TN Governor’s Discretion amounts to ‘Atypical’ Abuse
(Grit
and Ideology in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal)
Vanam
Jwala Narasimha Rao
The
Hans India (May 10, 2026)
{In both states, enduring success has belonged
to those who treated politics as ‘Systematic Commitment rather than a Purely
Casual Engagement.’ Whether it is the disciplined ascent of Vijay or the
decades of struggle by Mamata Banerjee, persistence has outweighed momentary
popularity. Both regions demonstrate shifts across ideological spectrums, from
anti-religious Dravidianism to Inclusive Secularism in TN, and from Left-wing
dominance to Right leaning politics in WB} – Editor’s Synoptic Observation.
Across
the diverse political landscape of India, few stories illustrate the interplay
of grit, ideology, and ambition as vividly as the recent electoral
transformations in Tamil Nadu (TN) and West Bengal (WB). Both states reveal a
striking convergence with a difference in political method: sustained effort
over decades, alliances of necessity, ideological shifts from Left to Right, alleged
electoral manipulation, and the enduring tension between democratic aspiration
and undemocratic practice. At the heart of these transformations lies one
defining principle: ‘Grit over Pastime.’
For
some, politics is fleeting engagement, while for others it is incessant struggle
defined by perseverance, reinvention, and calculated disruption. TN political
theatre has long been intertwined with ‘Silver Screen,’ categorized by either Grit
or Pastime. Historically, many actors in TN entered political arena by
leveraging their popularity, found roles within established systems, rarely
altered the political equilibrium, and navigated through alliances rather than
independently reshaping the structures of power.
Notable
exceptions were Karunanidhi, MGR, Jayalalitha etc. who demonstrated that
cinematic charisma, only when combined with organizational discipline and
relentless effort, dismantles entrenched political orders. Their rise resulted
from calculated engagement and a refusal to remain subordinate within existing
frameworks.
Continuing
this legacy, emergence of Thalapathy Joseph Vijay Chandrasekhar (Parents:
Director SA Chandrasekhar and singer Shoba Chandrasekhar) and his party,
Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, represents typical evolution of this tradition.
Vijay’s
approach transcends celebrity politics. His ascent reflects a deliberate shift
from symbolic presence to structural challenge, disrupting the long-standing
duopoly of DMK and AIADMK that defined TN for over five decades. This
disruption is both electoral and ideological. The political discourse of TN has
long been shaped by Dravidian Ideology, often marked by criticism of ‘Sanatana
Dharma’ and characterized by ‘Confrontational Atheism.’ Such
rhetoric from the top DMK leadership contributed significantly to voter apathy.
Vijay
signalled a significant recalibration. His articulation of an inclusive and
temperate secularism, rooted in social justice yet respectful of spiritual
plurality, marks a departure from rigid ideological binaries. By engaging with
temples, churches, and dargahs alike, he has reframed secularism not as
opposition to faith but as the coexistence of beliefs. This resonated well with
younger voters under forty, disillusioned with entrenched narratives. In addition,
contesting on its own across constituencies, TVK had broken the traditional ‘either
or paradigm’ of TN politics.
This
transformation also underscores a broader truth: alliances, or the refusal to
enter them, are strategic tools. Where earlier actors merged into existing
systems, the insistence by Vijay on autonomy echoes the ‘Disruptive Courage
with Grit with Popularity,’ that enabled this recalibration. If the story of TN
has been one of cinematic disruption, that of WB has been a chronicle of
ideological evolution, marked by intense struggle, systemic control, and
eventual transformation.
Before
and after independence, WB state became fertile ground for Left politics. Mass
movements were often led by Communist Cadre, gradually consolidating their
influence. This culminated in the rise of the Left Front led by Communist Party
of India (Marxist), which governed for 34 years, establishing one of the
longest democratically elected communist regimes in the world. This dominance
was shaped as much by grassroots mobilization as by the interventions of the
Centre.
The
frequent dismissal of non-Congress governments, chiefly by Indira Gandhi, set
troubling precedents. Removal of the first elected Communist Government in the
world through ballot, headed by EMS Namboodiripad in Kerala, signalled readiness
to override democratic mandates. In WB, similar patterns followed. The United
Front governments confronted repeated dismissals, often replaced by short lived
Administrations or President’s Rule.
