A Response to Prabhu Chawla's "Saffron Bengal Needs Ram Raj"
Jatinder Pal Singh
Retired Commandant, CPMF
Sri Amritsar
Phone : 91027-41111
When a respected columnist celebrates electoral victory as “cultural conquest,” it signals something troubling about Indian democracy. Prabhu Chawla’s article “Saffron Bengal Needs Ram Raj” in New Indian Express, treats political mandate as a cultural conquest and mandate for ideological homogenization. This is not merely a matter of rhetoric-it reflects a dangerous philosophy about what winning an election means in a constitutional democracy. The piece deserves a serious response. Mr. Chawla’s writing is undeniably eloquent, his imagery stirring. He sings glowing praises to the “saffron surge,” and identifies it as the original soul of Bengal !
He has every right to celebrate the BJP’s victory with passion. However, this kind of one-sided, emotional writing demands a calm and honest response.
Let me be absolutely clear at the outset: This is not a defence of the previous Left Front or TMC regimes. For decades, Bengal suffered from industrial decline, factory closures, massive unemployment, political violence, and corruption.
The democratic verdict was legitimate and deserved. But merely replacing red or green politics with saffron will not magically solve the state’s deep-rooted problems-and pretending it will – is a disservice to those hoping for real transformation.
Question of Accountability
In his rush to describe the new incumbent as a “saffron-clad stalwart” and “celibate political phoenix,” Mr. Chawla conveniently ignores questions about his alleged conduct in the Narada sting operation.
A government that claims to represent moral and cultural renewal cannot build its legitimacy by ignoring inconvenient facts about its leadership. Either these allegations are addressed transparently, through proper legal processes or the narrative of renewal rings hollow. Integrity cannot be washed away by changing the colour of one’s robes. If the new government truly represents a break from the corruption and moral decay of the past, then it must address these questions head-on, not sweep them under ceremonial cloth. When Mr. Chawla celebrates New face with-out engaging these facts, he turns political analysis into an ode.
The Mythology of the Magic Cure
The writer treats saffron as a sacred, all-powerful solution to Bengal’s decades of economic and administrative inertia. If that were true, why stop at kurtas and flags? By this logic, we should paint the roads, bridges, planes and all infrastructure saffron as well-Perhaps then the infra-structure and industries will boom, and unemployment will vanish overnight.
The simple, uncomfortable truth is this: Good governance does not depend on the colour of clothes or fluttering flags. Real progress comes from honest administration, sound policies, investment in education and industry, rule of law, and accountability. A government can wear Saffron if it helps democratic traditions but remember true democracy has no colour.
What is most telling is how Mr. Chawla devotes to cele-brating symbolism but reduces actual Ram Rajya which even Mahatma Gandhi invoked to mean jus-tice and welfare for all citizens-to a mere afterthought.
The Rewriting of History: Were Tagore and Netaji Saffron Ideologists?
Here lies perhaps the most troubling aspect of Mr. Chawla’s argument. He attempts to paint Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Rabindranath Tagore in saf-fron hues. This raises an uncomfortable question that deserves a direct answer: Does he truly believe these towering fig-ures were saffron ideolo-gists?
The pattern is now transparent. Sardar Patel has already been claimed and painted in saffron by champions of saf-fronisation. Now Mr. Chawla extends this project to Bengal’s most venerated fig-ures. Where does this rewriting of history end?
Consider Rabindranath Tagore. When Tagore wrote Jana Gana Mana-which became India’s national anthem-he did not envision it as an anthem of Hindu nationalism. It was an anthem celebrating the diversity of Indian peoples and traditions. His Sonar Bangla (Golden Bengal) was a dream inspired by the syn-cretic traditions of Bengal. When he wrote of Bengal’s greatness, he never meant saffron greatness-he meant the greatness of a civiliza-tion that had learned to blend many colours into gold.
Consider Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. His famous call-“Give me blood, and I shall give you free-dom”-was an appeal to all Indians, regardless of reli-gion. When Netaji worked with the Indian National Army, he recruited from every community: Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian. To claim Netaji for saffron ide-ology is not history; it is era-sure of his fundamental uni-versalism. To paint these fig-ures in saffron is to betray the very inclusive national-ism they worked for. Yet Mr. Chawla does precisely this, without acknowledging the contradiction between their actual legacy and the use being made of their memo-ry.
Democracy Is Not Majoritarianism
Mr. Chawla would do well to revisit basic constitutional principles. Democracy is not the rule of the majority community over the rest. It is a system designed so that all sections of society-feel they have an equal stake and equal protection.
Even in this election, victory came with approxi-mately 45 per cent vote share against 55 per cent for others. This is a democratic mandate to govern effec-tively for all citizens, not a cultural conquest that gives anyone the right to paint the entire state in one colour. The Indian Constitution does not assign any official colour to the government-neither saf-fron, nor red, nor green. It demands that the state remain colourless and neu-tral, treating every citizen with equal dignity.
When political discourse shifts to “Hindu solidarity,” “cultural conquest,” and to rejection of “secular fief-doms,” it risks making large sections of the population, especially minorities, feel like second-class citizens in their own state. This has real consequences-for social cohesion, for demo-cratic health, of those who do not identify with the majority narrative.
“Journalist Arfa Khanum Sherwani stated on count-ing day that ‘polarisation is complete.’ Suvendu Adhikari, while acknowledg-ing Hindu consolidation behind BJP and noting that the entire Muslim vote went to TMC in areas like Nandigram, said he would work for the Hindus there. A leader presiding over a sharply divided house will face the challenge of reclaiming Bengal’s shared soul.”
What If Every Region Discovered Its Own Coloured Soul?
Here is a question Mr. Chawla’s logic raises but does not answer: What hap-pens if every region, every linguistic group, every state in India begins “discovering the colour of its soul” and painting its identity in one religious hue?
If every region begins treat-ing electoral victory as a mandate of cultural con-quest- imagine the conse-quences – ethnic and reli-gious fiefdoms, each paint-ing itself in its own chosen colour. This is not an abstract concern. This is the logical destination of the philosophy Mr. Chawla celebrates. This is how con-stitutional democracies fracture. The architects of our Constitution under-stood this danger. That is why they insisted on a secu-lar, colourless state-one that recognizes and pro-tects the diversity within it, rather than trying to homogenize it under a sin-gle hue. That principle was not an accident or a com-promise. It was the founda-tional wisdom of India’s democratic design.
The Real Test: What Actually Matters
Bengal’s new government deserves a fair chance, and voters deserve to see whether their hopes will be fulfilled. But a fair chance does not mean a blank check. The real test lies not in how loudly slogans are raised or how many flags are waved, but in delivering tangible results:
Bengal has witnessed polit-ical violence from all sides for decades. The first meas-ure of the new government must be whether it can end this cycle-not just from opposition parties, but also ensure that state-backed goons do not terrorize citi-zens. A government serious about renewal must protect every citizen’s right to live without fear. Bengal’s true strength has always been its rich, syncretic culture – Tagore’s universalism – Netaji’s inclusive patriot-ism. This was not a distor-tion or aberration. It was Bengal’s genius. This inclu-sive spirit must be nurtured and deepened, not frac-tured for the sake of politi-cal symbolism.
Until the new government proves otherwise through measurable results, not stir-ring rhetoric, the jury remains out. The burden of proof lies with those in power. The burden of judg-ment lies with the people. Whether Saffron is really pious or just a colour like Red and Green – in next few months the verdict will be out.
