A powerful dive into Mamata Banerjee’s political challenges, internal TMC cracks, and Bengal’s tumultuous direction. Will the party overcome its crisis?
The Goddess and the Gale
In Bengal’s tempestuous political theatre, Mamta Banerjee is no mere player—she is the stage. Fierce, emotive, often incendiary, she once symbolised the cry of a state long stifled by ideological inertia. But now, the thunder in her voice echoes a deeper anxiety: that of a regime wobbling under the weight of its contradictions.
This isn’t just about one leader’s desperation; it’s a structural unravelling. The Trinamool Congress (TMC), born from defiance and nourished by anti-left sentiment, now finds itself battling both external aggression and internal erosion. What was once a monolithic movement of the people is now a fragmented machine gasping for coherence.
From Firebrand to Firefighting
The populist origin of Mamta’s persona
Mamta didn’t just oppose the Left—she embodied a generational rebellion. The slingshot against the CPI(M)’s bureaucratic Goliath, her rise was fueled by a rare fusion of personal suffering and political tenacity. But populist power is brittle. Once it becomes established, its moral edge blunts, its urgency turns into inertia.
From fighting for hawkers and evicted slum-dwellers to hosting lavish global investment summits, Mamta’s journey maps the TMC’s drift from activist idealism to elite orchestration. What was once a voice of the street is now garbled by court dates, scandals, and satirical hashtags.
Trinamool’s transition from outsider to establishment
A decade ago, TMC challenged the status quo. Today, it is the status quo. That transformation brings institutional complacency. While power was consolidated in Kalighat, governance grew increasingly opaque. Public accountability shrank. And loyalty became a currency traded for positions, not principles.
Unravelling from Within: TMC’s Internal Fault Lines
The SSC scam and the rot in recruitment
If any single episode epitomises TMC’s decay, it is the SSC (School Service Commission) scam. Qualified candidates were bypassed in favour of “identified culprits” who allegedly paid for their positions. This isn’t just corruption; it’s a profound betrayal of the very youth Mamta’s populist narrative once championed. The Supreme Court’s demand for salary refunds and exclusion of these “culprits” lays bare the depth of this institutional rot. The state government’s desperate attempts to shield them, even challenging court orders, underscore a party willing to sacrifice public trust for the loyalty of its compromised cadres. It’s a stark contrast to the rhetoric of protecting “merit” versus the reality of defending “marked individuals.”
Youth gangs, cash-for-jobs, and public outrage
The SSC scam is merely a symptom. The widespread allegations of “Bhhaipo gang” (nephew gang) and casual workers becoming permanent through illicit means paint a grim picture of a parallel economy of extraction. When a 44-year-old student leader is seen harassing a young girl, or accusations fly about “money collection” reaching the “Bhhaipo,” the party’s moral authority shatters. These incidents, whether “manufactured videos” or not, erode the public’s faith. It exposes a party where patronage, not performance, defines progression, turning political participation into a cynical exchange of cash for clout.
Electoral Desperation or Democratic Defiance?
Rajbongshi’s anxieties and NRC misfires
The Rajbongshi community’s plight, particularly the Assam Foreigners Tribunal notices, has become a potent, albeit cynical, tool in TMC’s electoral arsenal. The immediate outcry—accusing the BJP of forcing “marginalised, deprived minorities” to leave the country via the NRC—is a classic case of strategic ambiguity. The irony is stark: the NRC excludes the Koch Rajbongshi community, yet TMC continues to stoke fear, leveraging community anxiety for political mileage. This move, while galvanising a section of the electorate, reveals a party more interested in manufacturing consent through fear than in genuine community empowerment. It’s a desperate attempt to shore up support in areas like Cooch Behar, Jalpaiguri, and Alipurduar, where BJP has made significant inroads, securing six of eight Lok Sabha seats and 30 of 54 Assembly seats in the past.
Playing victim vs. playing leader
Mamata’s public postures, from threatening constitutional resistance to curbing “jingoist ministers” within her ranks, oscillate between victimhood and defiance. This authoritarian populism, while emotionally resonant, often blurs the lines between genuine democratic assertion and calculated theatrics. It’s a strategy to galvanize the electorate and force federal concessions, but it simultaneously courts the risks of a self-imposed siege and a slide towards autocratic tendencies. The “straw-clutching” imagery of a ruling party, seemingly losing grip, speaks volumes about its current state.