These
interventions exposed the fragile nature of federalism and normalized the use
of constitutional mechanisms for political ends. In the 1972 WB elections allegations
of booth capturing, bogus voting, and counting irregularities cast a long
shadow over democratic processes. The CPI (M) alleged systematic manipulation
designed to prevent their ascent. Such practices, whether fully substantiated
or not, contributed to a culture of mistrust still seems to repeat in subsequent
electoral discourse, including the present.
When
political conditions shifted, the Left Front rose decisively to power in 1977,
ushering in an era of stability under Jyoti Basu. His tenure, followed by
Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, provided continuity and governance that many viewed as
a golden period. However, over time, the ideological rigidity and
administrative inertia of the Left created space for disruption. That came in
the form of Mamata Banerjee, whose rise was systematic, and built on decades of
relentless struggle.
Much
like the grit seen in the transformative leaders of TN, the journey of Mamata
Banerjee involved shifting alliances, agitations, and strategic positioning.
Whether aligning with Congress or BJP at different times, her objective
remained constant: dismantling the ‘Left-wing Red Fortress.’ Her eventual
success in 2011 marked a critical turning point. The fall of the Left Front
demonstrated that even the most entrenched ideological regimes are vulnerable
to persistent challenge.
The
story of West Bengal continued. The BJP's rise as a formidable force marks a
significant ideological evolution, moving from Left-wing
dominance toward a vibrant narrative of national pride and cultural unity.
This transition underscores a broader national trend where ideological
boundaries are not static but ever dynamic, shaped by electoral strategy and
public sentiment. Despite their differences, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal reveal
common patterns that define Indian democracy.
In
both states, enduring success has belonged to those who treated politics as ‘Systematic
Commitment rather than Purely Casual Engagement.’ Whether it is the disciplined
ascent of Vijay or the decades of struggle by Mamata Banerjee, persistence has
outweighed momentary popularity. Both regions demonstrate shifts across
ideological spectrums, from anti-religious Dravidianism to inclusive secularism
in TN, and from Left-wing dominance to Right leaning politics in WB. Ideology,
while important, often adapts to electoral realities.
Therefore,
the underlying principle shall be: politics cannot be sustained as a platform
of convenience. Those who endure, who build patiently at the grassroots, and
who remain committed through defeat and uncertainty, ultimately shape history.
Equally significant is ideological fluidity. Movements from Left to Right (WB),
or recalibrations within Dravidian politics (TN), demonstrate that ideology
must evolve with societal aspirations. Voters today respond to relevance,
delivery, and inclusivity. The challenge for political actors is to balance
strategic alliances.
Undemocratic
acts, particularly ‘Gubernatorial Overreach,’ necessitate constant
vigilance. Success requires moving beyond rhetoric to build a structured
grassroots presence. As Tamil Nadu and West Bengal illustrate, resilient
politics must transcend rigid labels, centering instead on public aspirations
and the delicate balance between principle and pragmatism.
TN
Governor Rajendra Arlekar’s initial, instant and blatant refusal to
invite Vijay, despite his claim as leader of the single largest party,
suggests a concerning stall of the democratic mandate. Historical precedents: Sanjiva
Reddy inviting Charan Singh, Venkataraman inviting PV Narasimha
Rao, Shankar Dayal Sharma inviting AB Vajpayee etc. set the standard for
constitutional propriety. To uphold these democratic values, Governor Arlekar
should follow suit and allow the floor of the House to decide the majority.
In
Indian democracy, inviting the leader of the single largest party or pre-poll
alliance, by Governors or the President, is a convention generally followed.
Governor Rajendra Arlekar’s rigid insistence on physical proof of 118
MLAs at Lok Bhavan, rather than permitting a floor test, creates an ‘Atypical
Hurdle’ for a party clearly leading all others. This departure from
democratic precedent undermines constitutional propriety and stalls the mandate
in an unprecedented, institutionalized manner.
Ultimately,
TVK’s Vijay secured formal support from Congress. The Left Parties (CPI and
CPIM), in an attempt not to repeat past tactical errors as a face-saving
measure, extended support to Vijay. With VCK oscillating, the grand finality
appears clear: Vijay is poised to be Tamil Nadu’s next Chief Minister.
Meanwhile, in a historic shift, Suvendu Adhikari has been sworn in as
West Bengal’s first-ever BJP Chief Minister.
(Post
Script: TVK’s Vijay along with Nine others sworn in as Chief Minister of Tamil
Nadu today, the May 10, 2026, at 10 AM).
