Thursday, November 29, 2012

A Change for Worse

While the people celebrated a new dawn of Bengal politics, behind the cover the smiling tyrant was assuming more power by every strike of the clock. Bengal went to assembly polls in West Bengal in the summer of 2011 in hope of a better future where she would refuse to nod at every call of the pseudo left and there petty bourgeois demands. Out of the 35 years of left rule, for most of it the tolerant Bengali had been waiting so eagerly for the Indian left to meet its promise and when they caught the catch of the these oppressors in the garb of a Marxist flag they came down to the streets and finally the left was shown the door. For quite some time the left had held to its chair by all sorts of election malpractices, the opposition to which once saw them rise to power. This was a clear case of the prophet turning the devil.
The attempt to put the “Indian Left” to sleep had been reflected in agitations since the Nandigram disaster   (where the state machinery forcefully acquired land from poor farmers to fuel them into this neo liberal hypocrisy and many farmers died) and the final nail on the CPIM coffin was hammered in the 2011 polls. But this was a time of great hope on the new government which not only started failing all aspirations of the common Bengali almost immediately after assuming power but slowly and steadily started revealing their real face which if not similar to the former regime is worse beyond any doubts. The civil society withdrew its support and then came the day when the autocratic attitude of Mamata Banerjee(Present Chief Minister)came into light when during a Television show a teenage girl asked her some very uncomfortable questions. Having no satisfactory response in her armoury she chose to brand the 19 year old a maoist and staged a walk out of the show only to avoid having to respond to the questions that every Bengali wanted to ask but this teen  girl dared to.
However such flip flops have not been new to the Mamata Banerjee genre of politics for she has been quite infamous of switching parties and changing alliances in lieu of greater political power. This sort of political brinkmanship had always been the highlight of her politics. This flip flop took a new turn when the Congress decided to enhance the anti people FDI in retail sector. In her election manifesto she had promised the same only to appeal to the corporate mafias of India and generate more funds for her election campaign. However seeing the mood of the general population and their contempt towards Foreign Direct Investment in FDI which poses survival threats on millions of retailers spread across the nation constituting the second biggest source of employment in the country, she decided to oppose the bill. To earn some legitimacy in the public eye and avoid the discomfort of having to justify her manifesto post elections; she decided to withdraw her support to the government.  She took it a step further by bringing a no-confidence motion against the government in the parliament only to add to her so called legitimacy with clear possession of the knowledge that she did not even have the requisite numbers to bring down the government. This was just a show only to brainwash the people however the people had caught her for a cheat by now and this time no other party could muster the courage to support her claim in the open parliament resulting in a situation where people displayed their no confidence to the party that was calling for no confidence against the government in the floor of the house. She garnered support from three BJD MP’s of Orrissa which is a party similarly placed with the Trinamool Congress when it comes to their political bankruptcy. 
Criticism against her was outpouring from all corners of the Indian society and Bengal had already started taking cognizance of the so called change. In a recent development otherwise known for his outrageous understanding of peoples right a former Justice of the Supreme Court of India, Markandey Katju(a former supporter) came in strong criticism of her rule. This is an astute example of how degrading the practices of Mamata Banerjee are when someone like Katju known for his pro censorship stand too can claim a higher moral ground over her. However in a bourgeois state like India, the common scene is to have people of low working class consciousness assume high offices of government, and Katju being the chairman of the Press Council of India, his comments were immediately highlighted in the Media. Katju soon shot off a letter to the West Bengal state government and when the Chief Minister was asked for her comments on the letter she first refused to acknowledge the receipt of any such letter in the signature style of denial that she is so well known for. However at the insistence of some newspapers she indirectly started hurling abuses at the members of media and Katju himself on record.
Such brazen display of power will not go well with the Bengalis a race that is well known for its contribution against the anti imperialist struggle against the British Empire. This change is of regime hardly reflects the aspirations of Bengal which are more concerned with food, shelter, and jobs. It can’t be a change for a Bengal of promise let alone be the promise of a resurgent Bengal. If anything, this rule is directly questioning whatever democratic rights that were still held by the people during the previous regime. And the people will unite to boot her out in the same fashion that they mastered during the 2011 polls against the Marxist landlords.