Is the BJP losing its momentum?

Behavioral scientists have many a times noted that human beings tend to attribute success to one’s own efforts while blaming every possible factor (other than the self) for any failure. Like any other aspect of human behavior, this tendency too is not without exceptions. At the same time, these exceptions, when people rise above their frailties and share credit of success and own blame for failures are rare indeed. It is hence, not without reason, that individuals who display such behavior in a consistent manner and considered a class apart among their peers.

Likewise, human psyche is wired to accept tidings which seem favorable and discount omens when they deem unfavorable. History is replete with instances where a people had to pay the price for ignoring dire tidings of doom.

As a rule, political parties across the world, tend to accept findings of opinion polls only when they favor them. This approach of trashing an unfavorable poll cannot really be faulted for not only have polls proved erroneous on numerous occasions, accepting the validity of opinion polls as a given would ipso facto do away with the need to conducting real elections altogether.

Yet, in spite of all limitations associated with opinion polls, political parties of all hues rely on them heavily, if for nothing, they do provide a window on the prevailing sentiment. Given their utility, it is quite strange to witness a scenario where the BJP seems to be ignoring / dismissing the warning messages being delivered by the current set of opinion polls.

A consistent trend while all the polls across Jan, Feb and March 2014 have thrown up, is the stunting of the BJP/Modi wave. In state after state, particularly Bihar, the projected vote share of the BJP is either slipping or barely holding. Even at the risk of being called an alarmist, I would submit that something, somewhere, of the BJP’s electoral strategy is not working. The Modi wave was supposed to continuously gain strength till the last vote was cast. Here, it would seem that the BJP plateaued in January and the consistent attacks from all its opponents is gradually, but steadily chipping away on its gains. While the latter conclusion may still be questioned by the faithful, can it not be conclusively said that no further support is accruing to the party. After all, if the polls were kosher when they showed the party going from strength to strength, they cannot become treyf only because they are not as positive any longer.

In 2004, when elections were initially announced, the BJP was expecting to easily cross the 200 seat mark on its own. Almost all opinion polls projected a spectacular return for the NDA. However, as the elections progressed, the number kept on declining. Yet, when the NDTV published a 255-260 seats projection for the NDA, it was simply dismissed by the BJP. It cannot be possible that the top leadership were completely indifferent to the public mood. AB Vajpayee’s declaration that there was no difference in between the SP and the BJP was nothing if not the BJP veteran’s uneasy reaching out to the SP for support in case the NDA fell short of the majority. Yet, while Vajpayee may have felt the undercurrent, the BJP as a whole was impervious to any idea that it could lose. We know what the final results were. 

Even otherwise, the most positive opinion polls need to be viewed conservatively. A case in point would be the projections in Uttar Pradesh. For the last many elections, all opinion polls have consistently projected BJP performing better than what the final results have been. At the same time, hardly has any poll captured BSP's strength. If the trend holds true even this time, the projected BJP performance of 40 seats may turn out to be a measly 25! From where will the gaps be filled then?

If our Nation has to be delivered from the mess of the last 10 years, the ruling party needs to be in a comfortable majority. A BJP with 180-190 seats will be anything but comfortable. For those who forget, NDA 1 was led by a 182 seat BJP, but was hobbled by the AIADMK. For that matter, even 210-220 seats are 62-52 seats less than the majority, a number which cannot be reached with the current set of allies. The BJP owes it to the Nation to provide fresh impetus to its engine which seems to be slowing down. It cannot behave as if it has won the elections already. If it behaves like the victor, people will vote on the merits-demerits of Modi alone and not on the merits-demerits of the UPA. Why should the misdeeds of the UPA be allowed to become a distant memory when those misdeeds, when effectively highlighted, can by themselves provide much of the fuel required for the final lap. Further, victories become difficult to achieve when you substitute your foot-soldiers with mercenaries. Have mercenaries by all means, for they provide the effective force multiplier. But, please do not make the mistake of imagining those people as your core supporters.

The first vote is yet to be cast and it is still a long race. Can the BJP really afford to relax and not take corrective actions, when very clearly, its lead over the competitors is shrinking?

The battle is not won yet!

