West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari is expected to start a Saffron Samman Yatra on 9 September. The march will begin from Golpark and end at Jadavpur University. It will put the campus at the centre of another political mobilisation, following the large Vande Mataram programme held there on Rakhi Purnima.
The march will start from Golpark, pass through Dhakuria and culminate at the 8B bus stand near Jadavpur University. The party has said that the programme will seek to promote nationalist thought and underline the need for greater administrative monitoring of the university campus.
But the main question is: Why is Suvendu Adhikari consistently doing this? “Yaa Safron March Kain Kya Razz Hain” (What is the secret behind this Saffron Samman March)?
On Rakhi Purnima, thousands of people had gathered along the road from Jadavpur University to Jadavpur Police Station for a programme titled “Vande Mataram” in Ten Thousand Voices”. Adhikari had also attended that event, which created controversy. The issue of Maoist or Dimagi Naxal has come up, particularly after several posters supporting Mao’s cause were found inside Jadavpur University. The BJP raised these issues.
But why is Suvendu consistently pursuing this line?
The main political thesis is that whatever Suvendu Adhikari is doing, he is doing it consciously. It is not an amateurish play, and it is being done after careful thought. Basically, this is a nationalist, Sanatani BJP narrative.
Behind the scenes, what Suvendu Adhikari is doing also has a theoretical perspective within the RSS. RSS leaders are of the view, and they are saying that the party’s state president, Shamik Bhattacharya, is also making the same point.
According to them, during the Left’s rule for more than thirty years, there was a serious neglect of the old Indian, Sanatani and traditional ethos. After that, during the fifteen years of TMC rule, an unusual kind of extreme cultural leftism also entered the party. Many RSS leaders describe it as “cultural Marxism”, and they believe that it became deeply embedded within the TMC and was promoted further by several of its leaders.
According to this argument, the nationalist flavour of Bengal’s culture was weakened, and what Suvendu Adhikari is now trying to do is bring that nationalist character back. Perhaps he is doing it with a little overdose, but the basic theory is that Bengali pluralism should remain, while there should also be respect for Indian Hindu nationalism. Hindutva has to be brought to the forefront.
This is one of the major theses of the RSS, and Subhendu Adhikari is implementing that perspective in Bengal.
Suvendu wants to say that this narrative is not exclusivist. He does not want to say anything against anyone, but he wants to emphasise that one has to be nationalist.
According to Suvendu Adhikari, during the Communist rule, portraits of Rabindranath Tagore, Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, Saratchandra Chattopadhyay and Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar did not find a place at Jadavpur University, whereas Che Guevara and Mao Zedong were prominent. So, according to this argument, the narrative has to be changed.
The threat of giving ordinary students consequences similar to those faced by a student from Ranaghat is also being used to create a particular narrative. Through all this, a Hindu narrative is emerging.
Those who are opposed to the BJP are saying that this could destroy Bengal’s heterogeneity, its pluralism and its inclusive approach towards all religions. They are also raising the question of Bengali food habits.
The issue has also come up because, a few days ago, Bageshwar Maharaj came and said that Bengalis eat meat and fish behind the pandals during Durga Puja, and that this is not right and is not religious.
So, a new kind of issue is emerging. However, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, speaking from London, has also said that there should not be any kind of negativism in one’s approach towards food habits or khanpan. “It is not I, it is we.”
This is where confusion is emerging. The heterogeneous Bengali model has been discussed repeatedly by figures ranging from Kshitimohan Sen to Amartya Sen. It has also been articulated by placing Rabindranath Tagore at the centre of that cultural understanding.
So the question is: Is that culture now changing? Within this narrative of Hindutva, is majoritarianism entering? If so, is Bengal’s cultural DNA changing?
Actually, in the middle of this debate and controversy, there are two extreme opinions. On one side, there is an extremely Sanatani, pro-Hindu position. On the other side, some are anti-religion and much more leftist, even ultra-leftist, whom the BJP has described as “Dimagi Naxal”, a term that the Prime Minister himself has used.
But there is one thing that should not happen: there should not be any disrespect towards the Hindu ethos.
In other words, the narration should be, “I should not be shy about saying that I am not an atheist; I am a believer, I am a theist. Saying that I perform puja is not wrong.”
What is happening now, however, is that there is an argument that Bengalis have to return more strongly to their old heritage and their old culture, that they have to go back to it.
