The outpouring of grief, solidarity and condolence messages on the sudden demise of Comrade Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of Communist Party of India (Marxist) reflect the power of the left intellectualism and politics beyond their traditional political base. It shows how the left politics can’t be confined to merely parliamentary achievements but its success led in impacting the public, civic and intellectual space of the country and that was definitely disproportionate to their success as political parties. That way, Sitaram Yechury’s death is a huge blow to not only the democratic progressive polity of India but it leaves a huge vacuum in the political spectrum particularly in the left politics. It is not that Sitaram Yechury was the tallest leader but he was one of the most pragmatic of the left leaders who had friends across political parties. Sitaram Yechury actually followed the school of Hari Kishan Singh Surjeet who had huge friends outside his party that led him playing a pivotal role in formation of UPA-I. Surjeet was man we needed today who could unite all the non NDA political forces and Yechury as a junior member to Surjeet had seen his political skills to negotiate through Congress, Samajwadi Party and other members of UPA. Surjeet’s death was a blow to the party at the national level though he was not a vote catcher but influenced the party’s base among the secular socialist political parties. After Surjeet’s death, the party’s two relatively young ideologues Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury were at the forefront of leading the party at the National level and the choice fell on Prakash who was seen as a more dogmatic and impractical leader unlike Surjeet. It was clear that the party was uncomfortable with his dogmatic positions and hence a more acceptable face of Sitaram Yechury became the General Secretary of the party. Today, the huge number of political leaders, activists and intellectuals that came to pay respect to Yechury shows his reach beyond his ‘party’. Obviously, left parties and their strength is always visible whenever there was a crisis and therefore the cadre came in large numbers to bid adieu to one of their most beloved leaders.
Left politics in India has been active at the grassroots for years but unfortunately rigidity at different levels forced its demise in numerous places. The traditional parties were being replaced by others who were able to understand the quest for representation among the most marginalized. The futile intellectual debate of ‘class-caste’ only proved the point of their opponent that the party is the biggest protector of the Brahmanical caste interests. Parties like CPI(ML) were spreading their base in Bihar and Jharkhand just because they understood this identity aspiration of the most marginalized and provided space to the communities. It is also a fact that you can’t really blame one individual for the policies of the party particularly in the left parties where their state units are more powerful in many states than the central secretariat of the party. Even with all criticism, left parties are not a one man show and there is more democracy and discussion among them in comparison to any other political party claiming to represent the marginalized. There is still no messiah cult in the left politics, a need and demand for the colonial democracy that we are in.
Sitaram Yechury was definitely not a mass leader but his impact on political opinion making was enormous. The power of the left despite shrinking still remain in our social cultural lives apart from various trade unions, academia and the political sphere. In the last one decade, efforts have been made by not only the ruling party but many vilifying the left activists and leaders. As I said, there might be differences of opinion, their failure to include people from the margin in their decision-making bodies as well as failure of West Bengal model, democratic left was still the need of the hour. Sitaram Yechury’s writings were sharp and well explained. Frankly speaking, he was the face of the left politics in the last two decade who was articulate and much more comfortable in the north Indian politics of social justice in particular. Even when he hailed from the South, the ease with which he spoke Hindi was remarkable. While it is not my point that one must learn Hindi, the thing is, for a party leader who plans to work in the Hindi heartland, it is always great to be bilingual. That way, Yechury had command like Comrade A B Bardhan in Hindi which made his writing and speeches understood by a very large audience in the Hindi heartland.
Whatever may be differences about individual opinion but Sitaram Yechury proved that he did not have many faces who private beliefs were the same as his political ideology unlike most of the Indian political as well as ‘intellectual’ class who are ‘revolutionary’ in public life but ‘reactionary’ and rigid in their private lives. He was the President of Jawaharlal Nehru University three times and one is sure that whenever the history of student movement and truly democratic characteristics of student politics would ever be discussed in India, Yechury’s contribution to student politics can never be omitted or discounted.
One of the most vilified things in today’s India by the right-wing trolls on social media as well as Bania channels is the interfaith marriages. Yechury spoke about his personal life for the first time in his last speech in Parliament in 2017, which could simply be termed as one of the finest speeches.
‘I was born in the Madras General hospital now called Chennai General Hospital to a Telugu speaking Brahmin family. My grandfather being a judge, after the state reorganization the Andhra Bench of the state High Court went to Guntur (formation of Andhra Pradesh), so we shifted there in 1954, I was born in 1952. Shift to Hyderabad in 1956. My school education is in an Islamic culture that was prevalent in Hyderabad under Nizam rule in the early days of independence in 1956. I got my education there then come to Delhi, study here. I married to a person whose father is a Sufi of the Islamic order whose surname is a Chistie, whose mother is a Mysorian Rajput who migrated there in the 8th century AD. We are now in the 21st century. She is the daughter of these two, father and mother. A South Indian Brahmin born family married to this lady what will my son be known as sir. What is he? Is he a Brahmin? Is he a Muslim? Is he a Hindu? What? There is nothing that can describe my son rather than being an Indian.’
These last sentences in the Parliament actually relate to those who are victimized and vilified simply because they are challenging the traditional system of marriages, moving beyond their castes and faiths and building up their dream based purely on the idealism of Baba Saheb Ambedkar, Periyar and Bhagat Singh. Unfortunately, anti-caste movement would have promoted this kind of idealism but today in the age of deepening caste identities any alliance beyond your community might not be a politically fertile idea for all. Yes, for some, it might fetch bumper crops but not for all particularly when one partner is a Muslim. You suffer on a daily basis but Sitaram Yechury spoke from the heart and for those who have made their dreams as per this idealism.
It is important to understand that whether it is Marxism or Ambedkarism or any other idealism, dogmas take you nowhere. Ultimately, it is your way of life which matters more than anything. Even when we criticize Marxists in India for being Brahmanical in nature, by his own behaviour and life that he lived, Sitaram Yechury actually was following the anti-caste idealism of Dr Ambedkar or Periyar. Frankly speaking, inter-caste marriages are still rare among Ambedkarites who should have been in the forefront of carrying out the mission of Baba Saheb. That way, Sitaram Yechury might not have brought votes and seats to his party but he definitely enriched our political idealism as well as civic spaces. Such voices are always required to remind us of our moral duties. It is also true that political activism is not always for power politics but also meant to exert pressure on the ruling elite. Sometimes, you need the conscious keepers for our society, otherwise the so called representatives of the people would act on the whims and fancies of the powerful corporate to protect their business interests.
As a true comrade dedicated to scientific rational thinking who lived a secular way of life. He donated his body for medical research. Again, despite all political differences, left leaders lived a life dedicated to scientific temperament and relatively simple and honest than most of the political parties in today’s time. Sitaram Yechury’s last wish was honoured by his wife Seema Chistie and daughter which need kudos and appreciation. Most of the time, the families decide against the wishes of the deceased and place their own personal values in dealing with the dead body which end up in exactly the opposite to the idealism of the individual passed away. It happened to many people because after the death their families performed all religious rituals, they stood against all through their lives. At least, in his death, Sitaram Yechury as well as his family did not allow the death of his idealism dedicated to secularism, rationalist scientific thinking and humanist values.