To traverse that road map, the RSS and its founders adopted a twin strategy from the beginning. The Hindu Mahasabha was dedicated to develop its footprints and the RSS to penetrate different sections of society by building a cadre based organisation. This twin strategy continued from the days of Hindu Mahasabha through Jana Sangh and consolidated in the BJP era.

There is something to be learnt by all those who wanted to transform India built on a constitutional secular democratic republic to a people’s democracy (Marxists). To first and foremost is, to preserve constitutional democracy. This requires setting out goals with clarity, identifying ‘enemies’, chalking out a strategy to weed out those that harm society, and lay the foundation of achieving respective goals.

On all these fronts the RSS has travelled a long way and its implications and consequences are before us to see. I am not going to recount all those here except emphasising only one aspect. A political tactical line is not the patented right of the Left or Communist Parties. Any party that aspires to rule any country will ultimately will evolve its own tactics which includes accepting a united front as a tactic whenever such a force is weak.

The RSS has fought hard to come out of the woods and stay relevant within an Indian political context at a time when free India was being built on the basis of the universal values inscribed in Preamble of the Constitution.

The historiography of the RSS will be enriched if one critically looks into the role that this exclusivist organization played during Partition, more particularly in western and eastern parts of India, the two regions affected tragically by a sudden change in demography.

In the immediate aftermath of Independence and Gandhi’s assassination by one of its followers (January 30, 1948), the RSS went into political oblivion. Since then, it has worked patiently among the masses defusing its ideology in the name of being a ‘cultural and charitable organisation’ and at the same time, resorted to united front tactics with the then Congress and constituent partners of the Samyukta Vidhayak Dal.

Despite such occasional encounters with positions of power, the RSS felt that mass politics required far more pragmatic approach and transformed its political arm Jan Sangh into the re-incarnated, BJP. Even then, instead of coming up with its own original ideological road map as prescribed by Golwalkar, the RSS guided the BJP to traverse the path of Gandhian socialism and what not. Despite this, it could not achieve effective pace in political growth and relevance. It therefore came out open in the public, again, with a twin strategy.

The first strategy was focused on framing a debate on the lines of pseudo secularism primarily aimed at undermining one of the key pillars of the basic structure of the Constitution. Coupled with this, the second strategy was to publicly own up to the RSS’ core agenda of militarising Hindus and Hinduising society, and, in fact, building a new kind of civil society around this twin strategy. Demonising constitutionalists and free thinkers and transforming ‘Maryada Purushottam Ram into warrior on alien or alienated sections of society’ both were pivotal in the RSS spectacular rise to power.

The RSS, therefore, never faltered in identifying its enemies, nor resorted to a nuanced approach while dealing with them. In this journey, the RSS clearly held Communists in India to be among its prime enemies.

This was academically acknowledged by the Left in general and the CPI (M) in particular, decades ago. In a document released within in the lead up to the 2019 general elections, titled, In Defense of constitution and democracy, the party stated, “It is for this reason, and also for an alternate policies in the economic sphere promoted and practiced by CPI (M) led state governments, that the BJP Modi led Hindutva platform has openly declared the left and the CPI (M) in particular as its main ideological foe.”

Based on the road chalked out in In Defense of constitution and democracy, the CPI (M) in its Central Committee meeting held in December 2018 concluded, “The Political Resolution has pointed out that our line is not of equidistance between the BJP and the Congress. Hence in states where the main contest will be between the BJP and the Congress, such as Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and others) we should fight just one or two seats and campaign generally for the defeat of the BJP.” The resolution also called on the cadre to “contribute towards maximizing the pooling of anti-BJP votes based on our political line”.

Subsequently, while analysing the 2019 general election results, the Central Committee was not hesitant in cautioning the Congress party when it said, “The Congress party failed to put in place, on the ground, the unity of opposition secular parties when it was campaigning for in the run-up to the elections. In Uttar Pradesh, the Congress contested independently.”

The review further observed in “Overarching Hindutva Identity that “The BJP-RSS orchestrated an overarching Hindu identity during the campaign which cut across, to some extent, the social and ethnic divides amongst the people.  This was accompanied by micro-level social engineering to successfully combat the dominant caste based social alliances which were forged in some states. The BJP identified the non-dominant castes and individual tribal communities for targeted messaging and propaganda. This was accompanied by physically contacting voters by the RSS and its network, consolidating the BJP’s outreach.” This was observed in documents from the 2019 October Central Committee meeting.

Further the CPI (M) also observed that “The BJP is aggressively working to establish a unitary State structure in India. This is required for them to advance the RSS’s fascist agenda of converting the secular democratic Republic into its ideological political project of `Hindu Rashtra’ (This should appropriately be read as “Hindutva Rashtra”)”.

The document identified four key challenges,

“a) The BJP has won this decisive victory on the basis of unprecedented money power and full support of the international and domestic corporates.  The trajectory of anti-people economic reforms favouring the big business and the rich are bound to intensify by imposing greater miseries on the vast majority of the people.  The Party will take the lead in rallying the maximum sections of the people in struggles against such economic assaults.

“b) The consolidation of the Hindutva communal polarisation will lead to greater attacks on the rights of the religious and linguistic minorities, worsening their security concerns and livelihood.  The safeguarding and strengthening of secularism, as enshrined in our Constitution, will be taken up by the Party drawing in the broadest sections in these struggles.

“c) The penetration of the RSS in all Constitutional authorities that happened during the last five years is bound to further intensify.  This will lead to undermining such Constitutional authorities in order to facilitate the transformation of the Constitutional Republic into the ideological project of the RSS, “Hindutva Rashtra”.  The defence and strengthening of all Constitutional authorities will be championed by the CPI (M) along with all other forces willing to join these struggles. 

“d) The focus of the BJP’s victory was based on the need to establish a `security’ state in India, the infringement upon the rights of individuals specifically the right to dissent will sharpen.  Already ominous indications are evident. The assaults by private armies under one pretext or the other against Dalits and religious minorities will intensify. The rights of working people and religious, linguistic minorities will come under attack leading up to witch-hunting.  The CPI (M) will take the lead in mobilizing the broadest segment of our people who cherish democratic rights and civil liberties to meet these challenges squarely.”

Further, the party also discussed at its Central Committee meeting in January 2020, the intensified challenges from the RSS and stated that,

“The situation in Kashmir continues to remain far from normal even after five months. Apart from the merciless denial of elementary human and democratic rights of the people, the situation has devastated the J&K economy, imposing further misery on the people. All these measures are clearly aimed at consolidating Hindutva communal polarisation and seeking to replace the secular democratic Indian Constitution with the RSS fascist agenda of “Hindu Rashtra”.

It is on this understanding that the CPI (M) adopted its Tasks on Cultural Front document in August 2020 wherein it identified the twin dangers being faced by the country.

The Tasks on Cultural Front clearly stated, “Both neo-liberalism and communalism, domestically, thus seek the homogenisation of public tastes.   The former is to strengthen its cultural hegemony and to reap super profits. The latter, in addition to this, is to pave the way for the establishment of a rabidly intolerant fascist State – the RSS vision of `Hindu Rashtra’.

The RSS’ slogan of “one country, one people, one culture” can acquire a real status and meaning only through such homogenisation, negating the very fundamental foundations of India’s rich cultural diversity.  Further, both neo-liberalism and communalism seek to divert the attention of the people away from day-to-day problems and importantly weaken their struggle against the existing exploitative order.”

The Party also warned secular and democratic forces that the BJP, utilised the period of the pandemic and the consequent disruption of normal life and activities due to lockdown restrictions etc. to advance the core RSS agenda of converting India into their conception of a rabidly intolerant fascist `Hindutva Rashtra’.

The CPI (M) acknowledged that the establishment of such a `New India’ is not a product of this Modi government alone. It has a history of nearly a century – from the founding of the RSS in 1925, Savarkar’s theses on Hindutva and its ideological construct and the RSS’ organisational structure –all with the goal of a fascist `Hindu Rashtra’ by Golwalkar in 1939.

Armed with this understanding, the Party went in to preparations for its 23^rd Congress at Kannur, at which the Political Resolution in the opening chapter itself assessed that, “The period since the 22nd Congress has seen the further consolidation of the BJP, which being in government is aggressively pursuing the Hindutva communal agenda of the fascist RSS. It has mounted a multi-pronged attack through the pursuit of rabid neo-liberal reforms strengthening the communal-corporate nexus, looting of national assets, promoting crony capitalism, legalising political corruption and imposing full-fledged authoritarianism.”