Identity, Investment, and Institutional Drift
Broken promises of industrial growth
Bengal’s industrial landscape tells a story of unfulfilled promises. The much-touted Bengal Global Business Summits, despite attracting “investment proposals” worth 19 lakh crore over seven years, have failed to translate into significant implementation or job creation. While the state ranks fourth in investment proposals, it’s not even among the top 10-12 in terms of actual implementation. This disconnect between rhetoric and reality—between “happy photos” and actual factory inaugurations—highlights a critical flaw in TMC’s governance model. The lack of tangible industrial growth fuels public disillusionment and exposes a reliance on grand declarations rather than sustained economic development.
Identity politics as a distraction mechanism
When the economy flounders, identity politics often fills the vacuum. The emphasis on community anxieties, be it the Rajbongshi issue or other identity-based mobilisations, serves as a powerful distraction mechanism from governance failures. By framing issues in terms of “us vs. them,” TMC attempts to consolidate its vote base and deflect criticism regarding joblessness, corruption, and the erosion of merit. This strategy, while electorally convenient in the short term, undermines the very fabric of a pluralistic society and prevents genuine introspection on the state’s developmental challenges.
Strategic Ambiguity or Political Paralysis?
Legal battles and courtroom theatrics
The ongoing legal battles, particularly the SSC saga, have transformed state governance into a spectacle of courtroom theatrics. The government’s willingness to go “to the Supreme Court” to defend “identified culprits” against clear directives speaks volumes. This isn’t just about winning legal arguments; it’s about projecting an image of defiance against a perceived “Centre’s muscular diplomacy” and protecting a compromised patronage network. This strategic ambiguity buys time but introduces immense volatility and further erodes public trust in the institutions of justice and governance.
The SSC saga as a metaphor for governance collapse
The SSC scam, therefore, is not an isolated incident; it’s a potent metaphor for a broader governance collapse within TMC. It illustrates a system where the “marked” are privileged over the meritorious, where rules are bent to protect the politically connected, and where public service is compromised by private gain. This systemic failure, coupled with the “Bhhaipo gang” allegations, paints a picture of a party consumed by self-preservation rather than public welfare.
Allies, Adversaries, and Awkward Embraces
Congress-Left-TMC axis: Possibility or political posturing?
The idea of a broad alliance—Left, Congress, and TMC—to counter the BJP, as advocated by some, presents a perplexing paradox. On one hand, it acknowledges the BJP as the “biggest danger” and the need for a unified front. On the other hand, the deep-seated ideological differences and historical animosities, particularly from the Left, create an almost insurmountable barrier. The Left’s adherence to “equidistance” and “no compromise” with TMC, even while indirectly benefiting the ruling party by splitting the anti-TMC vote, smacks of political posturing rather than pragmatic alliance building. The “fish fry” meeting at Nabanna is a distant memory, replaced by a verbal war.
Dilip Ghosh episode: Defections and disillusionment
The recent episode involving Dilip Ghosh, a former BJP state president, highlights the internal dynamics and the allure of defection. While he met with Shuvendu Adhikari, his attendance at an event with Mamata Banerjee sparked controversy and “dissatisfaction” among BJP workers. The TMC’s alleged attempts to lure Ghosh, much like Somen Mitra, suggest a strategy of weakening the opposition through defections. However, the fate of those who have switched sides—many reduced to “lamp posts” with no real influence—serves as a cautionary tale. It underscores the transactional nature of such moves and the disillusionment that often follows, leaving established leaders without their prior “credibility” or “relevance.”
The Youth Disconnect
Generation gap in leadership and perception
A significant chasm is emerging between TMC’s old guard and the aspirations of Bengal’s youth. The leadership’s rhetoric, rooted in past struggles, often fails to resonate with a generation grappling with unemployment and frustrated by corruption. The “Bhhaipo brigade” allegations further alienate young voters who see the party as perpetuating a system of privilege rather than opportunity.
Disillusioned first-time voters
First-time voters, unburdened by the historical loyalties of their parents, are increasingly critical of the lack of industrial growth, the corruption scandals, and the pervasive sense of political opportunism. Their disillusionment poses a significant threat to TMC’s long-term viability, as their choices will be driven by tangible results and accountability, not just emotional appeals or identity politics.
