Whose vision of change will Kerala voters embrace? CPI(M), Congress, BJP promise ‘new age’

In the early 1980s, long before he became Kerala’s leader of the opposition, V.D. Satheesan entered a political contest almost by chance. A first-year degree student at the time, he was asked by the Congress-affiliated Kerala Students Union to step in as a substitute candidate for the arts club secretary post. The original nominee—a violinist student leader—had failed to appear on nomination day.

The post usually went to artists or musicians. Satheesan’s entry had one rival hosting a celebratory treat in the college canteen, as though the election had already been won.

But, as the campaign progressed, Satheesan began forging an emotional connect with voters through his speeches, often leaving sections of the audience teary-eyed. He also mocked what he described as the violent politics of the CPI(M)-affiliated Students Federation of India, using playful twists on film dialogues. The rhetoric struck a chord. Satheesan won—one of the first victories in a long political career.

Four decades later, the stage is larger but the method looks familiar. Travelling across Kerala with the Congress-led United Democratic Front’s Puthuyuga Yatra ahead of the assembly polls, Satheesan is once again relying on relentless campaigning and carefully-crafted speeches—sometimes emotional, at other times peppered with Gen-Z slang—to build momentum for himself, the Congress and the UDF.

‘Puthuyuga’ literally means a ‘new age’. Yet Satheesan and the UDF are not alone in invoking the promise of the new.

Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, after a decade in power, is projecting his vision of Nava Keralam (New Kerala) and seeking a third term for the CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front to realise it. Meanwhile, state BJP president and former Union minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar often repeats his slogan ‘Marathathu ini maarum’—‘that which remained unchanged will now change’.

All three political fronts, in effect, are offering competing visions of a break from the old order. Kerala’s election is not merely about who will govern next, but about whose idea of “change” voters will endorse.

Old ground, evolving turfs

When V. Sivankutty, Kerala’s education minister, was mayor of Thiruvananthapuram, he launched a project titled ‘Goodbye Mosquito’ to tackle the city’s mosquito menace. The programme was inaugurated by CPI(M) stalwart and then chief minister E.K. Nayanar. During his speech, Nayanar turned to Sivankutty and quipped: “Will the mosquito understand our language? Will it understand ‘goodbye’?”

As Kerala heads towards the polls, a similar question hangs over the political class: will voters understand—or believe—the language of change now spoken by all sides?

According to political observer Mohan Varghese, the idea of change has deep roots in Kerala’s history. The state has long absorbed ideas, people, institutions and processes from outside. “Kerala has been a melting pot for centuries,” he said. “Arabs, Jews, Romans and Chinese traders came here, bringing their ideas, currency and gold while taking away spices. In the process, they also shaped Kerala’s language, religion and culture, and helped nurture the state’s transformative mindset.”

Migration has long been part of this outward-looking history, with remittances playing a key role in development. But today’s migration trends also reflect the growing unease among the youth. Students account for more than 11 per cent of Kerala’s emigrants. Between 2018 and 2023, student migration nearly doubled—from 1,29,763 to roughly 2,50,000.

“Many among Gen Z and Gen Alpha feel there is no real future within the state,” Varghese said. “They believe they deserve better opportunities.”

Younger voters, he said, were increasingly sceptical about political institutions because of allegations of corruption, nepotism and political violence. “So, even though Kerala is considered politically literate, a certain inertia is setting in,” he said. “People want change.”

With an aspirational middle class and rapid urbanisation reshaping the state, all political fronts have been compelled to present their own vision of change. Development has become the dominant electoral language, with even parties driven by hardcore ideologies speaking it.

Kerala’s complex demographic composition also shapes politics. The population is 54 per cent Hindu, 26 per cent Muslim, and 18.4 per cent Christian. Though social reform movements transformed much of the old order, community identities—Nairs, Ezhavas, dalits, Christian denominations and Muslim groups—continue to influence elections. Shifts in community and demographic equations are pushing parties to add layers to their political narrative of change.

Former Union minister and senior BJP leader V. Muraleedharan told THE WEEK that, besides the party’s vision of ‘Vikasitha Keralam’ (developed Kerala), a key plank is the argument that whichever front comes to power, the Indian Union Muslim League ends up influencing power. This needed to change, he said.

A similar message—that a UDF government effectively means rule by the Muslim League—has also been deployed by the LDF. Varghese said the narrative had gained traction partly because sections of Muslim voters have turned increasingly anti-CPI(M). The party has also accused the UDF of having an understanding with the Jamaat-e-Islami.

UDF convenor Adoor Prakash said both the BJP and the CPI(M) were trying to create a communal divide. “Their positions are identical in this regard,” he told THE WEEK. “The UDF is gaining momentum, which is precisely why such propaganda is being unleashed.”

Nevertheless, the Muslim League, which has for long opposed Islamist organisations, has now adopted a softer stance toward Jamaat-e-Islami. Munavvar Ali Thangal, state Youth League president and member of the Panakkad family that has long led the party, recently said there was “cordial political coordination” with Jamaat-e-Islami despite ideological differences.

