[Even if one doesn't encounter any extraordinary gem of wisdom, the
write-up below is worth taking note of for at least acknowledging the
dire straits the Left is currently in, coming from a camp follower.
Not the usual array of lullabies.
Even Singur and Nandigram are mentioned.]

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/an-elevation-to-lift-the-left/article7126843.ece?ref=sliderNews

Updated: April 22, 2015 10:07 IST
An elevation to lift the Left?
SRINIVASAN RAMANI

The new CPI(M) general secretary, Sitaram Yechury, must realise that
mere electoral alliances with regional parties will prove to be a
fruitless exercise without a stronger emphasis on Left unity and
engagement with social movements

Srinivasan Ramani
Photo: The Hindu Srinivasan Ramani
TOPICS
parties and movements
political parties

politics (general)
political systems
The elevation of Sitaram Yechury to the post of general secretary of
the Communist Party of India (Marxist) is at a time when the party
(and other forces of the Left) are in dire need of new direction and
inspiration. The new leadership of the CPI(M) will be carrying a
difficult burden to revive the prospects of a depleted Left and
support from a largely sceptical electorate. The 21st Party Congress
of the CPI(M) was held at a time when the party had registered new
electoral lows -- even in its strongholds -- and is, perhaps, at its
weakest political position since its inception in 1964. This is in
stark contrast to the period when Mr. Yechury's predecessor, Prakash
Karat, took on the role of general secretary 10 years ago.
Incidentally, both leaders cut their teeth in student politics at
Jawaharlal Nehru University and are ex-presidents of the JNU Students
Union.

Within a year after Mr. Karat became the first general secretary who
wasn't a founder-member in 2005, the party was at its strongest
parliamentary position. The Left parties, combined, had more than 60
MPs in the Lok Sabha, in power in their strongholds and initially
leveraged these positions adroitly to influence policy in welfarist
directions, as they extended support to the Congress-led United
Progressive Alliance (UPA). At the centre, the Left managed to punch
above its weight and even steered a few landmark pieces of legislation
such as the Forest Rights Act and the National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act. It is another matter that the party could not utilise
these "achievements" to translate into support, bogged down as it was
by events that had hampered it in its strongholds. It must also be
said that tactical blunders -- such as withdrawing support to the UPA
over the nuclear deal at a wrong juncture -- did not help it either.

Decline in strongholds

In the States where the Left was in power, especially West Bengal and
Kerala, troubles of varying kinds began to brew only months after its
coming to or retaining power. Buoyed by a strong mandate that was won
on the slogan of industrialisation, the Left Front government sought
to pursue "big ticket" projects in a hurry. The "reform zeal" of the
then West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee was contrasted
with the "obstructionist" emphasis of the CPI(M)'s central leadership.
There seemed a disconnect between what the party was preaching at the
Centre -- the fight against "neoliberalism" -- and what the West Bengal
government was seeking to do in the State -- fostering capitalist
development through incentivisation. Much has been written about the
land acquisition issue that hastened the government's downfall in the
State and this need not be repeated. But the victory in 2006 in West
Bengal had also papered over serious issues with the Left Front and in
particular the CPI(M)'s rule in the State. The party had, over its
long tenure, turned into a machine that combined a set of progressive
leaders with others who were willing to get their hands dirty in
electoral mobilisation, issuing contracts, and "managing" support.
Over time, a large set of self-seekers had found a place in the party
-- that seemingly was going to be in power for a long time -- and it was
this set of careerists at the middle and lower rungs of the party who
defected to the opposition at the first instance of the Left Front
losing power.

The image of the party, as a pro-poor force, had also taken a beating
following the Nandigram and Singur incidents and a wholesale defection
of the rural support base to the Trinamool ensued. Since 2009, the
Left Front has only seen a cascading decline in vote shares at every
level of elections. This was partially because the CPI(M) could not
mobilise enough support as an oppositional force against the Trinamool
Congress due to a moribund leadership that had little experience being
out of power. And the latter had taken the strong-arm, violent tactics
of voter and candidate intimidation to even greater heights. It will
not be an exaggeration to say that the once mighty CPI(M) in West
Bengal is in a shambles, and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is
emerging as a stronger opposition force to the Trinamool Congress. In
Kerala, on the other hand, the CPI(M) and its allies have managed to
retain a steady support base, but a long-standing saga of factionalism
and reliance on an overly-militant leadership from North Kerala has
contributed to dents in its image and restricted its prospective
growth. All said, the CPI(M)'s journey to relevance as a major
national force will depend on how it manages to overcome the hurdles
it has posed for itself in its strongholds in Kerala and West Bengal.