Indian history is replete with tales where the Indian army seemed on verge of a victory just before some event decisively changed the course of the war. Sometimes it was sheer bad luck, at times bad strategy and in a few instances, complacency. Nothing could illustrate Indian complacency better than the image of Rama Raya directing the Vijayanagara – Bahmani war (Battle of Talikota, 1965) in a luxurious palanquin, right in the battlefield. The inevitable happened. Mobility severely hampered, Rama Ray was caught and decapitated by the Bahmani forces (some accounts say that he was burnt while still half alive) and glory of the Vijayanagara Empire was snuffed forever.

Closer home and in a totally unrelated field, we have been made to believe as to how Milkha Singh lost out on an Olympic medal on account of lessening his speed/looking back, inspite of leading the first lap. At more personal levels, each one of us, at some or the other point in life, would have witnessed a proverbial ‘slip in between the cup and the lip’.

If the above proverb holds true, then why would the BJP leadership embark on an electoral strategy which might lead to their doom again? It would seem that having succeeded in capturing the pole position or at least in public perception, the BJP seems to have started believing that the battle is already won. Howsoever well placed its confidence might be, a handful of factors might still result in the final results being very different from the party’s expectations.

·    Modi: Make no mistakes. The BJP’s perceived lead is a result of Modi’s leadership. A spell of ‘collective leadership’ or the image of a karate chop wielding LK Advani would have excited the people the way it did in 2009!. Yet, the focus on Modi has meant that rather than the issue being why Congress/UPA should be kicked out, the central issue of these elections is now Modi. At one level, while this may enthuse the faithful, at another plane it may make the undecided voter and the fencesitter forget that these elections are an opportunity to punish the Congress for its sins and an opportunity to rescue India from the mess she has been placed in. These voters, when bombarded with allegations seeking to puncture holes in the Gujarat growth story, on Modi’s vision, his suitability for the PM’s post, is more likely to develop a skepticism of Modi and miss out on the reality that while Modi may be not be the most optimal option, will a Rahul, a Mamata, a Jayalalitha, a Mulayam, a Laloo, a Chidambaram, or any other Manmohan/Gujaral clone, even remotely be a better option? How long will people remember that a vote against Modi, be it to any party, would in effect mean a vote for sustaining the disaster the Nation has been facing for the last one decade! After all, the BJP still does not have a slogan for Modi which could resonate as well as “Main kehti hoon – Garibi hatao. Woh kehte hain Indira hatao”!

Unidimensional Image: The entire campaign around Modi has been focused on painting him as a decisive leader. What we see from posters is the image of a man smirking, seelingly focused but carrying a haughty demeanour.

Worldwide, even dictators do not project a single persona. Totalitarian states like China and North Korea direct huge efforts in promoting their leaders as having a well-rounded personality – people who are decisive and firm but still blessed with warm human qualities. Indira Gandhi was not seen as a Durga alone. She was also seen as Indiramma by millions. For the Congress, we have a campaign built around the humane aspects of a photogenic fair-skinned Rahul Gandhi. Can it really be said that many, particularly the women, the elderly and the villagers, will not be attracted by the image of a Rahul Gandhi of soulful eyes and emotional bearing when compared to a smug looking Modi?

Does it really take that much to project a smiling, a laughing Modi, mingling with children, the women and the elderly, not as a speaker on a podium, but on equal terms? If this seems a stretch – well, Indians have a fetish for symbolism and imagery. The person who understood it the best is still deified as the Father of our Nation!

·     Turncoats galore: Historically, the BJP has seen 3 phases of ingress within its ranks. The first was in 1991, when riding high on its 1989 electoral performance and the 1990 Rath Yatra, it seemed to promise a new means of Governance. The second was in 1998, when the Congress seemed doomed to oblivion and the BJP was seen as the party whose moment had arrived. The third phase was 2004 when the NDA seemed poised to return to power. It is interesting to note that except for a few, most who joined the BJP in the early 90s have either retired or do not hold important positions within the party any longer. Whether it is a result of the party’s dilution of its ideology or a combination of other factors, is not known. Leaders who joined in the late 90s continue to be in the party and hold important roles, moulding its viewpoints / mode of governance. Interestingly, quite a few of those who joined in 2004, silently and not so silently, left the party when they realized that the Congress was here to stay. These were the people who were purely creatures of power and would move wherever they could cling to it. A BJP in opposition was hardly a good enough option for them.

