Advices To BJP Party

[Guest]

<b>Elections 2009: The Myth of ‘Secular’ Verdict</b>
Swati Parashar

The verdict of the 2009 Lok Sabha elections is loud and clear as the UPA returns to power for another 5 year term. In the light of the developments in the last one year this election verdict comes as a surprise and in many ways a pleasant one. However, for those gleefully claiming the victory of the ‘secular’ forces, it is time for some bitter ‘truths’. It may not be possible to cover every aspect in the short space of one paper, but let me at the outset claim that this election mandate is not pro secular or anti communal as I argue further, but has definitely jolted the pseudo secularists. It is time for these pseudo secularist forces to introspect as much as it is time for the BJP and the Hindutva forces to rethink their political strategy and ideology should they wish to survive as a viable political alternative. After the Mumbai attacks last year (2008), many of us had called for change and called for a war against the forces that are divisive and violent. This election mandate, though not ‘secular’ as such, is a positive beginning in this regard and a reminder perhaps that people are not to be taken for granted, people are not naive, and that ‘all the people cannot be fooled all the time’.

The single most important outcome of this election verdict has been the defeat of the Leftist brigade along with other staunch and ‘committed’ champions of ‘fanatic secularism’, such as Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan. In UP too, ‘secular’ Mayawati and Mulayam Singh Yadav have incurred losses, owing to the gains made by the Congress Party. The importance of this verdict cannot be overlooked. Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan have never hesitated to claim their alpsankhyak (minority) Muslim vote banks in their capacity as upholders of real secular values. The same vote bank could not come to their rescue as Bihar gave a decisive mandate to Nitish Kumar for the development work he has been doing as also for the personal image Nitish enjoys among the electorate. It was interesting to note that not one media report was keen to portray Nitish Kumar’s victory as the victory of the ‘communal’ forces considering he is officially still with NDA. Those who have memories of Lalu’s Bihar and his rise to ‘absolute power which corrupted him absolutely’ will heave a sigh of relief. Similarly, Mulayam’s Muslim vote bank could not do much for him and in fact sufficiently lowered his bargaining power because of the gains made by the Congress. Mayawati, who was being projected in the Indian and Western media as the possible first Dalit Prime Minister of India, is now blaming the Muslims for her defeat. She also has a few political lessons to learn. People vote for progress and that identity politics (of either caste or religion) does not always yield the best results in a democracy.

I must now turn my attention to the biggest secularists of our times, the Leftists (CPI - M/ML). Their ideological bankruptcy and regressive views saw them being routed from their home states, Bengal and Kerala. Does that mean that the people have rejected the agenda of secularism? Or that people have only voted for communal forces by rejecting the left? The usually eloquent Sitaram Yechury, D Raja and Prakash Karat did not divulge much on these questions but perhaps they have got the message. People are capable of taking decisions especially concerning issues of secularism/ communalism etc. We want governments that can best serve us, lead us into the future and provide us with security and development. If the BJP cannot dictate terms and decide for us what Hinduism/Hindu Rashtra should mean, the Karats and the Rajas cannot decide for us what secularism should mean. Moreover, the ideological bankruptcy of the Left was clearly revealed when they opposed the nuclear deal. They might learn a lesson or two now - that we live in a world of international relations and we have to deal with other actors in this system and ensure that our national interests are well served. They could also be advised that the Cold War is officially over and that it is no longer a fashionable subaltern position to be critical of the West (America) and isolate it, instead of engaging with it. The uncritical political tyranny that the Leftist ideology and leadership has unleashed in India (Nandigram is still fresh in our memories) has been exposed for what it really is. Ousted CPM leader and former Lok Sabha Speaker, Somnath Chatterjee made a pertinent point today that if the Left wishes to survive it would have to get rid of its narcissist leadership. Therefore, these are words of caution for those projecting this election verdict as a victory of ‘secular forces’. It is more of a defeat of pseudo secular forces and identity politics and a mandate based on developmental issues.

