Bengal turns new page, all must keep the calm

In his speech after the assembly results came in on May 4, Prime Minister Narendra Modi framed the BJP’s victory in West Bengal as a turning point. It would mark a break from a political culture marred by fear and violence, he said, the state would be “bhay mukt”. Bringing about this change in a state where political violence has a long and tangled history will require a deep resolve from the new ruling party, its leaders and workers. The task of rejuvenation and repair, however, also requires a buy-in from the outgoing Trinamool Congress. Unfortunately, in the 48 hours since the election results, the sounds of violence, though much more muted and erratic than after, say, the 2021 election result, are disquieting.

Cycles of retributive political violence have historical roots in Bengal. As far back as the early 20th century, the then-undivided Bengal was the epicentre of militant resistance to colonial rule, and of brutal responses by the colonial administration. The region saw outbreaks of communal rioting, and later, with the birth of Naxalism in the 1960s, violence flared between the government and anti-state political parties, and in internecine conflict between the communist factions. The 34 years of CPI(M) rule, as a result of this history and because of the blurred lines between a cadre-based party and the state, deepened the culture of fear and intimidation. The TMC inherited that structure, which it expanded into a parallel network, the “syndicate”, that became an important reason for its decline. Now, the BJP has the opportunity to break this dismal pattern. It must not miss it.

BJP state president Samik Bhattacharya seems to recognise that the mandate is not just for a change in government, but for a new grammar of politics. He has warned party workers against targeting TMC offices or showing disrespect to the outgoing Chief Minister. Unfortunately, however, his colleague, Suvendu Adhikari, has chosen the moment to send out a divisive and polarising message: Having defeated Banerjee in her bastion of Bhabanipur, he has said he would work only for the Hindus who purportedly voted for him, and not for the Muslim minority that, according to him, did not. In turn, Banerjee’s continuing refusal to accept the verdict undermines the system her party — as the main Opposition — continues to be a pillar of. As Bengal turns a new page, its new government needs to get down to work to deliver on its mandate, and the Opposition must keep it on its toes. Especially after an election in which people turned out to vote in record numbers, there can only be respect for the verdict, there is simply no role or room for violence.

Overall Analysis

This editorial discusses the political transition in West Bengal after the BJP’s electoral victory and emphasizes the urgent need to end the state’s long history of political violence. The article frames the election as more than a mere transfer of power — it is presented as an opportunity to reshape Bengal’s political culture into one rooted in democratic calm and mutual respect.

The opening paragraph establishes this central idea through Narendra Modi’s statement that Bengal should become “bhay mukt” (free from fear). The editorial’s language here is cautious and measured. While acknowledging the symbolic importance of the BJP’s victory, it also stresses that real change requires restraint not only from the new ruling party but also from the outgoing All India Trinamool Congress. The phrase “sounds of violence… are disquieting” subtly conveys concern without sensationalism, maintaining a balanced tone.

The second paragraph broadens the discussion historically, tracing Bengal’s violent political culture from anti-colonial resistance to communal riots, the rise of Naxalism, and cadre-based politics under the Communist Party of India (Marxist). This historical context gives the editorial depth and suggests that the present situation is not accidental but deeply embedded in the region’s political structure. The use of terms like “cycles of retributive violence” and “culture of fear and intimidation” creates a grim picture of entrenched hostility. By describing the TMC’s “syndicate” network as contributing to its own decline, the editorial implies that misuse of political machinery eventually weakens democratic legitimacy.

The final paragraph shifts toward accountability and responsibility. The editorial praises Samik Bhattacharya for advocating restraint, presenting him as someone aware that the public voted not only for a new government but for a “new grammar of politics”. This phrase is especially significant because it metaphorically compares politics to language, implying the need for a complete transformation in political behaviour and communication. In contrast, the comments of Suvendu Adhikari are criticised as divisive and communal, while Mamata Banerjee is faulted for not fully accepting the electoral verdict.

The editorial concludes with a strong democratic appeal: respect for the people’s mandate and rejection of violence. The emphasis on record voter turnout reinforces the legitimacy of the election process and underlines that political competition must remain within democratic boundaries. Overall, the article combines historical analysis with moral and political commentary, urging all sides to prioritise stability over confrontation.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Retributive – intended as punishment or revenge.
2. Internecine – destructive conflict within the same group.
3. Rejuvenation – restoration or revival of something.
4. Polarising – causing division into sharply opposing groups.
5. Mandate – authority or approval given by voters to govern.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial argues that Bengal’s political transition should become a chance to end decades of fear, retaliation, and partisan violence. It calls upon both the ruling party and the Opposition to respect democratic norms and ensure peace.

Tone: Analytical, cautionary, and strongly democratic, with an appeal for restraint and political maturity.