June 03, 2012

Why, Miss. Banerjee?


Ruled by the left-wing Communist Party of India (Marxist) for over three decades, Kolkata, or the “City of Joy” as it is fondly called, had been the core of communist politics. This, however, had failed to please the people and after years of disappointment, it came as no surprise when the 2011 assembly elections brought on a complete makeover in the affairs of the state. Having gained the confidence of the people through widespread campaigning, the Trinamool Congress, West Bengal’s state political party and an important ally of the United Progressive Alliance, swept the polls and gave new hope for better governance.

A conversation about one’s mission to overthrow communist politics would be incomplete without mentioning Mamata Banerjee, TMC’s commanding leader. Be it via concrete facts or blame games, she made use of every possible means to loosen CPI (M)’s grip over West Bengal politics. Although her aim to lead the state was achieved after a long wait, she finally found her place as the chief minister of West Bengal.

TMC and the Indian National Congress shared a common objective to oust the CPI (M) from its rule in the state. It was with their backing that Banerjee could pave way to her office in the Writer’s Building in Kolkata.

The Congress usually shares cordial relations with its allies, lets them take the lead in the state and depends on their support in the central government. This balance is typically maintained by both parties. So, the growing tension between the two allies in the not-so-recent past came as a shock to many political experts.

Banerjee had plans of her own.

Friction between the allies began with the Congress demanding more seats in the assembly and Banerjee out-and-out refusing them. She blocked the policy of 100 percent foreign direct investment in retail, she gave into secessionist demands and handed Gorkhaland administrative autonomy and also blocked the international agreement with Bangladesh over sharing waters of the Teesta River.

So we ask: Why, after so many years of striving to achieve their goal, would she risk losing out on the Congress’ support? Also, why would she oppose proposals which could benefit sections of the society as well as the population of West Bengal?

A 180 degree change in opinion

“Destructive bandhs (strikes) are not the future, and it ends today,” she said in response the failure of the bandh called by the Left on Feb. 28.

From 2006 to 2011, I lived in Kolkata myself. Apart from the city turning into a ghost town between the afternoon hours of one to five, if there was one thing that annoyed me the most about the city, it was the number of bandhs that were declared by the political parties of the state. It didn’t matter which commodity was the new target of price rise or who insulted or assaulted who in a remote part of the state, calling for bandhs seemed the answer to most of them. And yes, most of them were declared by the TMC.

It was not long before she was appointed the CM of West Bengal that she organized a sizeable number of road blocks and called for bandhs across the state. Why, I ask, would she make such a hypocritical statement?
It is only when in opposition that political parties realize the inconvenience it causes to citizens when such untimely bandhs are declared.  Clearly, such is the case with Banerjee as well.

Change in alphabetical status or mere stupidity?

State leaders believed that they faced an alphabetical disadvantage in meetings and surveys. To counter this drawback, West Bengal was renamed “Paschimbanga” in August 2011. This was done to raise the state’s alphabetical position from 28 to 21.

However, if raising its alphabetical position was the only motive behind this sudden need to rename the state, why did they not go with other suggested names such as Bangla or Banga? As filmmaker Rituparno Ghosh said, Bengal would have been the ideal replacement. Not only does “Bengal” sound a lot better, it would have also raised the state’s alphabetic position to fourth instead of 21st.

Not to mention it would be ridiculed a lot less.

Where is the need to maintain the term “west” in the name of the state (“paschim” in Bengali, means west)? Except in history, East Bengal no longer exists. The circumstances in which the state was partitioned was not one that called for celebrations; they were tragic and do not deserve to be remembered, even in the form of a mere name.

In spite of all the criticism thrown her way, there is no denying that Banerjee’s popularity has risen over the years. She knows her way around politics and is good at moving the crowd to accept her ways as well.



2 comments:

  1. Well written!!!! Didi is still popular!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I didn't know you still follow this. But thanks :)

    ReplyDelete