JOIN USThe ideological implications of BJP's Gujarat win
Another round of elections is over. The results have not been one-sided. If the Bharatiya Janata Party has won a record victory in Gujarat, it has been thrown out of power in Himachal Pradesh and has faced defeat in the municipal elections of Delhi. If Gujarat has been a huge setback for the Congress party, Himachal Pradesh gives it a reason to have confidence in its ability to challenge the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) should be called the main news of these elections. It has registered its powerful presence in Gujarat and has proved in Delhi that it can take on the agile election machinery of the BJP fuelled by all kinds of resources. That shatters the myth of the invincibility of the BJP.
Will the people of India outside these states be able to look at these results this way? The truth is that because of the TV channels and the rest of the media, the BJP's unprecedented victory in Gujarat will continue to be discussed more than the results of Himachal Pradesh and Delhi. Only this victory will be presented as the real news. Despite their defeat in Delhi's local body elections, BJP leaders are brazenly saying that even if the majority is with the AAP, they will get the mayor's post. This shows that the BJP is telling its voters that whatever the result may be, it knows how to grab power. Regarding Himachal Pradesh also, it is being said that the BJP will buy the MLAs of the victorious Congress party, and the power will remain with it.
Also Read | The titans of Gujarat
This discussion and conjecturing prove only one thing: that the BJP is seen as the only legitimate claimant of power, and all its machinations to capture power are justified. The public acceptance of its ploy to grab power despite being in the minority in Manipur, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, or Maharashtra has also given it the intrepidity to repeat it elsewhere. Elections have been turned into war. Believing that everything is fair in war, every trick to reverse the results of elections is being considered appropriate. People are told to believe that power is now the right of the BJP, and if the public has made a mistake by electing someone else, then the BJP has every right to correct it. Therefore, Gujarat election results will be used as a weapon to topple or not allow the formation of governments of other parties in Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and elsewhere. If the people of a "prosperous" state like Gujarat are voting in favour of the BJP, then why should those poor states bear the consequences of the democratic stupidity of their people? Every state will have to live up to the test of Gujarat.
It is against this background that the national implications of these election results must be considered. It is true that there is no single reason for any one result in an election. Different voters may make the same decision for different reasons. But a "mandate" that emerges from these different reasons can have very different results, which many voters might not have factored in when voting. That is, there will be no direct relationship between cause and effect.
For example, in 2014 and 2019, many voters voted for the BJP thinking they were voting for the Gujarat model of development, which is fast. But the fallout from their vote was something else. Hate and violence against Muslims and Christians and majoritarian laws, destruction of free media, end of the autonomy of educational institutions: many BJP voters had not elected it to do all these. But it was because of their vote that all this happened. All BJP voters may not want Umar Khalid or Sudha Bhardwaj arrested and would not like to take credit for that. But it was their vote that led to all this.
What will happen this time? As we said earlier, the shadow of Gujarat will be the longest. Its results will affect the Indian public consciousness the most. This time in Gujarat, the top leaders of the BJP made it clear that the BJP was fighting the elections on the platform of anti-Muslim hatred and the glory of the Gujarati identity. The prime minister kept telling his voters that urban Naxals were lurking behind and they needed to be cautious of the parties which have their support. He is there to save them from these Naxalites. He accused the Congress party of siding with anti-Gujarat Medha Patkar. Who could have thought Medha Patkar could also be an election issue in Gujarat.
The Home Minister of India crossed all limits and justified the anti-Muslim violence of 2002 using the dog whistling typical of all BJP leaders. He claimed that in 2002 rioters were taught an unforgettable lesson. It was a tried and tested method of mobilising Hindus against Muslims, which they used again. At the end of the election campaign, a BJP leader tried to create a scare in Hindus that they would be surrounded by Bengalis. What will they do with cheap gas? Will they cook fish for Bengalis on their gas stoves? Is the price of gas more important than your life?
In Gujarat, the BJP leaders have always used this communal dog whistling and scaremongering, but this time, it was extraordinarily brazen. So, irrespective of what the analysts explain, they cannot deny that this communal appeal has no hand in the huge majority that BJP got. In fact, this has been the main appeal that has led voters to choose the BJP. It is clear that it is a majoritarian majority. It should not be forgotten that the BJP leader who supported the release of the rapists of Bilkis Bano and the murderers of her family members has won with a huge majority. Despite the collapse of the hanging bridge in Morbi in the middle of the campaign, which resulted in 135 deaths, the BJP candidate was given a handsome victory with a huge majority. The daughter of the convicted prime accused in the Naroda Patiya gang violence and murder case also won. What else can this mean other than livelihood, administrative efficiency, corruption etc., were not the real issues for these voters, that the voters were making their decision for "cultural" reasons.
What will the political party elected on the basis of this mandate do in power? The BJP did not leave any room for doubt. With the Election Code in force, the Gujarat Police arrested Saket Gokhale, a Trinamool Congress spokesperson in Rajasthan, for a tweet about the prime minister's visit after the Morbi bridge accident. When he got bail in that case, he was arrested again as soon as he was released. It has become clear from this that there will be no place in Gujarat for any criticism of the government or for any protest.
This arrest was not symbolic. There is a clear threat from the government to the opposing political parties, to those critical of the government. Human rights and freedom of expression will be suppressed with impunity in Gujarat in the coming times. During the election time itself, V D Savarkar's photo found a place on the pillar of the overbridge right in front of Gujarat Vidyapith. Through this act, a message was given symbolically that the ideology of the state had taken the Savarkar route.
It was already clear from the appointment of Governor Devvrat Shastri to the post of Chancellor of Gujarat Vidyapith. Mahatma Gandhi's institutions will now be used for the propagation of Hindutva nationalism. It was also clear from the government's takeover of the Sabarmati Ashram.
The ideological implication of the Gujarat election result for India will be very dire. Anti-Muslim and anti-Christian hatred and violence will intensify outside Gujarat as well. Laws will be made to further harass and corner them. Administrative and legislative methods will be used to limit the rights of workers, farmers, students and other sections of society. The pressure on constitutional institutions will also increase, and they will be forced to work for Hindutva nationalism. The pressure of Hindutva nationalism will further increase on other political parties as well. It is possible that the atrocities against Muslims and Christians will no longer be considered a topic of discussion and will not be taken up by any party.
In such a situation, the responsibility of intellectuals and civil society increases even more. To keep the meaning of democracy alive in the public imagination, to make Muslims and Christians feel that they are not alone, to hold each other's hand, all this and much more is what they'll need to do.
(The writer teaches at Delhi University)
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.