Working class support eroded, CPM has much to learn from AAP

How exactly does one understand CPM general secretary Prakash Karat discovering his party's resonance in the new age phenomenon of AAP?

An honest appreciation of the emergence of a working class party that the CPM claims it has always been? A third front possibility that the CPM can latch on to without letting go of the non-Congress, non-BJP substitutes? Or a party whose reflected glory the CPM can appropriate to shore up its image?

Probably, all the three and more. But how close is the CPM to the real truth?

Prakash Karat. PTI.

In an interview with The Economic Times on Tuesday, Karat says that most of what the AAP is doing, sans a stated ideology, is in fact similar to what the CPM is committed to - the constituency of the working class, austerity and the fight against corruption. However, to substantiate his points, he doesn't get into serious details other than the routine exposition of his party line.

Contrary to what the CPM claims, AAP is a completely different entity - from its genesis and the evolution so far - in terms of its ideology, constituency and even ethic. The AAP is a home grown alternative to the country's established political culture, and not a monolithic, top-down adaptation of an imported ideology.

The AAP is avowedly bottom-up and has begun to demonstrate its commitment to decentralisation while the CPM's organisational methodology is democratic centralism, which in practice is not "freedom of discussion and unity of action", but the absolute control of a powerful elite. The axing and departure of several prominent leaders of the party over the last several years is an unmissable evidence of the lack of freedom of discussion, let alone democracy, within the CPM.

In terms of the constituency, Karat appreciates how the AAP has got the middle class on its side; but what he conveniently forgets in his compliments is that the AAP's core strength - as the Delhi results demonstrated - is not just the middle class, but the working class too. Not only did the CPM fail to gain some traction with the working class in Delhi, but it has also begun to alienate them in its strongholds such as Kerala and West Bengal.

The CPM's disastrous rout in West Bengal and the never-ending charges of wheeling-dealing by its top leaders in Kerala deflate Karat's claims of a working-class constituency and his ideological high ground against neo-liberalism. West Bengal, which the party ruled for three decades, is sitting on a massive debt and is one of the biggest sources of distress labour migration. The party is also both a source and target of mindless violence. Its historic debacle could't have happened without the massive erosion of its support base.

In Kerala, the party is besieged by allegations of capital accumulation, corruption, violence and wheeling-dealing that don't befit its claims of working class ideology or commitment. That it has lost its exaggerated revolutionary oomph was evident in the serial failures of the agitations it undertook against the present UDF government.

Some of them, such as the blockade of the government secretariat and the chief minister's residence, were unprecedented. That the party couldn't win the trust of the people or sustain the firepower to attack a minority government that is plagued by numerous scandals exposed the CPM's loss of character and moral strength. More over, that the party has no agenda for the three million plus outstation migrants in the state also exposes its double standards. Obviously, it has no gain from a community without franchise. Does language matter in the party's commitment to class struggle?

Meanwhile, the party leadership in Kerala itself is facing charges of corruption, unethical deals and organised violence. Karat is either unaware of, or closes his eyes to, the bizarre defence that the top leaders of the party put up against these charges. Often, their standard line of defence is that their deals are no different from that of the others.

Although Karat's words clearly do not match his party's deeds, this is an occasion to learn from the AAP. Unlearning the past and demolishing the political-industrial complex and the rings of violent cadres that the party leaders have built in the field are difficult, but Karat's leadership can take a few baby steps to reclaim its role in working class politics - open its account books to people and stop its obsession with capital accumulation. India certainly needs the Left, but the CPM cannot lay claim over it by force, deceit and shady capital.

What Karat and the CPM should realise is that AAP has emerged as an alternative, not a substitute. The parties that the AAP seeks to substitute will include the CPM as well.