The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has escalated its rhetoric against two rebel leaders in Kannur, Kerala, invoking historical traitors to describe the men it holds responsible for the party's shock loss of two long-held Assembly constituencies. The attacks followed a series of high-profile political meetings over the weekend of 31 August, marking the party's first public reckoning with its Assembly election debacle.

The Rhetoric: Mir Jafar and Brutus

In Payyannur, rebel-turned-MLA V. Kunhikrishnan has been compared to Mir Jafar — the Bengal nawab whose collusion with the British is widely seen as the turning point that cost India its sovereignty in 1757. In Taliparamba, former CPI(M) leader and now MLA T.K. Govindan has been labelled the 'Brutus of Taliparamba', a reference to the Roman senator whose betrayal brought down Julius Caesar. The 'Brutus' tag was applied by Kannur district secretary K.K. Ragesh at a Sunday meeting, a day after Kerala Chief Minister and senior CPI(M) leader Pinarayi Vijayan publicly accused Kunhikrishnan of working against the party's interests.

Vijayan's First Public Appearance After the Defeat

The weekend meetings were significant because they marked Vijayan's first public appearance following the CPI(M)'s unexpected electoral setback. At the initial gathering, Vijayan stopped short of naming Govindan but made clear that internal rebellion had cost the party dearly. The following day, with Ragesh sharpening the attack on Govindan, the party's messaging moved from veiled criticism to open condemnation.

Central Committee Review and Internal Debate

The party's Central Committee, in its post-election review, acknowledged organisational shortcomings and flaws in candidate selection. However, the public targeting of the two rebel MLAs has reignited debate within political circles over whether the CPI(M) is scapegoating individuals rather than confronting deeper structural weaknesses. Critics argue that the historical analogies, while rhetorically powerful, risk distracting from a more substantive self-examination.

What Political Analysts Are Saying

Political commentator Prof. M.N. Karassery offered a pointed observation. 'While the CPI(M) is calling Kunhikrishnan a Mir Jaffar and Govindan a Brutus, it is surprising that the party is not examining its own history in West Bengal and Tripura,' Karassery said. His remarks carry wider resonance: the CPI(M) governed both states for decades before losing power amid organisational erosion, voter alienation, and shifting political realities — a trajectory that Kannur's results may now be echoing.

The Kozhikode Meeting and What Comes Next

Attention is now focused on an extended state committee meeting scheduled in Kozhikode in September, expected to be critical for both the Kerala unit and the party nationally. General Secretary M.A. Baby and other Politburo leaders are expected to attend. The gathering will be closely watched for signs of whether the CPI(M) intends to move beyond identifying individual scapegoats and address the broader structural reasons behind its declining influence across India. In Kannur, the central question remains whether Kunhikrishnan and Govindan are symptoms of betrayal or indicators of a far deeper organisational crisis.