While observing the qualitative change in the political landscape off the country, the Political Resolution also stated, “Para 2.2: Since then, there has been the intensification of the above right wing offensive. However, with the return of the Modi government with a larger number of seats and vote share began the aggressive furthering of the Hindutva communal agenda of the fascist RSS. What is unfolding, particularly, in the post 2019 period, is on the lines laid down in the CPI-M Party Programme:

“The Bharatiya Janata Party is a reactionary party with a divisive and communal platform, the reactionary content of which is based on hatred against other religions, intolerance and ultra-nationalist chauvinism. The BJP is no ordinary bourgeois party as the fascist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh guides and dominates it. When the BJP is in power, the RSS gets access to the instruments of State power and the State machinery. The Hindutva ideology promotes revivalism and rejects the composite culture of India with the objective of establishing a Hindu Rashtra.” (Para 7.14)

“The threat to the secular foundations has become menacing with the rise of the communal and fascist RSS-led combine and its assuming power at the Centre. Systematic efforts are on to communalise the institutions of the State, the administration, the educational system and the media. The growth of majority communalism will strengthen the forces of minority communalism and endanger national unity. The support of sections of the big bourgeoisie for the BJP and its communal platform is fraught with serious consequences for democracy and secularism in the country.” (Para: 5.7)

“Party should fight against all forms of intrusion of religion in the economic, political and administrative life of the nation and uphold secular and democratic values in culture, education and society. The danger of fascist trends gaining ground, based on religious communalism must be firmly fought at all levels.” (Para: 5.8)

Political Resolution of CPI(M)’s Kannur (23rd) Congress also identified the emerging class contradictions in India in the aftermath of the farmers united struggle that forced a retreat by BJP government as follows: “Para 2.123: Class Implications- New class conflicts have emerged during the course of this struggle, between the big bourgeoisie in collaboration with international finance capital and the entire peasantry, including sections of the rich peasants.

“Para 2.124: Secondly, conflicts amongst the ruling class partners are also emerging between the big bourgeoisie, on the one hand, and the non-big bourgeoisie, particularly those belonging to the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME) sector, on the other.

“Para 2.125: Thirdly, BJP’s drive to establish its complete political hegemony in the country by destroying the federal structure of our Constitution and, in its place, erect a unitary State structure is creating conflicts between the Central government and elected state governments. Some regional parties, who head state governments, who were supporters of the BJP in Parliament and those who vacillated and remained largely neutral in their support to the BJP in Parliament, are being forced by this hegemonic drive of the BJP to come out in opposition, particularly during this kisan struggle.

“Para 2.126: The emergence of such conflicts amongst the ruling class partners creates possibilities that must be utilised by the exploited classes, particularly the working class, poor peasantry and agricultural labour, to intensify the class battles against the bourgeois-landlord order.”

“Para 2.127: Such possibilities for advancing the class struggle have emerged with the growing coordination between the working class trade union movement, the peasantry and the agricultural labour. Such developments began much earlier and since 2018 made significant advances through joint movements of these sections. This growing unity in struggles must be strengthened further in the coming period.”

It is in this backdrop, coupled with a solid ideological footing and absorbing the international experiences in fighting fascism, that it was decided to implement the Party’s 23^rd Congress directions and the CPI-M worked towards formation of INDIA block which played a crucial role in halting the roller coaster ride of the BJP to Parliament.

The CPI (M) has a programmatic understanding which clearly states that the BJP is ideologically guided by the RSS which has fascist characteristics.

In Telugu there is a saying. You can’t sow rice and reap wheat. Thus the ideological mentoring of RSS which sows fascist tendencies cannot result in any other outcome except that of transforming the country into a fascist Hindu Rashtra, armed with a militant Hindutva ideology.

This is what the understanding with which former General Secretary, CPI (M), Sitaram Yechury led the Party and this is the background in which the present Polit Bureau coordinator, Prakash Karat, acknowledged and hailed the contribution of Sitaram Yechury in expanding the Party’s understanding of the RSS and its fascist efforts to transform our constitutional secular democratic republic into fascist Hindu Rashtra. Whether in strength or in weakness, the RSS has never wavered in naming its enemies with determination.

Today, at this crucial hour, the question before the Party which is organizing its 24^th Congress at Madurai is whether it will further strengthen the ideological contribution of Sitaram Yechury or whether it steps back and wavers in naming the principle class enemy, which is the BJP guided by the fascist RSS.

Will the CPI-M lose ground, step back and retreat into its self-created binary confusion? The formulation on whether to give primacy to struggles against globalisation or to struggle or to strive and struggle to protect the constitutional secular democratic republic (and thereafter) to transform it into people’s democratic republic?

That is the crucial poser that presses for an answer.

(The author, Y Venugopal Reddy, is cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad and had contributed a series of articles in the run up to 22^nd Congress of CPI (M) at Hyderabad)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Part 1, 2 and 3 can be read here

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 1

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 2

Evolution of the Left [CPI (M)] approach towards Hindutva politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 3

Related:

Subjective thinking Hazardous for the CPI(M), India

CPI(M) must read the writing on the wall, realign to defeat fascist forces

Steer Clear from Jargon, Look at the Ground Reality: CPI(M) Today

The post Ram saved RSS-BJP from the brink, will Sitaram rescue the CPI (M)? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To sum up on how CPI(M) evolved it’s understanding about Modi regime which became an effective tool in the hands of Fascistic RSS let us look at the following. This characterisation of the Modi regime based on the party’s public statements, party documents, and broader political strategy:

1. Economic policy critique: Neo-Liberalism vs. Crony Capitalism

• Early Characterisation (2014-2019): Initially, the CPI (M) described the Modi regime as an extension of neo-liberal economic policies that favoured corporate interests over the working class and peasantry. It criticised the government for pursuing privatisation, deregulation, and policies like the National Monetisation Pipeline, which it saw as selling public assets to big business. The emphasis was on the regime’s alignment with global capitalism and its betrayal of the poor.

Further, the CPI (M) characterised the regime as a dangerous blend of neo-liberal economic policies and Hindutva-driven communalism accusing Modi of serving corporate interests—particularly those of crony capitalists—while simultaneously promoting a divisive Hindu nationalist agenda rooted in the ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the BJP’s ideological parent.

Since the 22nd Congress of the Party, this “corporate-communal nexus” was seen as a defining feature, with policies like tax concessions for the wealthy, loan write-offs for big businesses, and the dismantling of labour protections viewed as evidence of a pro-corporate tilt. At the same time, the CPI (M) highlighted incidents like the Gujarat riots of 2002 (under Modi’s watch as Chief Minister) and subsequent communal polarisation as proof of his regime’s anti-minority stance. The CPI(M) also framed Modi’s governance as a betrayal of his 2014 election promises, such as job creation and economic “good times” (achche din). The documents pointed to rising unemployment, agrarian distress, and uncontrolled food prices as failures that disproportionately harmed the working class and peasantry—core constituencies in their ideology.

• Later Emphasis (2019 onwards): While the neo-liberal critique persists, the CPI (M) has increasingly highlighted “crony capitalism” as a defining feature of Modi’s rule. It points to specific instances—like tax concessions for billionaires, loan write-offs for corporate allies, and the concentration of wealth among a tiny elite—as evidence of a regime that serves a select group of capitalists tied to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This shift reflects a growing focus on inequality data (e.g., the top 1% owning 40% of wealth) and a more populist framing to mobilise public discontent.

2. Authoritarianism: from subversion of institutions to full-blown fascism

• Initial Framing (2014-2019): In Modi’s first term, the CPI (M) characterised the regime as authoritarian, pointing to the subversion of democratic institutions like Parliament, the judiciary, and the media. It cited examples such as the refusal to engage with Opposition parties, the misuse of agencies like the Enforcement Directorate, and the suppression of dissent (e.g., arrests of activists). In the document the Party released before 2019 general elections titled ‘In Defence of Secular Democratic Constitution’, the Party gave call to defeat the BJP from centre and considered this goal as part of its larger agenda towards advancing peoples struggles to establish People’s Democracy.
• Escalation (Post-2019): After Modi’s re-election and events like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests –2019-2020-and the 2024 temple inauguration in Ayodhya, the CPI (M) has intensified its rhetoric, at times aligning with broader Left voices that label the regime as “fascist” or “Indian fascism.” While not always using the term explicitly, the party describes a “communal-corporate nexus” and an “authoritarian-repressive regime” that merges state power with Hindutva ideology, drawing parallels to historical fascism tailored to Indian conditions. Almost all the resolutions adopted by CPI (M) Central Committee have thereafter categorised the BJP regime as the one advancing the RSS’s fascist agenda.

In sharp focus, after Modi’s re-election in 2019, the CPI(M)’s characterisation evolved to place greater emphasis on the regime’s authoritarian tendencies and its perceived threat to India’s secular democratic framework. While the corporate-communal critique remained, the party increasingly highlighted the subversion of democratic institutions—such as the misuse of central agencies like the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation against Opposition leaders, the weakening of parliamentary norms, and the erosion of federalism.[1] The CPI (M) described Modi’s leadership as displaying “contempt for parliamentary norms” and fostering an “authoritarian-repressive regime.” This shift marked a broader framing of Modi as not just an economic or communal threat, but a systemic danger to the Constitution and India’s pluralistic identity.

