Roots of malady of the left rule in West Bengal

Agriculture : success/failure

From all accounts, the left front (LF) generated substantial goodwill in the early years (land reforms etc), though subsequently, government initiative in agriculture was not much more than a holding operation. The aspirations and the growing economic needs of the rural masses who were, ironically, unfettered by the early land reform related steps were held in check by the lack of follow up actions by the government in terms of massive agricultural development. Apart from fund crunch, lack of financial help from successive unfriendly/indifferent central governments, wasn’t there a positive lack of imagination at the government as well as at the party levels as to what the newly assertive peasantry, share croppers, landless labourers would need in order to sustain themselves and grow, given the reality of small and fragmented land holdings, high input costs, lack of markets for the produce.

Agricultural decline and LF’s lurch towards industrial revival via classic capitalist path

Despite limitations, West Bengal’s agricultural growth was possibly among the better ones in the country over the years, acknowledged by people like Swaminathan Ankleswaria Iyer (Time of India 22 May, 2011), not a great friend of LF or the Communist Party of India, Marxist (CPM). There were much fewer debt-related and starvation deaths (though the number of cases of under-nutrition was not necessarily miniscule) in West Bengal (WB) in comparison with Maharastra, Orissa or Andhra. But this growth story was clearly coming towards an end with the population growth and the dependence of the growing rural population on the land produce alone was becoming unsustainable. By 2006, some wise men in Bengal CPM must have realized this and wanted a way out : embracing massive industrial development, even at the cost of a prime agricultural asset, land, which, anyway, was appearing to become unremunerative. After a resounding electoral victory, feeling a little self righteous, this part of the leadership of the ruling party/parties including, most notably, the chief minister, decided to bite the bullet and chose a path that came to be associated with and portrayed by LF detractors as a new drive for the ‘primitive accumulation of capital’.

A government sworn to protect the interests of the working class and the peasantry was assailed by a growing popular perception of worst collusion with the industrialists/businessmen. The chief minister and his industry minister did not seem to appreciate the need to communicate the path forward to the rural masses who would be the most affected. The LF appeared confused and somewhat divided though outwardly the differences were papered over and went along with a chief minister who led it through a successful electoral process in 2006. After the start of the tailspin since the 2009 loksabha elections one has heard plenty of ‘sorry, made a mistake’ kind of perfunctory confessionals from many related quarters, but during 2006-2008 when the new ‘industrial policy’ was being experimented with not many contrary voices were heard. 

 

Muslim vote

Another important factor in the last election was the Muslim vote, which represents a significant share in the electoral pie. Traditionally, Muslims have been staunch supporters of LF and these relationships of mutual trust and friendship grew over years of secular support that left parties have provided for the Muslims. The secular credential of the left parties was testified by the fact that West Bengal had not had any communal clashes worth mentioning in all these decades of LF rule even while many parts of the country convulsed in communal tension during and after 1992 Ayodha kand. However, in terms of the economic progress as a group, vis-à-vis other groups or communities, Muslims in West Bengal have fared worse than they have in most parts of the country, if the Sachar Committee’s findings are to be believed. Despite feeble protestations and some contrary figures, these observations had struck a cord with the popular Muslim perception.

Many commentators have routinely mentioned about the LF government’s open alignment with the clergy and the conservatives among the Muslims in the case of the externment of Taslima Nasreen from Bengal (which became an emotive issue with many Kolkatans and other liberal intelligentsia). Add to it the shabby treatment (bullying) of Rizwanur, an upcoming Muslim youth trying to break the glass ceiling, by the state police (in collusion with a businessman/industrialist with some clout with the administration) leading to his tragic death/suicide. These events no doubt were construed by Muslim voters to indicate growing indifference of the LF government towards the sensibilities (intellectual and emotional) of one of its important constituencies.

Finally, perhaps the potential threat of expropriation of land in Singur and the proposed land acquisition elsewhere for fast-track industrial development was taken very seriously by the Muslim peasants in some parts of West Bengal (especially in Nandigram making it the flashpoint), active inciting by the TMC, the Maoists and the fundamentalist groups notwithstanding. There was an inevitable perception of the state acting with unseemly haste as a facilitator for the thinly disguised land grab on behalf of the big industry.  This was considered as an additional evidence for the growing disconnect between the ground level needs and aspirations of the Muslim peasants and the insensitive LF government who were plotting to take away their primary assets by outdated edicts and without adequate compensation.