Bihar to Karnataka, Congress must ask why

In recent years, Congress under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi has painted an apocalyptic picture of the state of India’s politics. It has claimed, in effect, that the entire electoral system is rigged against it. And that the values of the Constitution, the “idea of India”, are besieged. In election after election, however, this bleak and pessimistic tone has struck few sparks on the ground. And yet, in the aftermath of the party’s poor showing in Bihar, and at a time when the infighting in its Karnataka unit has again bubbled to the surface, Congress is still not asking itself why. The picture that emerges, once again, is of petty battles within and a leadership that is either irresolute or remote.

In Bihar, the Congress now has six MLAs, after an election in which it contested 61 seats. But going by the “post-mortem” exercise conducted by the party, no one in the party is to blame. According to the Congress refrain, the fault lies with the Election Commission’s SIR exercise and its defeat can also be blamed on the cash transfers by the NDA government. Reportedly, when arguments broke out among state leaders about the party’s rout, Rahul Gandhi stepped in, claiming he was “equally responsible” as state leaders. This could have been the beginning of an honest conversation on what needs to change in the party — it wasn’t. The party has all but squandered the gains it made in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, its footprint across north India and up to Maharashtra has severely shrunk (it has a government only in Himachal Pradesh). It continues to govern in Telangana and Karnataka, but in the latter state, instead of providing a model of governance, it keeps baring its internal faultlines to the public. Ever since the Congress came to power in 2023, the Siddaramaiah vs D K Shivakumar tussle has dominated public conversations, divided the party, and is drawing attention away from governance.

Overall Analysis

This editorial examines the Congress party’s recurring failures and internal dysfunctions, arguing that the party leadership — especially under Rahul Gandhi — continues to project a grim, almost catastrophic picture of India’s politics while failing to introspect on its own shortcomings.

The tone of the piece is critical but measured. It highlights a contrast between Congress’s claims (that the electoral system is biased, democracy is under threat, the “idea of India” is besieged) and its inability to convert these claims into electoral success. The language emphasizes this disconnect by using phrases like “struck few sparks on the ground” and “bleak and pessimistic tone”, showing how Congress’s rhetoric fails to resonate with voters.

The editorial then shifts to concrete political analysis: the party’s poor performance in Bihar, where it contested 61 seats but won only six. The writer presents this as a moment that should have triggered honest introspection, but instead, the leadership and state units deflect blame onto external factors such as the SIR exercise or NDA’s welfare measures. Stylistically, this section uses pointed phrasing (e.g., “no one is to blame”, “Congress refrain”, “squandered the gains”) to highlight the party’s avoidance of responsibility.

The final part turns to Congress’s problems in Karnataka, where internal rivalries — particularly the Siddaramaiah vs D.K. Shivakumar conflict — overshadow governance. The language here underscores dysfunction: “baring its internal faultlines”, “dominated public conversations”, “drawing attention away from governance”. The editorial suggests that despite having power in major states, the party fails to project stability or offer a model of governance, weakening it further in national politics.

Overall, the writing uses a combination of political criticism, pointed phrasing, and analytical commentary to argue that Congress’s continued denial, infighting, and lack of decisive leadership are costing it public trust and electoral relevance.

Important Vocabulary (5 Words)

1. Apocalyptic – predicting or describing great disaster or total collapse.
2. Pessimistic – expecting the worst; seeing negative outcomes.
3. Refrain – a repeated statement or complaint.
4. Squandered – wasted an opportunity or resource.
5. Faultlines – divisions or tensions within an organization or group.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial concludes that Congress must stop blaming external factors and instead confront its internal weaknesses: ineffective leadership, lack of accountability, and persistent factionalism. It warns that unless the party introspects honestly, it will continue losing relevance even in states where it holds power.

Tone: Critical, analytical, and cautionary — urging introspection and responsibility.