V S Achuthanandan, a rebel with many causes
The tussle for power in the Kerala CPM between Achuthanandan and the current Chief Minister, Pinarayi Vijayan, shadowed much of the political discourse in the early 2000s, right up till Vijayan's victory in 2016. It's seen as having an ideological dimension, with Achuthanandan taking the more orthodox line, as the Left across India tried to articulate a response to the tide of economic liberalisation. Achuthanandan's Marxism dovetailed with his anti-corruption stance, environmentalism and commitment to people's land rights, as seen in his campaigns to protect wetlands, ensure justice for victims of the endosulfan tragedy and opposition to the Plachimada Coca-Cola plant, and his drive against encroachment in Munnar. He was ready to take up more unlikely causes, too, such as open-source software. There's also a different story to be told, of IT parks and infrastructure — Technopark saw massive expansion and the Kochi Metro project was approved during his tenure as CM.
The last survivor of the 32 members of the CPI national council who walked out to form the CPM in 1964, Achuthanandan remained a rebel throughout his life. It often led him into conflicts with his party. He was expelled from the Politburo twice and was even characterised as functioning like an opposition leader when he was CM. He was no stranger to intra-party political manoeuvring, having crushed a rival faction in the party's trade union wing, the CITU, in the 1990s, and played a role in the ousters of senior party leaders M V Raghavan and K R Gouri Amma; eventually, he was outmanoeuvred himself. But if there was one factor that remained unchanged, it was the fervour he inspired among the people — the public outcry in 2006, which pushed the party leadership to walk back its decision not to field him in the assembly polls, is one example. That spirit could be heard one last time during his funeral procession on Tuesday in the slogans that rang in the streets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Thiruvananthapuram corporation adalat to begin today
Thiruvananthapuram: The city corporation will launch a file adalat under 'Nagarasabha Janangilekku 2.0' initiative from Monday to address pending files and public grievances. The drive, involving all zonal offices and departments, including engineering, revenue, health and PMAY, aims to provide timely legal and administrative solutions. The inaugural session will be held at Ulloor zonal office at 10am and will continue at Sreekaryam zonal office at 2pm. Mayor Arya Rajendran will inaugurate the adalat. Corporation secretary, standing committee chairpersons and departmental heads will attend. The mayor has urged the public to make use of the opportunity by attending the adalat sessions scheduled at their respective zonal offices on the specified dates and times. The adalat will conclude on Aug 4. The adalats were earlier scheduled last week, and it was postponed due to the demise of former chief minister V S Achuthanandan.
Mint
3 days ago
- Mint
Why MAGA Wants to Make Mexican Coke in the US
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Coca-Cola is launching a new product in the US this fall featuring cane sugar rather than high fructose corn syrup, and at least one restaurant chain is planning to offer sugar Coke as soon as next week. This news prompted Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to post his reaction online: 'MAHA is winning.' This new Coke is highly unlikely to Make America Healthy Again. But it raises the question of how US soda manufacturers came to rely so heavily on the corn-based sweetener in the first place. The answer is protectionism, one of the main items on the Make America Great Again agenda. As it turns out, when you combine MAHA and MAGA, what you get is … Mexican Coke. Because sugar-based Coca-Cola is already available in the US — it's just imported from Mexico and known colloquially as 'Mexican Coke.' The company does that because the US has extensive trade protections for American sugar growers, which pushes the domestic price of sugar in the US far above the world level. That means that it makes more economic sense to use corn-based sweeteners in US-based soda production while importing sugar soda from Mexico. Kennedy believes the ubiquity of high fructose corn syrup in the American diet has a significant deleterious impact on Americans' health. My more informed colleagues can adjudicate that claim, which I doubt. My concern is the distortionary impact of America's sugar policy on global trade flows and the allocation of natural resources. Turning corn into sugar is an inefficient process compared to turning sugar cane into sugar, so using HFCS is significantly more land-intensive than using regular sugar. Blocking sugar cane to promote HFCS therefore promotes global deforestation, on the margin, and raises the domestic price of food and land for Americans. In the grand scheme of things these are minor impacts — meat and especially cattle have by far the biggest land impacts of any economic sector — but they're something. The cornerstone of US sugar policy is a system of tariff rate quotas. Under the so-called TRQ system, a limited amount of sugar can be imported to the US and lightly taxed. These quotas are set on both a national basis and for dozens of sugar-producing countries. Any sugar above the quota level is taxed at a rate of at least 15 cents per pound — and with the global price of sugar at only about 16 cents per pound, that's a huge tax. These TRQs, meanwhile, are only one part of a larger plan whose objective is to prevent domestic sugar prices from getting too low while providing guaranteed profits to domestic sugar farmers. Another aspect of it, for example, is the US Department of Agriculture's practice of giving guaranteed discounted loans