Suman Nath
On May 30, 2024, a four-minute audio clip surfaced, allegedly capturing Mondal using derogatory and abusive language, including threats of sexual violence, against Bolpur’s Inspector-in-Charge (IC), Subrata Halder, and his family. (https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/anubrata-mondal-skips-police-summons-citing-health-issues-but-visits-tmc-party-office-prnt/cid/2105480). This is not an isolated event, nor it is a matter of poor etiquette or a momentary lapse of judgment; it's a calculated strategy, deeply embedded in the political culture, particularly at the regional level. The pervasive use of verbal abuse by political leaders, even against state functionaries like the police, is a symptom of deeper political, social, and cultural dynamics that demand critical examination.
'Gaali': The Unfiltered Language of Power
To truly grasp the phenomenon, one must understand 'Gali' (गाली) – abusive language, expletives, or profanities in the Indian context. https://www.suppresspress.com/book/language-and-symbolic-power]. Anthropologist Lawrence Cohen describes gaali as a performative act embedded in cultural power dynamics, particularly in masculine and political spheres [Cohen, 1995, Holi in Banaras] [https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2-4-399]. Gaali, deeply intertwined with power dynamics, operates as a form of symbolic violence that maintains existing structures through humiliation and fear [https://www.suppresspress.com/book/language-and-symbolic-power]. Its often masculine nature and role in projecting patriarchal authority are illuminated by R.W. Connell's theory of hegemonic masculinity [https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail/?isbn=9780745634265]. Beyond individual interactions, gaali functions within broader political systems; Kanchan Chandra's patronage democracy highlights its integration into clientelist networks [https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/why-ethnic-parties-succeed/9780521814525]. The impact of gaali is significantly amplified through communication channels, a concept underscored by Marshall McLuhan's media theory [https://mitpress.edu/9780262631594/]. Furthermore, gaali serves as a tool for collective action and political maneuvering; Charles Tilly's social movement theory frames it as a mobilization tactic [https://www.routledge.com/Social-Movements-1768-2004/Tilly/p/book/9781594510434], while George Tsebelis's game theory interprets it as a strategic signal within competitive political landscapes [https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520066779/nested-games]. These frameworks contextualize Mondal’s actions within West Bengal’s socio-political culture and India’s broader dynamics.
Clearly 'Gaali' is far more than just an insult; it's a potent social and cultural tool. While it can be playful among peers, in the political arena, it transforms into a powerful instrument for expressing anger, frustration, or, most critically, asserting dominance [Kaviraj, Sudipta. "Filth and the Public Sphere: Concepts and Practices about Space in Calcutta" (https://shekhar.cc/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/kaviraj.pdf)]. In certain social circles, the ability to deliver a 'Gaali' effectively can even be seen as a sign of strength, authenticity, or a defiant rejection of perceived elitism.
When a political figure deploys 'Gaali', it's a deliberate transgression of formal norms. It signals a willingness to operate outside conventional boundaries, connecting with a raw, unfiltered public sentiment. This makes it a powerful, albeit transgressive, tool in the political lexicon, capable of eliciting strong emotional responses and shaping perceptions of power and authority [The Wire, May 13, 2025 (https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/india-online-trolling-rightwing-doxxing-vikram-misri); It’s the language of the street brought into the hallowed halls of power, designed to resonate with a specific, often marginalized, segment of the population along with the followers, who are often tasked with exercising dominance through violence.
