HVK Archives: Defying common sense
Defying common sense - Indian Express
Swapan Dasgupta
()
May 30th 1996
Title : Defying common sense
Author : Swapan Dasgupta
Publication : Indian Express
Date : 30th May, 1996
CALL it oratory at its best or demagoguery at its worst, but
there is little doubt that Atal Behari Vajpayee emerged as the
real victor of the debate on the motion of confidence in the Lok
Sabha last Tuesday. His combative summing-up speech not only
confirmed his status as India's foremost parliamentarian, it
effectively blunted the thrust of the shrill anti-BSP rhetoric of
the United Front and the Congress. Even if he was effectively
outnumbered in Parliament, Vajpayee emerged as a statesman
capable of rising above narrow party considerations. He lost his
Prime Ministership but won the hearts of mere Indians than the
BJP ever hoped to attract. Deve Gowda may be the Prime Minister
with a fragile majority, but Vajpayee has confirmed his status as
India's tallest politician.
The transformation of Vajpayee from the leader of the single-
largest party in the Lok Sabha to a political hero owed partly to
a feeling of sympathy for the underdog - what L. K. Advani chose
to describe as the Dunkirk spirit. But soppy emotionalism is
only part of the story. Far more important is the political
rationale behind the willingness of a very large section of
middle India (as distinct from middle class India) to respond
positively to a party which has been incessantly vilified as the
unacceptable face of majoritarianism.
At one level, the appeal of Vajpayee stemmed from a fear of
history repeating itself. The country's experience with rag-tag
coalitions has been so bitter that there was a natural
inclination to give the BJP an honest chance to prove its worth.
Yes, Vajpayee too would have had to forge his own post-electoral
alliances with regional parties, but the BJP's status as the
number one party in the Lok Sabha meant that a BJP-led
government
would have been more cohesive and purposeful than a 12-party
arrangement propped up by ephemeral "outside" support.
The hope that the Vajpayee government would endure was based
less
on some unstructured faith in a resurgent Hindu rashtra than
plain common sense. The people wanted some respite from
uncertainty and political bickering, and Vajpayee seemed in the
best position to respond. On his part, the BJP leader pandered
to popular expectations by positioning himself as the great
healer who was willing to put the more contentious facets of the
party's programme - Ayodhya, Article 370, uniform civil code, et
al - on hold for the sake of a limited national objective.
In "ganging up" against the BJP combine, the UF and the Congress
were, of course, guilty, of disregarding the anti -Congress
tenor of the mandate, But that was the least of their sins. To
the millions of viewers who watched the parliamentary
proceedings on TV, the real folly of the opposition benches lay
in allowing ideology to override common sense. The CPI(M)
leader, Somnath Chatterjee, was, of course, right in suggesting
that the opposition was not obliged to support the BJP. But his
rational argument ran counter to the national mood. It was as if
the people expected the Lok Sabha ta defy political logic and
allow the Vajpayee government to continue.
From the BJP's point of view, this was the real achievement of
the 13-day government. Left-wing activists who were horrified by
the ease with which the BJP government was conferred popular
legitimacy do have a point.By some deft footwork, the BJP has
effaced its image as the party of discord and successfully
projected itself as the great harmoniser.
By doggedly refusing to acknowledge this prevailing market
sentiment, the anti-BjP forces have lost out in two ways. First,
in the battle between common sense and ideology they have come
out looking cussed. Second, and more significant, they have
tarred their major selling point - secularism - with the same
brush of cussedness. After last Tuesday's debate, it is not the
BJP which comes across as bigoted and doctrinaire, but the
secularist forces for their refusal to meet Vajpayee half way.
There is, however, a disconcerting facet to the BJP's existing
position of advantage. As speaker after speaker from the
opposition benches rose to praise Vajpayee the man and at the
same time denounce the BJP for its lack of commitment to
secularism, they ended up conveying the impression that only the
minorities stood in the way of the mandate being taken to its
parliamentary conclusion. When Vjjpayee demolished the myth of
the BJP lacking support of the dalits, the Scheduled Tribes and
the Sikhs, he was merely confirming the underlying rationale
behind the polarisation: effective governance was being vetoed
for the sake of one community.
This is indeed the major trap that both the secularists and the
Muslim community have fallen into. By unwittingly submerging
their identities, they have posited themselves against common
sense and against consensual wisdom. For the anti-BJP parties
there is still a way out since they have other social
constituencies to cater to. But the hardly rejoice in the
knowledge that they were made the the cannon fodder in a game
of power politics. They were seen to be the real force behind
the opposition's veto of the BJP government, thereby confirming
Vajpayee's lament that the Hindus felt beleaguered to the point
where India now has a majority with a "minority complex".
When Vajpayee warned that "there will be a reaction", he was
merely echoing a silent polarisation that is already taking place
at the grassroots. Not only are Muslims finding it increasingly
difficult to get elected from mixed constituencies, but
'Practicai'considerations are making it virtually impossible
foreven non-BJP parties to field Muslim candidates in winnable
seats. Muslim representation in the Lok Sabha has fallen
steadily from the high of 47 in 1980 to 25 (minus Jammu and
Kashmir) in 1996. In states such as Maharashtra, Madhya
Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and even Andhra Pradesh (outside of
Hyderabad city) and Assam, it has become a herculean task for
Muslims to win a parliamentary seat.
While articulating "Muslim" interests, the secularists appear to
be losing sight of the Muslim community's growing
marginalisation, except as solid vote banks. At election time,
considerable importance is attached to the shrewd tactical voting
by Muslims to defeat the BJP. The fact that Muslim voters are no
longer swayed by instructions from the local mosque has also been
adequately highlighted. But what has been conveniently glossed
over is the countervailing tactical voting by Hindus.
Reports from all over Uttar Pradesh and even Bihar suggest a
growing inclination on the part of Hindu voters to vote
tactically against the candidate being preferred by their Muslim
neighbours. In the Bhojpur region of Bihar, even the CPI(M-L)
has suffered on account of its supporters switching at the last
minute to the BJP as a reaction to Muslims turning out for the
Janata Dal.
The Muslim leadership needs to ponder over the implications of
this trend. It is one thing for Muslim intellectuals to rail
against Brahminical hegemony, but when this becomes
coterminous
with a parallel endorsement of opportunism and social
fragmentation, reaction is bound to set in.
Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, president of The Islamic Centre in New
Delhi, warned of precisely such a reaction in the run-up to the
vote of confidence. "It neither serves," he said in a statement,
" the good of democracy nor of the Muslim community if any party
or alliance tries to subvert the electorate's verdict in the name
of 'protecting' Muslims by keeping an adversary party out of
power 'at any cost'. Indeed, this undemocratic attempt is
fraught with the danger of making Muslims a target of the
misplaced ill-will and ire of the majority community. It will be
sad if Muslims were to suffer the backlash of the opportunist
political manoeuvrings for no fault of their own".
Unfortunately, it was a lone voice. By mortgaging enlightened
seli-interest to self-serving secularism, the Muslim community
has done itself a great disservice. As the BIP finds itself the,
unintended beneficiary of common sence wisdom and the search
for
new nationhood, there is sullen anger against those who force the
country into another spell of bad governance. It will be tragic
if the Muslim community is singled out of opprobrium.
Back
Top
|
