Politicians in power see ghosts in their dreams

Thousands of miles away from home, media is my only source to gauge what has really changed since a new government took over in Bengal. I deliberately use the word Bengal as it connects better to the wider world the Indian state, which has been known as West Bengal since India gained independence. My definition of media does not include only the conventional media - consisting of newspapers, radio and television or the web-based new media,  including the social networking sites, but also the interpersonal deliberations that I have with people all around the world. After all, such communication makes me more informed about the state I refer to.

Going by what the wider media depicts, I am confused about the state of affairs in Bengal. Some claim that things have changed for the better, since Mamata Banerjee became the Chief Minister of the state, while others denounce her government as much worse than the Leftists, who were thrown out of power after over three decades. Amidst the high pitch of the divided views about the state of affairs in Bengal, probably the more rational and objective assessment of the situation is drowned and lost.

Despite such confusion, I find a curious similarity with the time when the previous government was in power. The rhetoric remains the same only it has changed sides (mouth). Now what we hear from the Left - predominantly the CPI-M and their supporters - were earlier echoed primarily by the Trinamool Congress. Similarly, the content and tone of what the Trinamool Congress leaders tell now are very similar to the language used by the CPI-M leaders before May 2011.

They say that the rulers don’t change only the colour of their dresses change. Nowhere would this adage be more appropriate than in Bengal. There may be a gulf of difference in the upbringing, background, political allegiance and acumen of Jyoti Basu and Mamata Banerjee, yet when they speak as chief ministers defending their regime, they seem so similar in the tenor and tone of their rhetoric and also in their arrogance.

A few years back in 2001, the August 12^th edition of the British newspaper, The Sunday Times, published a story, titled “Paranoid President Mugabe on Antidepressants – Haunted by the Ghost”. General Josiah Tongogara, led the military wing of ZANU, the ruling party in Zimbabwe, during the guerrilla war for independence. He was one of the leaders in the fray to become the President of Zimbabwe in 1980 but was killed allegedly in a car accident on the Boxing Day of 1979, which paved the way for Mugabe assuming power. It is alleged that Tongogara was buried at the Heroes Acre cemetery near Harare without proper post-mortem. In the backdrop of widespread suspicion of foul play, The Sunday Times correspondent in Harare R W Johnson alleged that the ghost of General Tongogara haunted Mugabe for 'mismanaging the country' and the Zimbabwean President “sought to placate the ghost by laying an empty chair for him in dinner every night”. 

Given the strong anti-British stand taken by President Mugabe, the story may very well be made up, guided by some petty interests. However, seeing ghosts in their dreams is a commonplace among politicians in power.

Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister might have seen the ghost of Subhas Chandra Bose. An insecure Indira Gandhi might have seen the ghost of Jayprakash Narayan before imposing Emergency in 1975. Rajiv Gandhi might have seen the ghost of V P Singh at the peak of the Bofors controversy. Similarly, Jyoti Basu and Mamata Banerjee might have also seen ghosts in their dreams, which probably influenced them to put the onus of any adverse event to the conspiracies of their respective political opponents.

One need not be surprised by hearing Mamata Banerjee sound like Jyoti Basu. The similarity is probably  not of their making. Any politician in power suffers from insecurity, which manifests itself by the arrival of ghosts in their dreams.

All comments are personal.
Tirthankar.Bandyopadhyay.Blog@gmail.com

Social Media: A Tool for Democracy

In a television advertisement for an Indian channel, Abhishek Bachhan says, mobile phone controls his life. It might not be of that magnitude, yet for many our lives are now dependent on gadgets of connectivity, like the mobile phone, than ever before. Since mobile telephony, email, messaging system etc. facilitate connectivity, they can be seen as forms of media. After all, some of the main roles of the media are to inform, relate and connect. Like the media, they also create a platform where people can communicate and engage in a dialogue. From that perspective, various forms of connectivity, like the mobile telephony, email, social media etc. are tools to ensure pluralism, as dialogue is a pre-requisite for pluralism.

There are many definitions of democracy. However, for the sake of argument and clarity if we look at it from an intuitive point of view, then 'democracy' can be defined as a socio-political arrangement whereby peoples' voice determine the path followed by the institution which govern them. The use of the term govern is intentional to underline the transformation of the states from being entities which were ruled to those which are being governed in modern times. The concept of majoritarianism also follows from the intuitive definition of democracy as it is the view of the majority which determine the path of the government.

It is through the elections that the people or the electorate convey their messages. However, elections do take place only at regular intervals, may be after four or five years. In the interim it is the media, which acts as a messenger for the electorate. It does so by informing the people - so that they can make the most informed decision. The media has a role in upholding transparency and accountability of the people in power. It is through this mechanism that the media brings to light the issues which are essential for the electorate in order to make the most informed decision. Finally, the media also acts as a platform of communication between the government and the governed. So we see the media as an important tool to ensure democratic governance.

