Divisive and separatist politics promoted by Mamata and left parities has killed the rich Bengali ethos
nurtured by emiennt personalities like Ramakrishna Paramhansa, Bankim Chandra, Vivekananda, Tagore, Netaji, Vidyasagar, etc
Prof Rakesh Sinha
The decline of West Bengal is a clear indicator of the grim wages of political brinkmanship. The economy of the state is in a shambles and society is fractured by communalism. This decadence marks a departure from the Bengal that was the depository of rich legacy in culture, science, spirituality and economy. Great sons of the land impacted the nation’s destiny by their unmatched contributions. Ramakrishna Paramhans, Swami Vivekananda, Ishwarchandra Vidyasagar, Bankim Chandra, Rabindranath Tagore, Subhash Chandra Bose, Dr Syamaprasad Mookerjee and Trailokya Nath Chakravarty are a few names among many more who left an indelible mark on India’s history. During the freedom struggle Bengal was a breeding ground of
revolutionaries. Why does West Bengal present such a miserable picture now? Political brinkmanship is a major reason for its fall. Both Marxists and Mamata have destroyed it.
Prior to 1947, Bengal suffered from Partition in October 1905. The Muslims in East Bengal became receptive to the Partition after initial opposition, while the Bengali Hindus who held a strong foothold in business and in rural areas, opposed the Partition saying it would make them a minority in their own state. Bengal was again Partitioned in 1947 along the religious line. It suffered the most during the Partition, with killings of innocents driven by religious frenzy becoming their horrifying narrative.
Pro-Pakistan elements, realising that mere propaganda was not enough to
create Muslim mass support for Pakistan used conspiracy theories to convince Muslims that poverty, unemployment and illiteracy were the handiwork of Hindus. The colonial regime backed this
propaganda by forming the one-man Hunter Committee to ‘ascertain’ the
reasons of Muslim backwardness. William Wilson Hunter (ICS)
manipulated data and ‘concluded’ that the Muslim decline was due to the Hindus. However, when the Director of Public Instructions suggested introducing
modern education in the report, the
propaganda mill against the Hindus and their organisations and the Indian National Congress came a cropper.
The tragedy of the state — under diarchic rule — is unique. It is dismaying to find a sinister figure like Maulana Nurul Rahman Barkati of the Tipu Sultan Mosque, notorious for
issuing a fatwa for the murder of Bangladeshi novelist Taslima Nasreen, enjoying no less power than Mamata Banerjee herself. This is sufficient
indicator of decline of a civilised polity.
Mamata enjoys the company of an Islamist whose worldview is no different from Osama Bin Laden. Expecting the state to regain its past glory amidst such rank bigotry is a tall expectation indeed. Mamata, far from being a leader, is a
victim of self-acquired traits of vendetta. People’s hope of relief after suffering Marxist rule for over three decades have been belied. Mamata has proved to be disaster, and to conceal her failures, she has resorted to the communal card, a
dangerous weapon that mangled Bengal even before Partition. H S Suhrawardy, united Bengal’s interim Prime Minister (April 1946-August 1947) for his own survival fuelled a holocaust in Bengal. Jinnah’s clamour for Direct Action on August 16, 1946 caused the massacres of the state’s Hindus, with 5,016 people being killed and 13, 320 were injured in four days of riots (a statement in the House of Commons). Suhrawardy’s regime removed the police from duty, giving jihadi barbarians a free hand against the Hindus. In reality, more than ten thousand were killed and many
thousands displaced. The Great Calcutta killing was followed by riots in Noakhali in October–November 1946. Mamata Banerjee shares Suhrawardy’s
temperament and communal outlook. Her regime patronises communalists and the police have been crippled by her dictatorship. She turns a blind eye to Muslim communalists’ mini-Direct Actions against the Hindus. What Francis Robinson wrote about colonial rulers’
attitude is also true of Mamata: “As far as Muslims were concerned, politics comes first and administrative policy second. This was to
have far-reaching consequences.” Communalisation of the state and Mamata’s active sympathy for
anti-national elements is gravely
undermining the civil society of Bengal as it did before Partition.
The year 2011 had marked a new era of hope for Bengal with the rise of Trinamool Congress in power with a thumping victory after 34 years of ‘Left rule’ in Bengal. Mamata Banerjee
promised people poriborton (change). But to their utter disappointment; all hopes for progress and development have been shattered by Mamata Banerjee and her government. The constitutional machinery in the state has completely broken down due to vote bank
appeasement policy of Chief Minister. The centrality of Mamata’s politics has been using naked terror, seductive
sentiments and conspiracy theories to suppress democratic movements.
The instances of communal aggression and conflict point towards one thing — the administration has completely failed to protect the life and property of its people. The Constitution proudly celebrates liberty, equality and secularism as its key principles but the intellectuals in the country practice selective secularism. Dividing the country into groups of ‘majority’ and ‘minority’ based on their religion has become a new trend and the idea of secularism has been associated with minority centric rights due to ulterior political motives. Thus, in the political discourse, the concept of secularism has lost substance and symbolism. The silence of Trinamool Congress on the riots and the resultant lack of clarity on the part of the state police and administrative officials have further instigated the communal elements.
Further, Mamata’s approach of handling the media is confounding to say the least. Using the state institutions and machinery to manhandle or threaten the media is tyrannical in character. A democracy should feel ashamed and disgusted at the use of such arbitrary power to curb free voices and opinions. The route taken by the State Government to block the media from its natural domain is autocratic and unwarranted. Attempts to hinder the functioning of media, denying allegations and misusing the state machinery are a few methods employed by the State supremo to
obliterate various riots from the memory of the people of West Bengal.
The next question worth reckoning is where does the buck stop? Has the political-executive given full authority to the bureaucrats and the police officials and the lapse is on their end or, has the political executive of West Bengal headed by Mamata Banerjee contained the entire tumbler of power to themselves? How long the persecution of Hindus will take place in their own country? These
questions need immediate answers or else the fire of sectarian violence in the state of Bengal shall keep burning.
The time is ripe for undoing communal politics and restoring the image of Bengal as thinking today what India would think tomorrow. This is not impossible for the soil that has been a cradle of spiritual savants, intellectual luminaries and fearless revolutionaries. Bengal must shed the politics of minorityism, which will only be its nemesis.
(The writer is hon. director of IPF)
Comments