The Election Commission of India's decision to order re-polling in the entire assembly constituency of Falta is a manifestation of the 'endemic' political violence in West Bengal.
Ordering a re-poll for an entire assembly constituency is an extremely rare and drastic measure, but this has been ordered because the "integrity of the recorded votes" was compromised in over 21 per cent of the booths.
Such large-scale 'intervention' into the electoral process in the presence of historically the largest numbers of CAPFs and Union government officials, underscores that the violent brigands are not of little means in resources, as well as abilities.
The elections in West Bengal this year has been one of the most peaceful in the state's history, yet the violent past provided a backdrop, even if only in the form of the BJP raising the spectre of its return in the event of the Trinamool being re-elected.
Although the by-poll in Falta will, in all likelihood, have little bearing on the nature of the electoral mandate in the state - barring affecting the political fortunes of Mamata Banerjee's aide and Trinamool candidate Jahangir Khan - the episode underscores the paradoxical facet of the state wherein, political-driven ferocious brutality co-exists with distinguished scholarly traditions and an epic cultural canvas.
In almost a century and quarter of sustained existence, political violence remained a constant because it was not solely a series of isolated criminal acts. Instead, violence in Bengal has emerged as a deeply structural phenomenon with political power, local muscle, and economic survival being intertwined.
Often, the roots of political violence in the state are traced back to three major post-independence periods - the Naxalite movement (1967-72), the Left Front era (1977-2011) and the continuing Trinamool era.
However, the 1905 Partition of Bengal by the Viceroy of India, George Nathaniel Curzon acted as the primary catalyst for what has evolved into the current nature of violence. It has to be recognised that protests to this decision, eventually rescinded in 1911, in most parts of India, largely remained within the constitutional boundaries.
However, in (United) Bengal, it gave rise to the phenomenon of revolutionary or militant nationalism. Innumerable revolutionaries secured their space in history even as the British administration labelled them 'terrorists'.
Secret societies like Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar were formed and some spread to other parts of India too - contemporary Maharashtra for instance - and many of these groups or individuals, even assassinated British officials and came to be seen as heroes or martyrs, if they died in action or were executed by the colonial administration.
Such influence also crossed the proverbial seven seas and saw Madan Lal Dhingra, under the influence of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, assassinating a British official and walking to the gallows.
The cult of martyrdom, starting with Bengal, established political and cultural precedent. Over time, sacrifice and violence in the name of a 'cause' came to be justified in the region.
Independence was preceded by protracted and extreme levels of violence in Bengal, starting with communal rioting and targeted killings, triggered by Muslim League's call for Direct Action in 1946. It took little time for this trend to transit from being initially directed against the British, to becoming visible in the form of inter-party violence.
Eventually in Bengal, for the most part even today, 'politics' is not seen as an amphitheatre of anyone genteel.
In any case, as Indian nationalism began directing the agitation for freedom with greater focus, the 1940s in Bengal saw escalated levels of violence. The Great Calcutta Killings of 1946 were preceded by the Tebhaga Movement in which Bengali peasants rose in violent protest against landlords demanding two-third share of the harvest.
This radical phase of politics in Bengal was interwoven into the nationalistic upsurge and emerged from the tragic Great Bengal Famine of 1943 that resulted in complete collapse of the province's economy and completely eroded trust between citizens and administration.
As the local elite profited greatly by hoarding grain and trading unscrupulously, the peasants and urban poor were greatly radicalised and they, in time and in some parts, repositioned themselves into violent brigades, acquiring characteristics from the local goons to being part of a structured forces under the control of economic and political mafia or leader.
The Congress government headed by Siddharth Shankar Ray (1971) remains, in the state's history, as one of the most violent and repressive eras. The regime is known for its systematic "state-sponsored" crackdown, which although primarily aimed at neutralising the Naxalite movement, also targeted other political dissenters and even ordinary citizens. This period was also noted for initiating extra-judicial killings.
The mainstream Left, led by the CPM, had to face state onslaught and when after the 1977 assembly election, Jyoti Basu became the Chief Minister, his regime, took on the precise character of the Ray regime, with a few modifications.
Within no time, the party virtually became a parallel government, right down to the grassroots. Ordinary citizens, it became known, went to the local party appartchik for resolving all disputes - intra-family, with other individuals and with the state apparatus and its officials.
This 'party-society' system survived the defeat of the Left Front and shifted its allegiance to the Trinamool, which accepted it.
However, unlike the Left Front, which kept party hordes within the confines of self-drawn limits due to the presence of the party chieftain, Pramod Dasgupta, the Trinamool leadership was unable to curtail the 'autonomy' of over-zealous muscle-money strongmen.
It is a tragedy for Bengal and its people that the legatees of the ones, who at the onset of this phenomenon were seen as 'romantic' nationalists, are now perceived as those who must be shunned by the populace, failing which, they need to be mollified by handing over whatever is demanded by them.
In course of this election, the tradition of 'extortion' from local businesspersons, or the practice of forcing them to accept a business 'advice', emerged as a major issue. The BJP tried to harness this sentiment and fear of a 'repeat' episode electorally, even as its regimes in certain states have taken the extra-judicial path.
Regardless of the verdict and whichever party gets a chance to 'govern' the state for the next five years, it is time to whittle down this tradition of endemic violence. It remains to be seen if the new government charts this course or continues with it.
