CPI(M) declines to label Modi Government as 'neo-fascist,' diverges from other left parties
New Delhi: The Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] has clarified that it does not consider the Narendra Modi-led government or the Indian state as "fascist" or "neo-fascist," diverging from the positions of other Left parties like the Communist Party of India (CPI) and Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation [CPI(ML)L].
In a note circulated among its state units ahead of its 24th Party Congress in April, the CPI(M) emphasized that while the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) regime exhibits "neo-fascist characteristics", the political setup under Prime Minister Modi has not fully developed into a neo-fascist system.
Key differentiation from other left parties
The CPI, in contrast, has labeled the Modi government as a "fascist government", while CPI(ML)L claims that "Indian fascism" has already been established under BJP rule. This divergence from other leftist groups could lead to significant debate within the CPI(M), particularly as it prepares its strategy for the upcoming elections and alliances.
Hindutva corporate authoritarianism
The CPI(M) draft resolution warns of the "danger of Hindutva corporate authoritarianism" potentially evolving into neo-fascism if the BJP-RSS alliance remains unchecked. The party’s note describes the BJP as the "political front of the fascistic RSS" but stops short of categorizing the Indian state or government as fascist.
The leadership clarifies that while the BJP has consolidated political power over a decade of continuous rule, this has led only to the manifestation of "neo-fascist characteristics" rather than a fully developed neo-fascist government.
Internal debates and historical stances
The CPI(M) has faced internal debates over this characterisation. Former General Secretary Sitaram Yechury had previously described the BJP-RSS regime as "fascistic", while current Polit Bureau coordinator Prakash Karat argues that the regime should be described as "authoritarian" instead.
In previous political resolutions, the CPI(M) acknowledged the rise of "emerging fascistic trends" (2018) and described the Modi government as advancing the "fascistic agenda of the RSS" (2022). However, the current resolution marks the first official usage of the term "neo-fascist" by the party.
Distinction between classical fascism and neo-fascism
The party’s note distinguishes between classical fascism, which arose during the imperialist era, and neo-fascism, which has developed within neoliberal political frameworks. Unlike classical fascist regimes that rejected electoral systems, neo-fascist regimes participate in democratic elections while using authoritarian means to suppress opposition and subtly alter state structures from within.
Implications for alliances
Sources suggest that this nuanced stance could influence the CPI(M)’s political strategy, particularly its relationship with the Indian National Congress in the broader fight against the BJP. The outcome of the 24th Party Congress may set the tone for future opposition alliances ahead of the upcoming elections.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Speaker Khader dismisses BJP's charges of 'delay' in swearing-in of Jeevaraj as MLA
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday rejected opposition BJP's allegations of delaying the swearing-in of D N Jeevaraj as MLA, asserting that the process was being handled strictly in accordance with constitutional provisions and rules.
BJP candidate Jeevaraj, who had lost the 2023 Sringeri Assembly election to Congress leader T D Raje Gowda, was declared elected late Sunday night after reverification and recounting of postal ballots in compliance with a High Court order.
The recount reduced 255 votes from Gowda's tally, overturning his earlier victory margin of 201 votes and reversing the result.
The recount followed an election petition filed by Jeevaraj.
Addressing reporters, Khader maintained that there was no delay in administering the oath to Jeevaraj, who was declared elected from the Sringeri Assembly constituency after a High Court-ordered recount of postal ballots.
“Where have we delayed? The application was submitted at 11 am. If an application is given in the morning and by evening someone says it’s delayed — how is that a delay?” he said, dismissing the allegations.
The Speaker said the matter involved 'technical issues' that required examination before fixing a date for oath-taking.
“When such a matter comes, we also need to examine it and take a decision as per rules. If an application is given in the morning, at least 24 hours must be given,” he said.
Khader stressed that his role was bound by the Constitution and not influenced by political considerations.
“When an elected MLA asks for time, we must give it under the Constitution and law. Can we refuse? No, we have to give it,” he said, rejecting suggestions that he was acting under party pressure.
He also underlined the need for trust in democratic institutions amid the controversy.
“A democracy and parliamentary system must function on trust. Without that, how can democracy be strengthened? Trust is essential,” he said, cautioning against creating suspicion around constitutional positions.
On claims that the delay was linked to the ongoing political and legal dispute over the recount, Khader said the issue did not fall within his purview.
“My responsibility is to act as per the Constitution and rules. I will ensure that whatever is due to them is done as soon as possible,” the Speaker explained.
He said he had already communicated his position when contacted and would formally inform the concerned parties. “There is no delay, nor any intention to delay. I will discharge my duties as per the Constitution,” he said.
Khader also pointed to possible legal complications in hastily administering the oath.
“If I give the oath to one person and tomorrow the court declares someone else the winner, what happens then? Will it automatically cancel? Will confusion arise?” he asked, indicating the need for due diligence.
On concerns that Jeevaraj had lost over two years of tenure, the Speaker said representation was linked to that constituency rather than an individual.
“Whoever becomes the MLA represents the constituency. Benefits are not given to an individual,” he said, adding that issues of alleged irregularities should be examined by the Election Commission.
The remarks come after the Leader of Opposition BJP in the Karnataka Assembly, R Ashoka on Wednesday accused the Speaker of 'deliberately' delaying the oath and approached Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot seeking intervention, even suggesting that the Governor administer the oath if required.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah termed the process 'Vote Dacoity' by Jeevaraj and said an FIR has been registered against the newly elected Sringeri MLA.
Defending the recount process, Jeevaraj denied allegations of tampering, while the High Court has stayed an FIR filed against him in connection with the postal ballot issue.
