BHARATA BHARATI

“Political pulp queen Mamata Banerjee presides over a reign of state terror that could put Queen Mary I to shame—in 16th century England, Marian persecutions against Protestant leaders earned her the name Bloody Mary. Not many are drinking to Banerjee these days, but intoxication with power has changed her image from avenging angel to Hitler Didi. A few painting exhibitions or sonnets aren’t going to hide Madame Hyde. The bloody-mindedness of Bengal’s Mary was evident when she dismissed the death of student Sudipto Gupta in police custody as a “petty” and “small” matter.” – Ravi Shankar Etteth

“This crown gives me a feeling of power! Power! Forgive me a cruel chuckle. Heh-heh-heh.” Prince John in Robin Hood (1973).

Very little is original in the world. Atavisms are the bookmarks of history. Successive generations find tyrants, dictators and sadistic emperors of the past more interesting than virtuous and wise kings. More books have has been written about Adolf Hitler and Tamurlane than Harischandra. Asoka would’ve been just a footnote but for the fact that he slaughtered thousands in battle before going vegetarian. Penitence is scriptural while tyranny is a bestseller.

Political pulp queen Mamata Banerjee presides over a reign of state terror that could put Queen Mary I to shame—in 16th century England, Marian persecutions against Protestant leaders earned her the name Bloody Mary. Not many are drinking to Banerjee these days, but intoxication with power has changed her image from avenging angel to Hitler Didi. A few painting exhibitions or sonnets aren’t going to hide Madame Hyde. The bloody-mindedness of Bengal’s Mary was evident when she dismissed the death of student Sudipto Gupta in police custody as a “petty” and “small” matter.

The week after Gupta’s killing, the Trinamool Terror used an attack on her and her ministers in Delhi by alleged SFI activists to provoke lumpen sentimentality. Irony is lost in the battle dust of politics. Banerjee checked herself into a private hospital—presumably not trusting any of her own government hospitals she is fond of visiting and humiliating senior doctors—and lost the advantage again after TMC goons ransacked Kolkata’s Presidency College, assaulting students and professors.

Banerjee has imprisoned students and academics for tweets and Facebook posts; jailed a farmer for inquiring about TMC policies; and labelled a journalist a Naxalite for asking an inconvenient question. The only reason she can, perhaps, still win elections is that in West Bengal, there are no lesser evils and people have long memories.

After the Emergency, as cases of police brutality stumbled out into newsprint, revelations of a student’s death in police custody became a cause célèbre in Kerala. The murder of Rajan—branded a Naxalite sympathiser—lost K. Karunakaran the chief ministership. For the time being, Banerjee faces no such danger. History gives tyrants a long rope, on which many innocents are hanged before retribution sets in. What makes someone like Banerjee a dictator in a democracy? It’s politics, stupid.

In an age of coalition politics, survival strategy silences the inner voice. The Congress was wooing Banerjee with a carrot and a stick—support and funds—as it contemplates a scarecrow existence in the harvest of pre-poll calculations. The first time her tendency to blackmail a coalition surfaced was in 2000, when she walked out protesting a fuel price hike. Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee ignored it, and she withdrew the resignation without an explanation. In 2011, she quit the NDA taking to the moral high ground after a sting-op revealed corruption in the coalition, but hardly any attempts were made to appease her. But then, Manmohan Singh has neither Vajpayee’s stature nor political courage.

Politicians treat the people like excrement. In drought-ravaged Maharashtra, deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar arrogantly asked, “If there is no water in the dam … should we urinate into it?” “Short dresses and short skirts worn by women … instigates young men,” said Chiranjeet of the TMC, which is led by a woman who said rapes rise as the population rises. “Just because India achieved freedom at midnight does not mean that women can venture out after dark”, was the pearl flung by Botcha Satyanarayana, Andhra Congress chief, on the Delhi gangrape. A Haryana minister said cellphones corrupted women. The excuse given by Karnataka ministers caught watching porn on their cellphones was that they were investigating a video of foreign tourists misbehaving at a rave party. A Samajwadi honcho declared that he has instructed PWD officials that if they work hard, they can steal a little but cannot behave like dacoits.

The politician in his hubris insults the intelligence of the people who bring him or her to power. But then, doesn’t every nation get the leaders it deserves? – The New Indian Express, 14 April 2013   

Filed under: india | Tagged: AITMC, chief minister, civil rights, democracy, dictatorship, free speech, freedom of expression, india, indian politics, kolkata, legitimizing power, mamata banerjee, politics, psychological warfare, psychology, rape, secularism, society, sudipto gupta, TMC, trinamool congress, tyrants, west bengal, women's rights |