The creative climes of Bengal have inspired original thinking among its people for decades but TMC’s recent ingenious election stunts are setting a benchmark of a different kind. As part of its election strategy, popular Bangladeshi actor, Ferdous Ahmed was employed by the TMC to campaign for one of its candidates in a border town.
While mercenaries position themselves in different regions around the globe from Syria to South America sniffing out fresh issues to align themselves to, performer Ferdous Ahmed probably inspired by his name (which means “Paradise”) convinced himself that this was his chosen way of attaining paradise with the assistance of an overzealous party/candidate. Ferdous’s decision for this unique association might have been ‘noble’, but the reasons for the TMC to fraternize with their celebrity brethren from across the border are not ambiguous but downright nefarious. Get a load of this… a government in power solicits the support of a foreign actor during national /assembly elections? Let’s put it this way, when Ferdous offers his support to the TMC or their Candidate, the proper way would be to vouch for that person’s competence and his potential for good governance/administration.
Now that could only be possible if he has had some firsthand experience or been part of the electorate. In this case that can be ruled out as he is neither a part of the electorate nor a stakeholder. Also what is his incentive to do so? The assumption is that he would be involved only if the victory of the candidate ensures certain advantages to him in a personal capacity or those of his nation (if he were so patriotically inclined.) Now the benefits of two nations do not necessarily have to be at cross purposes in fact they can be expected to coincide but the motives remain different.
The concept of celebrity endorsement (however idealistic) operates at the primary level of endorsing the product and its direct benefits, not the accrued benefits. The product has and will always remain the focus, the celebrity is of course incidental. The moment there is a role reversal issues come to the fore.
All this points to a dangerous trend of political expediency going beyond borders. While Ferdous has since apologized for his “inadvertent mistake” after being blacklisted, no apology has been forthcoming from the primary offender, the TMC. Ferdous can safely be treated as a person with ‘vested interests’ or ‘misguided’ if you may, but does the TMC, a government in power deserve exoneration. The political situation in West Bengal remains as volatile as ever, with citizenship a hot topic of debate. While this would be enough reason for most parties to tread the cautious path, for the TMC it is a time to manipulate the electorate.
They have decided to queer the pitch by inviting Ferdous with a view to sway a section of voters, a decision that is as improper as it is unethical, and has the potential to impact the political equation considerably. That the invitation to Ferdous is itself a tacit admission that there is a voter who would be swayed by his presence, is another matter altogether.
An election is for the citizen and citizen only. It is his right to exercise his franchise for bad or worse. An invitation to a foreign national to have a say in this would be akin to a political party in Britain inviting an American leader of the Ku Klux Klan to exercise his oratorical skills during the parliamentary elections simply because he happens to have a following in a region.
Strong steps and a stronger political will is the need of hour, as a precedent needs to be set beyond mere tokenisms like the cancellation of a business visa and a “Leave India” notice (served to Ferdous), to act as a sufficient deterrent to any future adventurism. The steps of course need to be directed towards the facilitator rather than the opportunist.
Article By :Shantanu Sharma
Leave a reply