Veteran Muslim League leader and historian M.C. Vadakara said the Jamaat-e-Islami, which once supported the CPI(M), has now moved closer to the UDF. “The UDF has made some tactical adjustments with the Welfare Party, the political organisation floated by the Jamaat-e-Islami. That does not mean the Muslim League accepts their ideological positions,” he said.

Satheesan said the Welfare Party had supported the UDF in recent elections. “We accepted that support,” he said. “But they are not a constituent of the UDF.”

Some Hindu community leaders support the narrative of Muslim dominance in the UDF. Vellapally Natesan, general secretary of the Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam—an organisation of the Ezhavas, the largest Hindu community in the state—accused Satheesan of “acting like an advocate for the Muslim League”. He said both the BJP at the Centre and the CPI(M) in the state should continue in power. “Only Vijayan is capable of keeping in check the growth of communal parties, at least to some extent,” Natesan said.

Limits of change

Despite the rhetoric of transformation, observers say two structural realities are unlikely to change. First is the nature of electoral competition in Kerala. Political observer Joseph C. Mathew said the 2026 elections will continue the state’s long-standing bipolar contest between the UDF and the LDF. “I see the BJP’s prospects as somewhere between zero and four seats,” he said.

The second question concerned whether political promises of change can translate into policy shifts. Varghese argued that Kerala’s political structure itself often constrains transformation. “The political superstructure is not particularly supportive of large-scale developmental transformation. Populism continues to dominate. The real challenge for future governments is reconciling populist welfare politics with long-term development.”

For nearly a decade, Kerala has been the only state where the CPI(M) has remained in power. The party describes the government as a laboratory for advancing a left democratic alternative within the country’s capitalist framework.

A showcase initiative of the government has been the Extreme Poverty Eradication Programme, launched in 2021. The government identified 64,006 families living in extreme deprivation and implemented micro-plans to improve housing, livelihoods and basic services. Last year, it declared Kerala the first state in India free of extreme multidimensional poverty. Data from the National Family Health Survey show extreme poverty in Kerala declined from 0.7 per cent in NFHS-4 (2015–16) to 0.55 per cent in NFHS-5 (2019–21).

The LDF has been harping on its welfare initiatives—enhanced social security pensions, expanded health insurance and higher payments for scheme workers—alongside infrastructure improvements like national highway expansion, better road connectivity, and the launch of capital-intensive projects such as the Vizhinjam International Seaport.

As the elections approach, the government has launched a slew of welfare measures—adding 28 communities to the SEBC (socially and educationally backward) list, earmarking 14,500 crore to boost social security pensions, and increasing dearness allowance and clearing pending arrears for government employees.

But critics question the sustainability of Kerala’s welfare model. “Nearly one-third of the population now receive some form of direct financial support,” Varghese said. “The question is whether such spending is sustainable when funds for long-term development remain limited.”

Left, right, left

Some observers detect signs of deeper shifts within the state’s left ecosystem. Political commentator K.C. Umesh Babu argued that the CPI(M) government now occupies a pro-corporate development space. “Just because a party branded itself ‘left’ decades ago doesn’t mean it remains left if its policies have shifted,” he says.

The prolonged protest by Kerala’s ASHA workers, who staged a 265-day sit-in outside the secretariat demanding higher wages, also highlighted tensions between the government and grassroots movements. The CPI(M) dismissed the agitation as an anarchic protest.

S. Mini of the Marxist-Leninist party SUCI (Communist), which helped organise the protests, said the government’s response reflected a troubling shift in what is often described as left politics in the state. “The validity of a protest lies in the justice of its demands,” she said. “The ASHA protest showed how those calling themselves ‘left’ have been fooling the people.”

According to Joseph C. Mathew, the ideological space occupied by the left is evolving. He recalled a conversation between activist Medha Patkar and former Kerala chief minister V.S. Achuthanandan when West Bengal’s left government was battling Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee. “V.S. told her she should stand with the left in West Bengal. Medha replied, ‘But V.S., the real left there now is Mamata.’”

Mathew said a similar situation may be unfolding here. The traditional left, in his view, is losing character. “Some believe the LDF needs shock treatment, while others think this is only a temporary phase,” he said. “But many within the left fold are clearly disillusioned.”

Satheesan has been claiming that the Congress-led UDF now represents the “real left” in Kerala in the Nehruvian sense—socialist, progressive and secular. CPI(M) general secretary M.A. Baby responded by welcoming Satheesan’s appreciation of left values, but argued that the Congress cannot meaningfully be described as left. He said the Congress, like the BJP, had transferred valuable public assets to crony capitalists, while the CPI(M)-led government continued to protect public assets.

Mathew said some leaders within the Congress may not appreciate Satheesan’s projection of the party as the “real left”. According to him, the claim also had a flip side: it could prompt a section of traditionally pro-Congress voters to perceive the CPI(M) as a “better Congress”. Conservatives who once viewed communists as natural enemies, Mathew pointed out, no longer see the CPI(M) as aggressively atheistic or confrontational.

“The CPI(M) is more organised [than the Congress],” he said, “and many groups may feel they can get things done more effectively through that party, just as they once did through the Congress.”