top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Poriborton!

BJP candidate for Bhabanipur and Nandigram constituencies Suvendu Adhikari, who defeated West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in the prestigious Bhabanipur seat, shows a certificate of election on Monday. Pic: PTI Mumbai: The Bengali word “Poriborton” translates to profound change. While it was initially fiercely utilized as the central battle cry for the assembly elections in West Bengal, the final tally from all five state elections reveals that the spirit of the word has swept across...

Poriborton!

BJP candidate for Bhabanipur and Nandigram constituencies Suvendu Adhikari, who defeated West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in the prestigious Bhabanipur seat, shows a certificate of election on Monday. Pic: PTI Mumbai: The Bengali word “Poriborton” translates to profound change. While it was initially fiercely utilized as the central battle cry for the assembly elections in West Bengal, the final tally from all five state elections reveals that the spirit of the word has swept across the entire nation. The recent electoral outcomes have fundamentally rewritten the established rules of Indian democracy. From a massive anti-incumbency wave overturning fifteen years of rule in Bengal, to a political novice shattering a six-decade Dravidian stronghold in Tamil Nadu, and the Congress-led alliance successfully dislodging the incumbent Left in Kerala, the electorate has delivered a highly decisive mandate. Alongside sweeping consolidations of power in Assam and Puducherry, these results collectively disrupt historical traditions and reshape the national political landscape for years to come. Titan Toppled In West Bengal, the call for Poribartan finally resonated with enough force to bring down a formidable political fortress. A relentless anti-incumbency wave has overturned Mamata Banerjee’s fifteen-year rule. For a decade and a half, the Trinamool Congress maintained an iron grip on the state’s narrative, having previously ousted the Left Front on the very same promise of sweeping change. The defeat of the incumbent government signifies a monumental shift in the political psychology of Bengal. The electorate, driven by an urgent desire for a new direction, has dismantled a deeply entrenched political machine. This result forces a complete recalibration of power dynamics in eastern India, leaving a massive political vacuum that victorious forces will now rush to fill, fundamentally altering the governance trajectory of the state. Duopoly Shattered Equally seismic is the political earthquake that has struck Tamil Nadu. For six decades, the state’s political arena was fiercely guarded by a seemingly unbreakable Dravidian duopoly, with power alternating predictably between established giants. However, the emergence of the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, led by cinema icon Thalapathy Vijay, has dismantled this historical dominance. By emerging as the single-largest party in the assembly count, the TVK has achieved what generations of politicians deemed impossible. This is not merely a change in government but a profound cultural and political revolution. The voters of Tamil Nadu have overwhelmingly opted for a fresh narrative, proving that star power coupled with an untested political promise can still upend deeply rooted ideological empires, ushering in an entirely new era of leadership. Absolute Dominance Meanwhile, the political landscape in the Northeast has witnessed a different kind of decisive mandate. In Assam, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has not only retained power but has emerged significantly stronger, securing a third consecutive term. This victory effectively cements an aggressive regional hegemony and signals the near-total ouster of the Congress party from Assam’s mainstream politics. The result brings an ironclad continuity to the state, allowing the incumbent administration to push forward its agenda without any formidable legislative friction, while leaving the state’s oldest party desperately searching for political relevance. Pendulum Swings In Kerala, the electorate has delivered a decisive blow to the incumbent Left Democratic Front. The Congress-led United Democratic Front has successfully dislodged the government, claiming a vital victory in a state renowned for its fiercely contested, oscillating elections. This resurgence of the UDF injects critical new life into the state’s Congress machinery, drastically altering the governance model in Kerala. The outcome firmly proves that the traditional pendulum of Kerala politics still possesses the momentum to swing back fiercely against the incumbent, denying the Left a continued and uninterrupted grip on power. Comfortable Continuity Further down the coast in Puducherry, the mandate favored stability within a rapidly changing national map. The National Democratic Alliance government, led by the AINRC, comfortably secured its return to power. This victory ensures that the NDA maintains a crucial administrative foothold in the southern union territory, providing a steady anchor for its regional allies amid the broader national churn. When viewed collectively, these independent state results weave a complex tapestry that will inevitably reshape national politics. The fall of towering regional satraps in West Bengal and the disruption of the historic Dravidian stronghold in Tamil Nadu indicate a national electorate that is deeply restless and entirely unafraid to discard legacy systems. For the national opposition, the revival in Kerala offers a much-needed glimmer of hope, though it is heavily overshadowed by the existential crisis they face in Assam. The spectacular rise of new regional entities introduces a fresh, highly unpredictable variable into the national coalition arithmetic ahead of future general elections. Ultimately, the political center of gravity has fundamentally shifted, proving that “Poribartan” is no longer just a localized slogan, but the defining new reality of the country.

