By Subrahmanyan TD

Sitaram Yechury in his political journey spanning five decades has been a figure who defies easy categorization. As the General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), his ideological commitment to Marxism was unquestionable. Yet, his approach to politics reflects a blend of neo-Marxist thought, rooted in revolutionary ideals, and a pragmatic understanding of the evolving political landscape. As Rahul Gandhi rightly pointed out he was a person with a deep understanding of the country and its people. A lifelong socialist, Yechury has continually adapted to the demands of modern governance, balancing ideological purity with the necessity of realpolitik. In doing so, he has carved a unique space for himself in Indian politics—one that straddles theory and practice, idealism and pragmatism. The many facets of being Yechury is intriguing and is worth an analysis of how he became one of those very few leaders acceptable around all political circles and became the master alliance strategist.

The Man Who Transcended Cultural Boundaries: A Fusion of Identities

Sitaram Yechury’s political journey is defined by his ability to transcend cultural boundaries. Born a Tamil Brahmin in Andhra Pradesh, raised in Hyderabad, and politically reborn in the Hindi heartland, Yechury’s multifaceted identity has been his greatest asset. Fluent in multiple languages, he could navigate India’s diverse political landscape with ease, engaging leaders like Mulayam Singh Yadav, Karunanidhi, and Lalu Prasad Yadav in “the language they understood.” His role in managing the fragile coalition governments of the 1990s is a testament to his deft handling of India’s regional and cultural complexities.

Also read: Who was Sitaram Yechury — A Communist, activist, pragmatist and fighter to remember

What sets Yechury apart even more is how he escaped the ‘Brahminical’ label often associated with the upper echelons of the CPI(M). Despite his open acknowledgment of his Brahmin heritage, Yechury’s life as a communist overshadowed his caste identity. He uniquely stood out as a leader unafraid to critique the caste system, a subject many Marxist leaders have historically sidestepped. In the Rajya Sabha, he once remarked, “With the name Sitaram and having studied all the four Vedas, you might wonder how I ended up here? I ended up here because I studied all of them,” showcasing his intellectual rigor and willingness to challenge societal norms.

Yechury’s outspoken stance on caste and religion granted him a level of social acceptance that few in his party have achieved. In this, he followed the example of EMS Namboodiripad and drew inspiration from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar—both figures who criticized entrenched social hierarchies while championing socialism. Yechury’s courage in confronting these realities makes him one of the rare leaders of modern Marxism in India who has redefined what it means to blend personal identity with political ideology.

The Blurred Line of Ideologies: Defining “Yechurism”

“Philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.”

Karl Marx

Sitaram Yechury’s rise as the most people-friendly and widely accepted face of the Communist Party in the 21st century, a time when the party faced some of its greatest challenges, is no accident. His evolution into the master strategist who forged and held alliances together lies in the nuanced ideology that can be described as “Yechurism.” This blend of pragmatism, socialism, and modern Marxist adaptation made him distinct from his predecessors and contemporaries.

Unlike most Marxist leaders, Yechury often emphasized the need for adaptability. In a rare moment in Communist Party history, he addressed the cadre, stressing that socialism is the closest path to social equality in India and that, in times when the enemy cannot be fought alone, unity must be the way forward. This principle of unity became the cornerstone of alliance-building, especially in the India Alliance, and guided the party’s survival strategy in an increasingly hostile political landscape. His pragmatic approach redefined traditional Marxism, incorporating other theoretical frameworks that could work within the complexities of India’s social fabric.

At heart, Yechury remained a committed socialist who never lost sight of the deep-rooted issues within Indian society. His willingness to raise these concerns made him a voice of reason and empathy, a “humble Marxist” who stood in contrast to the rigid, ideological images projected by many of his predecessors. His ability to connect with the masses, while staying true to his socialist principles, transformed him into a figure of balance—one who understood both the ideological purity of Marxism and the need for realpolitik in an evolving world.

This blend of ideological flexibility and grassroots empathy is what defines “Yechurism”—a philosophy that reshaped the Communist Party’s approach in the 21st century and made Yechury the face of its survival and adaptability.

Legacy Redefined: What Does the Future Hold?

Sitaram Yechury’s legacy will not be that of a leader bound by the rigid ideological frameworks of his predecessors. Instead, he redefined what it meant to be an “ideal Marxist” in modern India. Yechury transformed the image of the Communist leader from a theoretical, unyielding comrade into a pragmatic, people-centric figure—one who not only built alliances but also fiercely protected the idea of a united India. Known for his sharp oratory and academic brilliance, Yechury could switch effortlessly to a language of compassion when speaking to ordinary people, embodying his belief that to be a communist was to be a people’s person first. Doing justice to Che Gueveras words that “The true revolutionary is guided by great feelings of love.”

As the party moves forward into an uncertain era, the challenges it faces are formidable. To continue on the path Yechury has charted will require an inclusive leader capable of uniting disparate forces and mastering the art of alliance-building. Brinda Karat, despite her age, stands as a potential successor, and the prospect of the CPI(M)’s first female General Secretary could enhance the party’s image in modern India. Manik Sarkar, while embodying the “people’s leader” persona, may struggle to connect with the urban middle class and the youth—two vital constituencies in today’s political landscape. Names from Bengal and Kerala will inevitably surface, and the party’s decision will reveal whether it chooses to move forward progressively or take a regressive stance.

One certainty remains: Yechury’s successor will inherit the weight of his legacy—a legacy of a man who defied convention, reshaped Marxism to meet modern realities, and stood for a compassionate, inclusive vision of leadership. As Lenin once said, “The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency,” but in Yechury’s case, the best way to sustain Marxism was to debunk rigid ideology—embracing pragmatism and people-first politics. His successor will carry forward not just a party, but the philosophy of a man who transcended ideological dogma.

(The author is a Political Analyst and ex-national Head, Strategy and Research, I-PAC. Views expressed are the author’s own and not necessarily those of financialexpress.com.)