The political temperature in India’s opposition space rose sharply over the weekend as the Congress and the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) exchanged sharp words, exposing fresh fissures within the INDIA bloc just as the country gears up for what promises to be a fiercely contested electoral season. The CJP, a youth-led formation that has captured attention through aggressive street protests and a loud, unapologetic social media presence, is no longer content to be treated as a footnote in the opposition’s larger battle against the Bharatiya Janata Party. Its leaders, visibly irritated by what they see as the Congress’s patronizing attitude, decided to hit back with insults and accusations, calling the grand old party’s leaders “self-declared liberals” and “thekedars of the constitution.” The war of words did not stop there. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the Trinamool Congress chief and a key figure in the INDIA coalition, stepped in to publicly back the CJP, creating an awkward and revealing moment for an alliance that is already struggling to present a unified front. The episode laid bare the deepening contest over who truly represents the democratic, secular, and youth-driven resistance to the BJP, and whether established opposition parties can tolerate a newer, more aggressive force that refuses to stand in line or show deference to the old guards.
The opening salvo came from CJP co-convenors Ashutosh Ranka and Saurav Das, who used X (formerly Twitter) to accuse a section of the liberal ecosystem—clearly aimed at the Congress—of monopolising the claim to democratic virtue. Ranka wrote that an “entire ‘self-declared liberal’ ecosystem has been activated to denounce @abhijeet_dipke and the fact that he has been able to capture the imagination of millions of Indians after a LONG LONG time.” He added, with barely concealed sarcasm, that this ecosystem exists only on Twitter but somehow imagines itself to be the sole protector of democracy. Das went further, referring to “total buffoons” and arguing that a certain section—not just the BJP, but another party—acts as though saving India and saving the constitution is exclusively their job. He accused these self-appointed guardians of the constitution of massive failures over the years, failures that have allegedly brought the country to a point where the young must show the way. These comments were not spontaneous outbursts. They were the culmination of weeks of simmering resentment between the two sides, especially after the Congress declined to give the CJP any credit for the resignation of former education minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Congress leaders viewed the CJP as a political rival for the youth vote, a new entrant that could cut into the traditional opposition base. The CJP, for its part, sees the Congress as an outdated institution whose inability to counter the BJP has created the political vacuum that the youth movement now seeks to fill.
Congress did not take the attack lying down. Spokesperson Reetam Singh responded with a forceful and personal rebuttal, reminding the CJP leaders of the help they had received from Congress during difficult moments. Singh pointed out that when CJP leaders were detained by the Assam Police, Congress leaders had intervened to secure their release. He then made a more damaging allegation: Ranka had refused to hold even a courtesy meeting with Congress leaders and party MP Gaurav Gogoi, and that this refusal was on the direct advice of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). Singh claimed that Kunki Chowdhury, who had hosted Ranka in Guwahati, was actually campaigning with Assam Jatiya Parishad president Lurinjyoti Gogoi for a Congress candidate in Nagaon, and they had asked the CJP leaders to meet and discuss with Congress. Yet, according to Singh, the CJP chose not to engage with the Congress or its students’ wing at any point. He went further, alleging that the CJP’s outreach was a “false charade,” and accused them of sidelining Neha Bora during the Jantar Mantar 1.0 protests. Singh stressed the contrast with the Left, which had chosen to engage with Rahul Gandhi, while the CJP, he claimed, had decided to avoid all engagement under the direct instructions of Arvind Kejriwal. In a line that summed up the Congress’s broader grievance, Singh said that it is one thing to stand for student issues, but quite another to hijack a movement. He accused AAP of being known for “piggy riding and hijacking issues of others,” implying that the CJP was merely a front for AAP’s political ambitions.
