On the one hand, the CPI(M) advisory says that the eleven years of BJP rule resulted in the consolidation of right-wing, communal, and authoritarian rule. Having said that, Karat wants us to conclude that neither the Modi government nor the state are fascist or neo-fascist entities.
Published Feb 26, 2025 | 11:00 AM ⚊ Updated Feb 26, 2025 | 11:31 AM
CPI(M) flags.
Synopsis: Madurai will be hosting the CPI(M) congress later this year, and as part of the routine, the party has issued its draft political resolution. There are self-contradictory statements in the two-page advisory signed by Karat. Differences of opinion existed between the Karat camp and the Yechury camp on the question of assessing the Modi regime. Yechury was instrumental in bringing almost all anti-BJP forces onto a single platform. However, Karat now wants us to conclude that neither the Modi government nor the state are fascist or neo-fascist entities.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) is back in the national media after an extended hiatus, even as both Communist parties get set for the triennial party conference season.
Madurai in Tamil Nadu will be hosting the CPI(M) congress later this year, and as part of the routine, the party has issued its draft political resolution for its rank and file to deliberate upon.
The political resolution, available in the public domain, often becomes a discussion topic for general intellectuals.
The latest political resolution, too, has sparked a debate and found space in the media by characterising the Narendra Modi dispensation.
“The nearly eleven years of the Modi government’s rule have resulted in the consolidation of the rightwing, communal, authoritarian forces with neo-fascist characteristics. The Modi government represents the alliance of Hindutva forces and the big bourgeoisie,” it said.
“Hence, the prime task is to fight and defeat the BJP-RSS and the Hindutva-corporate nexus underpinning it,” the draft resolution added.
Its cover note said this understanding was finalised at the party’s Central Committee meeting held in Kolkata from 17 to 19 January 2025.
Along with the draft resolution, the party also released a review of the Political Tactical Line pursued since the 23rd Congress (6 – 10 April 2022) in Kannur, Kerala. The party’s Central Committee adopted this report in its meeting held in Delhi in November 2024, two months after the demise of its general secretary Sitaram Yechury.
It is public knowledge that differences of opinion existed between the Karat camp and the Yechury camp on the question of assessing the Modi regime. There were heated exchanges between both camps on ideological questions surrounding the defining of and characterising the present dispensation.
In a historical first, at the party congress held in Hyderabad in 2018, General Secretary Yechury was compelled to move a minority political resolution on these questions.
Finally, after charged debates at the conference, as some states demanded a secret ballot to pass the political resolution, the Karat camp climbed down. They accepted a compromise formula, accommodating Yechury’s understanding of the definition of Modi government backed by the RSS and its ever-expanding tentacles of Hindutva.
The political formulation that evolved in this internal struggle is that the CPI(M) will pursue an electoral strategy where the pooling of anti-BJP votes is maximised by having an electoral understanding with the major Opposition parties, including the Congress. This resulted in rallying secular democratic forces around the notion of ‘Save Constitution, Save Nation.’
All these became staples for the media and was widely reported.
Sitaram Yechury.
Since then, the Modi government’s actions, such as the passage of the Citizen (Amendment) Act, farm laws, dismantling of Jammu and Kashmir, the treatment of the Ram Janma Bhoomi dispute culminating in the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, and opening it just before the general elections, as well as becoming instrumental in dismantling state governments ruled by the Opposition parties.
Excluding certain states from enjoying the benefits of central government schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, and Kendriya Vidyalayas, just because they rejected the diktats of the Modi regime, too, vindicated Yechury’s understanding.
These earth-shaking political developments forced the Opposition parties to join hands together in the form of the INDIA bloc in resisting and halting the Modi-BJP-RSS juggernaut. The above-mentioned para in the draft political resolution should be seen in light of historical developments that are seriously impacting the secular fabric of the country.
The ‘Save Constitution, Save Nation’ slogan evolved in the hands of Rahul Gandhi through his Bharat Jodo Andolan and Social Justice Abhiyan by the time of the 2024 general elections and played an important role in halting the BJP-RSS juggernaut.
It is for this reason the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Gandhi, called Yechury as captain who anchored the Opposition on a single platform.
The CPI(M) also officially acknowledged Yechury’s role in bringing almost all anti-BJP forces onto a single platform and becoming the backbone of the INDIA bloc. Keeping this in mind, Karat, too, while attending Yechury’s memorial meeting, once told that the deceased was instrumental in expanding the party’s understanding of Hindutva and RSS.
In light of all these developments and the characterisation of the Modi government’s 11 years of rule, it was given to understand that the CPI(M) is finally coming to terms with the fact of how to engage with its ideological arc enemy BJP which is backed by a multi-headed hydra-like organisation, the RSS.
Things appeared logical so far. But unanticipatedly a two-page advisory was issued to the party’s rank and file, guiding them to understand and interpret the party assessment of the Modi government’s 11-year rule.
While trying hard to differentiate from the other Left parties such as CPI and CPI(ML)’s assessment of the Modi regime the two-pager categorically stated: “We are not saying that Modi government is a fascist or neo-fascist government. Nor are we characterising the Indian State as a fascist State. What we are pinpointing is that after ten years of continuous rule by the BJP, — the political wing of the RSS — consolidated political power was vested with the BJP-RSS, resulting in the manifestation of “neo-fascist characteristics”.
The observation in the two-page advisory — “after ten years of continuous rule by the BJP, which is the political wing of the RSS, there has been a consolidation of political power in the hand of the BJP-RSS and this is resulting in the manifestation of ‘neo-fascist’ characteristics.” is antithetical to the formulation of the Draft Political Resolution.
The Draft Resolution states that the “Modi government’s rule has resulted in the consolidation of the rightwing, communal, authoritarian forces with neo-fascist characteristics”.
Despite having reasonable experience in reading Communist jargon, I found the draft resolution problematic since it assessed that the eleven-year rule of the Modi government consolidated the rightwing, communal, and authoritarian forces with neo-fascist characteristics.
It means all components in this formulation, i.e., communal, right-wing, and authoritarian forces, are exhibiting their neo-fascist tendencies.
Kodiyeri Balakrishnan with CPI(M) leader Prakash Karat. (Supplied)
Against this, the two-page advisory reverses this formulation and tries to confine it to the old understanding. The contents of the advisory are widely reported and discussed.
There are more self-contradictory statements in the two-page advisory signed by Karat. On the one hand, the advisory says that the eleven years of rule resulted in the consolidation of right-wing, communal, and authoritarian rule.
Second, the BJP which headed the central government and most of the state governments during these eleven years is nothing but the political wing of RSS. Also, the RSS has otherwise been held to have fascist tendencies.
Having said that, Karat wants us to conclude that neither the Modi government nor the state are fascist or neo-fascist entities. On an earlier occasion in October 2017, he wrote a detailed article in The Indian Express stating that a government elected through democracy and governing through constitutional mechanisms cannot be a fascist state.
The present two-page advisory is nothing but reiterating his understanding when his signed advisory says we can’t term Modi regime neo-fascist.
There can’t be any second opinion about the fact that CPI(M), having traversed so long in the dark, has become rudderless in the absence of ideologues rooted in praxis like Yechury.
It has to be seen if the upcoming congress helps to steer the party clear of these muddied waters with hairsplitting debates and chalk out a clear roadmap to lead the nation from the brink of a dark abyss.
(Next in the series is a discussion on the basic characteristics of neo-fascism and a reassessment of the current dispensation in the light of those characteristics. The writer is a lawyer, and cultural critic. He was previously associated with the CPI(M). Views presented are personal. Edited by Majnu Babu.)
