New Delhi, March 1:
CPI(ML) Liberation General Secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya on Saturday expressed sharp disapproval of the CPI(M)'s recent clarification that it does not classify the Modi government or the Indian state as "neo-fascist." Bhattacharya warned that any downplaying or ambiguity regarding the fascist threat could severely weaken the electoral standing and moral authority of communist parties in India.
Bhattacharya’s critique was triggered by a note recently circulated by CPI(M) to its state units. The note clarifies the party’s stance ahead of its April Congress in Madurai, Tamil Nadu, stating that while the Modi government's push for a reactionary Hindutva agenda and authoritarian measures exhibit "neo-fascist characteristics," the party itself refrains from labelling the government outright fascist or neo-fascist.
In an article published on the CPI(ML) Liberation's official website, Bhattacharya questioned the CPI(M)'s cautious approach. He suggested that the CPI(M)'s reluctance to categorically identify the Modi government as neo-fascist could stem from the electoral realities in West Bengal and Kerala, historically key CPI(M) strongholds facing challenging political conditions.
Bhattacharya pointedly remarked, "Perhaps the expression 'neo-fascism' had confused the CPI(M) ranks, leading them to mistakenly believe the only difference between CPI(M) and CPI(ML) revolves around the epithet 'neo'." He further highlighted that CPI(M)’s document used the term "neo-fascist" for the first time, prompting a careful clarification to its cadres that fascism in India was currently a "tendency," not fully entrenched or decisive.
Recalling historical positions, Bhattacharya cited the demolition of the Babri Masjid as the first "unmistakable glimpse" of fascist tendencies emerging in India, noting how prominent communist figures like Vinod Mishra and CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury had previously acknowledged the RSS’s fascist designs.
Critiquing CPI(M)'s cautious stance, Bhattacharya questioned: "After eleven years of unchecked consolidation of fascist forces at the helm of power, should Indian communists still wait longer to call the growing disaster by its historically known name?"
He emphasised that any downplaying of fascist threats or ambiguous distinctions between neoliberalism, authoritarianism, and fascism could ultimately damage communist electoral prospects and their political credibility. According to Bhattacharya, the current scenario demands a clear-eyed, unambiguous response from communist parties.
Bhattacharya also expressed concern over CPI(M)’s repeated electoral setbacks, particularly in Kerala, despite holding state power, as well as the steady migration of its voters and leaders to the BJP. He urged CPI(M) to prioritise independent growth, without undermining the crucial task of building a broad anti-fascist alliance.
Drawing attention to electoral realities, Bhattacharya noted that three of CPI(M)'s current four Lok Sabha seats came from Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan through the INDIA coalition. He rhetorically asked if any communist party could truly strengthen its political role by "obfuscating the central political question of the day."
Finally, Bhattacharya concluded with an appeal for unity among communists, hoping that no faction within the communist movement falters at this critical juncture. "We still hope that together we can strengthen the communist stream of anti-fascist resistance to save India from the growing calamity of fascism before it unleashes its fullest fury," he urged.
Last updated by a enewsx: