in India

by Pon Chandran

13/09/2026

The Indian Left today presents a complex and differentiated political landscape. Its various formations operate in markedly different institutional and political spaces. The parliamentary Left functions within electoral politics and legislative institutions; the non-parliamentary Left includes both underground armed organisations and open ideological and political groups outside electoral competition; and a broad range of grassroots organisations and social movements mobilise around agrarian, labour, ecological, civil-liberties and social-justice concerns.

These three broad tiers overlap in certain areas, but they also have distinct organisational structures, strategies and constituencies. Together, they provide a framework for understanding the changing character of Left politics in contemporary India.

1. The Parliamentary Left

The parliamentary Left is principally represented by the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Communist Party of India and other electoral formations, including CPI(ML) Liberation. For several decades, these parties combined electoral participation with trade-union, peasant, student and other mass organisations.

Their present position is substantially different from the period when the Left exercised governmental authority in several states.

The loss of power by the CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front in Kerala in the 2026 Assembly elections has further reduced the geographical reach of the parliamentary Left. Kerala had remained the principal state-level centre of Left electoral politics after the decline of the Left Front in West Bengal and Tripura. With the Left no longer heading a state government, its direct administrative presence has contracted considerably.

At the national level, the parliamentary Left has a relatively limited presence in Parliament. Its influence therefore extends beyond its numerical strength, particularly through participation in wider opposition formations and through interventions on economic policy, labour rights, secularism, federalism, social welfare and civil liberties.

The experience of CPI(ML) Liberation illustrates another route to electoral survival. Its sustained organisational work among rural labourers, Dalits and sections of the agrarian population, particularly in Bihar and parts of Jharkhand, has allowed it to retain a distinct political presence. Its experience demonstrates the importance of sustained local organisation and cadre-based political activity in areas where established electoral structures have weakened.

The parliamentary Left thus faces the task of maintaining its traditional organisational networks while responding to changes in class composition, electoral politics and the social movements emerging outside its direct control.

2. The Non-Parliamentary Left

The second tier consists of political organisations that do not operate primarily through parliamentary elections. It includes the underground Maoist movement as well as open Marxist, Leninist, revolutionary and other ideological formations that work through political campaigns, labour organisations, civil-liberties initiatives and other forms of mobilisation.

The Maoist movement

The CPI (Maoist) represents the armed and underground component of the non-parliamentary Left. Its political strategy has historically been based on protracted armed struggle and the establishment of areas of political and organisational influence in predominantly rural and tribal regions.

The movement has experienced considerable organisational and territorial pressure as a result of sustained counter-insurgency operations. The expansion of security infrastructure, including central armed police force camps, improved intelligence operations, road and communications infrastructure, and continuing military pressure have affected its ability to maintain earlier areas of influence.

The Bastar region of Chhattisgarh has been a major centre of the conflict, while parts of Odisha and Jharkhand have also witnessed Maoist activity. The movement has faced problems relating to the loss of senior leadership, the ageing of sections of its cadre, disruption of organisational networks and difficulties in recruiting a new generation of activists.

The contraction of the Maoist movement has consequently altered the character of the armed Left in India. Its organisational capacity and geographical reach are substantially different from those associated with the height of the insurgency.

Open non-electoral formations

Alongside the underground movement are numerous open organisations and collectives that draw upon Marxist, Leninist, revolutionary and anti-caste traditions without pursuing armed struggle or functioning primarily as electoral parties.

These formations work in areas such as labour organisation, civil liberties, human rights, legal assistance, social justice and opposition to particular state policies. Their activities are concentrated in different urban, industrial and rural settings and vary considerably in political orientation and organisational structure.

They operate in an environment in which organisations working on politically sensitive issues can face regulatory scrutiny, financial restrictions and legal proceedings. Laws governing foreign contributions and security legislation, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, form part of the wider legal environment within which some of these organisations function.

The open non-parliamentary Left therefore occupies a space between formal electoral politics and underground political organisation, with considerable variation in its methods and political priorities.

