The Victory shall not be undermined

Not very surprisingly, the fiberal establishment, yet to come to terms with the scale of Modi’s victory, has sought to undermine its legitimacy by focusing on the BJP’s vote share of 31%, claiming that 7 in 10 Indians voted against Narendra Modi. 

Well, in that case, who has the mandate, the Congress with its 19%? Or the BSP with its 4.5%? Or is the darling AAP with its 2%? Even factually, quoting 31% is incorrect as the BJP fought the elections in partnership with other parties, the total vote share of all of them coming close to 40% 

Leaving the overall NDA voteshare apart for a moment, the argument of 31% not mirroring National sentiments need to be examined on its own merits. Worldwide, there are only that many forms of representative democracy and hence it is not difficult to analyse on what each one of them mean as far as elections are concerned: 

1. Westminster model – Under the ‘First past the post’ system followed by the UK and most of its erstwhile colonies, the person securing the highest number of votes in a given constituency of voters is declared elected. The percentage of votes scored is immaterial here 
2. Proportionate representation – Each of the recognized political entities managing to secure a minimum percentage of the total votes cast (5% in most countries), get proportionate quota of seats in the legislature. Most of the time, parties fighting these elections do so in form of a list of candidates, the serial number for each of them, representing the choice of the party in case it managed to secure the minimum voteshare. For example, Nelson Mandela used to be number 1 in the list of ANC in South African elections and was deemed elected the moment ANC touched the threshold for representation. 
3. Run off polls – A derivative of the first past the post system, in case none of the candidates secure a bare majority of the votes, the top two candidates get into another round of run off polls so that at least one has a majority of votes behind him. However, most of the countries following this system restrict it to the top posts alone, preferring other forms of representation for rest of the legislature 
4. Electoral college – Most famously being used in American Presidential Polls, the candidate securing highest number of votes in a state generally is awarded all the electoral votes from that state. Hence, the candidate winning the President’s election may not necessarily be backed by popular vote. Two such incidents in the twentieth century were the victory of John Kennedy over Richard Nixon in 1960 and the victory of George Bush over Albert Gore in 2000, when both the winners had in a way, been rejected by the majority of voters. Usage of term ‘rejected’ is not incorrect here as under a two party system, a vote for one of them is a rejection of the other. 
5. Preference Votes – A complex system where the elector is required to mark candidates in order of preference. India follows this system in elections for the President and for the Rajya Sabha. A highly complex system, followed by very few countries of the world. 

In case India had opted for any of the other 4 systems, the results from these elections would have remained the same or even more skewed as under the proportionate representation, seats in the Parliament would have got split between the BJP and the Congress alone as no other party reached the minimum threshold of 5% of popular votes. In such a scenario, BJP would have won some 360 seats, i.e., 65% of seats in the Lok sabha. Even if the threshold were lowered to around 2%, we would still have had the BJP close to a majority as the cumulative vote share of the 10 parties reaching 2% is only around 75%. This would mean that the BJP’s 33.5% would get inflated to 42%. What would have been striking is that the fiberal cry for diversity would have been thoroughly defeated with parties like their favorite parties like the BJD, JDU, RJD, CPI and even the NCP would have failed to win any seat at all. One wonders what their reaction would be if they realised that their favorites from J&K, the PDP and the NC and for that matter, none of the regional parties from the North East, or even from Punjab and Haryana and their secular mascots like the IUML, MIM and AIUDF would have never won enough votes to merit a seat under this system.

In case of run-off, well, for the Prime Minister’s post, it would have been a no-contest in between Modi and Rahul Gandhi. For the constituencies, too, results may not have been very different. Currently, the BJP/NDA won over 50% votes in Goa, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Nagaland, Daman & Diu and Madhya Pradesh, winning 142 of the 152 seats in the offing. With over 50% of the votes, the results would hardly have been any different. In the second category are states like Delhi, Chhattisgarh, Arunachal Pradesh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Andaman & Nicobar, where it has won over 46%-48% of votes and 20 of the 22 seats. In the third category are states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Chandigarh where it has won over 42% of votes and 135 of the 163 seats up for picks. Is it really a stretch to imagine that a run-off would not have resulted in the BJP making up the 2% - 8% gap in votes, when its next competitor has barely scored in the range of 25% - 35%? 

With the above sufficing to provide a majority of 297 to the BJP/NDA, bonus would have been the states of West Bengal, Orissa and Tamil Nadu where in spite of clocking 17% to 21% votes, the BJP had to remain content with only 4 out of a 102 seats. In addition would be seats from Assam, Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and Andhra where with an around 35% votes, the party would have been assured of some seats, though probably not in the same quantum as of now. 