to sugar producers, with sugar itself offered up as collateral. The USDA is then instructed to manage an Overall Allotment Quantity (OAQ) — basically a national sugar production target — designed to ensure that the collateral is good for the loans and avoid credit losses. The upshot of all this is a windfall for a tiny number of American sugar farmers; a modest boost for America's corn farmers; higher prices for American consumers; and economic losses for America's trading partners in Latin America. This set of policies dates to the 1980s and has nothing in particular to do with President Donald Trump. But it amounts to a real-world road test of some MAGAnomics principles, and underscores how self-defeating protectionism can be. It's not just that American sugar policy raises costs and thus lowers living standards for the majority of people. It's that it undermines US manufacturing, because sugar is used as an input for other processes. Yes, in a naive sense, blocking sugar imports would seem to improve the US balance of trade. But the actual impact is unknowable. If tropical sugar-producing countries were allowed to export more sugar, they would have higher incomes. Those incomes would be spent on things, likely including the kinds of things that the US exports — airplanes, turbines, medical devices, beef, and whatever else. There would be real losses for some Americans, specifically the ones who own sugar plantations, but it's fundamentally a negative sum bargain that hurts most people on both sides of the trading relationship. Meanwhile, bad as all this sugar protectionism is as overall economic policy, the relationship to public health is borderline nonexistent. Coke simply manufacturing a cane sugar soda to give Trump a propaganda win, for starters, isn't going to change consumer behavior. Sodas sweetened with cane sugar are already widely available in the US, not only from competing brands but from Coca-Cola itself. They are less popular because they are more expensive. Even if consumers did switch, there is no real evidence that cane sugar is healthier than HFCS. Mexico, for example, where non-HFCS sodas are mainstream, has recently surpassed the US in its obesity rate. The reason HFCS is bad for you is not that it's worse for you than cane sugar — it's that the development of HFCS technology has made it cheaper to add sweetener to all kinds of things. And while most people like the sweet stuff, all this sweetened hyper-palatable food and drink encourages overconsumption. A serious conversation about what, if anything, to do about this would be welcome. But it solves nothing to pile scientifically illiterate policies onto economically illiterate ones. Elsewhere in Bloomberg Opinion: For more, subscribe to our newsletter. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. Matthew Yglesias is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. A co-founder of and former columnist for Vox, he writes the Slow Boring blog and newsletter. He is author of 'One Billion Americans.' More stories like this are available on
The Hindu
3 days ago
- The Hindu
CPI(M) pushes back against the ‘capital punishment' controversy centred around late V.S.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] has pushed back against the 'capital punishment' controversy centred around the late leader and former Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan, who died at the age of 101 on July 21. The recent portrayal by two former CPI(M) insiders that the party had singled out Achuthanandan for harsh criticism during its 2015 State conference in Alappuzha, forcing the veteran to exit the venue in distress, sparked the dispute, which erupted, discomfortingly for the party, in the wake of the outpouring of public grief for the departed leader. The controversy flared last week after former CPI(M) legislator and dramatist Pirappancode Murali alleged that a young leader had rhetorically recommended 'capital punishment' for Achuthanandan, following the presentation of a 'chargesheet', accusing the veteran of pursuing a cult of the individual that undervalued the role of the party and the masses in the struggle for working-class goals. On Friday (July 25, 2025) last, CPI(M) State Secretary M.V. Govindan dismissed Mr. Murali's averments, terming them 'pure nonsense'. He noted that Mr. Murali was no longer a party member and alleged that the latter had stoked controversy to get traction for an upcoming memoir. He accused the 'right-wing' media of 'vilifying communist leaders when alive and canonising them when dead to weaken the party'. Nevertheless, the dispute appeared to gain some political momentum on Sunday (July 27, 2025), with CPI(M)'s former MP, Suresh Kurup, seemingly endorsing Mr. Murali's allegations in an opinion piece published by a leading Malayalam daily on the same day. In the article reminiscing about his long years in the CPI(M) with Achuthanandan, Mr. Kurup alleged that a 'young woman leader old enough to be Achuthanandan's granddaughter had recommended capital punishment' at the State conference for the leaders' perceived transgressions. General Education Minister and CPI(M) State Committee member rejected the accusations. 'The State conference elevated me to the State committee. No such thing transpired as alleged', he stated. Another CPI(M) State committee member, Kadakampally Surendran, said the accusations 'were startling and aimed at slurring the character of rising stars in the party, including M. Swaraj'. He said the 'right-wing media' hounded Achutnandan and Kodiyeri in their lifetime. 'Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan endured waves of spirited smear campaigns aimed at weakening the party. 'Kerala has historically dismissed such false and malicious campaigns against Communists. The current controversy will be short-lived', he added.
