Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan’s eyebrow-raising volte-face on private universities is causing detractors and adherents to question whether the CPI(M) is shedding its Marxist dogma.
Until recently, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) would have considered private universities an abomination, a neoliberal Trojan horse ushering in capitalist decay. For a party that once wore its ideological purity as a badge of honour, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) is now embracing a shockingly contradictory stance on private universities in Kerala. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s recent defence of the Private University Bill marks nothing short of an ideological whiplash.
Once a fierce opponent of higher education privatization, the CPI(M) is now the very architect of reforming the sector which is being seen by critics see as a departure from its Marxist roots and an unmistakable lurch toward neoliberalism.
At the CPI(M) Thrissur District Conference in Kunnamkulam, Vijayan framed the Bill as a necessary evolution, insisting that social justice would be the guiding principle. The legislation, he argued, is not a radical departure from Kerala’s public education model but an inevitable step forward, one that mirrors the policies of more than 20 Indian states. But for those with a long memory of CPI(M) politics, his justification rang hollow.
The party’s stance on private education has been, for decades, one of fierce resistance. The CPI(M)’s ideological opposition dates back to 1995 when it launched a blood-soaked agitation against the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) government’s proposal to establish a cooperative-sector medical college in Kannur. The protest culminated in the infamous Koothuparamba police firing, where five members of the party’s youth wing, the Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), were killed. That tragedy became the rallying cry against the so-called privatization of education. One of the injured protestors, left bedridden for three decades, passed away only months before Vijayan’s government greenlit private universities.
A decade later, CPI(M) leaders decried the Congress government’s move to introduce self-financing engineering and medical colleges, branding it a ploy to commercialize education. When, in 2014, the UDF sought to grant autonomy to reputed arts and science colleges, the CPI(M) reacted with vitriol. The party’s student wing, the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), even went as far as physically attacking diplomat-turned-educationist T.P. Sreenivasan at a global education summit.
Given this history, Vijayan’s defence of private universities seems more like a calculated political pivot than a genuine ideological shift. And it is hardly the first instance of CPI(M) softening its ideological stance in the name of pragmatism. The party once opposed computerization, mechanization in agriculture, and even Asian Development Bank loans, only to eventually embrace them under Vijayan’s leadership. His tenure has been marked by a series of economic recalibrations, including Kerala’s entry into the international masala bond market and an openness to foreign investment.
In many ways, Vijayan’s decision reflects broader changes within the CPI(M). The party, once a bastion of Marxist orthodoxy, has been forced to acknowledge economic realities that demand adaptation. A dwindling student population in arts and science colleges, coupled with an exodus of students to private institutions in neighbouring states, has further exposed the limitations of an entirely state-controlled education system.
Yet, critics argue that the move is less about adaptation and more about survival. In shifting its economic and policy stance, the CPI(M) appears to be shedding its ideological rigidity in favour of electoral expediency. By controlling the entry of private universities rather than resisting them outright, the party ensures its continued influence over the education sector, albeit through regulation rather than outright ownership.
The UDF has wasted no time in highlighting this ideological U-turn, accusing the CPI(M) of hypocrisy.
To be sure, Vijayan’s strategy is not without merit. Private universities, if properly regulated, could help bridge the gap in Kerala’s higher education sector. But the larger question remains whether Vijayan is crafting a new, pragmatic CPI(M), or is he merely abandoning its ideological commitments for short-term gains?
Kommentare