Mamata Banerjee and the Bhadraloks
[Disclosure: I selected ‘None of the Above’ on Thursday]
As the West Bengal State elections are underway, it’s pretty much looking as though the TMC will be elected back for a second successive term. However, my facebook friendlist in recent days has almost uniformly skewed towards the CPI(M).
By most indicators, the TMC and the CPI(M) haven’t been very different from one another as far as general economic performance goes- especially comparing Buddhadeb Bhattacharya’s last tenure and Mamata Banerjee’s present performance, although the TMC has done somewhat better on certain indices, especially concerning human development. The crime rate too, shows trends that have largely continued from the Left Front period. Also, according to this analysis of policy trajectories, the difference between LF and TMC policy proposals isn’t really all that great.
Neither is political violence the exclusive domain of the TMC- the 34 years of Left Front rule was notorious for the ‘terror’ of the so-called ‘Harmad Bahini’ and saw brutal massacres like Marichjhapi, the immolation of Ananda Margis in broad daylight and not to mention Singur and Nandigram in more recent years. Incidents similar to the incidents at Presidency University and Jadavpur University in April 2013 and August 2014 have all happened under the Left Front governments as well. Neither do the TMC and CPI(M) have much difference in the way of their tolerance of dissent.
By almost all indicators then, it is baffling that there would such skewing of opinion in favour of the CPI(M) within a particular social class. Anti-incumbency could be a factor, but I don’t think that’s quite right. And presumptions of liberal/leftist idealism fall flat when you see this translating into endorsals of the CPI(M), in spite of the fact that their governments were pretty much antithetical to such idealism.
What is more telling is the way in which the TMC is routinely criticised among this particular socio-economic class and broadly, this hints at something extremely disturbing about Bengali Bhadralok society and politics in general. The criticisms rarely focus on specific policies or even the ideology of the TMC (beyond random accusations of ‘Rightist’- even though on many issues, they’re to the left of the CPI(M)), it generally concerns the composition of the TMC, their support bases and specifically, the character of their leader and Chief Minister, Mamata Banerjee. These ‘critiques’ in fact, predate the Saradha Ponzi scheme or the Narada bribery scandal.
I hadn’t made up my mind till the day of the elections in my constituency, because on the basis of wonkery there really was nothing between the CPI(M) and the TMC, and I had asked people for their opinions on whom to vote for- almost everyone I knew tried urging me to vote for the CPI(M). The interesting part of this was when I started weighing the CPI(M) and TMC together and commented on the fact that as far as indicators go, the scales would slightly tip in favour of the TMC in spite of scandals like Saradha, Narada and Mamata Banerjee’s regular invocations of ‘Shajano Ghotona’ and ‘CPI(M)/BJP-r chokranto’, the answers I got basically were all about how Suryakanta Mishra was more educated than Mamata Banerjee, how the CPI(M) was in general a party of more erudite people and what is half-shocking and half-amusing, the claim that the CPI(M) was ‘smarter’ and ‘classier’ about its thuggery, bribery and scams than the TMC is. Someone else put it as ‘Policies don’t matter- they’re just eyewash, what matters is political culture, and while I’m not saying the CPI(M) is all great, the TMC’s culture is worse than that of the BJP.’
Another friend later narrated to me how some people visited a TMC rally, came back and concluded, ‘Her speech is so crass, this is the party of kaajer mashis(maidservants) and their like.’
Much of it is based on the fact that Mamata Banerjee herself doesn’t fit into the template of the ‘Bangali Bhadralok’. Unlike her predecessors, her background is distinctly ‘subaltern’, she is an alumnus of Jogamaya Devi College as opposed to Presidency College, St. Xavier’s or Jadavpur University , her spoken English is poor and even her Bengali lacks the ‘style’ and ‘polish’ of the Mandarins of the CPI(M). By popular reckoning, she lacks erudition in political theory (something which most CPI(M) leaders are expected to be comfortable in)and she has a proclivity to making gaffes in public appearances and interviews. To top it off, she is extremely unapologetic about all of this and uses these to her advantage- especially among rural voters.
Furthermore, she’s broken a fundamental taboo of Left Wing politics in Bengal, and one that hasn’t been mainstream in West Bengal since the Partition- Identity politics. The LF Government under Jyoti Basu while being Bengali nationalists, significantly downplayed religious identities, minority identities and caste identities. The TMC in their way also espouse a nationalism that is distinctly centred around Bengal, but in a way that is far more inclusive of religious, ethnic and caste differences. Whereas the CPI(M) downplayed caste as a special case of class, the TMC has embraced caste and religion to a far greater extent. A prime indication of this was the TMC enacting affirmative action policy towards OBCs and categorising the majority of Muslims(the majority of whom are Bengali and poor) under the OBC. Neither has she shied away from wearing a headscarf and joining in Muslim festivities in a bid to convince Muslim voters she is one of them, as opposed to high-browed Bhadralok Leftist whose characterisation of religious identity isn’t ‘opium of the masses’.
Furthermore, the TMC has also pushed forward the recognition of tribal identities as distinct from the Bengali identity or in the North, the Greater Gorkha identity. To the best of my knowledge, the TMC is the only party which has published their manifesto in Santhali/Al Chiki and has championed the recognition of the Lepcha, Tamang and Bhutia minorities in the Darjeeling Hills(something which wasn’t well-received by advocates of Gorkha nationalism).
To a large extent, all of this is in opposition to the caste-blind, religion-blind and ethnically-blind orthodoxy of a primarily Hindu, primarily Upper Caste (Brahmin-Kayastha-Baidya) affluent Bengali Bhadralok community that while forming a small fraction of West Bengal’s 80 million plus population, are disproportionately overrepresented in circles of power and controls much of the public opinion in Calcutta and within the Bengali media(although being a minority in Calcutta itself). But this myopia towards the politics of identity is reflective of deep-seated prejudices and contempt of lower castes, Muslims, tribals and peasants. I refer back to the politics of the kaajer mashi classes- a pejorative that is all at once sexist, classist and casteist.
While Mamata Banerjee herself is a Brahmin, her background and her manner aren’t those of a Bhadralok and this along with her championing of identity politics are a threat to the established orthodoxy. But while the Bhadraloks turn their noses up at her ‘lack of class’ and ‘dignity’, the same characteristics endear her to rural voters and minorities, among whom her message remains popular.
The great irony is that the 34 years of Left Front rule were rarely about Calcutta and in fact, the Left would routinely lose constituencies in Calcutta to the Congress and later, the TMC. However, while at while in case of the Left Front governments, it was fellow Bhadraloks showing the finger to the Bhadraloks of Calcutta, this time, it isn’t and that is what distresses this class- the idea that West Bengal politics is no longer about them.
There could be numerous reasons for not voting for the TMC and voting for the CPI(M), but it is perhaps prudent for those Bhadraloks who pride themselves on their progressivism to really examine why they’re aligned so. The answer may require intense checking of one’s own privileges.