I believe that in a multi-religious and multi -ethnic country like India, politics of all kinds including identity politics will emerge and each will struggle to create its space and stake its claim. Each has its own relevance. There was much media attention paid to the concept of ‘Muslim votes’ majorly affecting election outcomes. Now I am alarmed by the fact that there are reports in the media claiming that Christians and Muslims are happy with this 2009 mandate. Should this imply that Hindus are not happy or that Hindus are not a political community or an identity group? Didn’t Hindus vote for the UPA and what if we really had a ‘Hindu vote’ or a ‘Sikh vote’ like the ‘Muslim vote’? These questions may seem inconvenient but they are legitimate and reflect the angst of people who are tired of being labelled as one or another and tired of the vicious political divide between ‘communal’ and ‘secular’ that overrides other important issues. I have always argued that the majority community is as much entitled to the politics of ‘nationalism’, ‘religion’ and ‘identity’ as is any minority and have earlier written about the pernicious politics of labelling (right wing, communal etc. which has been indiscriminately used to demonise people and communities).

Those celebrating ‘secular’ victory must remember that the biggest winner today like Nitish Kumar and Naveen Patnaik (are/were part of the BJP led NDA). Patnaik can claim all the secularism he likes after emerging victorious, but fact is that when anti-Christian violence was taking place in Kandhamal, his government fared worse than Modi’s Gujarat! He only quit the NDA alliance days before the elections when his astute political sense warned him that the NDA would not fare well. The ‘secular’ credentials of the Congress itself are not any better than its allies like Rashtriya Janata Dal (led by Lalu Yadav) and Lok Janshakti Party (led by Ram Vilas Paswan) who have lost the elections. Revisiting the past of the Congress can reveal how it has heavily relied on vote bank politics and played the communal card in states like Punjab and Kashmir. The Congress was also responsible for the opening of the disputed structure at Ayodhya in 1986 in a miscalculated effort to ‘appease’ the Hindus, after the Shah Bano controversy. We, therefore, must be careful before making tall claims about how ‘secularism’ has won or that communalism is out forever. BJP and its allies are not the only ones who practise ‘communal’ politics.

We might at this juncture, when celebrating a more decisive victory for the UPA coalition as against a fractured mandate, spare a thought or two for the role of the opposition. In any democracy the opposition has an important role to play as the conscience keeper of the government and as a political alternative at all times. In the absence of this alternative, it can become a one party tyranny which unfortunately we have witnessed in the past during the Congress ruled emergency years. In order to prevent that kind of one party dictatorship, it is important that we understand and appreciate the role of a strong opposition. Those stomping out the ‘Lotus’ in sheer political naivety must realise that the BJP will have to play the role of the opposition as the second largest party. If we are hoping and expecting the government to perform, let us also invest a little bit of that hope in an opposition that can be credible and responsible. BJP and its allies cannot be treated as a pariah in the political system. A revamp of the BJP is a must in the light of this electoral defeat (and it is up to their leadership to rethink their future strategy) but only lack of political sense will want anyone to desire that the BJP should disappear out of the political arena.

This election has sprung surprises of all sorts, pleasant and unpleasant but above all it has made it clear to the political parties that people are intelligent and politically mature and that they cannot be taken for granted, nor subjected to fear and oppression all the time. To end on a positive note, it might be worthwhile to appreciate how some criminal turned politicians and their kin have lost the plot. RJD MP Mohammad Shahabuddin's wife Heena Sahab lost in Siwan; Ranjeeta Ranjan, the wife of Pappu Yadav lost in Supaul; Congress candidate Lovely Anand, wife of former JD-U MP Anand Mohan, was defeated in the Sheohar constituency. Even veteran politicians have been shown the door in these elections. In this list is the most ‘secular’ of them all, Mr. A R Antulay (who had made some profoundly sinister ‘secular’ observations after the Mumbai terror attacks). Perhaps, out of optimism, we can claim that we did have the last laugh.

“Democracy is the only system that persists in asking the powers that be whether they are the powers that ought to be”.

~Sydney J. Harris~



Swati Parashar is a PhD candidate at the Department of Politics and International Relations, Lancaster University, UK. She can be contacted at swatiparashar@hotmail.com