A Democratic Betrayal

Updated: Mar 12, 2025


Brussels
Calin Georgescu

Few things are more dangerous than unelected bureaucrats who claim moral superiority while trampling on democratic principles. That is precisely what is happening in Romania where Calin Georgescu, a nationalist and staunch critic of Brussels, has been barred from running in May’s presidential election. The decision by the country’s central election authority and backed by European Union elites has exposed European liberalism which celebrates democracy only when the results are convenient.


At the heart of this crisis is the annulment of Romania’s December 6 election, a move so brazenly anti-democratic that it would have been condemned had it taken place in Hungary or Poland. Georgescu, a pro-sovereignty candidate, had been leading the race when, just two days before the final round, Romania’s highest court scrapped the entire process. The official reason? Allegations of Russian interference - allegations that remain unproven and which Moscow has denied.


This decision alone was troubling. But the outright ban on Georgescu’s candidacy reveals the real agenda at play. The election authority argues that “it is inadmissible” for a previously disqualified candidate to run again. But who made this rule? Romania’s Constitution does not explicitly prevent disqualified candidates from standing in re-run elections. The ban reeks of political calculation rather than legal necessity.


The response from Romania’s electorate has been telling. Protests erupted outside the election bureau as furious supporters of Georgescu, many of them ordinary Romanians disillusioned with Brussels, clashed with security forces. The anger is not simply about a single election but about the broader feeling that their country is being treated as a vassal state of the European Union, its sovereignty undermined by foreign elites who have no stake in the daily struggles of Romanian citizens.


The EU’s condescending attitude towards Romania has been evident for years. Since its accession to the bloc in 2007, Romania has been treated as an inferior member state, constantly scolded for its governance while Brussels extracts cheap labour and resources. Romanians have grown weary of lectures from Germany and France about the rule of law when those same countries ignore their own democratic failings.


The reason Georgescu gained such a strong following in the first place is that Romanians are rejecting the EU’s empty promises. Two decades of membership were supposed to bring prosperity, yet wages remain low, young people are fleeing to Western Europe for work, and local industries have been hollowed out by foreign corporations. Romania now finds itself reduced to a periphery state in the European economic hierarchy, useful only as a cheap manufacturing hub and buffer against Russia.


The growing Euroscepticism in Romania is part of a broader trend across Eastern Europe. From Hungary’s Viktor Orbán to Slovakia’s Robert Fico, nationalist leaders are winning because they speak for voters who feel abandoned by the European project. Brussels brands them as ‘populists’ and ‘authoritarians,’ but the truth is simpler: they are responding to the democratic will of their people.


The same European elites who lecture Eastern Europeans about democracy had no issue overturning Brexit votes in the UK Parliament, ignoring Dutch and French referendums on the EU Constitution, or interfering in Italy’s elections when Giorgia Meloni’s government came to power.


Georgescu’s exclusion from Romania’s presidential race is yet another example of this double standard. European diplomats, including those from Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Spain, have rushed to defend Romania’s courts, claiming that the ban is necessary to safeguard democracy. But what democracy are they referring to? A democracy where ‘Russian interference’ is selectively invoked to silence critics of the EU while pro-Brussels candidates are given a free pass?


For all its talk of democratic values, the European Union has shown once again that it prefers control over consent. If democracy is to mean anything, it must include the right of people to make their own choices - however inconvenient they may be to the ruling elites in Brussels.

Comments


bottom of page