If you needed further '80 proof' that we live in a nanny state, poll-going West Bengal provides an ample peg. Ahead of the 2-phased voting tomorrow and on April 29, all liquor shops and drinking establishments in the state will be shuttered for nearly four days each phase. If EC's standard imposition of 'dry days' prior to state or general elections wasn't head-scratch-worthy enough for adult Indians, the latest justification from the state excise department makes such concerned 'teetotalitarianism' 'curioser and curioser': an 'unusual spurt' in liquor sales during the Model Code of Conduct period was apparently detected, along with a 'sudden growth' in packaged liquor lifted by retailers. In other words, because people were found buying more alcohol - stocking up being a normal thing to do prior to the 'abnormality' of pre-poll prohibition - the state must stop them from buying any at all. Next, banning umbrellas because it looks like rain?
The ostensible fear is that alcohol may be used to 'induce' voters. Yet, inducement - if such 'last minute' bait, indeed, makes RoI sense - is a matter of bribery and enforcement, not of whether a citizen can buy a pint or quart. In the process, legitimate businesses have been shut. Such economic absurdity in c. 2026 India is worth knocking down - and knocking back. Liquor shops and bars are still seen as dens of vice with 'Helen dancing and Prem Chopra imbibing', rather than what they really are: sites of commerce for employers, taxpayers and contributors to state coffers. Shutting them deprives, or considerably truncates, the exchequer of revenue and hospitality workers of wages, never mind citizens of legal leisure. In the name of safeguarding democracy, commerce is being stifled, especially in a state where commerce has a tough time breathing anyway.
The Indian state patronisingly assumes that all voters cannot be trusted to exercise electoral judgement if they have access to alcohol. EC and excise authorities have once again mistaken prohibition for prudence. They need to get more sober.
The ostensible fear is that alcohol may be used to 'induce' voters. Yet, inducement - if such 'last minute' bait, indeed, makes RoI sense - is a matter of bribery and enforcement, not of whether a citizen can buy a pint or quart. In the process, legitimate businesses have been shut. Such economic absurdity in c. 2026 India is worth knocking down - and knocking back. Liquor shops and bars are still seen as dens of vice with 'Helen dancing and Prem Chopra imbibing', rather than what they really are: sites of commerce for employers, taxpayers and contributors to state coffers. Shutting them deprives, or considerably truncates, the exchequer of revenue and hospitality workers of wages, never mind citizens of legal leisure. In the name of safeguarding democracy, commerce is being stifled, especially in a state where commerce has a tough time breathing anyway.
The Indian state patronisingly assumes that all voters cannot be trusted to exercise electoral judgement if they have access to alcohol. EC and excise authorities have once again mistaken prohibition for prudence. They need to get more sober.
