An old ideology for new times: on Congress's leadership crisis

The outcry in the Congress related to the management of affairs in the party seems to be worsening with each passing day. Yet, for the Congress, a leadership crisis is nothing new. The party has experienced such crises on multiple occasions. During the Tripuri Session in 1939, there was a contest between Subhas Chandra Bose and Pattabhi Sitharamayya for the post of president of the party. Sitharamayya was M.K. Gandhi’s choice, whereas Bose represented the new-age thinking of Jawaharlal Nehru and others. The Bose-Nehru camp eventually emerged victorious. However, that was the Congress of the past, where politics and ideology had a say in determining the course of events.

Rise and fall

In contemporary times, especially since its historic split in 1969, the Congress crafted its politics around certain ideological commitments. It sought to represent secularism in the country. It was always keen to emphasise its belief in socialism, democratic values and national sovereignty. It affirmed that it was anti-imperialistic. Under the Congress, India became an accepted voice among the newly liberated countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, with a prestigious role to play in the Non-Aligned Movement. That was the time when India championed the cause of South-South dialogue with an intention to resist the early signals of imperialist globalisation. The erosion of the party’s eminence began with the declaration of Emergency. A parallel leadership emerged and controlled the party and the government. The high-handedness of those leaders led to the end of Congress monopoly at the Centre in 1977.

Congress leadership crisis | A divide within G23?

The party managed to resuscitate somewhat within a comparatively short span of time. At the same time, a kitchen cabinet consisting of power seekers and ‘godmen’ found voice in the party. Soon, the secular party started hobnobbing with the power brokers of various religious groups at the cost of weakening its own, and the nation’s, secular foundation. The Shah Bano case and the opening of the gates of the disputed structure in Ayodhya in 1986 were formative events. The Congress allowed an aggressive right-wing Hindutva to gain significance. The demolition of the Babri Masjid was a turning point in the history of secular India. The role played by the then Prime Minister, who was also Congress president, is well known. The Congress lost the confidence of the masses, especially the minorities. A tilt towards soft Hindutva also began to influence its politics. Certain powerful elements even went to the extent of half-heartedly embracing Nathuram Godse’s ideology. They failed to understand that secularism is the unifying philosophy of this great nation of vast diversities. When Hindutva forces unleashed an ideological tirade against Nehru, the Congress remained a spectator, not knowing that their blow was aimed at the heart of its ideology.

From the 1990s, the Congress was oriented to neo-liberalism. There was no trickle-down effect. The erstwhile party of ‘Garibi Hatao’ isolated the masses. Dalits and Adivasis lost trust in the Congress. The party’s electoral losses did not take place overnight.

A legacy not to be ignored

From the mid-1960s, the Congress experienced failure in various States and at the Centre. For a political party to overcome setbacks, it must look deep into the causes of such setbacks. That never happened in the Congress. The crisis in the Congress is not only organisational, but also ideological, political and economic. It is high time for the Congress to rediscover Gandhi and Nehru. It is regrettable that this legacy has not found mention in the current debate. Even those who oppose the Congress due to its political and economic policies do not wish its peril. The reason is simple. Notwithstanding its wrongdoings and failures, the Congress is the only party with a pan-India presence which offers the promise of secularism. All other secular forces, including the Left, are limited to their pockets of influence. The response of the masses to multiple issues such as citizenship, abrogation of Article 370, labour codes, the National Education Policy, etc. are indicative of contemporary politics. People have taken to the streets braving the government’s repressive measures. The political opposition to an anti-secular, pro-rich government has to be built based on this energy. This is the challenge before the secular, democratic, Left forces. Unfortunately, in the ongoing power struggle in the Congress, these intentions have not come to the fore. The debate revolves only around the question of a leader. Not one person has uttered a word about the Nehruvian dream of a free India. In the midst of these squabbles, Congresspersons must remember Nehru’s ‘Tryst With Destiny’ speech in 1947 and ask themselves: from this midnight of organisational crisis where will we go? To a dawn of hope or to a dark of ruin?

Binoy Viswam is an MP (Rajya Sabha) and Secretary of the CPI National Council. Views are personal