So far the media was confined to journalism, initially print and then through different electronic forms like the radio, television and finally online. Now the sphere of media has been extended even further with the expansion of the modes of communication. The advent of citizen journalism, has bestowed upon each and every citizen the role of journalist to ensure accountability and transparency. The social media, on the other hand, has liberated the media from the confines of only a few, i.e. journalists. Thus the likes of the Facebook and the Twitter have actually socialised and democratised the media.

Earlier, the content of the media was determined by a few and the powerful wanted to see and show things as they wanted to. Now the agenda and content of the media are determined not only by the powerful but also by the ordinary people. The Arab Spring is a testimony to the power of the social media and the energy it generates. This energy in turn empowers the ordinary people and makes sure that their aspirations and wishes are taken into cognizance by the powerful and the policymakers.

All comments are personal.

Tirthankar.Bandyopadhyay.Blog@gmail.com

Kalyan Sanyal: A Flamboyant Intellectual

Distance does make a difference. If it didn't, why someone who seemed distant in Kolkata felt so close and  approachable from London, that I wouldn't hesitate before giving him a call even in the middle of the night.  The first thing that crossed my mind when I heard about Kalyan Sanyal's demise was that I have lost a person, whom I could call any time either for a radio interview or to get a complex issue elucidated.

Let me put my record straight. My academic record in India never went beyond mediocrity and it was even worse when I was a student at Kantakal, the seat of the Economics Department of the University of Calcutta. I had just started working as a journalist then and the purpose of infrequent visits to the campus would be either to add to the pool of attendance necessary to appear for the university examinations or to spend some friendly time in between subsequent night shifts.

So there was no reason for Kalyan Sanyal, KS - as he was popularly known among his students, to know me in my Kantakal days. I would see him sitting on the boulevard on the way to the campus and smoking cigarette or drinking tea from a nearby tea stall. In the classroom, I would have nothing to do but to watch his mannerism - bending slightly forward and animating the bass of his voice to bring in a macho effect - from the back benches. Soon I would realise though that intellectually also he was a very macho person.

When I joined the BBC World Service, in 1999, the challenge was to get someone very articulate for radio interviews, who would explain a complex issue in a very simple way so that an average listener would find it easy to comprehend. Probably it was through this sort of an exercise that I got in touch with KS. His tone was so informal yet authoritative that we would have him on air frequently, for explaining issues ranging from the WTO to the economic disparity in India.

By then he had started writing post-editorials regularly for the Anandabazar Patrika. Undoubtedly, those were good food for thought and gradually paved the way for my proximity with him. I would often call him  to understand certain things, and even if my questions centred around naivety, he would have all the patience in the world to clarify them. Possibly it was on one such occasion, I confided that I needed to study more for clarity of thoughts, and since then almost every time we spoke, he would ask me about my plan to resume academic studies.

"Kabe theke parashuna-ta abar shuru korbe? Sara jibon ki radio-te kaj korei katabe?" he would ask me. (Meaning: When are you going to start your studies again? Are you going to spend your whole life working in radio?)

Finally, when I decided to go for my second Masters at the School of Oriental and African Studies, he helped me not only with his encouragement but also by providing me with a much needed reference, at a time when I had no such contact in the academia who would vouch for my academic ability. I owe my renewed interest in academics to him the most.

In the 1990's when we were students of the Calcutta University, he was very well known for his expertise in international trade. Although I didn't attend his International Trade classes, yet I am told that his work on 'trade in middle product' is being used as reference in International Economics.

In the 21st century his thinking went beyond the confines of theoretical economics and 'Rethinking Capitalist Development' is a testimony to that. Such a seminal work calls for more scholarly interpretation. However, my understanding is that KS reconciled with the fact that Capitalism, in whatever form, was here to stay. His thinking centred around the change in narrative and architecture of Capitalism, which were needed to make it bearable for the dispossessed and the marginals.

Situated in a post-colonial set up of capitalist development, his book became very influential among the social science thinkers around the world but KS was never outspoken or overwhelmed about it. In fact, I came to know about his book from Subir Sinha, my professor at the School of Oriental and African Studies.

In Rethinking Capitalist Development, KS has tried to demonstrate that in a post colonial set up, along with primitive accumulation, a parallel process of reversal of the effects of primitive accumulation also sets in. He argued, and many others agreed later, that "while growth is important, it is at the same time unacceptable that those who are dispossessed of their means of labour because of primitive accumulation of capital should have no means of subsistence. Thus while on the one side primary producers, such as peasants, craftsmen etc, lose their land and other means of production, but on the other they are also provided by the governmental agencies with the conditions for meeting their basic needs of livelihood". (Chatterjee, 2008)

Although the book was published in 2007, yet it helped me understand the crisis surrounding land acquisition at Singur and Nandigram in West Bengal and also the rationale behind National Rural Employment Generation Act (NREGA) in India. Who knows, the central argument behind his seminal work might one day pave the way for making the world much more equitable than it has been ever before.

