The communist party played a key role in ending feudalism in telangana, then lost in the first general elections against Congress. How did the party deteriorate within 1 or 2 years after the end of Nizam rule and feudalism?

Did the Telangana people lose faith in the communist party at that time or did Congress have better policies and leaders or was it the Nehru effect?

  • I don't know much about this but a quick wikilookup at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telangana_Rebellion indicates that the whole place was in turmoil. The "key role" you mention was an armed rebellion against the Nizam which apparently morphed into fight against the Indian Union (ruled by Congress). Or at least that's what I gather from the fact that Hyderabad was annexed to India in 1948 yet the rebels only laid down their arms in 1951. Overall, it's complex and I'm not sure the questions premises are valid - but I'll leave further comment to more knowledgeable people. Commented Oct 1, 2013 at 13:42
  • Date? Source? Citation?
    – MCW
    Commented Oct 1, 2013 at 13:57
  • @Felix Goldberg Yes now I can understand some points...but I dont think the rebellions were against congress then. They might be still fighting for distribution of land or they might felt insecured. And also there should be Nehru's influence for leading congress to victory and as Communist party has less democratic approach, people might have preferred Congress. And eventually the rebellions might turned against the corrupt governments later and now what they are called naxalites. Am I wrong anywhere?
    – GP92
    Commented Oct 1, 2013 at 14:26

1 Answer 1


First of all, starting a violent rebellion and winning an election is two completely different things. A party that does one thing is not in any way guaranteed to do the other, especially if they are perceived to have lost the fight, or been fighting without cause.

As such, the question is a bit strange in the first place.

Secondly, you ask if people lost faith in the Communist Party, but looking at the State elections in 1952, they got 20% in Hyderabad and that doesn't seem like a party who people have lost faith in at all, and I see no real indications that the party was significantly more popular earlier.

So I don't think the CPI declined in any way. Rather the opposite. They supported and instigated a violent rebellion in 1946, and this rebellion seems to have been so popular that in 1952 they gained 20% in a state election, even though the rebellion only took place in one of the three regions of the state, and despite the fact that the party was anti-democratic and violent only two weeks before the elections started.

  • This answer could be improved by resolving the lack of citation; and, by arguing fully or citing the causative argument that armed force and anti-democratic actions result in reduced electoral outcomes. Commented Oct 2, 2013 at 10:07
  • 2
    @SamuelRussell: You are right, the assumption that people prefer non-violent democrats in elections to dictatorial people would benefit from citations. I only have my own reflections of political history here, and I'm not a reliable source obviously. Note how often parties that claim to be socialist tend to embrace capitalism and democracy as soon as they win an election, for example. Once you can smell the power in a democracy you tend to drop your ideals and become populist, for good and bad. But a reliable source for this would be good, but I don't have one. Commented Oct 2, 2013 at 10:30
  • 1
    @LennartRegebro: I think most large newspapers, read over several days, would be an accurate source Commented Oct 3, 2013 at 2:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.