein being too harsher with communists and oppressive against CPB, I genuine think those so-called communists who demanded Stalin styled one party authoritarian dictatorship should not complain about oppression when it comes to them. I would say “a dorse of their own medicine” and they deserved all the oppressions coming towards them especially if that oppressions is coming to stop these red fascists from committing worse form of oppressions.
Also, the military party and those other fractions of Burma Socialist Party were doing a lot of socialist leaned state businesses. Those businesses indeed sparked the materialistic greed of those officers controlling this business. There is this analysis of CPB’s leader Po Than Gyaung claiming that the BSPP regime and all these military junta are the military capitalist bureaucratic class. His analysis is similar to New Class by Milovan Đilas (Stalinist bureaucratic collectivist class). Such analysis hold some truth on understanding the materialistic and economic profits of the military capitalist bureaucratic class and every Stalinist bureaucratic collectivist class.
Some immature and inexperience leftists thought of CPB, as an answer. CPB had always been open about its attempt to secure iron-fisted Stalin styled one party authoritarian dictatorship since day one. So, at least, with BSPP, some leftists can make excuses of BSPP, not technically socialist but national socialist or NazBol and so on. With alternative reality of CPB being in power, they will have to become Trotskyists or left-communists to criticise CPB. At the end of the day, the apologist justification of every red fascist is that every ruling communist party is oppressive and not real communist unless I’m the supreme leader. Enough with the jokes, even united front like NUF was a red-brown fascist alliance that paved the way of Ne Win conducting the coup too.
Comments