top of page

By:

Akhilesh Sinha

25 June 2025 at 2:53:54 pm

Ideology, Illusion, and the Politics of Power

Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi greets supporters during a roadshow ahead of the Kerala assembly polls, in Kozhikode district on Tuesday. | Pic: PTI New Delhi:  At a critical electoral juncture in Kerala, the political contest being waged in the name of ideology appears less about public welfare and more like a renewed struggle for the division of power. Kerala's electoral battle exposes contradictions between ideology and alliances, as BJP, Congress, and Left trade...

Ideology, Illusion, and the Politics of Power

Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi greets supporters during a roadshow ahead of the Kerala assembly polls, in Kozhikode district on Tuesday. | Pic: PTI New Delhi:  At a critical electoral juncture in Kerala, the political contest being waged in the name of ideology appears less about public welfare and more like a renewed struggle for the division of power. Kerala's electoral battle exposes contradictions between ideology and alliances, as BJP, Congress, and Left trade accusations while prioritizing power, leaving voters questioning credibility, governance plans, and commitment to justice.   At the national level, the Congress and the Left position themselves as opponents of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Yet before the public, they often appear equally eager to undercut one another. In Parliament, they join hands to bring no-confidence motions and accuse the government of misusing investigative agencies. However, at the state level, this coordination is conspicuously absent. In Kerala, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has alleged a nexus between the CPI(M) and the SDPI, even hinting at tacit understandings between the BJP and the Left. Meanwhile, LDF Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has dismissed these claims as "entirely baseless."   This persistent friction reinforces the impression that ideology has become largely symbolic, while the real contest revolves around consolidating vote banks and securing seats. The Left, invoking the language of "pragmatic alliances," signals readiness to align with the Congress at the national level. Yet in Kerala, it faces accusations of straying from its foundational principles, even as it projects itself as the principal alternative to the BJP.   Conspiracy factor Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has repeatedly asserted in his campaign rallies that this election is a contest between two ideologies-the Left and the UDF. Yet, he claims, for the first time there is an "unprecedented partnership" emerging between the Left and the BJP. He alleges that the CPI(M) can be easily controlled by the BJP, whereas the Congress-led UDF would not play into its hands. Such assertions risk creating the impression that ideological confrontation has now given way to a politics of expedient compromises.   On the other hand, CM Pinarayi Vijayan firmly maintains that his party neither seeks support from the SDPI nor engages in any covert understanding with communal forces. He portrays the Left Democratic Front as a formation grounded in "clear ideological principles" and resolutely opposed to communal politics. The contradiction here is striking that just as the BJP accuses the Congress and the Left of collusion, the Congress and the Left, in turn, level similar charges of "compromise" against each other.   Confused Electorate In Kerala's electoral theatre, PM Modi has branded both the UDF and the LDF as "each other's B team," while projecting the BJP as the only genuine "A team." His argument rests on the claim that the state has, for decades, been trapped between two traditional power blocs, one corrupt and the other allegedly even more so. He contends that both alliances have deceived the public through vote-bank politics, whereas the BJP now promises to "expose" their corruption and deliver "justice."   The larger question remains, when the Left and the Congress join hands in Parliament to oppose the BJP, is their unity rooted in a principled stand against the ruling party BJP/NDA, or is it merely political theatre calibrated for electoral convenience? If both claim to be ideologically committed formations, what justifies their readiness to confront each other in the states and often aggressively over vote banks?   Real Issues At the national level, the Left often raises its voice on substantive constitutional and economic questions; corruption, public debt, privatization, and decentralization. Yet, in the heat of elections, these very debates are reduced to the arithmetic of vote banks and seat shares. The BJP, as the ruling party, seeks to anchor its campaign in development metrics, flagship projects like the Vizhinjam Port, and symbolic initiatives such as the Nari Shakti Vandan Act, presenting them as tangible achievements before the electorate. The opposition, in turn, attempts to recast these same initiatives as narratives of "debt" and "plunder."

Decibel Discipline

Updated: Jan 27, 2025

The Bombay High Court’s recent ruling on the use of loudspeakers at places of worship is a long-overdue intervention against unchecked noise pollution. By affirming that the use of loudspeakers is not an essential religious practice protected under Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, the court has struck a judicious balance between religious freedoms and public health. While the judgment is a welcome step, it highlights the rampant disregard for noise pollution norms in Mumbai, Pune and other urban centers.


Noise pollution in India’s bustling cities has long been an unacknowledged crisis. The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, mandate strict decibel limits in residential areas—55 decibels during the day and 45 decibels at night. Yet, as the court observed, compliance is sporadic at best. In the case at hand, decibel levels near two mosques in Kurla and Chunabhatti exceeded 80 decibels, almost double the permissible limit. This is not an isolated incident. Across Maharashtra, religious places, construction sites and private events routinely flout noise regulations with impunity.


The High Court’s directive to the Maharashtra government to implement an in-built mechanism to control decibel levels of sound-emitting devices is a practical move. The emphasis on calibrating and auto-fixing loudspeaker decibel limits at places of worship ensures that enforcement is preventive rather than reactive. Equally commendable is the court’s insistence on the use of decibel-measuring applications by the police and the protection of complainant identities to prevent retaliation. However, enforcement remains a glaring weak spot in the system. The challenge lies not in the lack of rules but in their implementation. The enforcement often succumbs to political and religious sensitivities. Complaints of noise pollution, especially against religious establishments, are dismissed or ignored, leaving citizens to suffer in silence.


Noise pollution is a grave public health hazard in our age. As the High Court observed, no one’s rights are curtailed by limiting loudspeaker usage. On the contrary, regulating noise levels is in the broader public interest.


The court’s verdict should serve as a catalyst for systemic reform. Maharashtra must go beyond sporadic crackdowns and adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward noise pollution. This includes extending the court-mandated measures to all sources of noise, including political rallies, construction sites, and festivals, which are equally culpable. Cities like Pune and Mumbai, with their dense populations and 24/7 activity, are particularly vulnerable to the cascading effects of unchecked noise pollution. The Bombay High Court has shown the way forward with its pragmatic and balanced ruling. The court’s message is clear that lawlessness, whether cloaked in religious garb or otherwise, has no place in a democratic society.


Noise pollution, though invisible, is as damaging as air or water pollution. It is high time that Maharashtra treated it with the seriousness it deserves.

Comments

bottom of page