TMC’s Regional Clout and Global Stakes
Bengal in the Indo-Pacific corridor
Bengal’s strategic location, bordering Bangladesh and serving as a gateway to Southeast Asia, places it at a critical juncture in the broader geopolitical choreography of the Indo-Pacific. As the US and China engage in their “muscular diplomacy,” India’s internal stability and federal posture become crucial. Any misstep in Bengal could undermine crucial economic corridors, from Chittagong to Kolkata, and potentially invite external interference. Mamata’s stance, therefore, is not merely a regional issue but one that ripples through India’s broader strategic framework.
Federalism and middle power agency
As ASEAN and other rising middle powers navigate multipolarity, India’s internal balance matters. Dissent in Bengal, a “wiry state legislature,” signals to the Global South that even within democracies, regional actors hold significant agency. Mamata’s fight, whether driven by desperation or strategy, underscores the ongoing contestation over normative order—who defines democratic legitimacy in a federal polity. The question is whether Bengal can truly project “middle power ripples” or merely contribute to internal turbulence.
Public Sentiment: Between Loyalty and Fatigue
The shrinking moral high ground
The string of scandals, from SSC to extortion allegations, has severely eroded TMC’s moral high ground. The public, once swayed by Mamta’s image as an “anti-establishment fervour,” now witnesses a party seemingly more concerned with protecting its own than serving the people. This shrinking moral space makes it difficult for the party to rally genuine grassroots support beyond its core loyalists.
Grassroots abandonment
The old guard and long-serving grassroots workers, who “sweat and bled” for the party’s 2011 victory, feel increasingly sidelined by a new breed of “Bhhaipo” and those who gained prominence after 2011. This internal resentment, as acknowledged by some leaders, points to a growing disconnect between the party’s leadership and its foundational support base. The “Sacrifice” of old cadres is forgotten in the pursuit of immediate power, leading to a sense of abandonment at the grassroots level.
Mamta’s Crisis of Legitimacy
Governance vs. populism
The core of Mamata’s current dilemma lies in the tension between effective governance and the perpetuation of populism. While populist appeals resonated during her rise, sustained governance requires institutional strength, transparency, and accountability—qualities that appear increasingly lacking within TMC. The reliance on “big declarations” over “real-world investment” highlights this fundamental imbalance.
The risk of political exhaustion
The constant state of confrontation, the relentless legal battles, and the internal strife risk leading to political exhaustion, both within the party and among the electorate. A leader constantly “fighting the mirror” risks losing touch with the ground reality and the genuine aspirations of the people. This perpetual state of “worry” and “desperate acts” may ultimately drain the party of its vitality.
Contradictions of Resistance
Resistance without reform
The narrative of “resistance” against the Centre, while powerful, rings hollow if it’s not accompanied by internal reform. If TMC’s “dissent” is merely a cover for defending corruption and a lack of governance, then it risks becoming a resistance without reform. This hollow resistance ultimately serves no purpose but to perpetuate the existing malaise.
Anti-BJP, but at what cost?
The emphasis on being the “anti-BJP bulwark” is a significant part of TMC’s current strategy. However, the question remains: at what cost? If the fight against BJP leads to the compromise of democratic ethics, the undermining of institutions, and the perpetuation of corruption, then the very purpose of resistance is defeated. As the article suggests, if opposition parties implicitly support TMC by dividing the anti-TMC vote, then democratic pluralism suffers, reducing the electoral process to a “game” that benefits the “thieves’ empire.”
The Road Ahead: Realignment or Retreat?
Can TMC reinvent itself?
The current trajectory suggests a party in deep crisis, battling internal decay and external pressure. Can TMC reinvent itself, shed its populist excesses, and return to a path of good governance and genuine public service? Or will it continue down the path of “strategic ambiguity” and “desperate acts,” further alienating its core constituency?
Or is this a prelude to collapse?
The article’s stark warning—”If Bengal bends, will India’s federal spirit bend too?”—underscores the gravity of the situation. If TMC continues its current course, without addressing its fundamental flaws, it risks a further decline, potentially leading to a significant “retreat” from its dominant position. The “one percent” challenge thrown by the analyst points to the very real possibility of diminishing relevance if the party fails to “realign” its priorities with the aspirations of the people.
Closing Reflection: When the Queen Fights the Mirror
In the end, Mamta’s act is both a worry and a clarion call. Her defiance warns us—democracy requires more than elections. It needs institutional space, regional diversity, and moral conviction. If Bengal bends, will India’s federal spirit bend too? The next turn in this unfolding drama will reveal whether democracy survives under strain—or shatters under orchestration. The alert is clear: Republics cannot survive on rebellion alone—they need repair, reason, and righteous resolve.
