Bulldozer politics and the poor: Why Bengal may be wary of BJP model

As West Bengal moves towards the 2026 Assembly elections scheduled for 23 and 29 April, a key political message emerging from opposition parties is that the BJP’s governance model elsewhere in India has disproportionately hurt the poor — and that Bengal could be next.

The debate has sharpened around what critics describe as the BJP’s “bulldozer politics”, a reference to demolition drives in BJP-ruled states that have often targeted informal housing, small shops, and working-class neighbourhoods.

People in Kolkata still point to the relative affordability of daily essentials. A cup of tea is available for as little as Rs 3, and subsidised schemes such as Maa Canteen offer meals at prices ranging from Rs 5 to Rs 30. This contrast is often invoked politically to argue that the state has prioritised welfare over aggressive eviction drives.

However, BJP leaders campaigning in Bengal have increasingly invoked the imagery of the bulldozer as a symbol of administrative toughness. In Hooghly and Howrah, Bengal BJP leaders including former MP Locket Chatterjee have posed with bulldozers, promising to “bulldoze TMC corruption”, while campaign messaging has projected the arrival of a 'Bulldozer Sarkar' in the state.

Opposition leaders argue that such imagery resonates differently in Bengal than in parts of north India, where demolition drives have become a visible governance tool. TMC MP Kalyan Banerjee has criticised the approach, saying, “BJP imports bulldozers, exports empathy. Bengal wants jobs, not rubble.” CPI(M) state secretary Md Salim has similarly argued that such campaigns risk dividing poor communities for electoral gain.

Recent demolition drives in other states are frequently cited by Bengal leaders as evidence of what they describe as a pattern of governance that disproportionately affects economically vulnerable populations.

In Meerut, for instance, more than 200 shops were demolished in a market clearance drive last week, affecting small traders and vendors. Shopkeeper Raju Sharma was heard saying on camera, “We were happy when others' homes were bulldozed as 'illegal'. But now it's our turn. We are poor. We have no place to go.” Another resident, Meena Devi, said, “They gave no warning. Our kids have no roof now. BJP talked of development. This is only destruction.”

Opposition parties have also pointed to Bihar, where anti-encroachment drives intensified after the NDA returned to power in November 2025. In Patna and Muzaffarpur, demolitions targeted settlements along riverbanks and in urban areas, displacing daily wage workers and small traders. Ramu Paswan, described as a Dalit labourer affected by demolitions, said, “We voted for Nitish and BJP. They promised jobs and homes. Instead, they took our only shelter.”

Similar concerns have been raised over redevelopment projects in Mumbai’s Dharavi area. Critics argue that large-scale redevelopment tied to corporate interests could displace large numbers of low-income residents. CPI(M) leader Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya has described the process as prioritising business interests over residents’ rights.

Opposition leaders have also pointed to displacement linked to mining activity in parts of Odisha, including Sundargarh and Keonjhar, where Adivasi communities have been affected by land acquisition for mineral extraction projects. Veteran Bengal Congress leader Pradip Bhattacharya questioned what he described as a gap between political messaging around tribal welfare and ground realities.

Across these examples, opposition parties argue that demolition-led governance disproportionately affects those with limited economic and legal protections. Estimates cited by political actors claim that over 1.2 lakh homes were demolished across India in 2025, many in poorer neighbourhoods.

TMC MP Rachana Banerjee has framed the issue as one of competing governance priorities. “BJP says 'development for all'. But they bring bulldozers for the poor. They give gifts to billionaires. Their politics excludes Dalits, tribals, minorities,” she said, arguing that Bengal’s welfare schemes reflect a different approach.

Among voters in Kolkata’s working-class neighbourhoods, the discussion often centres on economic security and access to basic services. Concerns about evictions and rising living costs are shaping political perceptions, particularly among informal workers and small traders.

Political observers note that the BJP’s challenge in Bengal may lie in adapting its national messaging to a state where welfare delivery has become a central electoral issue. The extent to which voters view bulldozer-led governance as a sign of decisiveness or as a threat to livelihoods could influence how the party’s campaign is received.