UP, Gujarat, UT, Punjab- Election 2007

[Guest]

thanks Ashok Kumar.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->AB Vajpayee wanted to introduce "Gandhian socialism" into BJP.  That didn't go very well with the electorate<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Would you kindly elaborate on what were the principal differences between "Ekatma Manavatavad" of Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyayji and "Gandhian socialism" of Vajpayee? Also can you educate us on how/why exactly did it result in public's rejection of BJS/BJP at that time?

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It was only after the Rama-Janma bhumi issue that BJP's stock started to rise again.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I beg to slightly differ on this. In my opinion, Hindutva roughly has had a 15-21% of national vote share, which reflects in 90-110 natural Hindutva seats in Parliament. Such has been the case since 70s till late 80s. (Remember, Hindutva vote was even with Congress many times).

The conversion of votes into seats - sometimes BJP/BJS are able to do it, other times not when others are able to consolidate their votes. Even in Janata Party government, BJS members were these many. This number goes up when they have alliances especially in South, Maharashtra etc. After 1996, they have managed to have an alliance - which muster the overall national share of 30-35% votes, and at the same time the remaining opposition votes are split three-ways at most places and 4-ways at some places. That has been advantageous to BJP too.

So I think, issues like Ram Janma Bhumi have only marginally resulted in vote increase, but certainly reflected well in seat increase. Hindutva votes have, yes, been consolidated after the issue, and BJP emerged as the main hub of it. But more importantly, it resulted in cadre strength and confidence. Now, has it also improved the quality of the cadre and structure? That I seriousely doubt.