Flawed, yet trusted: The Nitish Kumar paradox

Their trust only deepened because Nitish delivered elsewhere. Patna is a transformed city today. Airports in places like Purnea—once inconceivable—are realities. Roads penetrate marshy districts that were long isolated. Infrastructure and agricultural improvements, along with predictable governance, became his hallmarks. He could not eliminate corruption or nepotism; he could not generate enough jobs for Bihar’s youth. But he could—and did—ensure piped drinking water, accessible roads, functioning schools, and a steady flow of central funds deployed with reasonable discipline.And he cultivated something rare in Indian politics: a caste-neutral, dependable female vote bank. You can’t quantify the peace inside a thatched hut at night.But those gains are real, and they matter.His flagship Jeevika self-help programme, too, deepened this trust. The network of self-help groups he nurtured became a quiet grassroots revolution—stable incomes, access to credit, and the dignity of labour for women who had never handled money. The new cash-transfer schemes fitted neatly into this ecosystem. The `10,000 cash support and the ambitious `2.5 lakh entrepreneurial fund allowed women to supplement household income in ways that reshaped rural life.Bihar remains haunted by uneven development and limited penetration of welfare schemes. Caste equations that help Nitish electorally often obstruct progress. Migration remains the people’s escape valve; the young return only to vote, preferring the higher wages outside the state. Entrepreneurship and startups are slogans that mean little in a predominantly rural society still waiting for an industrial moment. Nitish, consumed by political firefighting, has rarely had the bandwidth for deeper structural shifts. It sounds harsh, but it is true.As he prepares to take the oath again—likely for the last time, with age tightening its grip—perhaps he may turn to long-term developmental paradigms instead of managing daily crises.What worked for Nitish in 2025? Those close to him say goodwill accrued over 18 years paid off. He maintained an emotional, direct bond with the masses. No empty rhetoric, no theatrical promises. He delivered what he could. Rumours about his ill health created a sympathy undercurrent—an “ek aakhri mauka” sentiment.His politics was quietly syncretic: he facilitated the Off-Campus AMU centre in Kishanganj, and also stood with the centre to lay the foundation stone of a grand Sita Mata Temple in Sitamarhi. It was not a contradiction—it was calibration.Perhaps that is his final political lesson: you do not have to shout to be heard. Sometimes, silence itself can travel the farthest.



Source link