Friday, 17 May, 2024
Its time analysts started changing their blinkered glasses and follow data rather than personal ideologies and preferences
The decisive victory of Droupadi Murmu, the BJP led NDA candidate in the just held presidential elections is yet another powerful signal that the social and political structure and support base of the BJP is changing; a process that started decades ago when foot soldiers of the Sangh Parivaar spread across the country to reach out to marginalised groups like Dalits and Adivasis. The very fact that 17 MPs and about 126 MLAs who were supposed to vote for rival Yashwant Sinha but voted for President elect Murmu is testimony of how the BJP is forging new social coalitions. Unfortunately, many so called pundits, experts and commentators refuse to look at data and continue their diatribe that the BJP is a majoritarian Brahmin Bania party. The fact is that more than 60% of the Union Cabinet led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi comprises of tribals, Dalits and other backward castes escapes the habitual critics. The situation is the same in the largest and most populous state of India Uttar Pradesh which is led by chief minister Yogi Adityanath. The chief minister himself maybe an upper caste monk; but 60% of his council of ministers is similar to that at the centre. Independent analysts and observers who remain critical of the BJP on many policy issues have acknowledged this data based reality. But far too many analysts still cling to old delusions.
In fact, the illusion that the poor and the marginalised don’t like the BJP was proven to be a myth as far back as 2004; not to speak of the relentless electoral march of the BJP since the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. In 2004, the Congress President Sonia Gandhi had stunned Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the nation when the Congress won more seats than the BJP and formed the UPA coalition that ruled India for 10 good and bad years. The prevalent wisdom even in 2004 was that the “India Shining” campaign used by the BJP angered the poor who were suffering from low incomes and unemployment. So they voted for the pro poor Congress. Strangely, many respected analysts still hold this view.
But what does the data say? The accompanying chart shows the number of seats won by the BJP in the seven states that have the most poor people. Overall, the BJP won 96 out of the total 220 seats on offer in these states. But 2004 also was an unusual year. In Uttar Pradesh, the BJP had collapsed from a juggernaut to an also ran because of infighting and could win just 10 of the 80 seats. In Bihar and Jharkhand, the “secular” brand of politics espoused by the likes of Lalu Prasad Yadav was at its peak, resulting in the BJP winning just 12 out of 54 seats in the two states. In the remaining five states with very high incidence of poverty, the BJP led alliance won 74 out of 87 seats. Did the poor really vote against the BJP back in 2004? Its time analysts started changing their blinkered glasses and follow data rather than personal ideologies and preferences.
