So, the West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Assam election results are here. You’ve dissected them. Debated them. Agreed. Disagreed. Argued. Fought, even. Arrived at a conclusion or maybe not. But what almost always follows this entire exercise is either discord or quiet distance.
Especially if you are on one side while your friends, parents, relatives, in-laws, partner and, heaven forbid, your best friends are on the other, kalesh is inevitable. Nobody can save you here. And if you are opinionated enough to always want the last word, then not even God can help you. Either you lose the argument, damage the relationship, or spend the next three days rage-texting each other.
For years, political disagreements have ruined countless relationships. Because for many people, political identity has become deeply personal. So personal that disagreement now feels like betrayal. Yes, betrayal.
A cursory glance at social media after the election results – which saw the BJP breach the Trinamool Congress’s Bengal fortress and Vijay’s TVK delivering a political blockbuster in Tamil Nadu – would have offered enough examples of friendships turning bitter over ideological leanings. Bas, khatam. Tata. Bye bye.
Algorithms rewarded outrage and certainty, while nuance disappeared into the void. And then, of course, there are the WhatsApp family group wars where people muted chats, unfollowed friends, or simply stepped away in the name of “peace”.
But is all this necessary? Should a political disagreement really end your relationship? Is it worth losing your close circle and your peace of mind over something that may not even affect your daily life directly, and will likely fade from your mental space in a few days? Do you really have the bandwidth for this level of kalesh over satta aur sultanat?
Basically, can you keep your political ideologies and relationships separate?
Some people simply unfriend, unfollow and, if you happen to be in the same room, look right through you. If that’s the case, then end of story.
Others choose the obvious route to avoid conflict – don’t discuss politics. But that’s easier said than done, especially if you have strong opinions of your own. Another problem, of course, is that setting boundaries is something most people struggle with.
Pratik Sinha (name changed), a 34-year-old media professional in Mumbai who returned to Kolkata to vote, realised that his father had voted for a different party than he had. What followed, of course, is easy to imagine.
“My dad and I lie on opposite spectrums of political ideologies. While we overlap on certain aspects pertaining to the need for development and foresight, major differences have been leading to debates and heated arguments, depending on how soon my mother intervenes to pacify the situation. A younger me would have had a far more cynical and condescending approach towards these differences, but with age and worldview, I have learned to accept that his lived experiences and mine are very different,” Pratik told indiatoday.in.
After multiple rounds of debates, Pratik, for the sake of his sanity, arrived at a conclusion that feels like nothing but brutal reality: “The content we consume, the social circles we inhabit and even our privileges shape our ideologies. While our alliances may never align, I make sure to end every debate with only one thought: no MLA is going to stand beside me when I need help the most. Keep your beliefs close, but family closer.”
Down south, Janani K, a 33-year-old media professional based in Chennai, tries her level best not to sabotage relationships over political disagreements, but also knows when distancing herself becomes necessary.
“I usually let people have their opinions because everyone has the right to think differently. Sometimes those views come from ignorance or lack of understanding, and I don’t let that affect the relationship. But if someone’s beliefs question basic human decency or support something immoral, I try to reason with them. If nothing changes, I know I need to distance myself for my own emotional peace,” Janani said.
Now, this sense of “betrayal” has only intensified because of social media, where extreme positions are amplified and nuance is reduced to rubble. Politics today is tied to identity, morality and belonging, not just policy. People increasingly see opposing political views as reflections of character, not simply differences in opinion.
Ritwika Chaudhuri Tagore, creative director and writer of Kolkata-based theatre organisation Shriek of Silence, believes that in a politically diverse household and social circle, disagreement is inevitable, but relationships should not become casualties of ideology.
“If I support TMC, my father believes in Left politics, and my best friend supports BJP, the challenge is not to win every debate but to preserve mutual respect despite fundamentally different worldviews. There are moments of anger and emotional reaction too. I recently put up a Facebook status saying maybe it was time to unfriend people because so many had turned out to be BJP supporters. But political frustration is often a spur-of-the-moment emotion. With time, I realised it is healthier to keep people within conversation and visible disagreement than to erase them completely,” Ritwika told indiatoday.in.
Democracy, Ritwika said, survives through dialogue, not isolation: “We may argue fiercely and disagree fundamentally, yet still choose coexistence over hostility because relationships and political differences do not always have to cancel each other out.”
But as much as people want to avoid debates, sometimes there is simply no way out of them. As Ritwika pointed out: “There are times when ideologies are almost ‘worshipped’ by certain groups of people, and that often results in actions that trigger equally intense reactions. In those moments, maintaining the line of decency becomes incredibly difficult. Things are said that we may later regret, but in that heated instant, the conversation stops being about politics altogether. It becomes about winning. And somewhere in the middle of all that noise, the sad little friend called ego quietly takes control of the debate.”
So, what happens when ego takes over? The rational option is to separate a person’s entire identity from one political belief. And even if a debate gets the better of you, know when to pause the conversation. Accept that agreement is not mandatory for closeness because when politics enters the group chat, on screen or off it, relationships often exit.
That is exactly what Vineeta Kumar, a 33-year-old media professional based in Delhi, tried to convey.
“I never fear sharing my opinions, political or otherwise. But I also believe in expressing them with clarity, not just for the sake of being loud. In friendships, and in every relationship, it’s important to know where to stop. Beyond a point, it no longer matters how right you are, how strongly you feel, or how passionately you support a cause. Speak your mind, but learn not to drag a point simply because you are desperate to prove something,” Vineeta said.
At the end of the day, it is imperative to realise that political opinions often become relationship dealbreakers. And if such a casualty occurs in your case, then perhaps the foundation of that relationship was never really built on solid ground to begin with, but on shifting sands that were always waiting to give way with time.
Democracy depends on disagreement. Relationships depend on how we handle them. You can agree to disagree on life, politics or whatever else. But before you show someone the door because of a political disagreement, remember this: two months later, when life has moved on from election results and returned to, well, actual life, the politician on whose behalf you fought that battle will probably be sleeping peacefully at night.
But when life falls apart at 3am, and you reach for your phone to call the best friend you unfriended because she did not vote for the same party you did, you may realise that while politics moved on, your relationship did not. The politician will still sleep soundly. But will you be able to?
– Ends