Like any organization seeking to grow big, a political party too, has to tap both organic and inorganic sources. Hence, there is nothing wrong in the BJP absorbing erstwhile rivals in its ranks. However, a line has to be drawn when these erstwhile rivals are of the likes of those who have joined the party in the last few weeks. Some of them are:

• Ramkripal Yadav – a life-long secularist who had nothing but abuse for BJP all along. The only reason he has joined the party was denial of an election ticket to him
• Udit Raj – This self-proclaimed leader of Dalits has been in news only on account of his tirades against Hinduism, the RSS, the BJP and so on. A person devoid of any electoral base, what exactly does this anti ideologue bring to the BJP’s table?
• Satpal Maharaj – if the Uttarakhand BJP was short of factions, we now have the 10, Janpath ultra-loyalist Satpal Maharaj in the BJP now. A lifelong Congressman, he left the Narasimha Rao led Congress along with ND Tiwari, demanding to make Sonia Gandhi the Congress President and Prime Minister. A religious leader with large following, he has been at loggerheads with the BJP on both political and ideological issues
• Jagdambika Pal – a political lightweight, who was anointed as the UP CM by Romesh Bhandari. Has usually had only the choicest of abuses for the BJP 

The above notings are only illustrative as the intent here is not to make a list of people who should not have been in the BJP. The issue on absorbing turncoats is two pronged:

Are those who have toiled for years for the party subordinated to those who only had expletives for the BJP till the other day? Can it really be expected that a voter would not be disgusted by the sight of a Ramkripal Yadav standing on a BJP ticket? Will the committed BJP voter really vote for him?

While a Jaswant Singh may not be the greatest of political assets for the BJP, can there be any doubt that he is a much better BJP candidate than a Sona Ram who had lost even the assembly elections. Forget the voter, can the BJP/RSS worker really have heart to work for a Sona Ram or a Satpal Maharaj’s victory when he sees leaders, who had been with him for years being sidelined and humiliated for the sake of those who had little standing even in their own parties?

·     Voter outreach: Compared to the 2004 and 2009 elections, the BJP certainly seems to have improved its voter outreach. However, it seems to be relying a little too heavily on three factors – Modi rallies, online campaign and the RSS. However, this skewed focus on high visibility campaign modes may not necessarily result in desired results. The reasons are simple. Rallies are attended by the party cadre, the committed, the curious and the paid. Modi rallies have achieved what they could, i.e., a strong buzz in favor of the party. However, not only is the reach of rallies limited, they do not cover the last mile, i.e., of ensuring that even the rally attender actually ventures out to vote. As regards online campaigns, except for segments A & B of the society, does it really reach the voter in an effective manner? Certainly, the impact of online campaigns in city segments could be high. But while they will reach the voter in an Akola or a Rourkela, will it create an impact enough to reach a critical mass of voters? As regards RSS, well! Where they are known, its swayamsevaks are seen more as social workers and are not necessarily people who can influence voting choices. Also, given their very nature of training within the RSS, it is difficult for them to be engaged in ferreting people from their homes to the polling booth, on the day of the voting.

Unlike the Marxists and the caste identity based parties, the support base of the BJP are politically conscious part time alone. The summer heat, prospect of a day’s rest or simple household chores may be motivator enough for many of the supporters to feel that they have completed their duties by pressing a ‘like’ button on Facebook or engaging in an online spat with some rival party supporter.

One misses the zeal and enthusiasm which the RSS/VHP/ BJP workers displayed in mobilizing support in the elections of 1991, 96, 98 and 99. It is these people who ensured that latent support was translated to votes. The model was simple – continuous communication and aggressive follow up till the vote was cast on the election day. Indian elections are won and lost at booths. If the BJP’s campaign does not manage to make its supporters come out and vote, there will be a large mis-match between expectations and actual performance.

  

Some BJP leaders might be salivating at the prospect of the party ending with 160-180 seats, which would rule Modi out and give them a shot at power. This may have prompted handing over of tickets to many who stand no chance at the hustings. What such leaders may not realize is that today’s Congress with even 140 seats is much better placed to form a Government as compared to a BJP with 180 seats. A third stint in the opposition will ring a death knell to the BJP as a National Party. Like the Janata parivar, it will disintegrate into numerous regional parties, leaving only the Congress with a pan India presence. Even more importantly, does India have any more capacity to absorb any more blows, existential blows which are certain corollary to a UPA 3 or a 3rd Front Government?

