Why the Left is still relevant

The latest general elections have resulted in a further shift of our polity towards the Right. Apart from the objective conditions that led to a rightward shift, certain major subjective factors have also contributed to the Left’s electoral setback. Of course, it is high time for the Left to do a thorough introspection, serious course correction and undertake a total rejuvenation of its politics and practice. The Left has already started that process.

However, the electoral setback doesn’t mean the Left has become irrelevant in Parliament. It might have secured the lowest ever number of seats, but it will have to shoulder more responsibilities than ever before in Parliament in the days to come. There will be no dearth of issues which need to be taken up through meaningful interventions in Parliament. For a number of reasons, only the Left can play the role of an effective and firm opposition.

First, though the Congress is the principal opposition party, it is not in a position to play the role of a strong and credible opposition. It has lost its political and moral authority to occupy that space.. The fact that the Congress, as opposition, will have to confront its own policies will make it weak and vulnerable. The present government has already started the process of carrying forward the policies of the UPA government.

The broad agreement between these two parties was quite evident in President Pranab Mukherjee’s speech presenting the objectives of the new government. Narendra Modi’s government has re-affirmed the continuity of the past government’s neo-liberal trajectory. The prescription for reviewing economic growth is the same for both parties. Further opening up the economy including crucial sectors such as defence, greater dependence on FDI and FII, and an overall approach of appeasement of both foreign and domestic capital, continue to be a priority for the NDA too.

The major complaint that the BJP had against the UPA-II government was policy paralysis. What that means is, had the UPA-II vigorously pushed some of those policies now prescribed by the NDA, it would have been better. Despite their loud claims about poverty elimination, the BJP too doesn’t want to disturb the criteria for defining poverty followed by the previous government.

Yes, of course, there is a reference to the importance of containing food inflation. But again, just like its predecessors, the present government is also unwilling to ban futures trade in commodity markets. Neither of these parties is in favour of the Left’s demand for universal PDS. The BJP is talking about ending the unfortunate trend of farmer suicides but without ending policies responsible for the suicides.

Just as the Congress did, the BJP too prefers to ignore the recommendations of the National Commission on Farmers (NCF) headed by MS Swaminathan. How Modi is going to tackle farmer suicides without even making a mention of ensuring cheap institutional credit to the farmers, remains to be seen.

The presidential address referred to measures to create jobs. Whether those policies had ever led to job growth in the last two decades is a big question. Rather, these policies have resulted in jobless growth. Even when GDP growth occurred, there was no corresponding growth in employment. Is the BJP government not aware of the fact that more than a million posts are lying vacant in Central government service alone? Will the new government take steps to fill those vacancies?

Clearly they will prefer not to entertain these questions because their doctrine of “minimum government” is in conformity with the earlier government’s policy of abolishing posts in Central government service. After all, it was the NDA government that took the decision to reduce the number of posts in the Central government services by 2 per cent every year.

The unanimity in economic policy between the Congress and the BJP is also reflected in the foreign policy of the respective governments. The BJP has categorically made it clear that it wants to bring renewed vigour to India’s strategic partnership with the US.

This would come as heartening news to Manmohan Singh who strived hard to achieve this through the civil nuclear agreement. It is obvious that a strategic partnership with the US and an independent foreign policy cannot co-exist. This broad agreement between these parties, from economic to foreign policy issues, leaves a space too wide to be measured merely in terms of the Left’s parliamentary strength. The UPA’s slogan of inclusive growth, as well as its social security initiatives (though half-hearted), were influenced by the mass appeal of the Left’s alternative vision.

Even the BJP was forced to echo the Left’s opposition to FDI in multi-brand retail, contrary to its economic philosophy. And though utterly confused over policy issues, the Aam Aadmi Party too has tried to imitate the language and methodology of the Left in order to attract the attention of the poor masses.

The Left, throughout history, and especially in the post-liberalisation era, has been the sole voice of true dissent against a broad consensus among various other political parties on the ruling class’s vision of development. The Left has always championed the cause of secularism, democracy, protection of minorities, empowerment of women and so on. The Left will have to do this with greater vigour in the changed environment.

A genuine opposition will have to offer an ideologically and politically sound alternative perspective. The only political force capable of doing this is the Left.

Finally, the Left’s alternative vision has an appeal beyond the mass base of Left itself. The influence of this alternative vision is capable of effectively challenging the Right which is driven by the corporate-hindutva combine. Parliament, as the highest institution of our democracy, will be utilised to resist, counter and defeat any rightwing onslaught. Left members, though few, will not only spearhead this struggle within Parliament, they will also link this with the mass struggle outside.

The writer is a CPI(M) Member of Parliament