The untold part of India’s watershed vote

Mahbubur Rashid | Published: December 27, 2014 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2026 06:01:00

In the October 2014 volume of the Journal of Democracy published  from  John Hopkins University press, four articles were published under the heading: India`s Watershed Vote. These have been authored by Eswaran Sridharan, Ashutosh Varssney, Rajeb Kumer and Sumit Ganguly. Undoubtedly it was a watershed vote and the BJP-led coalition NDA (National Democratic Alliance) got a landslide victory elbowing out the Congress-led alliance UPA (United Progressive Alliance). In the 545 seat Lok Sabha (lower house), NDA under the leadership of Narendra Modi won 326 seats. BJP alone got 282 seats, nine seats more than the number required to form government. Congress obtained 44 seats and even fell short of the required number to claim the position of the leader of the opposition. So the Lok Sabha is without the leader of the opposition, a setback for ideal democracy.
But the vote gap was only 12 per cent (BJP 31 per cent and congress 19 per cent). The humiliating defeat of Congress is attributed to increasing prices, rising corruption, sluggish economic growth and  unemployment. Even the staunchest of Congress supporters will not contradict these charges. But ironically, India achieved its highest ever annual GDP growth of 8.5 per cent during the Congress rule in 2011.
While citing a number of reasons for the spectacular success of Narendra Modi, Eswaran Sridharan mentioned that a large part of the print and electronic media seemed to have swung in favour of the BJP or against the Congress, giving the former a relatively wider coverage while downplaying Rahul Gandhi. It may be added here that a large part of the media has always encouraged religious fanaticism by airing different television programmes depicting supernatural and mythical incidents and thereby embarrassing the liberal and scientific psyche. The media was indeed heavily biased towards the NDA, so to say the BJP. There were TV charnels that were ventilating pathological hatred towards the Congress.
In some places of the article on Nehru-Gandhi regimes, they have been covertly charged with crimes of regal mentality. While no member of the family came to power undemocratically or ever tried to stay in power that way, it was a slander. Indira Gandhi proclaimed emergency which was not liked by the people and she had to quit following a humiliating election defeat. But she was elected in a bye-election immediately after her defeat in the general elections and the government in power at that time did not allow her to sit in the Lok Sabha. Thereafter, in the mid-term elections in 1980 she came back with a thumping majority.
Mrs. Gandhi showed her acumen as a statesman in 1971 when she extended her support and assistance towards the cause of Bangladesh. She did not show any vaulted ambition after achieving the victory in 1971. She unilaterally declared ceasefire on the western front after the surrender of the Pakistan army on the eastern front. Earlier, she had categorically stated that her only aim was to see the people of Bangladesh achieve independence.
In his article, Mr. Sridharan mentions a very important issue. According to him, "total election expenses by all parties in the 2014 elections reached an estimated $5 billion, with the BJP vastly outspending Congress. Most of the corporate business houses were on BJP's side. Sridharan and another author Ashutosh Varshney have tried to idolise Narendra Modi as a changed man who will shun politics of riots. The mindset of Modi can be best understood from the fact that he closely supervised the tragic killing of Mr. Jafry, a former MLA, when all members of his family were burnt to ashes.  Ashutosh Varshney quoted from the surveys to establish that every fourth voter voted in favour of Modi and not his party BJP. Surveys can be manipulated and therefore cannot be accepted as a gospel. Mr. Modi occupied the chair of the prime Minister through coercion at the cost of Sushma Swaraj, the current Minister for External Affairs.
Rajib Kumer, in his article, mentioned about five broad sets of economic ideas propagated by the BJP. These are: (a) development (b) efficient and effective programme (c) improving Infrastructure and (v) translating popular aspirations. These have been very traditional and typical election promises made by all the political parties from time immemorial. Rajib Kumar expressed his optimism about good performance of the Modi government in economic affairs. According to him, the Finance Minister has bought himself some time by appointing an Expenditure Management Commission which is tasked with finding ways to reduce food, oil and fertiliser subsidies along with recommending measures for achieving greater efficiency in public expenditure.
 Reducing subsidies on food, oil and fertiliser is a very sensitive issue in a country like India, where a large section of the population lives in abject poverty. We shall have to wait and see whether this commission really means business or is just an eyewash to move away from election pledges.
To remain in power BJP will have to be always subservient to RSS (Rastriyo Sevak Sangha), a militant right-wing fundamentalist party. RSS`s only target is to drive out all other religious communities in general and the Muslims in particular in order to establish Hindutva.
Distortion of history is the first trick to achieve the goal of establishing Hindutva. That is why, the Modi government immediately after being formed, appointed Yellapragada Sudershan Rao as head of the ICHR (Indian Council of Historical Research) in the hope that he will try to rewrite history distorting all the existing information. A state minister of Modi government, while speaking in connection with the ensuing Delhi Assembly elections a few days back, he remarked that those who will vote for BJP are sons of Rama (the Hindu God) and those who will not are bastards (Haramjade). A man, unless he is a psychopath, can not utter such words. It is believed that he is the blue eyed boy of the RSS. Ram Temple issue will also be the litmus test for Mr. Modi.
Although India is our neighbour and a big and powerful one, we have no reason to feel intimidated and yield to Indian pressures. But as a good neighbour and friend, we want to see a prosperous, democratic and secular India. We have not forgotten that more than 12000 Indian army personnel sacrificed their lives for our liberation war.
 It is now for Mr. Modi to decide whether he wants to build a prosperous, democratic and secular India or step into the dark dungeon of Hindutva. As a neighbour, we will hope that he will be on the right track.
rezaulparvaz@live.com