The South does it again

BY Darius Nakhoonwala| IN Opinion | 21/04/2015
Sitaram Yechury's election as general secretary of the CPI(M) revives an old angst at the South v East divide in the party.
DARIUS NAKHOONWALA looks at this, and other reactions, in the editorials.Pix:A Telugu channel reports on the elections.

 You don’t say!
By Darius Nakhoonwala

  

Around 2007 or so, I remember reading an article which said the problem with the CPI(M) was the East v South tension. Political power, the author said, lay in Bengal while party-patronage power lay in the South.

 

Until then, I had thought the CPI(M) was beyond such pettiness. But the editorial in Kolkatta’s Telegraph on the appointment of Sitaram Yechury, who is from Andhra Pradesh, as general secretary, proves his point. The edit is a massive rant.

 

It points out with undisguised parochialism and deep anguish that the party believes in Think Indian, act South Indian. That perhaps explains why it always had its general secretary, with the sole exception of Harkishan Singh Surjeet, from south India. Sitaram Yechury's elevation to the party's top job continues that mysterious tradition. Such is the lure of the south for the comrades that Mr Yechury's potential rival, S.R. Pillai, is also a southerner.” Gosh! Such vitriol.

 

The  edit  goes on in the same note “So, if Prakash Karat, who is from Kerala, had to go, only another leader from the south could come in. For those uninitiated into the strange ways of the CPI(M), it is legitimate to ask why the party never considered having a general secretary from West Bengal.”

 

I urge you to read it in full.

 

The Hindu, which despite its flamboyantly capitalist owners, has always had a soft corner for Communists, was the opposite. Being from the South it wholly approved of Mr Yechury’s appointment as party supremo. 

 

“The 62-year-old Mr. Yechury was widely seen as the automatic choice in the normal course.” It then dwelt for a few lines on the internal politics of the party before pointing out what is most relevant: “…the change of guard in the CPI(M) this time does not mark a generational shift... Mr. Karat and Mr. Yechury represent very different strands of thought. Mr. Karat is more ideological in his approach, a theorist reluctant to compromise on core issues even when the party enters into electoral seat adjustments with others. Mr. Yechury believes in greater cooperation and coordination with other secular-democratic parties and in building a more broad-based front to deal with changing ground realities and the growing threats to secularism.”

 

The edit should have pointed out that when the chips are down, ideology goes out of the window and who better than the Communists to prove that?

 

The Indian Express compared Narendra Modi, Rahul Gandhi and Sitaram Yechury. “The three events are connected,” it said and “it is possible to join the dots” which it proceeded to do via the “rich versus poor” rhetoric adopted by the three. Nice, I thought.

 

The edit gave much needed perspective to the reader. “For Modi, Rahul and Yechury, the challenge will be to talk about the rich and the poor while remaining sensitive to the complexity of constantly evolving ground realities that blur the old cleavages while creating new bridges and possibilities.” Excellent.

 

The Hindustan Times wrote a run-of-the-mill edit which had nothing much to say. But it did point out something which no one else did: “The problem the CPI(M) suffers from is a problem common to many parties, i.e. not having lower rungs of leadership. The declining fortunes of the party are largely owing to this factor, which should be the principal task Mr Yechury should focus on.” Fat chance. 

 

The Pioneer simply sneered. “The Communist Party of India (Marxist) must be hoping for a grand revival of its fortunes with the election of Mr Sitaram Yechury as its general secretary. There are two reasons for this. The first is that the party possibly cannot go electorally further down than it already has, and so a new leader at least cannot destroy what is already in tatters. The second reason is Mr Yechury's persona.”   

 

It then focused on telling its readers what a nice and sensible guy Mr Yechury is although “he has nurtured a soft corner for the Congress.” It then listed the number of times Mr Yechury had demonstrated this and concluded “It is possible that, with this seasoned networker at the helm, the CPI(M) will strike a more elaborate working relationship with the Congress to corner the Modi Government in the months to come.”

The Times of India did not write an edit. How silly.

 

Subscribe To The Newsletter
The new term for self censorship is voluntary censorship, as proposed by companies like Netflix and Hotstar. ET reports that streaming video service Amazon Prime is opposing a move by its peers to adopt a voluntary censorship code in anticipation of the Indian government coming up with its own rules. Amazon is resisting because it fears that it may alienate paying subscribers.                   

Clearly, the run to the 2019 elections is on. A journalist received a call from someone saying they were from Aajtak channel and were conducting a survey, asking whom she was going to vote for in 2019. On being told that her vote was secret, the caller assumed she wasn't going to vote for 'Modiji'. The caller, a woman, also didn't identify herself. A month or two earlier the same journalist received a call, this time from a man, asking if she was going to vote for the BSP.                 

View More