3. Communalism: Hindutva as a tool vs. state-sponsored majoritarianism

• Early Perspective (2014-2019): The CPI (M) initially framed Modi’s communal agenda as a political tool of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the BJP to consolidate power through Hindu majoritarianism. Armed with the 22nd Congress Political Resolution and Political Tactical line the party evolved it’s assessment of the BJP central government with its ideological moorings in the RSS. The CPI (M) has therefore portrayed communalism under Modi as a state-sponsored project, exemplified by the Ayodhya temple event in January 2024, which it called a “death knell of secularism.” The party argued that the regime has moved beyond using Hindutva as a mere electoral strategy to embedding it into governance, violating constitutional principles for example the explicit separation of religion and state.

4. Electoral and tactical shifts: BJP as the main enemy vs. broader Opposition unity

• Consistent position: Throughout Modi’s tenure, the CPI (M) has identified the BJP as the primary political enemy due to its communal and neo-liberal character. It has called for mass struggles to resist these policies, emphasising the Left’s role as the most consistent opponent.
• Tactical variation: However, the CPI (M)’s approach to opposing Modi has varied. In 2014-2019, it focused on independent Left mobilisation, wary of alliances with “neo-liberal” parties like Congress. In its election review of the 2019 general elections CPI (M) without mincing words took the Congress to task for its unwillingness to come up with broader Opposition unity. Subsequently, after the Covid lockdown and the BJP-led government using the lockdown to advance its political goals compelled all Opposition parties to coordination on public issues. This coordination gradually expanded into political actions and culminated in the formation of INDIA block as the Opposition’s unified attempts to unseat the BJP from the centre.

Post-2019, with the formation of the INDIA bloc (a coalition of Opposition parties), the CPI(M) has softened its stance, advocating for a broader unity to defeat the BJP electorally, even while maintaining its critique of Congress’s historical role with regards to neo-liberalism. This reflects a pragmatic shift in characterising Modi as a threat requiring a wider resistance, not just a Left-led one.

5. Response to specific events: Reactive vs. strategic framing

• Reactive Critique: At times, the CPI (M)’s characterization has been event-driven. For instance, it condemned Modi’s handling of the 2002 Gujarat riots (pre-2014) as evidence of his complicity in violence, and later the 2021 oxygen shortage denial as proof of callousness and authoritarian denialism.
• Strategic Framing: Over time, the party has woven these incidents into a broader narrative of a “post-truth” regime that manipulates facts, undermines democracy, and prioritises Hindutva and corporate interests over people’s lives. This shift shows a move from piecemeal criticism to a cohesive ideological attack.

Post-2024 Election: weakened but unchanged in essence

The 2024 Lok Sabha election results, where the BJP lost its outright majority and formed a coalition government under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), prompted a subtle adjustment in the CPI (M)’s rhetoric. They hailed the outcome as a “setback” for Modi’s “image of invincibility” and a public rejection of his authoritarian-communal agenda. However, the party maintained that the core character of the regime remained unchanged. They argued that despite coalition constraints, Modi’s economic policies would continue to favour  big corporations (e.g., through privatisation initiatives like the National Monetisation Pipeline), and his communal politics would persist, as evidenced by ongoing attacks on minorities in the BJP-ruled states.

The CPI(M) also noted that while Constitutional changes (like those undermining secularism or federalism) might be harder to push through due to the lack of a BJP majority, the regime’s “thrust” toward neo-liberalism and authoritarianism would see “no qualitative change.”

Ideological consistency vs. tactical nuances

Throughout these phases, the CPI (M)’s Marxist lens has remained consistent—viewing the Modi regime as a tool of the bourgeoisie, allied with imperialism and monopoly capital, while exploiting communal divisions to maintain power.

However, tactical differences emerge in how they prioritise these elements. Early on, economic critiques dominated, aligning with their class-based analysis. Later, the focus on authoritarianism and constitutional defence reflected a broader alliance-building strategy within the INDIA bloc, where the CPI (M) sought to unite secular and democratic forces against the BJP. Post-2024, their characterisation balances cautious optimism about electoral setbacks with a warning against underestimating Modi’s resilience.

Key differences over time

Thus, the CPI (M) emphasised Modi’s pro-corporate policies (e.g., labour reforms, tax cuts) as the primary betrayal. Over time, this expanded to include a stronger focus on democratic erosion, reflecting the regime’s growing consolidation of power.

2. Communalism as strategy vs. systemic feature: Early critiques framed communalism as a political tactic to distract from economic failures. Later, it was portrayed as an intrinsic feature of Modi’s governance, tied to a broader Hindutva state-building project.
3. Invincibility vs. vulnerability: Pre-2024, Modi was depicted as an unassailable figure backed by money and media. Post-2024, the CPI (M) highlighted his vulnerability, though without softening their overall condemnation.

Conclusion

The CPI (M)’s characterisation of the Modi regime has evolved from a focus on neo-liberal economics and institutional subversion to a more layered critique that integrates crony capitalism, state-sponsored communalism, and fascist tendencies. While the core Marxist analysis—viewing the state as serving ruling-class interests—remains unchanged, the party has adapted its rhetoric and tactics to address the regime’s growing consolidation of power and the shifting political landscape. These differences reflect both an escalation in the perceived threat posed by Modi and a strategic response to rally the wider Opposition, all while staying rooted in its ideological opposition to capitalism and communalism.

The author, Y Venugopal Reddy, is cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad and had contributed a series of articles in the run up to 22^nd Congress of CPI (M) at Hyderabad; the concluding part of this series will appear tomorrow)

[1] The regime’s pursuit of Hindutva politics intensified in this period, with policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 and the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir 9August 2019), both seen as assaults on secularism and minority rights.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Part 1 and 2 can be read here

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 1

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 2

Related:

Subjective thinking Hazardous for the CPI(M), India

CPI(M) must read the writing on the wall, realign to defeat fascist forces

Steer Clear from Jargon, Look at the Ground Reality: CPI(M) Today

The post Evolution of the Left [CPI (M)] approach towards Hindutva politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 3 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Yechury’s approach of boldly confronting contemporary political reality and strengthening the Party was persistent and he started working out an alternative political tactical line in the place of isolationist one.

Way back in 2016 itself the former general secretary of the party who still holds strings of the organisation in his own, unique way wrote an opinion piece in Indian Express concluding that, “The threat that is sweeping through India today is one of authoritarianism, not fascism, he argued. Nor are the conditions present for a fascist regime to be established, even though a ‘determined effort is being made to reorder society and polity on Hindutva lines”

This enables us to understand that immediately after taking over the reins of the Party at the 21^st Congress, against all odds, Yechury started working on this hypothesis, What is Hindu Rashtra, and his opinion piece in Asian Age on the 10^th anniversary of Babri demolition wherein he called the demolition the beginning of fascism in India. Accordingly in the Polit Bureau meeting that was held in October 2017 he proposed an alternative line which was shot down by a majority in the Polit Bureau, then.

With unwavering commitment, however, he pursued the same with the Central Committee that was held in January 2018 where the Draft Political Resolution was adopted. In that meeting he could persuade the central committee to follow the Party Constitution which permitted him to present an alternative political tactical line backed a by minority in the Central Committee. After the January Central Committee meeting, the Tripura election results were out where the Party got routed shockingly at the hands of BJP. This helped Yechury to firm up this commitment about the need for an alternative political tactical line.

Hence, by the time the party assembled itself for the 22^nd Congress to finalise the prospective Political Tactical Line (PTL), there was a buzz in the air that in that, at the conference Yechury, would be asked to resign as general secretary. Several leaders like P Madhu, the than Andhra Pradesh secretary of the Party openly campaigned advancing this sectarian line handed down by BV Raghavulu and others that the PTL has already been settled and the question before the 22^nd Congress was merely to elect a leader (probably like BV Raghavulu, in his opinion) to steel the Party along those lines. The present day secretary of the Andhra Pradesh CPI-M unit, V Srinivasa Rao also publicly told a gathering at Bhimavaram that if Sitaram Yechury was not willing to follow the principle of democratic centralism (which implied an agreement with the sectarian political tactical line backed by the majority in the Central Committee) he would have to step down as general secretary. These narrations are but the symptoms of the malaise. If one gets into details and narrates all part of the criticism(s) against Yechury such as being a ‘Congress agent’, the list will be unbelievably long!

To come back to the main thrust of this article, the draft political resolution then summed up the three years of BJP rule, “2.78 The BJP has consolidated its political position. Under the Modi Government, there has been an intensification of the neo-liberal capitalist exploitation of the people; the secular-democratic framework of the Constitution is being eroded with the pursuit of the Hindutva agenda; and the BJP-led government has bound India closer to the imperialist strategy of the United States. All this marks the onset of an authoritarian-communal regime.” It accordingly called for “2.81 The Party should step up its intervention to advance the struggles of various sections of the working people against the economic burdens being imposed upon them. Combining these struggles against the impact of the neo-liberal policies with the struggles against the communal agenda is the way to advance the struggle against the BJP-RSS combine. The struggles against the neo-liberal 40 policies, Hindutva communalism and authoritarianism, are all inextricably interlinked.”

Having said that much, the draft political resolution stopped at the gates, when it came to the question of dealing the elephant with the elephant in the room, the looming Congress question. This confusion is well articulated in the draft, “2.90: Our tactical approach should be to cooperate with the Congress and other secular opposition parties in parliament on agreed issues. Outside parliament, we should cooperate with all secular opposition forces for a broad mobilisation of people against the communal threat. We should foster joint actions of class and mass organisations, in such a manner that can draw in the masses following the Congress and other bourgeois parties.” This paragraph reads close to the para 2.89 wherein it states, “2.89 The Party will cooperate with INDIA bloc parties in Parliament and, on agreed issues outside Parliament. The Party will join hands with all secular democratic forces on issues of authoritarian onslaughts against democracy, the use of draconian laws to suppress dissent and the opposition to efforts to subvert the Constitution and the institutions of the State.”

If we read through these paragraphs carefully and analytically, one can decipher that Prakash Karat was sticking to his original understanding formulated way back in 2016, in the recent opinion piece in Indian Express. This is why those who are willing to fight against the fascist RSS and its political offshoot which acquired fascistic characteristics being in power are so worried.

The 22^nd Congress stands as one of the milestones in the long journey of Communist movement in India. This can only be compared to that of the one in 1964 where a threadbare discussion took place about characterising the Indian bourgeoisie state.

The open and fierce discourse witnessed then at the conference split vertically. The minority who backed the Yechury’s alternative tactical line inched ahead, day by day, with more and more delegates are realising what lay ahead for them. Some delegates among those who participated in the discussion –like the ones from Punjab– encountered Prakash Karat on the dais itself by asking him, “When would you agree with the fact that India is on the tenterhooks of fascism? After our cadre and Party passes through gas chambers?” Even after being stung by such penchant criticism, Prakash stick to his line by advocating and repeating his way of thinking, the line. To put it simply, a party that has come to power through Constitutional means cannot not undermine the same.

Against this, the minority resolution presented by the then General  Secretary, Sitaram Yechury, batted for all-out war against BJP and RSS by joining hands with all secular forces including the Congress. Amidst the heated debate, perhaps for the first time in the history of CPI (M), delegates demanded a secret ballot on the Political Resolution. The situation reached a head where it was clear that if, such a secret ballot was allowed, the majority line proposed by Prakash Karat and others, was set to be defeated. Realising the intensity and sense of the house, the majority came down to a kind a battered down position and accepted partially the tactical line advocated by Sitaram Yechury. They agreed that defeating the BJP and ousting the government from the Centre was key.

Given the importance of the line then adopted, and this interpretation (by the writer) is a means to help readers understand the CPI(M) through its own documents. I am, therefore giving below the full text of a significant portion from the CPI-M’s 22^nd Congress Party documents (on the political line):

“Political Line

2.116 (i) Given the experience of the nearly four years rule of the Modi Government it is imperative to defeat the BJP government in order to isolate the Hindutva communal forces and reverse the anti-people economic policies.

(ii) Thus, the main task is to defeat the BJP and its allies by rallying all the secular and democratic forces.

(iii) But this has to be done without having a political alliance with the Congress Party.

(iv) However, there can be an understanding with all secular opposition parties including the Congress in parliament on agreed issues. Outside parliament, we should cooperate with all secular opposition forces for a broad mobilization of people against communalism. We should foster joint actions of class and mass organisations, in such a manner that can draw in the masses following the Congress and other bourgeois parties.

(v) The Party will fight against the neo-liberal policies being pursued by the BJP government at the Centre and by the various state governments including those run by the regional parties. The Party will strive to develop united and sustained actions on the issues of people’s livelihood and against the onslaught of the economic policies.

(vi) Joint platforms for mass movements and united struggles at all levels must be built up. Resistance to the anti-people policies should be intensified. The united actions of the class and mass organisations must seek to draw in the masses following the bourgeois parties.

(vii) Given the serious challenge posed by the Hindutva forces both inside and outside the government it is essential to build platforms for the widest mobilisation of all secular and democratic forces. The emphasis should be on building unity of people to fight the communal forces at the grassroots. These are not to be seen as political or electoral alliances. Similarly, broad unity to fight against the authoritarian attacks on democratic rights should be forged.
(viii) The Party will give priority to developing and building the independent strength of the Party. It will work to broaden and strengthen Left unity.

(ix) All Left and democratic forces should be brought together on a concrete programme to conduct united struggles and joint movements through which the Left and democratic front can emerge. In states, the various Left and democratic forces should be rallied to form a platform around a concrete programme. At the national level, the Left and democratic alternative should be projected in our political campaigns and to rally all those forces who can find a place in the Left and democratic front.

(x) Appropriate electoral tactics to maximize the pooling of the anti-BJP votes should be adopted based on the above political line of the Party.

This understanding is further cemented by the CPI-M’s resolution on Election Tactics which was adopted in October 2018 in face of impending general elections 2019. The Party then agreed, “There cannot be an all India alliance to fight the BJP. We have to therefore work out state-wise election tactics based on the overall electoral tactical line. We should rally (the) secular and democratic forces in the different states so that the widest (possible) forces can be mobilised to defeat the BJP and its allies.” At the same time, it also emphatically stated that the Party should strive for understanding with non-Congress secular regional parties.

The formation of the Bharatiya Rashtra Samithi (BRS) should and K Chandrasekhar Rao aiming to be key player in the post 2019 general election scenario, and Pinarayi Vijayan attending the public meeting on the occasion of BRS formation should be seen in the light of the above resolution. Finally the Federal Front fell flat in the face of the mounting BJP challenge and subsequently the BJP returned to power with enhanced strength.

Though Sitaram Yechury, given the historical background of regional parties, aware that the Federal Front was not going to materialise as such, much like a teacher guiding students based on their errors/mistakes, patiently waited for the consequences of the post 2019 general elections, the unraveling of the true face of BJP government and its parent organization the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS), given the power strings it holds on the Union Government.

The tactical and organisational maneuver adopted by the CPI (M) in the post 2019 general elections scenario will be discussed in third part of this series.

(The author, Y Venugopal Reddy, is cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad and had contributed a series of articles in the run up to 22^nd Congress of CPI (M) at Hyderabad)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Read Part 1 here

Related:

Subjective thinking Hazardous for the CPI(M), India

CPI(M) must read the writing on the wall, realign to defeat fascist forces

Steer Clear from Jargon, Look at the Ground Reality: CPI(M) Today

The post Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 2 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The untimely demise of Sitaram Yechury, the General Secretary, CPI (M), a personable and astute leader also considered to be an ace tactician, less of a pragmatist, more of an orthodox Leninist,  of the  Communist Party of India (Marxist), has created a huge vacuum. Yechury contributed significantly to the understanding of Hindutva politics in India.

This article is an attempt to chart out the contribution of Sitaram Yechury to comprehend the contemporary political reality in order to realise the goals of the Left in India, which is the apparent purpose of the conduct of these such a Conference.

The Political Resolution is an important document in the history of all Communist Parties which sets out their international outlook, assesses certain core ingredients of the country’s politics and sets out a road map for action.

The Political Resolution adopted by the CPI (M) at its 21^st Congress is such an important document The question of resurgence of Hindutva politics was finally acknowledged by the CPI (M) only at its 21^st Congress wherein the Party, in the opening remarks of the resolution observed, “The advent of the BJP government represents the consolidation of the rightward shift in Indian politics. It welds together the neo-liberal thrust and the Hindutva drive with a pro-imperialist orientation. Already, the impact can be seen in the nakedly pro-big business policies which will further deepen social inequalities and intensify the exploitation of the working people. This combined with the offensive of the Hindutva forces poses new and serious challenges to our aim of changing the correlation of class forces in favour of the working people.” Further the 21^st Congress categorically declined any kind of electoral understanding with secular parties as it declared, “(Para) 2.71: The Party will give primary attention to developing and building the independent strength of the Party. At the same time, the Party will strive to develop united actions on people’s issues, defence of national sovereignty, states rights and against imperialism with other democratic forces and non-Congress secular parties. Joint platforms for mass movements and united struggles are necessary if the Party is to expand its independent strength. The united actions of the class and mass organisations will seek to draw in the masses following the Congress, the BJP and the other bourgeois parties.” (emphasis is mine)

In consonance with this finding, one would have expect the Party which developed this tactical line under the leadership of ace tactician Prakash Karat to come up with a concrete tactical approach. The tactical line adopted by the 21^st Congress was detailed from Paras 2.68 to 2.72. A bare analytical reading of the same reveals the confusion within the leadership of the Party.

