While BJP PM candidate is leaving no stone unturned to project an ‘inclusive’ face of the party in order to fill the vacuum created by the tainted UPA-2, his partymen like Giriraj Singh competed with the ilk of Shazia Ilami to divert the discourse from the development plank to divisive politics
Election time is an occasion when flurries of partisan polemics, ideological conflicts, claims and counterclaims, reassessment and reexamination of the loyalties to parties keep haunting the contestants as well as the electors. The political flux so generated helps one perceive the political trends and the mood of the electorate that eventually decide the fate of many on the hustings. Although the preceding fifteen parliamentary elections witnessed more or less a similar climate, involving healthy debates on vital issues of social relevance, the 16th lok Sabha polls, unfortunately, seem to be a complete departure from the established electoral conventions observed in the past.
This election appears to be largely fought on trivial issues, personal jibes, insinuations and counter-insinuations. Although at the beginning, an euphoria was generated indicating that the main electoral plank will be development and progress, many an unpleasant event crept in during the course of the campaign, consequently, bringing into focus the very primordial, sectarian and divisive loyalties that the political actors vowed to fight out and demolish.
It is quite embarrassing to see the prime ministerial aspirants of the world’s largest democracy indulging in contemptuous jeers involving malicious remarks and counter-remarks such as “balloons” and “chocolates”. The appeasement vs no appeasement discourse between Narendra Modi and Rajnath Singh on the skull cap issue, Uma Bharti’s vindictive comment that her government will send ‘jamaibabu’ Robert Vadra to jail, Imran Masood’s threat to cut Modi into pieces, Ajit Pawar’s intimidation to the villagers that water supply will be withdrawn if they fail to vote for his cousin, VK Malhotra’s silly observation that Jamia Nagar in Delhi is a nursery of terrorism, and Shazia Ilmi’s argument that Muslims need not be too secular, all these signal a turbulent society in days ahead. What kind of example are we going to set inIJ Are we preparing to establish a new culture of brutality and barbarism in our electoral politics and consciously carving a savage epoch in the countryIJ
It is an irony that all political parties see the future of this great nation in the youth force, vow to hand over the reins of power to the youth and swear to work for their empowerment and prosperity, paradoxically without juxtaposing any concrete programme or vision for their education or employment!
The onus of the prevalent painful state of political affairs in the country equally rests with the Congress. The party leadership in the post-Nehru phase not only failed to sustain the Nehruvian paradigm of secularism that was essentially meant to uphold India’s finest traditions of religious assimilation, accommodation and tolerance but also gradually eroded it by interpreting and reinterpreting the concept to suit their political designs. Those who had completely subscribed to, and reposed faith in Nehru and his secularism and unhesitatingly supported the Congress even after the exit of Nehru, today find themselves at the crossroads. Although, the confidence instilled in them during all these years that India is a common home to all those who live here and the freedom for which India had laboured through generations of sufferings is for all the people of India and not for one group or followers of one religion, is beginning to shatter.
As a matter of fact, it is this very formidable chunk of the society that has kept our secular edifice intact and firm even in the face of abysmal onslaughts of the 1984 and 2002 variety. Now that Sonia Gandhi has completely failed to revisit Nehru and rejuvenate her party on those lines, and that the BJP too is in no clear mood to come out of its dogmatic cloak, preserving the confidence of the teeming millions in our acclaimed traditions of secular-democracy and social justice has once again become a big challenge.
It was expected that the BJP, drawing inspiration from the political traditions of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, would come forward with an effective alternate vision plan akin to the famous Nehruvian consensus model in order to fill the political space created by the Congress-led UPA-2 following a series of scams and fiddles. But this did not happen. On the contrary, the party shoved a single individual as an omnipotent Jack of all trades. This not only infuriated and isolated many a veteran baron, but at the same time made the hitherto dormant vertical crack in the party organisation, wide and conspicuous.
It was believed that the BJP recognising the nitty-gritty of a pluralist secular polity would transform its conservative and exclusive agenda and adopt an accommodative and inclusive posture prioritising the need for policies for the socially and economically excluded segments and make it a central election plank in electoral calculations.
Incidentally this also did not happen. What is witnessed instead is a crazy race of verbal assertions and reassertions spreading hatred and hostility. Giriraj Singh’s open and daring outburst that those who do not vote for Modi has no place in this country, and in the same vein, Tagodia’s sudden rise from hibernation proclaiming that Muslims will not be allowed properties in Hindu localities are essentially serious warning bells about the shape of things that are on the political anvil. Pertinently, these assertions are also a significant reflection on the soft posture adopted by the Election Commission while exonerating Amit Shah from his revenge remark in an election discourse. Ironically, all these are happening when Narendra Modi and more precisely Rajnath Singh are extra cautious in their bid to project a moderate face of the party.
Although the BJP released its manifesto in the public domain quite late, nevertheless, the document was carefully drafted to retain contentious issues such as Ayodhya and Article 370 on a low profile. The party thus set out to build an image of moderation and the exercise successfully fetched it an influx of new recruits including the so-called progressive faces like MJ Akbar, Bollywood scriptwriter Salim Khan or Kuldip Nayyer. At this crucial juncture, the abrupt spurt from BJP spokesperson Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi bringing the temple issue back into the electoral arena raised many eyebrows and provoked many to find justification in Jaswant Singh’s formulation Asli BJP vs Naqli BJP.
looking at these unwarranted gimmicks orchestrated by leaders like Giriraj, Tagodia or Naqvi, one is constrained to recall the witty saga of a devil who sought an appointment with God. When the devil was denied the appointment on the plea that God has no business with devils, he made a fresh request pleading God that he wanted to discuss about characters like Giriraj, Mukhtar and Tagodia. The appointment was immediately granted. When God commanded the devil to quickly narrate what he wished to, the devil simply requested God to clarify whether these creatures were with Him (God) or with him (the devil). The reply from God was, “I am equally confused”.
In such a climate of internecine incongruity in the party organisation, can the BJP, if voted to power as the hype in a section of media is to be believed, under the sole command of Narendra Modi, be able to steer the nation successfullyIJ It is, indeed, a pleasant surprise to find quotes from the self-proclaimed Vicar of God in the print media that he would run the government in accordance with the Constitution rather than RSS’ views, and that he has always taken “moral responsibility” for the 2002 riots and Muslims have no reason to fear him. Equally interesting is his emphasis on mutual respect and cooperation in foreign relations that fetched him passionate appreciation from no other person than the High Commissioner of Pakistan in
New Delhi.
It appears that Vajpayee’s piece of advice given to him in 2002 that he should uphold Raj Dharma in polity management has now begun to work and appropriate his mindset. Perhaps, the following Urdu couplet from Mirza Ghalib succinctly reflects the people’s anxiety on the ground:
Dekhiye paatey hain asshaq butoun se kya faiz,
Ek Brahman ne kaha hai ki ye saal accha hai.
(Translation: let’s see what all, the aspirants get from the gods;
One Brahmin has predicted that this year is auspicious. )
(Professor M Mujtaba Khan is Director, Academic Staff College, Jamia Millia Islamia. Views expressed here are his own)