Overall, even under the run-off system, the BJP majority would have been very secure. 

In a system of Electoral college, the BJP/NDA would have won all the seats in all the States and Union Territories of India, barring Lakshadweep, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, West Bengal, Sikkim, Tripura, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Manipur, cumulatively accounting for 128 seats. The NDA with 415 seats would have surpassed the 1984 tally of the Congress. 

Lastly, under the preferential voting system, it is indeed more difficult to predict the outcome. But here too, the outcome would not have differed substantially in those states with 152 seats where the NDA won over 50% of popular vote and those states with 185 seats where it won over 40% of the votes. On the other hand, it is not beyond comprehension that large chunks of those voting for the AIADMK, the BJD and the Trinamool would have chosen the BJP as their second preference. 

While the above figures adress the ‘If….’ pipedreams of those still unreconciled with the Modi victory, a deeper question mark arises on the fiberal commitment to democracy only if the outcome suits them. No party, in any General Elections in India has even touched the 50% threshold of popular vote, with the 49.01% scored by the Congress in 1984 being the highest ever till date. Closer in time, the 2004 elections, the Congress barely had around 26% votes, the UPA some 35%. One does not recall the fiberals questioning the legitimacy of the Congress/UPA. On the contrary, the same set of people praised the Indian voters sky high for their ‘maturity’. Even in 2009, the Congress had a 28% vote share, the UPA some 37.22%. In both these elections, the ruling dispensation had a much lower vote share than the current NDA vote share of around 40%, but these worthies did not claim at any that more Indians had rejected than voted for the Congress/UPA. 

People with slightly longer memories may recall that when the NDA had constituted the Constitution Review Committee, the fiberal classes had raged against what they saw as the RSS project of replacing the Westminster model with a Presidential and proportional representation system, wherein faces RSS apparatchiks would dominate the ‘list’. Given their outrage then, it is all the more funny to see them raise a cry for proportional representation only because their hate figure no 1 has secured a majority on his own. 

There is no fool proof system of electing representatives but till a better alternative is found, one must respect the outcome under the system which is in force. In seeking to question the legitimacy of Modi, the fiberals are only reinforcing their image of churlish creatures, who are unable to come to terms with electorate’s verdict.

A Vote for Modi

Let me start by confessing that I not visualised the scale of BJP’s victory at anytime in the run-up to the polls. On the contrary, the shrill media generated noises on ‘Modi-as-PM’ being the against very ‘Idea of India’ (whatever it means), had given rise to lots of apprehension that these elections too, would be decided on some esoteric humbug and that our ruling buccaneers would get yet another shot at power through some more crooked arrangements – all to defend that ludicrous ‘idea’. Even worse, a communal consolidation against Modi would have meant a BJP tally of something like 180 odd seats, which would have resulted in shameful contortions by the party to solicit support of the likes of Mamata and Maya. Mercifully, the Indian people have ensured the BJP and the Nation has been spared such ignominy for now.

One would have imagined that the mere fact of BJP’s wins in places where it did not even have units in place and an over 13% surge in popular votes (in spite of having fought in lesser seats than 2009) would have shut all those ridiculing the concept of a Modi wave. But, never underestimate the thick skin of our self proclaimed ‘intellectuals’. The chief editor of a leading fiberal weekly, who happens to be a UK citizen but claims to have voted in these elections, was trying hard to argue that ‘64% of all those who voted for the BJP would still have voted for it even if Modi were not its PM candidate!’ Unfortunately for him, his verbal jugglery itself reveals that at least 36% or 1 of the 3 BJP voters, voted for Modi and not the party. Juxtaposed against the BJP’s voteshare, a standalone Modi vote is some 11%, a figure which by itself would make it the 3^rd largest political formation in India in terms of popular vote! Remove this 11% from the BJP’s 31% and you have a 20% share, the same as what the party drew in 1991 and 1996!

No group of people worldwide, other than our fiberals would have the gall to contend that it they (the media) who propped Modi up. If by propping up, they mean continuous abuse, derision, name calling, targeted ‘sting’ operations, vilification campaign, mobilising ‘intellectual’ opinion and writing reams on ‘Why Modi cannot be the Prime Minister’, then yes, Modi could not have been supported more! Needless to say, this support is going to continue and our fiberals are going to continue to hold Modi responsible even if dogs litter Sujan Singh Park!

Very certainly, it was only on account of this support that the Modi wave has resulted in the BJP having at least 1 Lok Sabha seat from each major state barring Kerala. For the first time, the BJP is the largest political formation in the country, both in terms of seats and in popular vote (Even in 1998, the Congress with 112 seats had a slightly higher vote share than the BJP with its 182 seats). And again for the first time, it has swept 6 states (Gujarat, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Goa). But, the icing on the cake has been Uttar Pradesh. This intermittent blogger has consistently argued that the BJP’s revival runs through Uttar Pradesh and what a vindication it has been!

