CHENNAI: Hitting out at actor-politician Vijay's unilateral decision-making style, Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary MA Baby warned that it sends the wrong signals to the democratic process. The "Führer type" leadership style is ominous, he said, adding that it remained unclear whether crowds would translate into votes.
It's ironic that the new entrant TVK, promising political change, doesn't spell out a comprehensive political or economic agenda, he said. The CPM leader also defended the party's decision to accept a reduced share in the DMK-led alliance, saying that seat compromises were necessary to preserve unity.
Does CPM's acceptance of a reduced seat share weaken the party's long-term prospects?
Contesting elections is only one part of political work. Equally important is organising the toiling masses, including workers, labourers, youth, women and marginalised sections.
Our political responsibility extends beyond elections. We mobilise people affected by the economic and political policies of ruling class parties, especially the BJP-led Union government.
Even though we were not allotted seats commensurate with our influence, we chose to contest one less seat than last time to maintain unity among secular and democratic forces committed to defeating the BJP-AIADMK combine. Preserving this unity is crucial in the current political context.
How do you assess the prospects of the DMK-led alliance in a multi-pronged poll fight?
The principal challenge to the DMK-led secular alliance comes from the BJP-AIADMK front, which we consider highly opportunistic.
The AIADMK traces its ideological roots to the Dravidian movement led by Periyar and Annadurai, both of whom stood firmly against centralisation of power. However, the party is now aligned with the BJP, which embodies centralised, authoritarian tendencies.
There is no ideological or economic coherence between the AIADMK and the BJP. If the AIADMK adheres to its stated principles, it should defend federalism, state rights and linguistic diversity.
The imposition of Hindi over Tamil is unacceptable. Tamil is a vibrant and ancient language, while Sanskrit, despite receiving disproportionately high funding, is not widely spoken. This imbalance reflects the BJP's misplaced priorities.
Given these contradictions, the alliance lacks credibility and is unlikely to have a durable political impact.Will Vijay's crowds translate into electoral success?
Will Vijay's crowds translate into electoral success?
Vijay's party is a new entrant. Yet, has not articulated a clear political position or outlined a concrete economic programme.
He speaks about offering an alternative model of governance with himself as Chief Minister, but does not sufficiently address key issues such as secularism or the defence of democratic institutions.
The party appears centred entirely around his individual leadership, with no visible collective structure or democratic functioning. He is like the Führer, the ultimate leader who decides everything.
Such a model sends the wrong signals in a democratic system. While he is attracting large crowds, it remains uncertain whether this support will translate into a sustained political force. The absence of a clearly defined agenda further adds to this uncertainty.
What are the CPM's views on DMK, AIADMK's freebies and welfare promises?
There is an increasing tendency among parties to compete through welfare announcements. If such measures are part of a coherent programme aimed at supporting people living in poverty, they can be appreciated.
For instance, the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government in Kerala has implemented a range of welfare initiatives. Similarly, the DMK government has introduced social security measures, including financial assistance for women.
However, it is important to distinguish between genuine welfare policies and promises made solely for electoral gain. The intent, design and long-term impact of such measures must be carefully assessed.
The DMK government has been accused of pursuing neoliberal economic policies that are at odds with the CPM's. Does this contradiction affect your credibility?
Neoliberal policies prioritise profit maximisation and allow the free movement of capital without adequate safeguards for workers. While capital can move freely, labour does not enjoy similar mobility or protection.
These policies dominate globally, and many governments are compelled to adopt them to varying degrees. This creates limitations for parties committed to pro-worker and democratic alternatives.
Within alliances, however, we engage constructively to influence policy decisions. In Tamil Nadu, we are working with the DMK to ensure that such policies are not implemented in their entirety and that safeguards are introduced to protect workers and marginalised communities.
How confident is CPM about LDF's third consecutive term in Kerala?
Our preliminary assessment is positive. The LDF government has delivered on development and welfare, strengthening public confidence. On that basis, we are hopeful of securing a historic third consecutive term.
The INDIA bloc partner on the national-level Congress has accused the CPM of having a tacit understanding with the BJP in Kerala. Do such remarks affect unity?
When parties within the INDIA bloc are compelled by the political situation to contest one another in states such as Kerala, such contests are unavoidable.
However, it is important that these differences do not benefit the BJP. Unfortunately, some of the statements made by Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge did not reflect this responsibility. At times, the criticism compelled us to respond and crossed acceptable limits.
Such exchanges are not conducive to the smooth functioning of the INDIA bloc. While political competition is inevitable, it should not strengthen the common adversary-the RSS and the BJP.
A similar situation was seen in Delhi, where divisions among Opposition parties, including the Aam Aadmi Party, created conditions that benefited the BJP. We must be more careful in future.
The CPM has raised serious concerns about SIR in Bengal. Where do you stand now?
SIR, in reality, is a large-scale removal of voters, particularly from minority and marginalised communities. This undermines citizens' constitutional right to vote. The CPM and other Left parties have been actively exposing and opposing this exercise. We have taken a firm and consistent stance on this issue.
CPM failed to win even a single seat in the last Assembly election in Bengal, an erstwhile stronghold.
We acknowledge the setbacks in West Bengal, but we are steadily working to rebuild our organisational base and reconnect with the people.
There is a positive response to our on-the-ground efforts. In this election, we aim to demonstrate that the Left remains a relevant political force. But the extent of that recovery will become clear over time. However, the process has already begun.