The Iron Fist of Political Control
One of the most immediate and impactful reasons for political leaders to resort to verbal abuse is to overtly exercise and demonstrate political contro through violencel. By publicly intimidating opponents, critics, and even administrative officials like the police, these leaders send an unmistakable signal of their unchallenged authority and their readiness to transgress established norms [The Telegraph India, June 1, 2025 (https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/anubrata-mondal-skips-police-summons-citing-health-issues-but-visits-tmc-party-office-prnt/cid/2105480)]. This aggressive posturing creates an environment where dissent is stifled, and compliance is implicitly or explicitly enforced. When a political figure abuses a police officer without immediate, severe repercussions, it broadcasts a clear message about the power hierarchy. There are triple underlying obligatory meanings attached, to become someone of supreme authority in both tradition and legal-institutitional forms, to be able to operate with impunity that undermining the authority of state institutions, and to be able to normalise violence [The Telegraph India, June 1, 2025 (https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/anubrata-mondal-skips-police-summons-citing-health-issues-but-visits-tmc-party-office-prnt/cid/2105480); Times of India, June 1, 2025 (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/anubrata-cites-ill-health-to-skip-cop-call-police-issue-2nd-summons/articleshow/121542120.cms)]. Such Gaali by political bosses isn't merely an outburst of anger; it's a calculated performance designed to establish dominance and reinforce the leader's position at the apex of the local power structure. It showcases a capacity to bend or break rules, thereby asserting a form of extra-legal authority that proves highly effective in maintaining control over both party cadres and the local administration [(https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/POLITICAL-VIOLENCE-IN-WEST-BENGAL-A-COMPARATIVE-ANALYSIS-OF-DIFFERENT-STATES-OF-INDIA.pdf)].
Masculinity: The 'Strongman' Persona
Gaali when seen in broader context projects hegemonic masculinity in West Bengal. Mondal’s 2024 audio, with slurs against Halder’s wife and mother, crafted a “mafia don” persona resonating with rural supporters who equate aggression with strength. This aligns with Connell’s theory, where toughness reinforces patriarchal authority [https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=masculinities-2nd-edition--9780745634265 ]. Mondal’s role in projects like Deocha-Pachami coal mine bolstered his rugged image. His 2018 threats against police also reflect this masculinity. Filippo Osella’s work supports this, noting gali’s role in gendered hierarchies [Osella, 2004, Men and Masculinities in South India].
However, Mr. Mondal is not alone, the aggressive, often vulgar, language employed by several Indian political leaders incluidng the top ranking ones is deeply intertwined with a specific performance of masculinity. Across many parts of India, particularly in local politics, the "strongman" archetype holds significant sway [Taylor & Francis Online https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14608944.2024.2421009?af=R]. The strongman leaders are then seen as fearless, decisive, and unafraid to use unconventional or even aggressive methods to achieve their objectives. In this context, verbal abuse becomes a performative act of hyper-masculinity, signalling virility, toughness, and an unwavering resolve. It aligns with traditional notions of power where overt displays of dominance and a willingness to confront are highly valued [https://doras.dcu.ie/29387/]. This "macho" image resonates powerfully with a populace that often equates strength with effective leadership, especially in contexts where political power is seen as the key to navigating complex social realities and securing vital resources. The leader who employs 'Gaali' and aggressive rhetoric might be perceived as someone who "gets things done," who is not afraid to challenge authority (even if it's the state's own authority), and who embodies a raw, unrefined power that is seen as more authentic than the polished discourse of elite politicians [Taylor & Francis Online (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14608944.2024.2421009?af=R)]. This performance of masculinity is a deliberate strategy to cultivate a loyal following and to project an image of unyielding power that intimidates rivals and assures supporters.
The 'Rowdy' Populist Appeal
Adopting a "rowdy" or unconventional approach, frequently characterized by Gaali, is also a deliberate populist strategy. By eschewing formal language and embracing the vernacular of the streets, leaders aim to differentiate themselves from the perceived "elite" or "gentleman" politicians. This approach cultivates an image of authenticity and relatability, presenting the leader as "one of them" – someone who understands and speaks the language of the common people, unburdened by the niceties of high politics [(https://mcrg.in/populism-populist-politics-concept-note/)].
This populist appeal is particularly effective in mobilizing support from segments of the electorate who may feel marginalized or alienated by traditional political discourse. The "rowdy" leader is seen as unpretentious, direct, and willing to fight for the interests of their constituents without bureaucratic circumlocution. This rejection of political decorum can be interpreted as a sign of genuine commitment to the masses, fostering a sense of solidarity and trust. It taps into a popular sentiment that often views formal institutions and their representatives with suspicion, preferring a leader who embodies a more direct, confrontational style [http://www.mcrg.ac.in/PP138.pdf)].