Kalyan Sanyal passed away on February 18, 2012. His book Rethinking Capitalist Development: Primitive Accumulation, Governmentality & Post-Colonial Capitalism has been translated in several languages. Many scholars have accepted his book as a world reference on Post-Colonial Capitalism.


All comments are personal.

Tirthankar.Bandyopadhyay.Blog@gmail.com

Where I got rooted to India

Whenever I think of Sahibganj, the first thing that comes to my mind is its picturesque beauty. Bound by the Rajmahal Hills and the Ganges, the town epitomised a rustic simplicity, which was ingrained among the people who lived there. Not many places are gifted with such scenic treasure, of being bound by the hills and the river, that apart Sahibganj would have been like any other non-descript town, till a few years back, of southern Bihar, unless the Jesuits from Malta decided to build a school there.

My uncle Benu Banerjee was a teacher of the St. Xavier's School in Sahibganj for more than a decade and I got admitted there in KG2 in 1975. My paternal grandfather accompanied me from Kolkata and he still lay in the midst of the Ganges, making Sahibganj his eternal abode. I left Sahibganj to join the Ramakrishna Mission Vidyapith, Purulia, in 1980, but the time I spent there still remains vivid in my memory, not least because it was my first school but because it was the place which rooted me to India.

St. Xavier's, Sahibganj, was quite a reputed school then and it attracted students not only from its natural hinterland but also from Kolkata and many other places of the country. David James was my first class teacher and, as it happens probably to every child, he still holds a special place for me as do my other teachers, K P Mitra (Class 1), Brother Andreas (Class 2), Ronnie Ried (Class 3), Miss Meenakshi (Class 4), Bhaskar Sharma (the Bengali teacher), Mr Dey, P C Chowdhury, P K Acharya, A D Acharya, Swapna Banerjee and many others .

Mr James' mother, Mrs James and her two daughters Rosie and Margaret were very fond of me and would often provide me with chocolates. I later learnt that Mrs James was originally from Croydon, which is not far from Hounslow, the place where I live now.

Mr and Mrs Munshi, our next door neighbours, were more like my guardians. Their son (Sushim Da) lived at Chicago the last time I heard from him, and for a very long time I was lucky enough to have a fair share of their affection. Mr Munshi (I used to address him as Jethu meaning in Bengali uncle who is older to one's father) used to umpire cricket matches and probably was the main inspiration behind my prolonged interest in cricket. Jethima (Mrs Munshi) was often strict and would not spare a word while taking anybody to task.

Mr M K Biswas' elder daughter Ratri was my classmate and his wife (Mala Kakima) was another embodiment of love and affection, which was no less than my own uncle and auntie (Mrs Banerjee). Within the staff quarters we were a motely team comprising among others Kuntal (Mr S C Mian's son), Rajesh and Suresh (Mr Raphael's sons), Gujju (Mr Biswas' younger daughter), Sushil (the school laundryman's son), Agnes and her brother (kids of Mr Daniel, who was in charge of shopping for the hostel kitchen). Then there were the Martins and the Josephs. Undoubtedly it was much more diverse than my hometown Belgharia and it gave me my first flavour of a mini India. We had regular picnics and other celebrations, respected each others' beliefs and upheld a sense of fellow feeling. Our diversity never came in the way of celebrating the shared values.

The school was an extrapolation of the same flavour but in a much wider canvas. We had students from many different parts of the country. Initially, I was very close to two Bengalees Ramapati Sanyal (who is now a doctor) and Ashis Banerjee but later on also got closer to others like Randhir Prakash, Rohit Karna, Sanjay Kumar, Chetan Anand, the Kumar Brothers (Rajesh and Rakesh, if I remember correctly), Ramanand Bhagat, Md Ibdouzzia, Anil Yadav, Rumi Bilgrami, Sangeeta (Mr Roy's daughter), Joyeeta Biswas, Dominic Marandi, and Vinay Murmu. Manoj Kumar was very good at playing popular songs using a comb and a piece of paper and Amir Yousuf was a good pace bowler. (There was a Chinese guy in our class and I sincerely apologise for not being able to recollect his name)

Then there were others including some of my uncle's students - Abhijit Chanda, Amitava Biswas (Bablu-da, Dr Biswas' son), Chung Kafa (he was a good footballer), Joseph Chiu (goalkeeper of the school team), Suman Banerjee, Deepankar Roy, Bartik Acharya, Biton Banerjee, Bubanda (Dr Ghatak's son), Kailash Bhaiya (P C Chowdhury's son). The long list might be tiring for those who haven't had a feel of the school in Sahibganj but all these people are still very vivid in my memory. The range of people in St. Xavier's , Sahibganj probably had a profound impact on shaping my idea of India, which takes pride in its diversity and celebrates pluralism.