The State units of the CPI(M) have been loath to admit these
frailties, let alone work upon them. The party leadership in West
Bengal has insisted that the break in relations with the Congress at
the centre (over the nuclear deal) was the main reason for the drastic
loss of support for the party. This lazy excuse had allowed it to
imagine that mere electoral rearrangement -- a joint coalition with the
Congress against the Trinamool -- would be enough for revival. Combined
with the rise of the BJP and the party's organisational tepidity, it
is not a surprise as to why the CPI(M) continues to flounder in the
State despite the Trinamool government's unfavourable image.

Lack of a positive voice

Yet, the decline in the fortunes of the CPI(M) and the Left as a whole
since 2005 is not merely due to parochial factors. The Central
leadership had emphasised the need to grow in other parts of the
country particularly in North India. But the lack of an adequate
organisation, or enough imagination to formulate specific strategies
of mobilisation that are relevant to these areas, has resulted in the
further enfeeblement of its presence.

The CPI(M) has been forever late in trying to innovate its political
tactics to reach out to a changing India. The emphasis on "negation" --
resistance, obstruction and dependence upon statism -- has not helped
fulfil its aims to set an alternative agenda. The Left parties will be
better off seeking to promote an alternative agenda of comprehensive,
welfare-driven growth, by emphasising universal health care, social
security and state support and struggling for them rather than only
offering resistance to the model of development espoused by the BJP
and even the Congress. There are exceptions of course, in the manner
in which the party has taken up issues of the marginalised in
proactive ways -- such as the Tamil Nadu Untouchability Eradication
Front for example. But largely, despite espousing progressive and even
Left-liberal values (for example, the CPI(M) is the first party to
openly take a position against capital punishment and its legislators
were at the forefront of the Section 66A annulment discourse), it is
seen as a party that does not stand for something, but is only opposed
to many things. This is especially so among the youth and the middle
classes. The latter in particular and the CPI(M) seem to share a
mutual derision, even if the party's leadership mostly comprises
leaders from the very same section.

Even the urban poor, a humongous category that should be the ideal
constituency for the Left, seems to have been bypassed by it. The
Left's emphasis on mobilisational tactics being limited to the
workplace -- organising the poor as labourers, craftsmen, public sector
employees, etc, rather than urban residents who lack amenities, access
to essential supplies and who live precariously due to inflation and
job insecurity -- is another factor that has limited its reach. The
urban poor prefer to be mobilised by sectional and
patronage-dispensing parties because of the lack of an alternative.
The electoral success of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi -- by
reaching out to the urban poor as a mobilising category through the
distinct lack of sectional appeals related to caste or region --
perhaps holds some lessons for the Left parties. Of course, the AAP's
organisational failures are a reason why it has not matured as a
progressive political party but that is not germane to the discussion
here. India's Left parties can also look up to the influences of the
"new left forces" in Latin America and Europe, where the rise of
radical Left parties has been aided by new strategies of mobilisation
and organisational building.

Left unity

The easy claim made by critics for the weakness of the Left in India
is that the goals that it espouses -- socialism and comprehensive
welfare driven economics -- are passé. This is not true. While the Left
parties have certainly declined, social movements have pushed for and
achieved the implementation of welfare policies that do not flow from
the neoliberal form of development. Left parties in Latin America have
sought to rethink socialism as a process rather than a stage of
development and have formed united fronts with social movements to
bring about substantial changes in the economy, with large public
support.

Mr. Yechury's remarks after his promotion suggest that the CPI(M) will
look to revive organisationally and is seeking to renew its support
base, even while venturing to form programmatic (and even electoral)
alliances with secular and like-minded parties to take on its primary
enemy, the BJP. One hopes that the CPI(M) realises that without a
stronger emphasis on Left unity and engagement with social movements
to set a positive, progressive agenda, mere electoral alliances with
regional parties and programmatic tie-ups with the Congress will prove
to be a fruitless exercise for the party.

[email protected]

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to