The ideology of regional parties in Bengal and other provinces is not very clear and unique, rather the change in power is just a change of personalities. Bengal is now moving away from regional supremacy towards assertive nationalism.
Ranbir Singh, senior journalist
If we study the political sociology of West Bengal closely, it appears that BJP’s coming to power is a sign of a fundamental change. Mamata significantly changed the political landscape of the state by moving away from centralized politics towards nationalist and right-wing ideology, but her regionalism did not please anyone. This time, instead of a contest between multiple parties, there was a direct contest between mainly two parties, the main new changes in the scenario of which include emphasis on social inclusion of Other Backward Classes and Dalits, increase in cultural polarization and increase in post-poll violence.
In a research paper ‘Rethinking Regional Politics: Beyond the 2021 West Bengal Elections’ published in the May 6, 2022 issue of the Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, critic Vipin Kumar Chirkara said that the ideology of regional parties in Bengal and other provinces is not very clear and unique, but the change in power is just a change of individuals. Bengal is now moving away from Marxist/regional supremacy towards assertive nationalism; It is moving away from selective secularism to focus on ‘Bengali Hindu civilisation’.
While making an assessment in 2022, Chirkara said, ‘BJP has replaced the Left/Congress as the main opposition party, making the elections now a direct fight against the Trinamool Congress.’ The BJP has focused on wooing OBCs, Dalits and tribals, especially in North Bengal and Jangal Mahal, thereby breaking the traditional, elite-driven political structure. If we have to understand it very well, then apart from the book ‘Tribes and Castes of Bengal’ published by Herbert Risley in 1891, we will have to look at two more important sources like Ashutosh Mitra’s book ‘The Tribes and Castes of Bengal’ published in 1953 and the district gazetteers prepared between 1905 and 1910 and the settlement reports of the districts before the partition of Bengal.
The socio-religious behavior of the upper castes, backward classes, scheduled castes in Bengal, the arrival of Muslims in Bengal since the time of Firoz Shah Tughlaq and the extinction of local Hindus due to giving jagirs to the chieftains, the partition of 1947 and post-colonial politics, apart from the Jagirdari system of the British era in Bengal and the history of tremendous exploitation of farmers, the political changes between 2000 and 2026. Have to understand. Apart from the subordination of foreigners and heretics, the long history of exploitation gave rise to the Left here, but without understanding the dynamics of the politics done by Mamata to oust the Left parties from politics, the dynamics of BJP coming to power cannot be understood.
Mamata’s rebellious attitude was not indicative of any deep economic-social change, but rather a kind of dangerous regionalism. During this long period, the role of Bengal’s intellectuals was not for the welfare of the people of Bengal, but for influencing the British, maintaining the colonial legacy and the emergence of a separate elite class. During the communist rule, the industrial scenario of Bengal was destroyed by the anarchic movements of the workers. The Nababi culture that operated from Murshidabad was overshadowed by the colonial glamor of Calcutta and those places became just a tourist attraction.
After 1947, the hilly areas of Bengal (Darjeeling) were considered only as entertainment places and the governments of Calcutta did nothing in the name of development there. This resulted in violent movements led by Subhash Ghisingh, which were controlled by the Central Government, but at the cost of creating the Darjeeling Hills Autonomous Council.
The increased emphasis on Hindu cultural identity is only the result of Mamata’s political shortsightedness, which led to the allocation of huge gratuities from state funds instead of equal opportunities and equitable development to the Muslim community and diverting the money meant for the development of farmers in the south-western districts. This gave rise to regional religious jealousy. The potential generalization of religious expressions was not appropriate.
Bengal faces the challenge of resolving its long-running industrial stagnation, and the BJP has to learn to move from being a protest-based movement to functioning as a ruling party in Bengal. There is now a need for a public discourse on rapid cultural and political changes ending the political stagnation of the past, which is what the intellectuals of Bengal’s universities and Shanti Niketan have to think about. The way Mamata Banerjee described the suffering that Bengal has suffered in fifteen years by calling it ‘My Bengal’, turned out to be nothing more than an emotional betrayal of the people of Bengal.
A kind of political aggression is currently being witnessed in India, and along with it, a process of ‘re-culturalisation’ is also subtly changing social customs. Controlling this intensity of increasing anarchy in the political scenario is an integral part of practical politics, for which the increasing use of Central Security Forces every time is in front of us as a sharp indicator. In this, the common people or the bureaucracy are not in the power to do anything and they have either accepted the situation or become passive participants in it, which is even worse. (These are the personal views of the author)
Comments are closed.