Going by the tactical line adopted at 21^st Congress it appears that the first and foremost task of the CPI (M) is to defeat the BJP and its Hindutva politics. Accordingly it was held that, “(Para) 2.68: The Party has to fight against the BJP and Modi government’s policies. This is the main task at hand. This requires a concerted opposition to the Modi government’s economic policies and its Hindutva oriented social, educational and cultural policies. The Party has to conduct a political-ideological struggle against the BJP-RSS combine. However, the fight against communalism cannot be conducted in isolation. It has to be integrated with the struggle against (the) neo-liberal policies and in defence of people’s livelihood(s).”

The above enunciation reveals that the Party had yet to make up its mind to defeat the BJP and remove that party from the seat of power, at any cost. It was merely confined to fight against the BJP’s policies by opposing the Modi governments economic and Hindutva oriented social education and cultural policies. Though it called for a bold initiative to take on the politics of the landed (land-lord) bourgeoisie parties, nothing concrete had been chalked out at least to strengthen the historical bases of the Party such as West Bengal, the then undivided Andhra Pradesh and Assam. The strengthening of the party was primarily seen through the lens of the Party in power in West Bengal, Tripura and Kerala. Once the Party lost its core base Bengal, a question that was posed was about the very survival of Left politics in India.

Subsequent developments however and the policy orientations of the BJP lead by Modi which had bulldozed the foundations of parliamentary democracy caused a serious re-think within a section of the Party. Adhering to the call given by the 21^st Congress to devise a bold initiative the then General Secretary conceptualised a broader alliance of secular forces including Congress, proposed an alliance in the wake of the collusion (unspoken alliance) between the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and BJP. This strategy was agreed upon after detailed discussions and arriving at a majority within the Bengal State Committee of the Party. Accordingly there was an alliance with the Congress in terms of seat adjustments in the 2016 assembly elections. However, given electoral arithmetic (s) and mutual suspicions that developed between the core constituencies of both parties, this alliance tottered.

Surprisingly — and to the astonishment of all Indians aspiring to an alternative politics — the Polit Bureau followed by the Central Committee, both, heavily weighed down in favor of a sectarian approach, resolved that the Party in West Bengal had violated the Party’s understanding. Thereafter it was decided –by the Central Committee –to convey this (report) to CPI-M cadres across the country. With undue haste, almost a kind of one-upmanship, the Party ignored the fact that the very same leadership has scripted the Paragraph 2.288 of the Political Resolution, wherein it had been stated, that, “(Para) 2.88: The struggle for building Left and democratic unity will proceed differently in different states. Various types of Left and democratic combinations will emerge in the states and they will contribute to the building of the Left and democratic front at the all India level. The focus of all the tactics adopted by the Party should be for the realisation of a strong Left and democratic front.” Thus the Central Committee Resolution which castigated the West Bengal State Committee for its electoral understanding with the Congress, was itself, in a way, clearly against its own Political Resolution adopted at the 21^st Party Congress of the CPI-M at Visakapatnam.

Despite having such a solid tactical footing, the then General Secretary, without confrontation, allowed the resolution to be passed adhering to the principle of democratic centralism. This is another instances where the top leadership of the Communist movement in India, often, does not read, its own document and adopts a less rigorous approach.

Despite such a retreat, Sitaram Yechury gradually educated his party’s Central Committee towards the need of not merely battling against Hindutva politics, but also towards a clear-cut strategy to unseat Hindutva forces from the seat of power. Towards this end, he took inspiration from the amended Party Programme. The Party Program, amended at the CPI (M)’s 2000 Special Conference categorically stated, at Para 7.14 that “(Para)7.14: Reactionary and counter-revolutionary trends have existed even after Independence. They make use of the backwardness of the people based on the immense influence of a feudal ideology. In recent decades, making use of the growing discontent against the Congress leading to its steady decline, they are making serious efforts to fill the void left by the Congress Party. The Bharatiya Janata Party is a reactionary party with a divisive and communal platform, the reactionary content of which is based on hatred against other religions, intolerance and ultra-nationalist chauvinism. The BJP is no ordinary bourgeois party as the fascistic Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh guides and dominates it. When the BJP is in power, the RSS gets access to the instruments of State power and the State machinery. (The) Hindutva ideology promotes revivalism and rejects the composite culture of India with the objective of establishing a Hindu Rashtra. The spread of such a communal outlook leads to the growth of minority fundamentalism. This has serious consequences for the secular basis of the polity and poses a serious danger to the Left and democratic movement. Besides, a substantial section of big business and landlords, imperialism headed by the USA, is lending all-out support to the BJP”. (emphasis is mine).

The portion of the paragraph emphasised here had a direct reference to the 21^st Congress resolution wherein it called for, “(Para) 2.83:  There has to be a bold initiative to take on the politics and ideology of the bourgeois-landlord parties and to counter them with the CPI (M)’s political line and the Left and democratic programme. The Party must intervene and take up struggles on social issues.” Finally, sectarianism won and the West Bengal committee got castigated for its alleged violations. Being a leader who follows the core organisational principle of democratic centralism which says minority has to follow the majority decision, Sitaram agreed to follow the majority decision of the 2016, sometime in August that year.

This was the time when the Party castigated its own elected General Secretary to be an ‘agent of Congress’ whereas this electoral understanding with Congress revived the Save Democracy theme which had been coined by the then Party State Secretary, Bimon Basu. The 2016 Bengal elections were a watershed as they were in 2011. The 2011 elections focused only on defeat of the Left Front government by an electoral alliance sans a goal and ideology whereas the 2016 electoral understanding of 2016 focused on the Save Democracy theme in the wake of an onslaught by the a authoritarian regime in the state supported by a more authoritarian regime in center.

(In the second Part, the author, Y Venugopal Reddy, a cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad, will deal with the evolution of the Party’s approach towards BJP’s Hindutva politics by examining its discourse towards 22^nd Conference of the Party)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Part 2 and 3 can be read here

Evolution of the Left [CPI (M)] approach towards Hindutva politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 3

The post Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 1 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Left Front’s call for judicial inquiry

In a meeting held at the Communist Party of India (Marxist) office in Nagpur on March 18, the Left Front expressed shock over the violence in Nagpur, a city not historically known for communal strife. The party questioned the police’s decision to permit the effigy-burning protest organised by the Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) at Shivaji Chowk. It argued that if the authorities had taken prompt action against those responsible for inciting communal sentiments—particularly given that the protesters had engaged in similar activities twice before—the violence that erupted later that night could have been prevented. Reports have suggested that apart from burning of the effigy, these BD and VHP men had also desecrated the chadar  of the local dargah.

The Left Front has demanded a judicial inquiry into the entire incident, holding the police accountable for their inaction. The party has also called for strict measures against all anti-social elements and urged public representatives, including the Chief Minister, to make inclusive statements to help restore peace. In this regard, a delegation from the Left Front will present a statement to the District Collector and Police Commissioner, seeking immediate intervention. Additionally, an all-party meeting has been proposed to address the communal tensions and find ways to prevent such incidents in the future.

CPI(M) deems the incident as a conspiracy to escalate communal tensions

The CPI(M) has taken a stronger stance, attributing the riots in Nagpur to a deliberate conspiracy by fanatic forces with political motives. According to Dr. Ajit Navale, the party’s state secretary, the violence is part of a larger effort to divert public attention from pressing livelihood issues and economic distress. He alleged that communal tensions were being deliberately escalated to serve political interests, particularly in light of the state government’s failure to address governance challenges.

The party criticised ministers in the state government for making provocative statements, for weeks before the violence broke out, that encouraged religious polarisation. CPI(M) warned that extremist organisations are emboldened by the ruling dispensation’s tacit support, creating an atmosphere where communal violence can flourish. The party has demanded that the state government take a non-partisan approach and act decisively against those responsible for inciting violence.

Readers of Sabrangindia will recall, how Maharashtra has been allowed, by the earlier Eknath Shinde and now Devendra Fadnavis-led governments to host repeated events where controversial figures delivered provocative hate speeches that have undoubtedly left their impact on the social fabric. These have been extensively reported by us since September 2022. (More on this can be read here, here, here, here, here, here, and here)

Nagpur Violence: A politically motivated communal flare-up?

The background of the Nagpur violence suggests a calculated effort to inflame religious sentiments. The protest demanding the removal of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb from Maharashtra—organised by the VHP and Bajrang Dal—escalated when protesters burned a symbolic grave wrapped in a green cloth, allegedly picked up from a nearby local dargah. Despite the fact that the caretakers of the shrine went to the local police urging immediate action against these communal miscreants, reportedly no steps were taken by the police other than the filing of an FIR, either to prevent the burning or thereafter.

