论文部分内容阅读
从印度发生的巨大变化中看印度国民大会和M·K·甘地在印度人民民族解放斗争中所起的作用,这问题具有巨大的意义。在苏维埃印度学中对这个问题研究得不正确、片面,因此必须重新考慮我们以前的观点。战后发生的事件,特别是最近五六年来的事件表明,在我们的印度学者中所流行的对印度的历史性的变化的评价是错误的。这种评价首先是由于缩小了国民大会领导的印度民族解放运动所达到的成就,1952年以前的苏维埃刊物中以下述论断占着优势,即:由于英国政府和印度主要的资产阶级及资产阶级——地主政党妥协的结果,印度于1947年獲得了自治领的权利,被分裂为两个国家——印度和巴基斯坦,而英国保留了在印度的重要经济阵地实质上几乎没有什么变化,印度只是英国的殖民地变为半殖民地而已。说印度所獲得的地位只徒具形式。这种论断是不正确的。说印度的民族资产阶级已和英帝国主义者完全妥协,它和帝国主义之间已不存在或者几乎不存在严重的矛盾,这种说法也是不符合实际情况的。
From the great changes that have taken place in India, the issue of the role played by the National Assembly of India and MK Gandhi in the national liberation struggle of India is of great significance. This issue was not properly and one-sidedly studied in Soviet Indian studies, and we must reconsider our previous point of view. The events that took place after the war, especially in the last five or six years, show that the popular assessment of India’s historic changes among our Indian scholars is wrong. This assessment was primarily due to the achievements made by the Indian Nationalist Liberation Movement led by the National Assembly. The Soviet publications prior to 1952 dominated the assertion that as the British government and India’s major bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie - - As a result of the compromise of landownership parties, India gained the right of self-government in 1947 and was split into two countries, India and Pakistan, while Britain retains virtually no change in India’s key economic position, with India simply being British The colonies became semi-colonies. The position gained by India is only a mere formality. This assertion is incorrect. It is not true that India’s national bourgeoisie has completely compromised with the British imperialists and that there is no existing or almost no serious contradiction between it and imperialism.