So, looking back, I remember Sahibganj for its scenic beauty and also as a special place where I spent my formative years. I remember St. Xavier's as my first school and many happy memories. But more than anything else, I remember the place, the institution and the people for giving me a flavour of India and rooting me to the very idea that she stands for.

All comments are personal and have no bearing on others.

My Idea of India

The King's India Institute was formally inaugurated on January 26, India's Republic Day. It is on such days that the feeling of Indianness reverberates within me. My inner self stokes with an inquisitiveness as to what India stands for me in the 21st century.

Almost 65 years ago at the stroke of midnight hour when India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru delivered his famous 'Tryst with Destiny' speech, not many people were hopeful that India, as it stands now, would traverse such a length of time united. The parting of the British rulers , who encapsulated the diversity and robustness of India in the form of a nation state, was seen as a signal that the disintegration of the country was only a matter of time. The communal violence which accompanied India into her independence only gave credence to such cynicism. However, as history has shown, India has managed to keep her borders intact, notwithstanding the threats posed by terrorism, diverse aspirations of the various ethnic, religious, linguistic and social groups, poverty and social inequality. The diversity of India turned out to be her binding force and the apprehension of disintegration seems nothing more than a cliche now.

It was not an easy journey though. The path of democracy that India embarked upon created the political matrix which held the various religious, linguistic and ethnic groups together. The sense of Indianness has grown in strength with passing time and now the whole world wants to have a share in India's success story. It is now an incentive to be part of India, in whatever form, than to ignore her spread in various spheres of modern life. It is not only the economic success of India which lured the whole world but also her democratic polity, which promotes pluralism. Despite all its shortcomings, India never thought of abandoning democracy. The plurality in India made the politics in the country more vibrant. If nationalism and patriotism were India's strength then it never came in the way of allowing others to question majoritarianism.

I was born at a time when the experiment called India was still at its early stage. Despite several successful  elections, democracy was not as deep rooted as it is now. Poverty threatened the very existence of a young nation. Patriotism and nationalism were yet to give way to pragmatism and rational thinking and India was still not sure whether it could hold on to what it stands for. My first test of Indianness happened when as a seven year old boy I saw the nation burst into celebration after the defeat of Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections. It was a national celebration and the young mind in me never looked for a regional rationale or a Bengali element to it. I am proud to be a Bengalee but my Bengaleeness was not an incentive enough to abandon or overlook my Indian identity.

Almost three decades after my birth, on the very day when I stepped outside my motherland, I was witness to a situation which only strengthened my bond with India and the idea it stood for. The day I reached London in 1999, a Greek girl asked me how come Bengali is spoken in both India and Bangladesh yet they are two separate countries. It is not an exceptional case though, however, it is not very usual to the homogeneity that the Europeans are used to. Even before I could respond, a colleague of mine from Bangladesh quipped: "We carved out a country for ourselves but they chose to remain with India."

To tell the truth, I was not a bit offended. I visualised myself more as an Indian than a Bengalee. My Bengalee identity lies in the cradle of India and it is  true for all facets of my existence, be it physical, emotional, psychological, political or economic. India lies at the very heart of my identity, not only because I am an Indian by birth but because of the plurality, democratic politics and more than anything else the sense of intellectual excitement she stimulates.

Now with the economic rise of India, there is a well defined trend of reverse migration. Many people who left India to enjoy and explore the opportunities and comfort of the West are now home drawn. It is not unusual at a time when the whole world wants to have a share of India. Despite a third of the world's poor people still living in India and the unexplainable inequalities, India is considered to be the land of opportunities, achieving what she has, despite democratic pluralism. On my part though, I would like to see India from a distance and relish her rise from a different perspective than being sipped into it.

My idea of Indianness became more pronounced ever since I left the country about 12 years ago and Sunil Khilnani's 'The Idea of India', the first book that I bought in London from the Economist Bookshop at Piccadilly Circus, stoked it even further. I wonder whether my sense of Indianness would have been so pronounced and well defined had I remained within her physical confines, travelled to work everyday on a crowded local train from a Kolkata suburb or got stuck in a traffic snarl near ITO in Delhi. India for me is more of a concept which goes beyond anything physical and stimulates my intellectual imagination.

All comments are personal and have no bearing on others.