The act and subsequent police non-response or inaction, reportedly led to rumours that sacred verses were being desecrated, which provoked a violent reaction from members of the minority community. The ensuing clashes resulted in widespread destruction, including arson, injuries to security personnel, and police vans being set ablaze.

The CPI(M) has linked these events to a broader pattern of communal agitation in Maharashtra, accusing the ruling establishment of tacitly encouraging such incidents to shift focus from governance failures. The party has pointed to the state’s worsening financial condition, rising public dissatisfaction, and economic distress as underlying factors that the government seeks to obscure through divisive politics.

Demands for action and restoration of peace

In response to these developments, the Left Front and CPI(M) have jointly called for immediate measures to restore communal harmony. Their demands include:

• A judicial inquiry into the Nagpur violence to identify those responsible.
• Action against extremist groups that incite communal discord.
• Holding police accountable for their failure to act in a timely manner.
• Non-partisan handling of law and order by the state government.
• Public representatives making statements that foster unity rather than division.

The CPI(M) has also appealed to the people of Maharashtra to reject communal provocations and recognise the political motivations behind such incidents. They urge citizens to remain vigilant against attempts to use religious polarisation as a tool to divert attention from critical governance and economic issues.

As Maharashtra reels from the aftermath of the Nagpur violence, the response of the state government and law enforcement agencies will be crucial in determining whether justice is served and whether communal harmony can be preserved in the face of escalating tensions.

Related:

How communal unrest was stoked, misinformation & rumours ignited unrest in Nagpur

Shielded by Power? How Prashant Koratkar’s remains un-arrested, even after making derogatory comments against Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj

Colours of Discord: How Holi is being turned into a battleground for hate and exclusion

Maharashtra Human Rights Commission probes Malvan demolitions after suo moto cognisance

Hindutva push for ‘Jhatka’ meat is a Brahminical & anti-Muslim agenda

WB LoP Suvendu Adhikari’s open call for Muslim-free assembly from the Assembly must be met with action, not silence

The post Left front, CPI (M) demand judicial inquiry into Nagpur violence, call out state for inaction appeared first on SabrangIndia.

New Delhi: The victims of riots in North East Delhi came together on the third anniversary of horrific violence that claimed 53 lives at Qaumi Ekta Bhawan in Brij Puri to demand speedy justice. In a public meeting organised by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) to remember the victims, the family members on Sunday emphasised that the riots were not about tyranny by followers of one religion over other but injustice by ruling leaders who used violence to further their political interests.

Aaghaz who lost his newlywed son Ashfaq in riots said that the struggle for justice must continue if it is to ensure that no violence occurs again in the area. He said, “the victims have gathered here only to say that justice is yet to be delivered. The struggle for justice must continue. We will get it one day. History is a testimony to it that no ruler would be permanent. Just look at the religious scriptures of any religion and you would find the fate of unjust rulers. The one who perpetrates injustice is a tyrant and it does not matter which religion he follows. If Mughals could go, if British could go then present tyrants would be dusted too.”

Mallika, who lost her husband said that her partner could have been alive, had the police intervened in the matter. “My husband was hiding in the room. I had hidden my children inside the bed. When the rioters came, they started beating my husband. When they got to know about my children, they started beating them with iron rods. Later, my husband was brought down in the street and thrown away in the fire. I went to the Policemen to ask for help but they mocked me! My family was finished. After three years, I only seek justice,” she told NewsClick.

The members of the left party maintain that there had been a slew of challenges ranging from rehabilitation and compensation to perusal of justice. After rehabilitation, the struggle for just compensation has begun. We still do not know the status of all cases related to murders. Further, the challenging part has been to enable the survivors to earn with dignity and begin a new life. The space of Qaumi Ekta Bhawan was created with the intention to strengthen the bond among communities.

Ashok Tiwari, who specialises in pedagogical training told NewsClick, “we need to stand up with the communities in a sense that ensure that they are empowered economically and socially. We are right now focusing to impart training for self-employment. When we interacted with community members, we found that there are learning gaps in students studying in school. So, we started coaching and computer classes. We are also looking at other avenues where children could express themselves creatively such as writing and acting workshops too. It’s a new beginning for people and us too.”

Sehba Farooqi, Secretary, of All India Democratic Women Association (AIDWA) Delhi emphasised that the struggle for justice could not be fought by Muslims alone. “It is not a question of Hindu-Muslims unity. It’s a political question. The attacks which happened here were not attacks on Muslims alone. They were attacks on every individual who wish to see India as a secular republic. It was an attack on the constitution. Some people say that Muslims alone endured injustices and they will have to fight alone but if we see the country, it is being pushed in one specific direction. There are attacks on Dalits and Tribals too. People here are saying that Brinda Karat was the first to visit them after the riots. It’s not a new thing for us. She went to Jahangirpuri too when bulldozers were demolishing the homes and shops of innocent people. We could have issued the statements at the luxury of home. We went there to emphasise that the struggle to save the country will be fought on the streets. So, Muslims too will have to join other segments of society for a united struggle too,” Farooqi said.

Addressing the gathering of riot victims, Brinda Karat, Politburo Member, Communist Party of India (Marxist) said that the objective of bringing together riot victims is not to refresh their grief and trauma but to show that they are fighting the hardships and look after their families with unprecedented resolution. She said, “the victims have narrated their ordeal about life without their loved ones. With this meeting, we wanted to show the world that even though our sisters and brothers are living in hardships, they are demanding their right to life. They are saying to rioters that you tried to finish their families but we are alive and demanding justice. One of the victims recounted that when his husband was killed and she went to the police station, she was persuaded by police officials not to file the complaint. In today’s newspaper, we are learning that among 700 cases related to riots, only 10% of cases could see any progress and nobody has been persecuted in murder cases. We cannot abandon this struggle for justice. I urge you to please come up with case files, documents and information for us in the next month and we will initiate this legal struggle by keeping all people together. We must say that what was done to us will not be forgotten. If we want our generations to never face this violence again, we must fight this struggle and get real culprits punished.”

Karat said that it is a pity that government could not fix a universal mechanism for compensation of riot victims and treats different classes without a humanitarian approach. “I also wish to speak about compensation. No compensation can bring back a dead person but I fail to understand the standard of relief for people. The son of Ram Sugarath Paswan was a minor and he was given only half compensation. How inhuman is it? Ankit and Ratan Lal were murdered in a gruesome manner and their families were rightly compensated Rs 1 crore each. I want to ask this government which yardstick it is using to compensate somebody Rs 1 crore and somebody Rs 5 Lakh and discriminate against people. There are victims who lost their eyesight in acid attacks. If the compensation could not help them live with dignity, then it should be reconsidered. So, there should be a renewed for justice collectively.”

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Brinda Karat on the Third Anniversary of Delhi Riots- “Cannot Abandon Struggle for Justice” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Condemning the brutal killing of two young Muslim men between February 15-16 in Bhiwani of Rajasthan, the CPI-M has pointed out how the serious and relevant charge of murder is absent from the FIR, demanded that the Gehlot run Congress government purse the investigation seriously and a compensation of Rs 50 lakh per family is paid. The CPI-M has also demanded government employment for one family member of the deceased.

A delegation of the party that included Brinda Karat, member, Polit Bureau of CPI(M) and Amra Ram, Central Committee member and Sumitra Chopra, Dr. Sanjay Madhav, Raisa (Rajasthan state secretariat and state committee members) and advocate Shabbir Khan. They visited Ghatmika village in Rajasthan.

A detailed press release issued states that fears of the family that the investigation and prosecution in this case of brutal twin murders will be compromised, is justified. “The FIR filed is on the charge of kidnapping and the charge of murder is yet to be included. Those named in the FIR include the notorious Mohit Yadav known as Manu Manesar who operates with impunity in the region with the approval of the BJP government in Haryana. The burnt car and bodies were found in village Barvas, Loharu in the Bhiwani district of Haryana. So the Haryana police, which has been complicit in providing patronage to the activities of the gau rakshaks, is to be involved with the investigation. Only one of the accused has been arrested.” Media investigations have revealed that Mohit Yadav (allias Monu Manesar) has close links with some BJP leaders.

 Hence, the delegation has appealed to the Rajasthan Government to act firmly, more so since the initial crime of kidnapping took place in Rajasthan. “The criminals named must be arrested without delay. Compensation of fifty lakh rupees, as given by the government in the earlier communal murder of Kanhaiya Lal, should be given to the families of the victims along with employment assistance.” Kahhaiya Lal was beheaded brutally last year following former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma’s controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed.

 A delegation of the CPI(M) went to Ghatmika village in the Mewati area of Rajasthan on February 17 and met the families  of Junaid and Nasir, who had been kidnapped, brutally beaten and then burnt alive by criminals reportedly belonging to the Bajrang Dal Gau Rakshak gang operating on the border of Rajasthan and Haryana.

