Why have the Left parties failed to emerge as an electoral force in India? Many have argued that these parties underestimated the mobilising potential of social identities such as caste in India’s electoral arena. The Left, goes this theoretical formulation, failed to anticipate that caste could transform itself into an interest group and successfully engage with democratic politics. While this argument has some merit, it does not provide a complete picture of the Left’s failure in Indian politics.
The Communist parties in most parts of the world, especially where they have a strong electoral presence, thrive on class politics, detest religion and rely heavily on formal associations such as labour unions. In a previous article in this series ( > An Uphill task for the Left , March 14), I suggested that in India, class politics remains marginal, religion and religious practice is ubiquitous, associational activity is weak and strength of labour unions is far from what the Left would expect. It seems, therefore, that the “objective conditions” that are essential to the electoral strategies of Left parties elsewhere do not gel with the basic facts of Indian political life.
Importance of religion The Indian Left has never managed to come to terms with the importance of religion in India’s social milieu. They conflate religious practice with communalism and majoritarianism without realising that there is a clear distinction between the two. The founding fathers of modern India understood this, and this is partly why the conception of Indian secularism is very different from the European vision of secularism. While the European vision of secularism emphasises separation of the state from church, the Indian vision is centred on the idea that the state will treat all religious faiths on a par and remain equidistant from all religions.
Extent of Religious Practice in India (in %)
Prayer (Puja, Namaz etc.) | Visit Temple, Mosque, Church, Gurudwara etc | Participate in kathas, sangats, bhajans, kirtans, jalsas, church services etc. | Give donations for religious activities | |
Daily/Frequently | 47 | 19 | 15 | 15 |
Weekly/Occasionally | 26 | 37 | 43 | 45 |
On festivals/Rarely | 21 | 34 | 23 | 26 |
Never | 7 | 10 | 18 | 15 |
(Source: NES 2014, Lokniti-CSDS)
As Pradeep Chhibber shows in his recent book, Religious Practice and Democracy in India , the practice of religion bears a close relationship with participation in democratic politics. He demonstrates using data from multiple surveys that across all communities that there is a positive association between Indian citizens’ practice of religion and their favourable perceptions of the quality of their political representation, as embodied in political parties and politicians.
That religion is ubiquitous in India is clearly evident from the recent Census data, which reported that more than three million structures were being used as places of worship in the country, a figure that exceeds the total number of schools, hospitals and dispensaries combined. Similarly, data from the National Election Study (NES), 2014, conducted by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, show that religious practice in India is confined not only to solitary acts of praying or visiting formal institutions but also to more informal settings such as sangats, kirtans, and jalsas. The data from the NES of 2004 and 2009 support this trend.
Associational life Other forms of associational activities in India, as Chhibber suggests in his book citing survey data (State of the Nation Survey, 2009), have limited presence. The survey asked respondents whether they had participated in the activities of an association such as a trade union, student organisation, farmer’s association and cultural organisations, and found that most respondents did not report any level of participation, either regular or occasional, in any of the types of groups or associations about which they were asked. The weak presence of associations and unions in India further constrains the Left as in other parts of the world, they rely heavily on trade unions and farmers’ associations.
There are four reasons why the Left parties in India do not have strong linkages with these associations. First, the labour force in the organised sector is very small. Less than one in 10 people work in the organised sector. Second, though the Labour Ministry last year started the latest round of surveys to estimate trade union membership, the data from a survey conducted in 2008 suggest that trade union politics in India is highly fragmented. The Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, affiliated to the RSS and the BJP, has the largest presence followed by the Congress-affiliated Indian National Trade Union Congress. Third, the trade union activities are generally concentrated in industrial towns and urban areas where the Left parties have a scant presence. Most parties in India are pro-poor and hardly distinguish themselves on a pro-labour or pro-capital dimension. The comparative weakness of class-based organisations limited the Left’s ability to turn “concrete conditions” into mass-based politics.
Membership in top five central trade unions in India
Name of the Trade Union | Political Party Affiliation | Membership in 2008 (in millions) |
Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) | Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Bhartiya Janta Party | 6.0 |
Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC) | Indian National Congress (INC) | 3.8 |
All-India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) | Communist Party of India (CPI) | 3.3 |
The Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS) | - | 3.2 |
Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) | Communist Party of India- Marxist (CPI-M) | 2.6 |
(Source: Ministry of Labour, Government of India.)
Rahul Verma is with Lokniti-CSDS and Travers Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley.
Read all articles in the series 