With all its good tidings, mandate 2014 does have some jarring notes. While it is disappointing that a stellar candidate like O Rajagopal had to lose yet again on account of the Muslim-Christian consolidation against him, it is even more disappointing that the winning candidate had to be Shashi Tharoor, a person whose integrity was tainted on account of his involvement in the IPL sweat equity scandal and even more criminally, whose wife was found dead under mysterious circumstances with lots of questions remaining unanswered.

Among the states, while the BJP should have performed better in Tamil Nadu and Bengal, the real disappointment is its performance in Andhra Pradesh, particularly Telangana. Just what did BJP have to show as results for its 45 assembly and 8 parliament contests? A measely 3 and 1 seat as results! Maybe it is poetic justice. Just as the Congress was punished by both Seemandhra and Telangana for its crooked mechanisms around bifurcation of the state, the BJP was punished for its complicity with the Congress in ensuring that all parliamentary decencies were given a go by when the Telangana bill was being piloted.

Then we have the curious case of the self proclaimed ‘Chinamma’ from Vidisha. From threatening to shave off her head if Sonia became the PM, to declaring herself a ‘little mother’ to Sonia’s ‘mother’, Sushma Swaraj has indeed traversed quite some distance. Some five years, the advent of Sushma Swaraj as the leader of the opposition was welcomed as a harbinger of change for the BJP. But what did Sushma do? In spite of being the Leader of the Opposition, she insulated herself so much from the general workers/public that even her email ID is not accessible to the general public. If any of her constituents tried to reach her on her phone numbers, he would be asked by one of her lackeys to send a letter by post! Maybe Sushmaji picked her imperiousness from Soniaji who she tried hard to emulate. If this were all, maybe it could have been excused. No. Sushmaji tried very hard to emerge as a leader with friends across the political spectrum. If that meant BJP’s absence from parliamentary discussions or its voting for disastrous bills being pushed by the UPA, well, that were a small price to pay for possible Prime Ministership. This was the lady who in 1999 had promised the residents of Bellary that she would perform the Varahlakshmi puja with them every year. But once her protégés, the Reddy brothers came under the cloud, not only did she jettison them, she jettisoned Bellary altogether. Throughout the election campaign, the lady remained aloof from campaigning, other than in Vidisha. Through public pronouncements, she tried very hard to portray that she was not party to decisions which were being criticised by the media. Yet, she believes that it is her right to be ‘suitably rewarded’ in the new Modi Government! It is really, really unfortunate that she won her Vidisha seat. This victory, of a thoroughly undeserving candidate, will be one of the conspicuous low points of verdict 2014. 

For the BJP, Arun Jaitley’s defeat is certainly a setback. What makes it even more unpalatable is that the victor, Amarinder Singh is not really seen as a person with high integrity. While it was good that the people of Punjab registered their rejection of the depraved Majithia, it was distressing that Mr Jaitley became a collateral damage to that rejection.  Still, a victory to Mr Jaitley would have been a sort of approval of the Sukhbeer-Majithia duo and compared to them, Amarinder Singh certainly comes across as the lesser devil. One silver lining from Punjab has been the performance of Aam Aadmi Party. Not only is the victory of those 4 AAP candidates a testimony to people’s rejection of corruption in all colours, it is also a strong rejection of the empty attention grabbing antics of the AAP leadership. If only Arvind Kejriwal had remembered that people chose him in November to fight corruption and not to act as yet another ‘secular’ warrior, he would have ended these elections with some dignity left.

Having been a Hindu Nationalist since gaining political consciousness, I had no doubts with regards to who I will vote for these elections. However, in spite of having voted for and being almost deliriously happy in celebrating Modi’s victory, I will confess yet again to continue being a little apprehensive on the future. The years under the previous NDA regime were wasted in a sense for while the Government changed, governance did not. Vajpayee continued the old Nehruvian consensus and the result was a saffron coloured Congress Government in between 1998 and 2004. Will Modi bring about a paradigm change or will 2014 remain a wave election like 1977 and 1984, much sound and fury but no impact? That said, unlike many who feel that Modi could inflict as much harm to the Nation as Indira Gandhi, I believe that unlike Indira, all of whose actions were aimed solely at neutralising her detractors and consolidating her position, Modi has the interests of our Nation at heart. Yet, these are early days. 1971 gifted us an autocrat whose actions hit the very core of our National well being. History alone will be able to judge if 2014 was the decisive right turn on our path to all round progress.