Family Account of the Murders: According to the family, states the CPI-M press release, on February 15, Junaid accompanied by his cousin Nasir left Ghatmika sometime in the evening to meet the family of the boy with whom he hoped to fix the marriage of his brother’s daughter. His brother suffers from a mental disability and it was Junaid who was looking after both families. Junaid, a father of six children, owned a shop which had to be closed during Covid after which he was working as an agricultural worker or doing manual work. The delegation met Shajida, Junaid’s widow and his sister-in-law and their children. Nasir, was a truck driver. Both he and his wife Harmina are orphans. They have no children and Nasir was supporting  his siblings. Their killing has left their dependents desperate and devastated, in need of urgent assistance.

The CPI-M delegation inquired about the reported cases against Junaid on charges of “cow smuggling”. These cases had been filed during the earlier BJP regime along with cases against many others in surrounding villages. Since there was no evidence of any kind, Junaid was never arrested nor have any of the charges been proved even after all these years. In fact, they were false cases filed by a vindictive government to justify the spate of incidents of violence against cattle farmers and traders by the gau rakshak gangs.

The ‘manufactured narrative is that dairy farmers and cattle traders who belong to the Muslim community are actually not dairy farmers but cow slaughterers. The village Ghatmika with a predominantly Muslim population is situated in the Mewati region which has been the target of the so-called gau rakshaks. During the previous BJP regime in Rajasthan, in November 2017, a resident of this village, Umar Khan, a cattle trader was shot dead by the gau rakshaks. This was a few months after the brutal killing of dairy farmer Pehlu Khan.  The family of Umar Khan is yet to get justice. The village apprehends that the same fate awaits the families of Junaid and Nasir. They said they did not want to bury the bodies till all the accused were arrested but were persuaded to do so by the Congress Minister Zahida Khan who assured them of justice. The delegation arrived in the village after the last rites had been performed and could not meet the Minister or officials.’

Background

Sabrangindia had reported on February 16 how two young Muslim men, Junaid and Nasir who were kidnapped allegedly by members of Bajrang Dal two days before were found burnt to death, their  charred bodies were found in a burnt car. It has been alleged that Monu Manesar, a Bajrang Dal man with connections to the ruling Bharatiya Jnata Party (BJP), who also leads a 50 member team of cow-vigilantes or gau-rakshaks is involved in this crime. Kidnapped on false allegations of cow slaughter two slaughter, these men were found brutally killed. An FIR has been registered at Gopalgarh police station in Bharatpur, Rajasthan against Monu Maneshar, Lokesh, Rinku Saini, Srikant under sections 143 (member of unlawful assembly), 365 (Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person), 367 (Kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to grievous hurt, slavery, etc) and 368 (Wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement, kidnapped or abducted person) of the IPC. It appears this FIR was filed before their bodies were discovered in the burnt car.

Early this month, Monu Manesar had also been accused of killing a 21-year-old man, Waris in Nuh, Gurugram. Waris’s family claimed he was killed by gau rakshak (cow vigilantes) led by Monu Manesar however, the police let him off claiming that Wairs met with an accident and died due to internal bleeding.Reporting on the background of Monu, The Wire wrote, “Often, Monu and his team live-stream the process of chasing a vehicle that is suspected of illegally carrying cattle. After the ‘smugglers’ are nabbed, Monu and his team post several images of the rescued cattle and the accused on their social media pages as ‘conquests’.”

Related:

Mathura: Cow vigilantes target Muslim family

Cow vigilantes attack truck driver in Amritsar

Cow vigilantes brutally murder two Adivasi men in Madhya Pradesh

Gun wielding cow vigilantes walking free in Haryana?

Atrocious! Cow vigilantes brutally attack two Muslim men and a woman for allegedly possessing beef, Madhya Pradesh

The post Pay Rs 50 lakh compensation each to Junaid and Naseer, two men burnt to death: CPIM to Gehlot govt: Rajasthan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The CPI (M) captured 93 posts of the Sarpanch (Gram Panchayat President) by direct election in the recently concluded round of Gram Panchayat (Village Panchayat) elections in the Maharashtra. The party has done reasonably well, especially in its traditional Adivasi strongholds of Nashik and Thane-Palghar districts. This round of Gram Panchayat elections was not state wide, since only 1165 Gram Panchayats in the state went to the polls. The voting was on October 16, 2022, and the counting was on October 17. 

The earlier system in Gram Panchayat elections was such that the election of Gram Panchayat members from different wards in a village. These members then elected their Sarpanch. But in this round, due to a change in the rules made by the present BJP-dominated state government, there were direct elections to the post of Sarpanch, with the entire village voting for this post. Gram Panchayat members were simultaneously elected from the various wards in the village. 

The 93 Sarpanch posts that were won by the CPI (M) district-wise as follows: Nashik (59), Thane-Palghar (26), Ahmednagar (6), Nandurbar (1) and Pune (1). In some Gram Panchayats the Party lost the Sarpanch post narrowly. However, it could win a majority of the elected Gram Panchayat members in many such cases. It therefore now has a majority in over 100 Gram Panchayats in the above districts. The Party won hundreds of Gram Panchayat seats in over 150 villages. 

Most of the winning candidates in these districts work in the AIKS, AIDWA, DYFI and AIAWU.  

The number of Sarpanch posts won tehsil wise in Nashik district is as follows: Surgana – 33, Kalwan – 8, Tryambakeshwar – 7, Dindori – 6, Peth – 5. The total number of Gram Panchayat seats won in the district runs into hundreds.    

The number of Sarpanch posts won tehsil wise in Thane-Palghar districts is as follows: Dahanu – 8, Jawhar – 5, Talasari – 4, Wada – 4, Vikramgad – 3, Shahapur – 1, Murbad – 1. Of these 26 Sarpanches, 11 are women. In these two districts, which are under one district committee since they were in the undivided Thane district earlier, the Party won 291 Gram Panchayat member seats. 159 of them are women. 

Felicitation 

A large function to felicitate the winners in Thane-Palghar districts was held on October 23 at Comrade Godavari Shamrao Parulekar Bhawan at Talasari in Palghar district. They were all felicitated by presenting them with red scarves of the Party and a book of revolutionary songs in Marathi and Hindi, titled ‘Woh Subah Kabhi To Aayegi’, recently published by the AIKS Maharashtra State Committee. Along with the winners, over 1,000 main activists of the Party and mass fronts from all the above tehsils attended.

The meeting began by paying homage to CPI(M) Polit Bureau member Kodiyeri Balakrishnan and former Central Committee member Kumar Shiralkar. Polit Bureau member Dr Ashok Dhawale outlined the sterling contributions made by both these leaders. The CPI (M) district secretary and state secretariat member Kiran Gahala made the speech of introduction, state secretariat member and MLA Vinod Nikole presided, and state secretariat member Kisan Gujar greeted the winners. 

Dr Ashok Dhawale made the concluding speech in which, while warmly congratulating all the winners and Party activists, he dealt with the current political challenges, and the responsibility of the newly elected members and the local party leadership in running the Gram Panchayats in a clean, transparent and pro-people manner. He also pinpointed the weaknesses in this election that must be overcome at the earliest. 

In another 500-strong felicitation meeting held at Surgana in Nashik district on October 23, Central Committee member J P Gavit, ex-MLA, and state committee members Subhash Choudhary, Bhika Rathod and Indrajit Gavit felicitated all the winners from Surgana tehsil.   

The Maharashtra State Committee of the CPI(M) thanked the voters for showing their faith in the Party, which had striven hard to solve the people’s problems at the grass roots. The recent peasant struggles in Maharashtra led by the AIKS also had a good impact on the results. The Party congratulated all the winning candidates and the Party workers for an impressive show. 

In this round of elections in the state as a whole, it was good that the opportunist, corrupt and communal BJP-Shinde combine was clearly edged out by the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA).

Within a few months, a mini general election will be held in Maharashtra. Most of the Municipal Corporations, many Municipal Councils, and most of the Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis will be going to the polls. Actually, these elections were due in the beginning of 2022. But due to factors like Covid, OBC reservation, etc they were postponed. 

The gains in this round of elections must be consolidated by the CPI(M) and by the Left, democratic and secular forces in the next vital round of elections.

(The writer is a polit bureau member of the CPI-M)

The post Maharashtra, CPI (M) makes impressive gains in Gram Panchayat elections appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Set up an independent commission of enquiry led by a retired judge into the North East Delhi Communal violence of February 2020, and its aftermath demanded Justice Gopala Gowda, former Supreme Court judge and Wajahat Habibullah, India’s first Chief Information Commissioner of India today. Speaking at the release of the report today, they were joined by Harsh Mander, an activist and Brinda Karat, polit bureau member of the CPI(M).

They were all speaking at the online release of “In search of justice”, a three-part report that studied the Communal violence in North East Delhi, based on its on ground work carried out by the Delhi State Committee of CPI(M). The speakers also sought justice for the many victims and survivors of the riot, who are yet to be compensated even though 10 months have passed since the six days of violence and arson changed their lives forever. 