The Congress’s anger was not just about the CJP’s rhetoric. It was driven by the unmistakable sense that the CJP is being encouraged by forces within the opposition who want to weaken the Congress’s claim to be the natural leader of the anti-BJP front. Mamata Banerjee’s intervention made that dynamic impossible to ignore. Speaking to reporters on Friday, the TMC chief said, “We fully support the CJP, all the young generation and students.” It was a short sentence, but it carried enormous political weight. Banerjee was effectively siding with a formation that had just called Congress leaders “total buffoons.” Her statement sent a clear signal that not all INDIA bloc partners share the Congress’s perception of the CJP as a troublesome rival. It also positioned Banerjee as a champion of the youth and an opponent of the BJP, while simultaneously allowing her to occupy a contrasting moral high ground within the opposition alliance. The CJP founder, Abhijeet Dipke, responded with gratitude on X, writing: “Thank you @MamataOfficial ma’am for extending your support to the cockroach movement! All Indians need to come together to save democracy!” The post, however, was soon restricted by X, which prompted a message saying the content had been restricted “due to local regulations.” This only added to the perception of government pressure on social media platforms. TMC Rajya Sabha floor leader Derek O’Brien shared the post, reinforcing the party’s endorsement, and later Dipke warned darkly: “Won’t be surprised if the govt takes down my handle before Oct 10.” The censorship of the thanks note became, in itself, a political event, used by both the CJP and its backers as further evidence that the establishment and its allies are afraid of the movement’s growing resonance.
The real significance of this episode lies in what it reveals about the fragile chemistry of the INDIA bloc. The alliance, born out of the hope that a united opposition could defeat the BJP, has always been an uneasy coalition of regional satraps, leftist parties, and the Congress. The CJP’s rise introduces a new destabilising element. The Congress views the CJP, correctly or not, as a creature of AAP, a party that has repeatedly positioned itself as a challenger to the Congress in both national and state politics. The CJP, in turn, accuses the Congress of monopolising the narrative of constitutional protection and ignoring the contributions of young people who are actually on the streets, facing the lathis and the legal cases, while Congress leaders sit comfortably in offices and on Twitter. This is not just a clash of egos. It is a clash between two competing visions of resistance: one rooted in institutional opposition, electoral alliances, and parliamentary debates; the other rooted in street protests, social media mobilisation, and the raw energy of students and young professionals. The CJP has sought to present itself as a “cockroach” that survives all attempts to crush it, a symbol of resilience in the face of state power. That self-image has captured the imagination of many young Indians who are disillusioned with conventional politics. But it has also made the CJP suspicious of any attempt by established parties to co-opt or control its movement. The Congress’s leaders see this as arrogance and opportunism; the CJP sees it as necessary independence in a political landscape where every street movement is immediately colonised by vote-seeking parties.
In the end, the feud is a symptom of a larger crisis within the Indian opposition. The INDIA bloc was supposed to be a broad tent that could accommodate the Congress, the regional parties, the Left, and even newer formations like the CJP. But the tent has proven too small for leaders who each want to be the primary voice against the BJP. Mamata Banerjee’s endorsement of the CJP complicates the Congress’s attempts to discipline the new party, because it offers the CJP a powerful patron outside the Congress’s orbit. At the same time, the Congress’s attacks on AAP and the CJP risk alienating precisely the young voters that the opposition needs if it hopes to challenge the BJP in the next general elections. There is also a deeply human dimension to this story: a young activist who thanked a political leader for her support was censored on social media; another young activist was booked along with more than 400 supporters after a protest at Mumbai’s Shivaji Park; and yet another group of young leaders now finds itself caught between police cases and political infighting. The CJP says it will keep fighting to save democracy. The Congress insists it has the experience and the constitutional commitment to do so. The TMC says it stands with the young. But in the midst of this bitter quarrel, nobody seems to be asking the simplest and most urgent question: if the opposition cannot hold together even at the level of courtesy and mutual respect, how will it possibly unite against a political machine as disciplined and overwhelming as the BJP? The answer may determine not just the future of these parties, but the future of Indian democracy itself. For now, the cockroach movement marches on, but the cracks in the wall around it are becoming impossible to ignore.