The “Aurangzeb ki auladein” (progenies of Aurangzeb) barb used by Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra Devendra Fadnavis underscores the anxiety increasingly gnawing at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its brass regarding prospects in future elections, the impending Assembly polls, as well as the 2024 general elections.
Fadnavis’s provocative taunt was in response to uncalled for media posts by ill-motivated youngsters in Kolhapur and other cities in the state. Given their marginal profile and even though their actions triggered violence, a less apprehensive leader holding an important executive office would not have engaged in a tit-for-tat as Fadnavis did. Any other responsible leader in such a position would not have uttered a slight that had the potential to add fuel to the existing bushfires.
Fadnavis’s choice indicates his and the BJP’s awareness of a three-way split in Maharashtra’s traditional Hindutva vote bank as a result of which he struck a strident posture.
Assembly polls are due in November 2024, although speculations are rife that the BJP may advance the polls and hold them alongside those for the Lok Sabha to benefit from a Narendra Modi-centric campaign.
Unlike the years when the Hindu nationalistic constituency aggregated for the BJP and Shiv Sena from the 1990s onwards, when the two parties were allies, it is now likely to get divided between the Shiv Sena (Udhav Thackeray), the Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde), and the BJP.
The BJP’s apprehensions also stem from the fact that despite being part of a coalition that includes two major non-Hindutva parties, Thackeray has not deviated from core principles of the party. On the principal issues of Hindutva and sub-national Marathi identity, the Thackeray faction remains firm, at least in intent. It discreetly pressured Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Sharad Pawar to sound out a warning to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and others in the Congress to keep their views on V D Savarkar to themselves.
For the BJP, all pretence of seeking a fresh mandate solely on ‘good work’ done by the government has been abandoned. The party is now increasingly looking at hardline Hindutva issues to give it an electoral push.
This could not be more evident than in Fadnavis’ and the party’s decision to back groups pursuing programmes which threaten the social levelheadedness in the state, even though this will risk the reputation of its government.
Every district in Maharashtra has been the theatre of Hindu Jan Aakrosh Morcha rallies with the state government’s unspoken backing. At these hate-mongering jamborees, speaker after speaker, mainly local BJP leaders, lash out at Muslims levelling preposterous charges: ‘love jihad’, ‘land jihad’, and ‘forced conversions’ — nothing new, but enough to heighten Hindu prejudice against Muslims.
Clearly, the BJP has concluded that nothing but communal polarisation will electorally work in numerically significant states where the party is politically vulnerable.
Fadnavis is not the first BJP leader who while holding office and started as a level-headed leader against the belligerent advocates of Hindutva has over time adopted a more confrontational stance, administratively as well as politically. Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan too has been more pronounced in his advocacy of Hindutva policies and statements since he became Chief Minister in March 2020.
This has to do with not just his assessment that only hardline majoritarianism shall get him another tenure this winter, but is also because Prime Minister Narendra Modi does not lose an opportunity to hoist the flag of aggressive religio-cultural nationalism — witness, for instance, how he tried polarising the electorate in Karnataka.
But as the verdict from Karnataka showed, the BJP cannot expect to benefit from one single issue all the time, in every state. The way Modi drew up a new equation of political algebra, where the Bajrang Dal equalled Bajrang Bali (or Lord Hanuman), indicates one of the narratives that the BJP is going to harness, at least in some states.
The BJP senses an assurance in states like Uttar Pradesh which have a longer history of communalised polity. Where the national party is worried about its electoral prospects is in states like Maharashtra — with 48 Lok Sabha seats — which do not have a deep-rooted tradition of polarisation on the basis of religious identities.
Fadnavis referring to some Maharashtrians as Aurangzeb’s progenies solely because they disagree with the BJP’s contention that the entire medieval period was one of the Hindu subjugation, demonstrates that the BJP’s emotive calls remain embedded in a pack of lies.
It is unfair to single out Fadnavis. Is it not true that Modi was the one to revive his party’s theory on Indian history with the “1200 saal ki ghulami” contention?
The Karnataka assembly election verdict demonstrated the limitations of social welfarism and dole distribution. Consequently, expect the BJP and its leaders to blow the dog whistle more frequently.
(Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, a Delhi-based journalist, is author of ‘The Demolition and the Verdict: Ayodhya and the Project to Reconfigure India’. Twitter: @NilanjanUdwin.)
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.