3. Grassroots Mass Organisations and Social Movements

The third tier consists of mass organisations and social movements whose activities are rooted in material, social, ecological and civil-rights issues. Many have historical or organisational connections with the Left, while others function independently of political parties.

Their significance lies partly in their ability to mobilise people around immediate questions of livelihood, land, wages, social rights and access to public resources.

Agrarian and peasant movements

Peasant organisations remain an important component of mass politics in rural India. The Samyukt Kisan Morcha brought together different farmer organisations during the major farmers’ mobilisation against the agricultural laws, while organisations such as the All India Kisan Sabha continue to maintain a nationwide organisational presence.

Their concerns include remunerative agricultural prices, legal guarantees relating to Minimum Support Price, agricultural debt, input costs, land and the growing role of large corporate interests in agriculture.

These organisations bring together sections of the rural population with different economic positions. Small and marginal farmers, larger cultivators and agricultural workers may participate in particular campaigns, although their interests are not always identical. The question of building sustained unity across these groups remains an important feature of agrarian mobilisation.

Trade unions and the changing workforce

The transformation of India’s labour market has also affected the traditional Left trade-union movement. Organisations such as the Centre of Indian Trade Unions and the All India Trade Union Congress continue to organise workers in the formal and organised sectors, but an increasing proportion of India’s workforce is employed informally or through contractual and platform-based arrangements.

The expansion of the gig economy has created new organisational challenges. Delivery workers, platform workers and other workers without conventional employer-employee relationships have begun developing new forms of collective organisation. Scheme workers, including ASHA and Anganwadi workers, have also undertaken repeated campaigns concerning wages, working conditions and employment status.

Digital communication has become an important organisational instrument for these newer forms of labour mobilisation. It enables workers who are geographically dispersed and often employed through different contractual arrangements to coordinate campaigns and collective action.

Ecology, Adivasi rights and displacement

Land, forests and natural resources constitute another important field of grassroots mobilisation. In many Adivasi regions, communities have organised against mining projects, large infrastructure schemes, land acquisition and displacement.

Such movements frequently draw upon the principle of community control over land and natural resources and invoke legal protections provided under legislation such as the Forest Rights Act and the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act.

The politics of Jal, Jangal, Jameen has provided a common vocabulary for several of these struggles. Their organisational forms are generally decentralised, relying on village assemblies, community committees and local networks rather than centralised party structures.

These movements can intersect with Left politics without necessarily being controlled by Left parties. Their immediate concerns often arise from questions of land, livelihood, customary rights and environmental protection, while their political analysis may incorporate broader critiques of state policy and corporate resource extraction.

Class, caste and gender

Another important development in contemporary grassroots politics is the increasing interaction between class politics and movements against caste and gender discrimination.

Earlier Left political frameworks frequently placed class at the centre of social analysis. Contemporary movements often combine this with ideas associated with the Phule-Ambedkar tradition and with feminist critiques of social and economic structures.

Student organisations, youth forums, civil-liberties groups and independent social movements have increasingly addressed questions of caste discrimination, institutional exclusion, gender inequality, freedom of expression and constitutional rights alongside economic questions.

This has produced a more differentiated field of Left and progressive politics in which class is one of several interconnected dimensions of political mobilisation.

Conclusion

The contemporary Indian Left cannot be understood solely through the electoral performance of Communist parties. Its institutional presence has contracted in important areas, while other forms of political and social mobilisation continue through trade unions, peasant organisations, Adivasi movements, civil-liberties groups, student organisations and other grassroots initiatives.

The three tiers—parliamentary politics, non-parliamentary political formations and grassroots mass movements—have different organisational structures and political strategies. Their relationships with one another are also varied. Some are directly linked to political parties, some maintain loose ideological affiliations, and others function independently while addressing issues that have historically formed part of the Left’s political agenda.

The changing balance among these three tiers reflects broader transformations in Indian society: changes in electoral politics, the structure of employment, agrarian relations, patterns of displacement, caste and gender relations, and the forms through which people organise around their material and democratic rights.

Understanding the Indian Left today therefore requires attention not only to seats won or lost in elections, but also to the continuing forms of collective organisation that exist beyond the parliamentary arena.