• What is the difference between left parties and democratic parties? Which are left parties and which are democratic parties? Are DMDK of Vijayakanth and Tamil Manila Congress of GK Vasan democratic parties? If not, what are they? R Jawahar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai The basic difference between left parties and democratic parties is that the former stands for some form of socialism as their eventual goal. It is not an essential condition that a left party adopts Marxism as its ideology or believes in scientific socialism. But the left programme must have elements of an anti-feudal, anti-monopoly capital and anti-imperialist content. Such an outlook should find reflection in its social programme too which is against social inequalities of caste and gender. Moreover a left party would represent the interests of the working class, rural poor and different sections of the working people. There can thus be various shades of the left ranging from a Marxist-Leninist party to a left social democratic formation. As different from them, democratic parties are those parties that espouse democratic positions on economic, political and social questions. They would take a stand in support of democratic rights. In class terms, democratic parties may be of a bourgeois-democratic or petty bourgeois character but not a party representing the interests of the big bourgeoisie. Primarily, the characterisation of such parties as democratic would depend on the political role they are playing in a given situation. For instance, in the Indian situation, a regional party which allies with a communal party like the BJP cannot be considered to be playing a democratic role. There are no democratic parties at the all India level at present. Most of the regional parties today are also not playing a role which can be considered as democratic unlike the role some of them played in an earlier period till the 1980s. Both the parties of Tamilnadu which have been mentioned, the DMDK and the Tamil Manila Congress can be treated as regional parties but not democratic parties from this view point. Further, the characterisation of parties is not a permanent one, their role may change over a period of time. A regional party which is not democratic today may play a democratic role in the future. This characterisation of parties such as the DMDK or TMC should not be confused with electoral alliances. The left and democratic front is not an electoral alliance. The Political Resolution of the 21st Congress talks of rallying the Left and democratic forces. This means there are democratic forces which are represented not only by parties. For instance, there are democratic elements in the various secular bourgeois parties including the regional parties. There are also democratic organisations of various sections of the working people, women, dalits, adivasis and so on. Our efforts should be to draw in all these forces into joint struggles and joint campaigns on agreed political issues and people’s issues. Based on an alternative programme all these forces should be mobilised for a Left and democratic alliance. • Our Party believes in gender equality. We have been demanding 33 percent reservation for women in legislative bodies. We criticise AAP for not giving any representation to women in its cabinet. But when it comes to giving representation to women in our decision-making bodies, we are no different from other parties. We graciously give a token representation to women in top echelons of the party. If we say that enough number of women comrades have not acquired the necessary “quality of leadership”, it means that we are no different from menfolk of other political parties. When are we going to actually practice what we preach regarding the status of women in the society? K Raju, Nanganallur, Chennai The CPI(M) is committed to struggle for gender equality. This applies to the Party organisation as well. The Party has been making conscious efforts to increase the membership among women and to promote women cadres at all levels. The Party is aware that trends of patriarchy and male domination exist in the organisation which we are fighting. In the rectification campaigns undertaken by the Party this has been pinpointed and sought to be corrected. The recruitment of women into the Party in adequate number has been one of the tasks set out in successive Party Congresses. Let us see what has been done in the last two decades. In 1995, women members were a paltry 5.5 percent of the total membership. In 2014, this went up to 14 percent, an increase, but still slow and unsatisfactory. In terms of women in the main decision-making bodies of the Party, there is some progress. For instance, women constituted only 5 percent of the Central Committee in 1995, today it is 15.4 percent. In 1995, there were no women in the Polit Bureau, in 2015, there are two members. Similarly there are more women members in the state committees, though they are still very inadequate. If there is slow progress in recruiting women into the Party from the millions of women in the class and mass organisations, if there are not enough women represented in the Party committees at various levels, it is not for the lack of Party decisions and directives in the matter. What it underlines is the need to change the attitude of the leading cadres and committees to recognise the capacities of women and the necessity of gender equality.