Justice Gowda once again questioned the role of Delhi Police during the violence, and termed their conduct a “failure of law enforcement to contain the violence. He demanded that this be probed and that the central government appoint a former judge to conduct an enquiry. “The victims are entitled to compensation from the state. it is the duty of the state to protect citizens,” he said adding that an enquiry commission was essential.

According to Wajahat Habibullah, all citizens of India are one community. it needs to be asked who benefits from dividing this wider community. He said it was people in the garb of ‘bhakti’ who were creating such infighting amongst Indians. “What sort of desh bhakts are these?” He questioned why the government did not act against those spreading hate?  who are the people who gain from such violence and hate, he asked, adding that the government was responsible and answerable to the people who must stand up as one united force.

Activist Harsh Mander stated that he could not even remember when such massive hate for Muslims was spread in the national capital. He said in the past when such incidents happened it was political representatives who would go into the riot hit areas and compile a report, however now it was only activist-politician Brinda Karat who has been seen doing this. Brinda Karat continues to keep the fight for justice to the victims and survivors alive in court via her many submissions. Mandar, who along with other activists, has found his name in the accusations of conspiracy made by the Delhi Police. Both continue to be vilified by the Right Wing ecosystem on a regular basis.

Karat said while on the first day of the violence, february 23, there must have been attacks from both sides, it was the police inaction thereafter that led to the escalation of violence against the minority community. She detailed how there were only 6 more police personnel deployed at the peak of the violence even as distressed calls were being made “29 people were killed on February 25,” recalled Karat adding that the fight for justice, and the seeking justice from courts shall continue for as long as it takes. This report, released on the eve of December 10, Human Rights Day,  has analysed the North East Delhi communal violence in depth, citing data that the Delhi Police itself put on record during various replies in court, and on ground facts gathered by teams, and reached some startling  conclusions: 

1. This was not a riot: According to the report “it is incorrect to describe the communal violence as “Delhi riots” because in a riot both sides are equally involved. However, in this case “the offensive was from the Hindutva mobs while the other side, in the main, was desperately trying to save themselves from such attacks,” it states. 
    
2. One sided, area specific attack:  The report states that the Hindutva mobs “the offensive was almost completely on minority dominated areas” which were near the . The areas chosen for attack were all near the site where the anti-CAA protest sit-ins were taking place. Subsequently, the greatest losses in the violence were borne by the minority community.
    
3. Delhi Police’s role needs examination: The communal violence continued for five days from February 23 to 27. According to the report, and the panelists who have all studied such violence over the years in other parts too, this arson and killing cannot continue if the police acts quickly. However, in North East Delhi “there were some incidents on the sixth day too because of the role of the police. In almost all areas there is video evidence of the police siding with the Hindutva mobs” concluded the report. “ The serious injuries to the DCP, the ACP, the killing of Ratan Lal, all of these condemnable, are being used by the Delhi Police to cover up their openly blatant and partisan role against minority communities and in support of the aggressive actions of the Hindutva mobs including direct participation in the violence” it concluded. 
    
4. Home Minister Amit Shah’s role: Delhi Police reports to Home Ministry, this is perhaps the first report to directly name Home Minister Amit Shah’s role in police deployment. “There has been no answer from him or his ministry as to why adequate security forces were not deployed from February 23 onwards,” the report asks. It cites that the number of police personnel deployed even as the communal violence rged on was “only between 1,393 and 4,756 ( citing charge sheet based on FIR 59/2020 quoted in Section 2 of this report)” and “by not deploying adequate forces, the Home Ministry deliberately left 13,000 distress calls to the police by frightened citizens unattended.” According to the report, and the panelists at the online discussion there was “political conspiracy at the highest level to let Delhi burn as part of a political agenda”. 

The political agenda behind the violence and its aftermath of ongoing “conspiracy investigations” , as explained by Harsh Mander was to send a message to dissenters, demonise, end and criminalise the anti-CAA protests. This is also evident, said Karat, in the way student activists  Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal remain in jail even after they have got bail in multiple cases, all because they have also been accused under the UAPA.   

Now, months later, the subversion of justice continues as the relief provided to riot survivors is abysmal.  “The family of Nitin, a child who was killed in the violence,  was given just 50 per cent of the compensation,” revealed Karat as the child’s father leaned in to share this shocking fact with her.  She reiterated that she will continue to fight for the victims and survivors as even the Delhi government had not given the proper compensation it promised. There are victims “such Sikander, whose death is not noted as one killed in the communal violence,” recalled Karat who has raised the issue in court too pointing that “the number of those killed is 54 not 53 as officially recognised.” 

The first section of the report, apart from recording the socio-economic and political profile of the area as well as the election campaign by the BJP and Sangh Parivar stated that while Kapil Mishra’s speech on February 23 is now recognised as “the trigger for violence, “ there is also “evidence of the plans of the Sangh Parivar plans to spread unrest even before that. The Report cites “use of Shivratri processions on February 21 for aggressive sloganeering. Meetings of Sangh Parivar groups as well as an attack on two Muslim boys on February 22, all before the speech indicate that preparations were already in place to create communal division as part of a plan to attack the anti-CAA protest sites.” 

The second section has the details of the killings, dates, places and situations, that “the main offensive was on the Muslim inhabited colonies”, and that “this was almost always backed by the police. The attacks and killings at Johripur Pulia and surrounding areas for four days, including the day that Ajit Doval had visited the area,” are placed on record as is the role of the Home Ministry.

The report also put on record that most of the residents of the area want to live in peace, “though it is true that hundreds were involved in the mob violence, it is equally true that the vast majority of people were deeply disturbed by the violence and did not participate in it. There have been many positive examples of Hindus saving their Muslim neighbours and vice- versa” it stated. The report also has on record detail all the relief and rehabilitation work being done from February 29 till now. 

It recommends that an independent inquiry into the Delhi communal violence headed by a retired High Court judge whose record of impartiality in upholding the Constitution is undisputed, be set up. And that inquiry should “include the role of the Home Ministry and the deliberate delay in deploying adequate security forces to prevent the violence.”  It seeks the “immediate prosecution and arrest of BJP leaders involved in incitement and participation in violence,” and “investigation and action against all police personnel involved in the violence” apart from setting up “an impartial panel of lawyers for the prosecution as suggested by the Delhi Government.” 

And most urgently, it recommends “full compensation and assistance to be given to victims of the violence based on the actual extent and severity of the injuries and damages suffered.”

The report may be read here: 

Related

Serious inaccuracy in police account of those killed in Delhi violence: Brinda Karat
Brinda Karat moves Delhi HC, challenges order refusing hate speech FIR against Anurag Thakur, Pravesh Verma 
Delhi Police ‘conspirators list’ is to save actual perpetrators of violence, suppress

The post Independent inquiry into the North East Delhi communal violence must be set up: CPI(M) appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Digital media should remain free of direct government control, said the Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI(M)) on November 12, 2020.

The CPI(M) opposed a notification of the central government that brought all online media platforms and online content providers within the ambit of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (I&B.)

“This notification is a clear expression of intent that the central government is now moving to “regulate” digital media content. Having muzzled the print and electronic/visual media to a considerable extent, it is moving to control digital media,” said party members in a press release.

Earlier, online content came under the Ministry of Information and Electronic Technology and was subject to various provisions under the Information Technology (IT) Act regarding digital platforms and intermediaries. According to the organisation, the existing laws and IT Act are adequate for the purpose of a healthy digital media.

However, under the new notification signed by President Ram Nath Kovind, films, audio-visual programmes, news and similar content would be screened by the I&B Ministry from the date of issuance.

Filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri and cinephiles on social media have also expressed their reservations regarding the recent announcement.

Brilliant news. Perversion and psychotic content must be regulated. They are slowly turning OTT into not just soft-porn, gore and abusive platforms but also as religious, cultural and political weapons. https://t.co/J52C0PfMrn

— Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri (@vivekagnihotri) November 11, 2020

Lots of films nd shows criticising right wing politics have been releasing in online streaming platforms nd now the government has brought OTT contents nd digital news under the regulation of Ministry of I & B. Expect a lot of bollywood deshbhakth film announcements nd a pic.twitter.com/3D7Ij7qclW

— Ananthakrishnan H (@ak070499) November 11, 2020

Last year, I&B Minister Prakash Javadekar over-the-top (OTT) platforms required regulations just as other forms of media like print, news channel, advertisements and films work under corresponding presiding authorities.

Related:

OTT content now under the Information and Broadcasting Ministry of India
Plea in Delhi HC seeks regulating news channels from broadcasting content on communal disharmony
Erosion of Right to Free Speech leading to destruction of Right to Dissent: Justice Madan Lokur
Double assault on freedom of press: PUCL 

The post CPI(M) demands freedom of digital media from government control appeared first on SabrangIndia.