Inflammatory and abusive language serves as an incredibly powerful rallying cry for party cadres and supporters. Its emotional impact is undeniable: it can generate excitement, foster a sense of collective anger against political opponents, and solidify a shared identity and purpose among followers. When a leader uses strong, often transgressive, language, it creates a visceral "us-versus-them" dynamic, intensifying loyalty and energizing the base.
Verbal Abuse as a Precursor to Violence
The connection between verbal abuse and the threat or actual exercise of violence is often subtle, yet profoundly significant. Verbal aggression can serve as a direct precursor to physical coercion, cultivating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation that can, and often does, escalate into actual violence. When a leader employs abusive language, especially direct threats, it signals a clear willingness to resort to more extreme measures if their demands are not met. This implicit threat of violence can be highly effective in compelling compliance from individuals and institutions.
In political contexts, particularly in regions with a history of political violence like West Bengal, such language can unfortunately normalize aggression and lower the threshold for physical confrontation. It desensitizes both perpetrators and potential victims to the severity of violent acts, making them appear as a natural, albeit regrettable, extension of intense political rivalry. The public display of verbal aggression by leaders can embolden party workers to engage in similar behavior, secure in the knowledge that their actions are implicitly sanctioned by the leadership. This creates a dangerous cycle where verbal abuse not only intimidates but also paves the way for the actual exercise of political violence, severely impacting the democratic fabric and the rule of law [The Wire, May 13, 2025 (https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/india-online-trolling-rightwing-doxxing-vikram-misri)].
The Broader Context: Weak Institutions and Media Amplification
Beyond these core strategic and cultural drivers, several other factors contribute to the pervasive nature of verbal abuse in Indian politics. A perceived lack of stringent and swift legal action against political leaders who engage in verbal abuse often emboldens them to continue such behavior [(https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/anubrata-mondal-skips-police-summons-citing-health-issues-but-visits-tmc-party-office-prnt/cid/2105480); When institutions, including the police and judiciary, are seen as susceptible to political pressure, the deterrent effect of laws against abusive language diminishes significantly.
Furthermore, the widespread dissemination of audio and video clips of leaders using abusive language, often amplified by social media and news channels, can normalize such behavior. Even if the intention may be to expose, it can also provide these leaders with a wider platform, contributing to the perception that this is an acceptable, albeit controversial, part of political discourse (https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/india-online-trolling-rightwing-doxxing-vikram-misri)]. West Bengal, in particular, with its long history of intense political rivalry and street politics, has a deeply ingrained culture of confrontation. This historical context often fosters an environment where aggressive language is not only tolerated but sometimes even expected as a sign of political strength. Lastly, in regions marked by significant socio-economic disparities and intense competition for resources, political power often translates directly into patronage and control. Leaders who project an image of unyielding power, even through abusive language, might be seen as more effective in securing benefits for their constituents.
A Call for Reflection
The phenomenon of political leaders employing verbal abuse, as starkly exemplified by cases like Anubrata Mondal, is a complex and multifaceted issue. It is rooted in a confluence of political strategy, deeply ingrained cultural norms, and raw power dynamics. It is far from a mere lapse in decorum; it is a deliberate, and often effective, tool for exercising control, performing a specific type of masculinity, adopting a populist "rowdy" persona, mobilizing followers, and implicitly or explicitly threatening violence. The indigenous concept of 'Gali' provides a crucial cultural lens through which to understand the deeper resonance and performative power of such language in the Indian context.
While democratic discourse ideally thrives on reasoned debate and mutual respect, the reality on the ground in India often deviates significantly. The normalization of verbal aggression by political leaders poses a serious challenge to the health of democratic institutions, eroding public trust in the rule of law and fostering an environment where intimidation can supersede dialogue. Addressing this critical issue requires not only robust legal and institutional reforms but also a deeper societal reflection on the values that truly underpin political leadership and public discourse in India.
The author is an anthropologist.
