Unlike the first spell of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), the Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has consciously anchored itself to a deeper foundation of political legitimacy, beyond the prosaic imperatives of holding on to political power. Over the last decade, the wider political culture of the country has undergone a thorough process of making and un-making. The political scholar and activist, Yogendra Yadav, had provocatively captured this palpable phenomenon as the “unveiling of the second Indian republic”. There are, of course, scholarly disputes about the nature and extent of such stated political transformation. In the midst of a crucial round of State elections, and before the national elections, one might revisit certain questions afresh.
BJP dominant or Modi dominant?
First, can the present political system be characterised as a dominant party system; and if so, can it be more accurately characterised as a BJP dominant system or a Narendra Modi dominant system? Second, how robust and sustainable does the present structure of political dominance appear from a historical perspective? Some political scientists, such as Adam Ziegfeld, have articulated reasonable doubts over the BJP’s claims to dominance. They say that unlike the Congress’s geographical spread under Indira Gandhi, the BJP’s spread still substantially excludes southern and eastern India. The much-vaunted BJP electoral machine has been unable to dislodge a regional incumbent in State elections outside of the so-called Hindi belt. At present, the party does not possess a State government in any southern State and in a large swathe of eastern India (Bihar, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha). Also, unlike the Congress under Jawaharlal Nehru, the NDA has also not fulfilled the gruelling test of regime longevity (a rough rule of thumb being three consecutive terms).
Editorial | Roadblocks to unity: On the INDIA bloc
Nevertheless, few might contest the fact that the present majority coalition led by the BJP commands more robust popular support than what the Congress enjoyed in the latter half of the 1980s under Rajiv Gandhi. Between 1985 and 1990, the Congress suffered dramatic reversals in its previous strongholds of Assam, Punjab, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh. In the words of the political scientists Susanne and Lloyd Rudolph, the rise of regional parties in crucial States and the consequent de-legitimisation of the old centralised Congress system had “reduced Congress’ ability to win the super-majorities that had enabled it to be [the] dominant party for so long”. Thus, the Rudolphs held the 1989 election loss as both anticipated and much in line with a broader trend of party decline caused by the “cancer of party de-institutionalisation, launched by Indira Gandhi, and not addressed by Rajiv Gandhi”.
In contrast, one can gauge sharp discontinuities and ambiguities in the political picture gleaned from this round of State elections. While the BJP appears to be struggling in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Telangana, and hardly appears to be decisively ahead in Rajasthan, a State known for its ‘revolving door’ trend, a heavy dose of caution is warranted before extrapolating this to a national trend.
In 2019, the BJP’s victory had largely rested on landslides in north, west, and central India, often exceeding a stupefying 50% vote share. A recent CVoter survey asked voters of poll-bound States to rate their satisfaction with the work done under the leadership of Prime Minister Modi. In Rajasthan, 60% claimed to be very satisfied, with 17.4% exhibiting no satisfaction. Similarly, in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, there were high levels of satisfaction with the national government (roughly 58% each) and low levels of strong dissatisfaction (22% and 17%, respectively).
This is a far cry from the last years of the Rajiv Gandhi government, when the tumultuous Ram Janmabhoomi movement and the onward march of the rural-centric Other Backward Classes (OBC) parties had resulted in the evisceration of public support for the Congress in northern and central India. The present phase bears no similarity to the 1988-89 period, when the Congress coalition was reeling under allegations of corruption, declining support, and intra-party tussles.
Absence of strong State leaders
Arguably, however, the over-centralised nature of the BJP party machinery has weakened State units, reminiscent of the follies of the Congress of an earlier era. The BJP’s reversals in several State elections in recent years stem in large part from the absence of strong, credible leaders. This weakness of State leadership is partly a result of the lack of intra-party space afforded to powerful State leaders such as Shivraj Chouhan, Vasundhara Raje, and Raman Singh.
Editorial | A lot in a name: On INDIA and the BJP
Combing through data from past surveys of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies and Axis My India, the political analyst Amitabh Tiwari recently sought to quantify the ‘Modi factor’ in national versus State elections. In national elections, Mr. Modi’s leadership was claimed to be a decisive factor in the BJP vote by a large section (roughly between one-quarter and one-third of all respondents in the last two elections). However, in almost every State election, only around 5% explained the Modi effect as a vote choice (the only exception being Uttar Pradesh where it was reported to be a decisive factor for 10.2% of respondents). According to the political scientist Atul Kohli, Rajiv Gandhi had harmed his own party by hoarding political capital within his own charismatic leadership, and not divesting decision-making power to State-level leaders. Thus, Rajiv Gandhi had failed to institutionalise political support within the structures of the Congress party organisation. Can a similar fate befall the BJP under the centralised reign of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah?
The indefatigable BJP engine
It is hard to provide any pre-determined answer to that question. This is because, as this writer had argued two years ago (along with the political scientist Rahul Verma), the present BJP system of dominance can be more accurately defined as a BJP dominant system rather than a Modi dominant system. In other words, more of an ideologically pre-figured ethnic-majoritarian coalition rather than one based on any singular charismatic personality. One can provide two pieces of supportive evidence from the present configuration of the political dynamics at large.
The first is the lack of a clear ideological alternative provided by the Congress in States where it is in a straight contest with the BJP. In this round of State elections, the State Congress leadership (particularly in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh) has consciously anchored itself to (and thus again legitimised) the ideological mainstream of Hindu nationalism. Indeed, Congress stalwart Kamal Nath declared in as many words that India is already a de facto Hindu Rashtra. This proves that the BJP has established itself not just through the remoulding of institutional arrangements, but also through the decisive charting out of the dominant ideological mainstream. This unchallenged Hindutva-inflected political culture has contributed in large part to the sustenance of the Modi charisma. Second, conflict is bubbling under the surface of the INDIA coalition between Mandal parties and the Congress. These two political forces together comprise the primary opponent to the BJP in almost half of all national seats. Their latent (and sometimes open) conflict testifies to the many constraints thwarting efforts to fuse together a coherent ideological platform, particularly on thorny issues such as sharing political ownership of the caste census agenda. The intensity of these skirmishes are liable to increase with (potentially) a growing realisation of being dragged into a zero-sum fight over a stagnant pool of the anti-BJP vote.
Moreover, the Opposition shows a lack of political imagination in connecting welfare promises and caste-based slogans to the larger questions of the political economy. Both the BJP’s and Congress’ socio-economic agendas often appear to be an undistinguishable potpourri of ‘freebies’ and ‘handouts. Thus, though support may be frayed around the edges, the engine of BJP dominance chugs along, still powered by its long-gestated ideological steam.
Asim Ali is a political researcher and columnist
