A certain topic I was listening today among my friends about the 'lawlessness' of the current society, of the eroding security, and such issues, made my mind wander to politics and political personages. Of core politics, I'll say nothing in this article, since that is not my objective, but the chanced wandering of my thoughts to one of Bengal's political icons - Miss Mamata Banerjee, is what has triggered this article, and of her, and of her opposition – the Communists in Bengal, I shall key in my present thoughts.
I have never been an avid follower of politics. I had always in my past looked at the political headlines with a kind of bewilderment as to why such bureaucratic nonsense attains such importance, as to how come such clashes come up between those 'wise old men' in regard to the question of common good (about which, in my personal arena I had never seen such doubts among people regarding what is progressive and what is degressive), and how come people keep supporting such men after clearly seeing how far they deviate from what they are supposed to be doing, seeing how they get carried away like stupid thick-headed children about their own personal egos! But of course, bewilderment or not, you cannot live without being aware of what goes around, and such is my case. And it is through such slow indirect accumulation of the political accumen over the years, that the opinion I voice here has taken shape.
The Bengal political scenario is divided in two main camps - the 'Communists' (strictly just a proper noun these days) and the 'Congress' (I'm totally lost about the significance of the name) - or rather, 'Trinamul Congress' these days to be more precise. The Trinamul Congress front is led by Mamata Banerjee, and the Communist front is led by Jyoti Basu, Buddhadeb Bhattacharaya, and others.
For many decades, the ruling Communist party had been comfortably reigning over the state. However, the last decade saw some serious momentum being gained in the opposition camp, led by Mamata Banerjee. I have for long been listening (being the silent listener - seldom voicing, but always attentive) to supporters of both parties, to both their sides of arguments, about how the other is absolutely lost. And against Mamata Banerjee, a prevailing general opinion which I have gathered is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. But before going into her as I see her, I'll write out something about the ruling party - the 'Communists' - with whom she is up against.
Who are these 'Communists' in Bengal? It is of no doubt that they had lost credibility and had ceased to be useful at least in the last decade. Anybody can see through it. Yet, why, and how exactly, did they retain their vote bank and support? A popular opinion is that its by 'rigging' and by force, but I refuse to believe that unless a party have a huge chunk of true support, it cannot, however strong its 'force' might be, gain the majority of votes. Yes, it might be able to change 40% to 50%, but even if it has 20% true support, that is quiet a formidable number.
And in my personal circle also, I have found quiet a lot of people truly supporting the party. However, in more recent times, the party has shown certain reforms, and the support opinions I have heard might have been due to this. Yet, then, how come the party stood through the last decade - when it looked really all lost?
The party, when it had started, had its root in novel ideas. It must have had true communism in the heart. Many people believed in it. And true communism effects that people help people. This 'standing out' for others must have grown widely practiced inside the party. The party members took and gave favors to others. This practice must have become widespread. And this giving and taking is what I think brew a very intricate chain of 'loyalty'. So that now, the people if they move away, they would feel troubled by consciousness. And the majority of youth of the 'then' times, having grown older by now, and having thereby lost the openness of mind which happens with age, would naturally find it more difficult to move out. Their mental loyalty chain inhibits them from displacement even when they must be seeing through the fallacies which have been as clear as daylight. And still when someone truly speak for the party, I think it is because their mind having created for their comfort a circle of justifying reasons, which the mind falls to believe much more easily, since such a belief would keep it more comfortable.
Fighting such a system is no trifle. And it is this opposition that Miss Mamata Banerjee is up against. And I think, it is her kind of nature - the one true to herself and others - which can put up with such a situation.
As I mentioned earlier, a general opinion against her is that she is incapable of the position of Chief Minister - that she is 'absolutely ridiculous' in many of her actions. This is probably true to some extent. It is true, that many things which she does are indeed futile. It is true that she might give out an image of not being the ideal politician who is always in control and witty. It might be that what she does suddenly might even harm her own party's vote bank. So, then, what is it with which she is formidably spearheading the intricate system of power which has been attained by the ruling party?
It’s her nature. She believes in what she does and says. She feels it. She lives a life true to herself and to others. And it is this quality, I think, which has gained her most of her aides. A rare quality, and a seductive one too. She lives a real life. She has true empathy. She is heavily toiled, yet she still goes on. And because of such truth, she actually make some profound simple observations, can actually see through injustice, recognise it more by feeling than by reason, when there is one and takes certain steps, which being very real and true, naturally finds support from the intellect and the masses. I believe, people would find it easier to stick to
her, than to her political ideas. With her, people would feel secure. With her, they would be able to identify. With her, they would feel trusty. And these days, that is a huge incentive. It is with such qualities, and because of such qualities, I think, that she has been able to gather such momentum and loyal aides, and as long as she remains true to these, she will continue to find loyal support, no matter what she does.
I myself don’t know whether I'd support her ideals or not, but I would gladly help her personally if ever she needs such help.
