What next for Hindutva-nationalism polarisation

Vibha Sharma in New Delhi

Advertisement

It was somewhere around the last week of January that the central BJP leadership realised that it would not be able to win Delhi, with AAP riding high on the popularity of ‘mohalla’ clinics, school makeover, free DTC tickets, reduced electricity bills, aided by a faction-ridden state BJP unit and the ‘rot’ in the BJP-controlled MCDs.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah stepped in, building a vitriolic narrative around Hindutva, nationalism and anti-CAA protests at Shaheen Bagh, putting the party in a fighting position.

The rest, as they say, is history.

Many though heaved a sigh of relief when the BJP lost Delhi on February 11. A BJP win, they felt, would have been an endorsement of its campaign, a scary signal ahead of the elections in West Bengal, with its history of confrontationist politics, and other key state elections.

Experts say Arvind Kejriwal won using a template leaders like Narendra Modi, Nitish Kumar and Naveen Patnaik have followed to win elections. And that is to take up a couple of schemes of direct benefit, ramp up with strong communication and back up with an effective election machinery. But to call the AAP sweep a defeat of BJP’s Hindutva-nationalism model will also not be correct.

Kejriwal’s ‘soft Hindutva’

The fact that ‘Hanuman bhakt’ Arvind Kejriwal had to publicly recite ‘Hanuman chalisa’ and his daughter recall her Bhagvad Gita lessons are proof of the change Narendra Modi-Amit Shah’s ‘new BJP’ has been able to bring in Indian politics in the past few years.

After he was called a “terrorist” by the BJP, Kejriwal’s daughter Harshita was quoted as saying: “My father has always been in social service. I still remember he used to wake us up at 6 am, make us read Gita and sing, ‘Insaan se insaan ka ho bhaichara’. Is this terrorism?”

Significantly, the 2020 Kejriwal model — delivery, development and class (not caste) mobilisation — also had ‘soft Hindutva’ woven into it. It was one reason why the BJP was not able to push through the “Punjab-type” allegations against him in Delhi. The model was also perceived as a refreshing change from the disembodied “competitive religious/appeasement” politics of the past three decades.

The Kejriwal model demolished BJP’s well-practised ‘Hindutva-nationalism polarising’ formula. Aided by deputy Manish Sisodia’s pro-Shaheen Bagh utterances, the minority/Muslim voters also stayed put. In any case, they had nowhere to go.

Despite BJP’s massive election machinery, it lost the bipolar fight. With its model, the BJP managed to consolidate Hindu voters, ramped up the vote share to 38.51 per cent but not enough to win fence-sitters or those Hindus who preferred development over religion.

In the past one decade, the rise of the BJP has also increased the value or currency of Hindu voters in the country.

Remember the times when political leaders would queue up before the Shahi Imam for Muslim votes? It is no longer happening. Non-BJP parties are also now vying for Hindu voters with ‘janaeus’ and ‘Hanuman chalisa’, thanks to the BJP. It is this change that Modi and Shah should be worried about, henceforth.

Making sense of Delhi defeat

Ideally, a political party and the State should not be concerned with the religion of citizens, but that’s a utopian state of affairs. The Congress, Samajwadi Party, BSP, TMC, TRS, JD-U, RJD, you name it and everyone has used religion to run politics.

In those terms, Delhi is a big lesson for the BJP from the section it often takes for granted — the Hindu middle class.

Delhi voted by class, not religion. So while AAP managed to sway lower middle sections with its schemes and electricity bills, stung by a poor economy and the Modi government’s “disdain”, the taxpaying middle class seemed to prefer AAP. After all, who minds some extra money, even if it is by way of saving on electricity bills?

Using its biggest weapon — polarisation — the saffron party was able to consolidate the Hindu vote bank but not enough to overcome the consolidation on the basis of delivery, work and counter-polarisation. Apparently, it has a membership of 62.28 lakh in Delhi, but only 35.6 lakh polled in its favour.

There is a sea of difference between Hindutva and Hinduism. By bringing his faith into politics, Kejriwal practised what is now being called ‘soft Hindutva’ in contrast to BJP’s form of ‘hard Hindutva’, resulting from “Congress’ appeasement of Muslims”.

In those terms, Delhi had another message for the saffron leadership, a hint of which came from the RSS a couple of days back. The thought holds a world of meaning amid the ongoing fracas over CAA-NPR-NRC, the BJP’s divorce with right-wing Shiv Sena and the Kejriwal model of ‘soft Hindutva’.

According to RSS leader Suresh ‘Bhaiyyaji’ Joshi, the BJP is not synonymous with the Hindu community and opposing it does not amount to opposing Hindus. “It is a political fight that will continue. That should not be linked with Hindus,” he said in response to the question — “Why Hindus are becoming the enemy of their own community?”

“Some claim that Vivekananda’s Hindutva is good and not that of Vinayak Savarkar. What is the basis for such claims?” he questioned. That there can be other claims to the Hindutva ideology is something the BJP needs to be careful about while designing its future strategies.

Hindus may favour it but the saffron party cannot claim copyright. As the rival Sena argues, the BJP manifesto does not say it is a Hindu party and that only Hindus can be associated with it.

The Congress factor

If the anti-BJP votes had got divided, AAP would not have had such a comfortable win is what the BJP says, in a way dumping the blame on the “missing Congress”. Experts, however, believe that most of its additional vote share was courtesy the Congress.

While preparing for “bipolar” elections henceforth, can it ignore deep divisions between Punjabi and non-Punjabi (read Bihari) factions in Delhi and perceptible corruption and rot in party-run MCDs?

Senior leaders are also talking of the “sabotage within” to stall the BJP from coming to power in Delhi. It was with an eye on Poorvanchali and Bihari migrant voters in the national capital that the then chief Amit Shah appointed Bhojpuri singer-actor Manoj Tiwari as the state unit chief. But last year when Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri said the BJP will fight the Assembly election under the leadership of Manoj Tiwari, he had to backtrack a couple of hours later.

10 lessons the BJP can draw from the debacle in delhi elections

•  People preferred the Kejriwal model of delivery and ‘soft Hindutva’ over BJP’s ‘hardline Hindutva & polarising politics’
• BJP does not hold a copyright on Hindu voters or nationalism
• In presidential form of elections practised these days, voters want to know who their PM or CM will be
• Voters are mature enough to make a clear distinction between the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections. They may vote for Modi to run the country and a Kejriwal in Delhi
• You need regional leaders, local issues to win Assembly elections. Even to highlight Hindutva/nationalist agenda, a face is needed
• The party can no longer rely on PM Modi alone to win states
• Overdependence on Hindutva poster boys like Yogi Adityanath is not working
• Polarisation is a double-edged sword
• Avoid doing and saying the wrong things. Negative campaigns backfire
• Last and most important, clean up your Delhi house