e n

‘Modi versus Rahul’ in the eyes of history

It is the social groups associated with political parties that decide whether they win or lose. In the 2014 General Elections, Narendra Modi managed to bring Hindutva and Backward politics on a common platform and score a scintillating win. But this social base of the BJP seems to be dismembering and may lead to the party biting the dust. Premkumar Mani analyzes the current political scenario  

An appraisal of the contemporary political scene

In a democratic set-up, political parties have distinct social groups as their base. The parties, in fact, are manifestations of the collective interests or demands of various social groups. During the national struggle against imperialism, differences between the political parties were almost invisible. But as soon as it became clear that Independence was imminent, social vested interests began surfacing. Jinnah and his associates began branding the Congress, which had led the national struggle, as a Hindu party. Within the Congress, the Socialists came together as the CSP (Congress Socialist Party) and began raising the concerns of the labourers and the farmers. A section of the farmers and the labourers became associated with the Congress. The Communist Party also championed the cause of these classes.

With Independence, the pace of sociopolitical polarization gathered pace. A new social class began emerging due to the socio-economic changes. This new class, called the middle class, had its own beliefs and ideology. This class was born of new production relations and had progressive ideas. Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru were its first choice. The middle class broadly supported the Congress but the Congress was not the party of only this class. A motley group of classes constituted its support base. This continues to be so even today. But the party always tries to project its progressive face. Under Nehru and Indira Gandhi, it refused to bow to communal forces. Under Rajiv Gandhi, it committed the grave error of submitting to the conservative sections of both the Hindus and the Muslims by interfering in the Shahbano case and the Ramjanmabhoomi issue. But it had to pay a heavy price for it and is still doing so.

Rahul Gandhi and Narendra Modi, both are trying to woo the Bahujans

The Congress had to face opposition from both the Socialists and the Communists, whose main grouse was that the party was not doing enough to bring about socio-economic changes. Then, there was the rightist Jansangh, which opposed even the cosmetic changes made by the Congress. The Jansangh was supported by the social groups whose interests were hit by the changes initiated by the Congress. They included former rulers, landlords and kulaks. Jansangh combined rightist economic thought with conservative Hindutva and thus won the support of a section of “pandas” and “purohits” who felt that only Jansangh could protect their social and economic interests. Even after Jansangh took on the new avatar of the Bharatiya Janata Party, its socio-economic leanings remained unchanged.  

Narendra Modi and others at a programme in Bihar

But how and why did a big chunk of the middle class distance itself from the Congress and jump on the BJP bandwagon? Let us go back to the Indira Gandhi era when the measures she had taken, such as nationalization of banks and abolition of privy purses, had turned almost the entire middle class and the leftists into her supporters. The result was that in the elections that followed, she won two-thirds majority and the opposition was nowhere to be seen. This was a political battle but in the background was a social struggle. The oppressed and neglected social groups rebelled against the dominant classes and defeated them. Indira Gandhi built a social base that comprised Dalits, Muslims, Backwards and progressives and it backed her politically. This social base helped her end the Rajput-Bhumihar (Satendra-Mahesh) domination of Bihar Congress. It also sounded the death knell of the Thakur-Bania rule in Uttar Pradesh and of Biju Patnaik rule in Odisha. Lingayats lost their clout in Karnataka, Patels in Gujarat and Rajputs in Rajasthan. In all these states, new social groups joined the mainstream.

 This was bound to trigger a political backlash and it did. The social base of the Gujarat and Bihar movements has yet to be analyzed. Bihar’s Jayaprakash Narayan movement was led by those who were against the progressive economic policies of Indira Gandhi. The socialists also joined hands with them. In 1977, the Janata Party splintered in Bihar over the issue of reservations. It did not take long for Kailashpati Mishra and Jagannath Mishra to join hands. This was an alliance of social interests. This is how social interests manifest themselves.

What I mean to say is that politics has always been influenced by social groups and their interests. No political party can survive without a social base. This is visible even in today’s politics. The miracle that Narendra Modi worked in the last Lok Sabha elections was the result of combining Hindutva and Backward politics. At the state level, Kalyan Singh had done it much earlier in Uttar Pradesh. Modi did it at the national level. You could say that he became the Lalu Prasad Yadav of India. Without any hesitation, he referred to his caste directly or indirectly in election meetings. He definitely did something that seemed impossible earlier. But there was no way he could have continued to hold them together. It is very difficult to serve the interests of two rival social groups simultaneously. You cannot keep both the landlord and the farmer or the capitalist and the labourer happy at the same time. That has become evident over the past four years. On the economic front, the Modi government could not do much beyond demonetization and opening bank accounts with zero balance. The scams in the banking sector drew much more attention. The government failed to keep the farmers happy. By tinkering with the Atrocities Act, it lost the support of both the affected groups and both parted ways with it. The outcome was its defeats in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh Assembly polls.

As elections draw closer, it is becoming increasingly clear that Modi’s social base is in a shambles. His Backward mantra has turned stale and is unlikely to work again. The Backwards no longer have a soft corner for him. The farmers – who include both the “Forwards” and the Backwards, with the latter forming the majority – have drifted away from him. Modi has failed to serve their social and economic interests. Clearly, there are tough days ahead for Modi. If the BJP thinks that Modi’s oratory will help it humble Rahul Gandhi or the Congress, it is living in a fool’s paradise. Once people decide to defeat someone, they do it. For them, it hardly matters who the winner is.   

Translation: Amrish Herdenia; copy-editing: Anil 

About The Author

Premkumar Mani

Premkumar Mani is a leading Hindi writer and thinker. In politics, he is known for his advocacy of social justice

Related Articles

In Dev Bhumi, enactment of UCC topped off with Haldwani violence
Hindutva was first invoked in this Dev Bhumi in 1994 – when it was still a part of Uttar Pradesh – to oppose the...
Jayant Singh and RLD in NDA: Who gains, who loses
The Congress may be the biggest beneficiary of RLD’s exit from the INDIA alliance, with the chances of a Congress-Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) alliance...
Prakash Ambedkar: Social justice, not Ram, will be key poll plank
“I feel that Modi has been caught in a bind. The way he is breaking up organizations, the way he is trying to splinter...
Karpoori Thakur deserves the Bharat Ratna but so does Karunanidhi
Is this a genuine expression of respect for Karpoori Thakur or does it have a hidden agenda? Will civilian honours now be used as...
Casteist slogans on Patna roads: What do they mean?
Nitish Kumar is not a social-justice warrior but an adept social engineer. And Nitish’s social engineering complements Narendra Modi’s social engineering very well. No...