After the CPM State Committee meeting on Tuesday, two top CPM leaders acknowledged the party's huge failure in the Assembly elections in contrasting ways. One aggressively, and the other, cautiously.

The apparent CPM patronage for SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellappally Natesan's toxic anti-Muslim remarks was identified by the CPM State Committee as one of the primary factors behind the defeat. 

Right after the CPM State Committee meeting on Tuesday, the CPM State Committee member P Jayarajan sarcastically termed Natesan "a multifaceted personality". 

"The deeds of SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellappally Natesan, when seen through the lens of history, were attempts to have his feet in two boats," Jayarajan said while delivering a lecture in Thiruvananthapuram as part of promoting his latest book 'Sanatanikalude Hindutva Vazhikal' (The Hindutva Paths of Sanatanis).

"How is such a thing possible?" Jayarajan wondered. "He is SNDP Yogam general secretary. And the previous LDF government had picked him to lead the Navothana Samithi (Navothana Moolya Samrakshana Samithi was constituted in 2019 to provide a social reform sheen to the LDF government's pro-women stand in the wake of the Supreme Court verdict on Sabarimala women's entry). But he makes his son (Tushar Vellappally) the general secretary of BDJS (Bharath Dharma Jana Sena). And this BDJS is with the Sangh Parivar forces. And his wife Preethi Natesan was busy trying to whitewash BJP candidates," he said, and added: "Kerala should be aware of this multi-faceted role of Natesan."

Implication was that Vellappally was patronised though he was highly unreliable.

Then, it was CPM state secretary M V Govindan's turn to confess. He tried defence instead. "The party had rebuffed Vellappally whenever he had strayed from Sree Narayana Guru's principles. However, we could not overcome the general suspicion that we did not strongly oppose Natesan's recent anti-Muslim comments," Govindan told reporters. 

Basically, Govindan said that the party had actually resisted Natesan's communally divisive comments but this was drowned in the opposition and "right-wing media" propaganda that the party had not done enough to keep Vellappally in check.

He was then asked how such a communally divisive person could remain as the chairman of the Navothana Moolya Samrakshana Samithi. "Can renaissance and bigotry go hand in hand," he was asked. Govindan's instinctive reply, before the question could even be completed, was: "He was made chairman long before he made such comments." 

The CPM state secretary then attempted a fake balance that turned out to be both vague and factually wrong. "Whenever renaissance values were upheld we had provided unstinted backing and whenever sectarianism reared its head we had refused to provide any support whatsoever," he said. Govindan did not specify the renaissance values championed by Vellappally. And by not removing him as the chairman of the Renaissance Committee it was also evident that the LDF government had done nothing "whatsoever" to rein in the SNDP Yogam supremo. 

So it was not clear whether the CPM State Committee had concluded that Vellappally should not have remained as the chairman of the Committee for Renaissance Values. But Govindan seemed to confirm. "That's exactly what I meant when I said we have been self-critical in our analysis of the electoral loss," he said. This gave the impression that the party did regret that Vellappally was not asked to step down as the head of the Renaissance Committee.

For clarity sake, Govindan was once again asked: "So should Vellappally have been removed from the committee?" 

Govindan quickly reverted back to his fragile balance of both supporting and disowning Vellappally. "The Samithi was formed in a different context," he said. 

He seemed to imply that the Samithi under Vellappally had achieved what it had set out to do. "The Samithi was formed to counter the RSS attempt to mobilise all Hindu castes, from 'nayadi' to 'brahmins', under a single umbrella. The Samithi could fight back the RSS designs," Govindan said.

Vellappally heading the Renaissance Committee was not the issue, Govindan seemed to indicate. "But when anti-Muslim comments were made the party should have effectively resisted them," Govindan said. 

In other words, the CPM is of the view that Vellappally's leadership was valuable in the fight against the RSS designs to mobilise various castes under a single Hindu identity. 

It is here that P Jayarajan's "multifaceted" indictment becomes pertinent. Even while heading the Renaissance Committee, Jayarajan said that Vellappally had let his son Tushar Vellappally have an electoral understanding with the BJP. Govindan seemed to have conveniently ignored this.

The CPM state secretary was also reminded that then Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan and Devaswom Minister V N Vasavan had heaped praises on Vellapally when he was spewing Muslim hatred. Pinarayi had even remarked that Vellappally adhered to Sree Narayana Guru's principles.

"Our self-critical analysis was that we were not able to provide a convincing response to the general perception that gained ground as a result of these remarks," he said. Meaning, the pro-Vellappally comments were alright, just that they were not given an effective political spin. 

Govindan also said that no individuals, neither he nor Pinarayi, were held responsible for the various factors that led to the electoral loss like the long leash given to Vellappally and the poor candidate selection in constituencies like Taliparamba where his wife P K Syamala was the candidate. "There were no individual failures. Be it the Chief Minister or the party secretary, all of us are functioning as part of a whole. It is wrong to say that certain things had happened as a result of individual decisions. The party does not subscribe to this view," he said. 

Govindan said that the Kannur CPM district committee was self-critical about candidate selection in Taliparamba and Payyannur, indicating he had no role in choosing his wife as the candidate.  

As for the Global Ayyappa Sangamam fiasco, Govindan said the party was a victim of misinformation. "The Sangamam was organised by the Travancore Devaswom Board. But a false narrative was spread that the event was organised by the state government," Govindan said. 

Nonetheless, he admitted that it was imprudent to read out the speech of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adithyanath, whom Govindan called "RSS's most prominent RSS spokesperson", at the Ayyappa Sangamam. It was then Devaswom Minister V N Vasavan who did the reading.