Opposition to all forms of arbitrary and unchecked power is central to the democratisation of societies, states, families, governments, and other institutions essential for governance, peace, and prosperity. The deepening of democracy and the protection of citizenship rights depend on opposition politics, parties, and their struggles against governing powers, holding them accountable to the people. Opposition parties play a pivotal role in representing the people’s interests by scrutinising laws and regulations to ensure effective checks and balances. They offer alternative visions for policies, politics, and governance, presenting concrete, improved solutions aimed at empowering and emancipating marginalised groups—whether defined by poverty, gender, or position in the rung web of capitalist and feudal hierarchies. Through the development of compelling programs for social and economic transformation, opposition politics ensures that governments are pressed to implement measures for the greater good. Electoral participation, street protests, writing, critical thinking, consciousness-raising, and organising communities are all essential tools in achieving these aims.

However, Odisha and its people are witnessing a different form of electoral democracy—one in which opposition politics exists in name only, without fulfilling its essential role of deepening democracy and safeguarding citizenship rights in the state. Following the death of Mr. Biju Patnaik, the Odisha faction of the Janata Dal politically reincarnated itself as a regional force, the Biju Janata Dal (BJD). On 5 March 2000, the BJD came to power, ending what was seen as the Congress Party’s era of misgovernance. For more than two decades, the BJD ruled the state with virtually no serious challenge from the two national parties. At times, it appeared as though the BJD government, led by Mr. Naveen Patnaik, was a permanent fixture in Odisha’s political landscape. Opposition parties repeatedly failed to mount any substantial resistance to the BJD and, on several occasions, even collaborated with it. This political complacency persisted until 12 June 2024, when the BJD’s dominance finally ended. The party’s downfall was largely self-inflicted, brought about by the over-centralisation of bureaucracy and its failure to broaden its mandate to ensure the political democratisation of economic development across the state.

Without much political effort and facing significant electoral challenges, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) capitalised on public sentiment and deployed its propaganda machinery to seize power in Odisha during the 17th State Legislative Assembly election in 2024. The BJP ended twenty-four years of BJD rule largely by invoking the idea of Odia Asmita (Odia dignity), without presenting substantial policy programs capable of transforming the entrenched social and political conditions of economic marginalisation in the state. Since coming to power, the BJP government in Odisha has largely continued the policies of its predecessor, the BJD, with minimal changes. In several cases, it has even diluted the welfare measures introduced by the previous administration, rather than expanding or improving them.

Odisha has never witnessed such an unpopular and ineffective government within just two years of its formation. The BJP administration has proven defunct, presiding over a rise in crime as well as deepening economic and social marginalisation. Yet, the leading opposition party has mounted little meaningful resistance. The BJD has failed to channel its electoral mandate as an opposition force or to harness growing public discontent in the state. The BJD and its leadership continues to squander good will of the working masses in Odisha. It increasingly appears that Odisha is being governed through tacit collaboration between the ruling and opposition parties. For twenty-four years, the BJP worked in cooperation with the BJD while it was in power; now, the BJD seems to be repaying this political debt by refraining from opposing many of the BJP government’s anti-people policies and actions. As a result, working people are left searching for a political force that genuinely represents their interests in both governance and the broader political landscape of Odisha.

The political ineffectiveness of the BJP government in Odisha is not due to a lack of political will or policy exposure but rather appears to be a calculated strategy to create the conditions for political authoritarianism. The absence of serious opposition from the BJD—and the collaborative nature of their politics—has created fertile ground for authoritarian tendencies to take root in the state. Ineffective governance, the failures of opposition parties, and the erosion of democratic checks and balances together form a dangerous recipe for authoritarian rule in Odisha. In such a climate, there can be no so-called “constructive opposition” to authoritarianism; politics of accommodation only enables its growth. What the people of Odisha urgently need is a genuinely democratic opposition—one that not only resists authoritarianism but also works to promote the conditions necessary for deepening democracy and achieving progressive social transformation.

Many commentators argue that the people of Odisha have the ability to quietly unseat governments through the silent currents of electoral politics—a bloodless battle fought at the ballot box. Even if this is partially true, such an approach consumes valuable time and resources that could otherwise be devoted to the development of the state and its people. Silence and delay, therefore, is not a viable political strategy for achieving social and economic transformation. In politics, silence in the face of ineffective governance is often indistinguishable from collaboration. Despite the democratic posturing of the newly established BJP government, the people of Odisha—and their opposition parties—must act decisively to safeguard the state’s interests before authoritarianism takes firm root. If action is delayed, it may soon be too late to preserve democracy in Odisha.

As the popular saying goes, “Morning shows the day.” The first year of BJP governance in Odisha has already revealed that the party is not only ineffective but also lacks the sensitivity to understand the everyday needs of the state’s working people. The BJP leadership suffers from both a lack of political commitment and the vision to steer Odisha onto a progressive path of development. Underdevelopment is not merely an economic condition—it is the product of political failures, and it creates fertile ground for authoritarianism. In this sense, the BJP appears to prefer an underdeveloped state over a progressive and developed one, as it allows the party to pursue and entrench its authoritarian politics.

The last twenty-six years of rule by the BJD and BJP reveal that these parties are no different from the earlier Congress governments in Odisha. Over-promising and under-delivering has been the defining feature of the state’s politics. Mainstream political parties have consistently failed to place Odisha on a path of progressive development. It is time for the people of Odisha to understand, analyse, and reflect—to generate a new kind of politics that truly reflects the needs, aspirations, and long-term goals of its people. Only such a political transformation can break the cycle of stagnation and open the way for genuine progress. Politics is a means for social and economic transformation of people and their society.

The alternative politics in Odisha can draw its inspiration from the Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s clarion call: educate, agitate, and organise. Odisha must take this path to democratise itself beyond the stagnant binary of governing and non-governing classes, and beyond the entrenched hierarchies of caste and gender, each with their own regional variations across the state. What Odisha needs is a radical politics—one that can mobilise the state’s resources and redistribute its wealth within a democratic and decentralised framework. Such a politics would empower the people and place the state on a path of development that works for all, not just for the privileged few in the caste rungs of capitalism.