Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has returned to power with Narendra Modi as the Prime Minister for the third term but not without collapse of lofty electoral towers propagated by Modi- which marked him as a mega-winner and his key rivals being crushed to political insignificance. It was probably assumed that BJP’s key rival- Congress, would not succeed in winning even fifty percent of seats it won in 2019. In fact, this apparently was the notion held by BJP-stalwarts about all rivals of their party, including those contesting from Maharashtra, West Bengal and other states. But the impact is not what BJP-leaders desired. Electoral results suggest that they were chasing a political mirage.
Besides, failure of BJP to win majority should certainly not be equated with religious attitude of Indians at large, particularly Hindus. True, religious cards were extensively and elaborately played by BJP leaders from numerous angles, of which perhaps the most “commanding,” expected to be most result-oriented, was apparently the “Ram” Mandir at Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh (UP). At several levels, BJP leaders didn’t cease to target their rival leaders on “religious” grounds, accusing them of favoring minorities, indulging in communal politicking and so forth. This politico-religious card failed to work from both ends. One apparently aimed to convince voters of “Hindutva” card being used by BJP particularly that linked with temple at Ayodhya. The second, as is obvious, was right-winged, communal card aimed towards polarization of vote-banks along religious as well as other ethnic differences, particularly between Hindus and Muslims. This card also, as is obvious, did not have the desired impact. Failure of “religious” cards’ political impact doesn’t mean that voters are any less/more religious than before. But yes, they certainly have become more assertive about not being “convinced” by politicians’ display of their “religious” moves. Undeniably, people have always been on guard regarding exploitation of “religious” exercises by individuals/groups dressed as religious persons, chanting religious scripts, to extract money from them and more. Now, as suggested by electoral results, chances of their being moved by politicians’ religious strategies may also be viewed as minimal.
Paradoxically, prior to declaration of results, for greater part of their campaign, most BJP leaders seemed to have an easy, relaxed attitude towards a positive impact of their “religious” cards. With respect to voters, the majority had chosen not to be easily taken for a ride by these “religious” cards. They were more easily convinced by anti-BJP attitude held among themselves and propagated by BJP’s rivals. What BJP leaders seemed easily convinced by, that is “favorable” attitude of voters towards them was hardly entertained by the latter. If this was not case, anti-BJP votes may not have been bagged by opposition parties, particularly the ones which chose to align and engage in seat-sharing agreements. Clearly, what was taken as almost “guaranteed” by BJP, that is voters’ support on ground of their “religious” card, was countered by latter’s refusal to be taken for “guaranteed” by BJP leaders. And this point also necessitates giving attention to a very important development in attitude of voters towards political leaders.
Indian voters have apparently reached the political stage when they have become well aware of the importance that their votes hold during election-phase for politicians/parties in the race. Yes, politicians are treated as celebrities and voters are well aware of the former’s importance for the media world and in the socio-political arena. But the voters are also strongly conscious of when and how to have their say through their votes during electoral season. Question of their understanding politicians’ language, without considering their own concerns, gains as well as losses, may be viewed as non-existent. Even illiterate voters, rural and urban, are well-aware that whatever is being said and done- including religious moves- is targeted towards attracting their attention and securing their votes. Ordinary voters have also mastered the “strategy” of keeping their electoral decisions to their own groups, which share similar concerns and problems, about what can be expected from which candidate in the race.
It may also be noted, till 2019, parties seemed well-versed in the art of fielding numerous candidates from small parties or as independents to cut into votes of the rival candidate expected to win so as to if possible secure victory of their own candidate or of one, who could be attracted to their camp. Interestingly, 2024 elections suggest that this time voters have not been fooled by this strategy apparently tried by certain parties. What also stands out is the seriousness with which voters exercised their right to vote during these elections. This doesn’t suggest that this trend – that of voting seriously – was not present during earlier elections. However, this time it stood out more markedly and strongly than in preceding few elections.
It cannot be ignored, voters seemed strongly dissatisfied with performance of Modi-led government during the past ten years on certain issues, particularly linked with their economic grievances. This was further aggravated by information gauged by voters from various outlets of communication. This included “news” about rich getting richer, poor getting poorer; the money spend on programs – such as G-20 hosted in India; certain religious moves and so forth. Clearly, people also paid attention to millions spend on these, which played no role in reducing their economic stress. From one angle, it may be noted, migrant laborers, street-dwellers and probably majority of these sections, including those who retain their roots in rural areas while working at various urban places, don’t exercise their right to vote either because they don’t have it or are away from places where they are registered as voters. This point is specifically made to draw attention to the fact that all the deprived and poor due to some reason or other at times do not exercise their right to vote. In addition, reports of certain aggrieved sections, including minorities, being forcibly restrained from voting and that of voters’ names missing from the list also need to be considered. In other words, from certain angles, it is difficult to assert that voters’ democratic right to vote was constitutionally totally respected and exercised during these elections, irrespective of the opinions being circulated that results indicate this. Besides, BJP has not been defeated on all fronts as is marked by it heading the government again.
Nevertheless, there is no denying that certain hard-core realities despite being promoted by right-winged extremists along “religious” as well as communal grounds failed to click with majority of Indians who voted. First, their decision was primarily based on whether they preferred a Modi-led government or some other. Strangely, though they opted for the former, politicking has decided otherwise. Secondly, sections, from farmers to unemployed, who faced economic problems voted against Modi as they apparently had no hope about any relief from his government. Communal and/or religious campaigning carried little relevance for majority weighing their electoral options in keeping with their socio-economic priorities. This doesn’t imply, as pointed out earlier, that religious inclinations of Indians bear little or no importance for them. They do. Nor does this suggest that they are against public display of their religious identity, ceremonies and so forth. This is commonly and extravagantly practiced among most Indians. Give a thought. Despite religious ethics, feelings- from personal perceptions to public display of the same- 2024 electoral results are clearly suggestive of a key factor. The voters have chosen to draw a line, which may be referred to as a Lakshman Rekha, virtually turning their back towards priorities colored as well as weighed by religious strategies staged by political “actors”/players. If voters had not exercised this strategy, electoral results as a whole, including that of UP, would probably have been different.
The question is not just of politico-religious rhetoric bearing little or no importance for voters. It is time that politicians understood this and gave greater importance to issues from the angle of people at large. This also suggests, voters seem least inclined to let their religious beliefs as well as votes be exploited/used as pawns by politicians for their own political gains. In addition to speculations being voiced about these electoral results reflecting strong roots of Indian secularism as well as democracy, some importance should also be given to voters having a drawn a line, marking their refusal to accept religious labels electorally displayed by politicians. In other words, voters’ Lakshman Rekha for politicians’ politico-religious rhetoric restrained them from being guided solely and strongly by the same. The defeat of confidence held by certain politicians in winning elections with a great majority by display of such cards, particularly religious, clearly signals now that they were chasing a mirage!