It is no 'Alternative'

“This book is cleverly and powerfully written. The carefully chosen quotations give it the false appearance of a truthful book. But the impression it leaves on my mind is that it is the report of a drain inspector sent out with the one purpose of opening and examining the drains of the country to be reported upon, or to give a graphic description of the stench exuded by the opened drains. If Miss Mayo had confessed that she had come to India merely to open out and examine the drains of India, there would perhaps be little to complain about her compilation. But she declared her abominable and patently wrong conclusion with a certain amount of triumph: 'the drains are India'.”

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi – on Katherine Mayo’s Mother India

Katherine Mayo was an American researcher and historian. Her fame or rather infamy in India rests with her magnum opus ‘Mother India’ in which she attacked the Hindu society and religion, alluding to the treatment of its women, the Harijans (as known then), the animals, the dirt and the character of its politicians. As was expected, the British welcomed and enthusiastically propagated the book. Even more expectedly, the book outraged Indians and over fifty books/pamphlets were penned in response. Some of these highlighted the gross errors and inaccuracies in the book while others sought to denounce the ‘conclusions’ of Mother India on more polemical grounds.

Unfortunately, Ms Mayo’s work proved to be a powerful influence on the American view of India. A simple testimony to it would be the fact that Mother India is known even today and hardly any of its rebuttals elicit any recall.

Katherine Mayo was neither the first nor the last foreigner who looked at India and the Hindu society with suspicion and disdain. While the Indian society will remain indebted to those who discovered and propagated the wealth of Indian thought, we, as a Nation, cannot but ignore the immense damage the numerous ‘drain inspectors’ have inflicted on our psyche and the way we are perceived by the ‘others’.

James Mill wrote an authoritative ‘The History of British India’ without ever visiting the country. Yet, this book, published in 1818 brought him fame as an expert on India and within a year, he was appointed to the India house. The book and his seventeen years of association with India effected a dramatic change in the way the Nation was perceived by the British and consequently, on how it was governed. No longer was the Hindu seen as a descendant of a noble and cultured race, now enslaved. It was declared "under the glosing exterior of the Hindu, lies a general disposition to deceit and perfidy.” (chapter titled General Reflections in 'Of the Hindus', The History of British India). It will not be an exaggeration to say that this highly influential work, particularly the section 'Of the Hindus' comprising ten chapters, played a huge part in cementing Indophobia and hostility to Orientalism.

Why so much of history?

Because history is repeating itself – both as a tragedy and a farce. The banshee like wailing over withdrawal of the book by Penguin India is turning bizarre and ‘bizarrer’. Not only have the protestors been labelled Taliban, Penguin’s act has been linked to the likelihood of the BJP coming to power. Some worthies have condemned it as being grievously harmful to Hinduism while others lament on how the protesters are not true Hindus ala their inability to live the liberal ethos of their religion

How much merit do these arguments have when the self proclaimed liberals declare this voluntary withdrawal a ban? How can their painting of book protestors as fascists be taken seriously when these protestors have engaged in a very civil, legal and constitutional mean of registering their protest?

Yet, since even the most well meaning may get swayed by magical wordsmithery of the Arundhati Roys and Ramachandra Guhas of the world, it will do good to analyse the ‘real’ arguments surrounding this controversy.

1. Prof Doniger is an academic. Academic works have to be accepted.

Do academic credentials provide immunity from inspection and criticism? Or is it rather that a tenured academician has a higher responsibility towards ensuring rigorous scientific enquiry before reaching conclusions?  

The criticism of ‘The Hindus...’ is based on its factual inaccuracies. Detailed chapter wise listing of these errors has been shared by many scholars/laypersons. Yet, Prof Doniger’s response to all criticisms has been a haughty ad hominem dismissal of the critics as Hindutva torchbearers. Even if all the critics were communalists, how does it validate Ms Doniger’s countless errors and inaccuracies? If we don’t have qualms in questioning and revisiting scriptures, which millions believe to be divine revelations, how can some output of a mere professor be above scrutiny?

