Bengalureans sign up for Cockroach Janta Party

Signees admit the online movement is symbolic, with possibly no outcome, but reflects the youth's frustration

Cockroaches and parasites have become the unlikely mascots of a youth uprising in India. Here’s the story so far.

Two satirical political outfits — the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and later the National Parasitic Front (NPF) — sprang up online after Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant was reported to have compared unemployed youth to “cockroaches” who, after failing to find jobs, turn to social media, journalism and RTI activism to challenge the system.

The CJI has since clarified that his remarks were misquoted and were directed at people entering the legal profession with fake degrees. But by then, the meme-fuelled movement had become an outlet for the youth’s frustration and dissent over the broader state of politics, arriving right on the heels of the ongoing NEET exam leak controversy.

However, not everyone is amused by the animal politics. Parents and many netizens have dismissed it as FOMO politics, arguing that if the concerns were genuine, young people ahould be out on the streets protesting instead. Moreover, X (formerly, Twitter) withheld the CJP account following a ‘legal demand’, prompting its founder, Boston University student Abhijeet Dipke, to return with a new handle, @cockroachisback.

Metrolife spoke to Bengalureans who have signed up for the more viral CJP. They admit it is a reactionary movement that won’t bring change like the Nepal ‘Gen Z’ protests did, but they wish to express solidarity while it lasts.

‘Unemployment’s not a choice’

Smrithi Viswanathan, 23, signed up on Wednesday in protest against what she believes was an uninformed remark about “the country’s majority demographic”.

Unemployment, she says, is not a matter of choice. Some of her college batchmates are still jobless two years after graduating.

“There’s one opening and a thousand applications. Then there’s the constant fear of layoffs,” she says, adding, “Ministers think we can’t hold on to jobs because we are either clueless at work or bad at pleasing seniors.” But the reality, she argues, is otherwise.

Smrithi herself “rage quit” after facing disrespect at work, and has since joined her family business.

For Faisal, a law student, the movement’s popularity itself shows it has touched a raw nerve. He says mainstream politics has failed to address young people’s anxieties, from AI threatening jobs to the shrinking space for free speech. In contrast, he points out, the CJP manifesto calls for 50% reservation for women in the Parliament, and an end to corruption.

Afrah Fathima, another law student, sees the movement as a way for students to reclaim political agency. She points to the recent case of a law student from Tamil Nadu who initially faced pressure from his university to take down an essay critical of the Supreme Court’s ban on an NCERT textbook chapter discussing judicial corruption. “Why should anyone be degraded and called unemployed or lazy for speaking up?” she asks.

Even Sonika Nair, a law faculty member, has joined theparty because it aligns with her "ideology”. She found the remarks related to her profession and RTI activism to be offensive. “There are plenty of junior advocates who earn meagre salaries and eventually drop out,” she explains. She is thrilled to see what the youth have achieved. “This generation has largely grown up amid majoritarian politics, so I understand why they usually hesitate to respond to contemporary issues. But this response is mesmerising.”

While A Krishna Prasanth, a 32-year-old data scientist, hasn’t signed up, he is supporting the movement from the sidelines by sharing and liking posts online. He says he relates to its core sentiment, that the current political dispensation does not respect citizens, whether their right to access to information through RTI or failing to adequately address controversies like the NEET exam leak.

However, could the movement itself amount to contempt of court? Sonika does not think so. “Fair criticism is exempt from contempt to an extent. And here, we are not questioning the judiciary or passing any derogatory comments,” she says.