2. The Hindus…’ is fruit of laborious labour. It provides an alternative view to the Hindu history

For a view-point to be seen as alternative, the original/mainstream must be known. What exactly is the original Hindu history as per Prof Doniger? Her book makes no reference to any such creature. It is her conclusions alone which are both the alternative and the mainstream!

The above statement may sound rhetorical. It is not, when you consider that the learned Prof uses twentieth and twenty first century ‘works’ to analyse Ramayana and Mahabharata.

3. Prof Doniger is being targeted because she is uncovering uncomfortable facts regarding our deities. She is being targeted for she is white.

KM Munshi’s stellar work, Krishnavatar narrates the life story of Krishna and the Pandavas. Though a devout Hindu (a revivalist and communalist as per the Marxist school), Munshi’s Krishna is not God. Iravati Karve declared Ramayana to be work of fiction and concluded that Yudhishthir was the son of Vidur through Niyoga. Recently, Amish Tripathi’s Shiva trilogy depicted a somewhat hippie like mortal as Shiva. Numerous texts, both ancient and medieval have commented and criticised gods over acts which are seen to have digressed from the path of Dharma. Yet, none of the above has been deemed offensive. It is because these alternative viewpoints stand subordinated to the spirit of enquiry and a general respect for the larger belief system.

Prof Diana Eck, another of the ‘white’ professors has been writing on Hinduism for long. Prof Eck too, has tried to analyse the roots of many practices of Hinduism. But, challenging her views might be, they are not offensive, if only because Prof Eck seeks reasoning and does not seem to be on a mission of invent and degenerate!

4. Hinduism has withstood numerous challenges over the last two millennium. How can a mere book harm it?

A three pronged answer to the above

One - The Hindu faith survived not because people comforted each other that it is too strong to be uprooted. It survived because across ages, great men and their followers took it upon themselves to defend their way of life and worship. At times, this meant taking up the role of missionary philosophers, at other times, military warriors, at times, bhakti saints and yet at some other times, social reformers.

Two – Works like ‘The Hindus…’ Kali’s Child or ‘Oh Terrifying Mother’ are not unique. Right from the time the missionaries identified India as the dark land, fit for an enormous harvest, many critiques of the Nation, its people, its faith, its culture have kept churning out with amazing frequency. But, even till the early twentieth century, each ‘Mother India’ had at least fifty responses. We do not have that luxury now. In fact, we don’t even need a Katherine Mayo to write another ‘Mother India’ for we have many Indians who will gladly do such hatchet jobs now.

Three – Our perception of self is to a large extent driven by how the others perceive us. The emerging ‘scholarship’ from the West, sired effectively by the likes of Wendy Doniger, Sarah Caldwell, Jeffery Kripal, et al and aided even more effectively by our own ‘useful idiots’, has successfully turned Hinduism studies as a study of the kinky, the exotic, the bizarre and the revolting. Works like ‘The Hindus…’ threaten the very space of practitioners for any attempt by the latter to correct the misrepresentations are denounced as fascism. It the invented ‘alternative’ becomes the mainstream, how exactly will the displaced original survive? If it sounds hyperbolic, just think of ‘Tantra’ in the western context. The immediate imagery is of ‘Tantrik sex’ and not of an alternate means of worship. How much respect will others have for Hindus if all their awareness of the faith is underlined by such abominations as ‘the red dot is symbolic of menstrual fluid’, ‘breaking of coconut is a proxy for human sacrifice’, ‘the handing over of a staff as the time of the sacred thread ceremony is symbolic of the father handing over his penis to his son’. This list can go on and on. Do people, or at least who believe, not have both a right and a duty to contest such portrayals of their faith?

Overall, ‘The Hindus…’ is just a ghastly work. It is a sad commentary on the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of some of our academicians that they are fighting for restitution of mischief and falsehoods.

PS

In a previous post, I had shared my views on why Prof Wendy Doniger’s – Hindus, An Alternative History is a bad book! In another post, I had commented on the Supreme Court upholding the ban on RV Bhasin’s book on grounds of social peace. In yet another post, I had expressed my anguish on the systemized muzzling of contrarian views. Hence, I have attempted not to repeat myself in the above note.