May 24, 2014

Economic & Political Weekly EPW may 24, 2014 vol xlix no 21
7
Anger, Aspiration, Apprehension
Narendra Modi has won a massive victory but his ascendance does not portend positive change.
I
n the months leading up to Elections 2014, the media, in its
anxiety to project Narendra Modi as the next prime minister,
frequently described the 16th Lok Sabha elections as the most
important ever. Prone to its usual exaggeration the media forgot
that in terms of outcomes there have been bigger landmarks in
the past 1967 when the two-decade-old Congress monopoly
was rst weakened, 1977 when Indira Gandhi was voted out af-
ter the Emergency and 1998 when the rst ever Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP)-led coalition came to power. Elections 2014 have in-
deed turned out to be a landmark, but not because Narendra
Modi has led the BJP and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA)
to a huge win that has led to a single party enjoying majority in
Parliament for the rst time in 30 years.
This was an election that the ultimate victor had set out plan-
ning for years ago. It was an election for which, beginning in 2012,
international public relation agencies were hired to build a per-
sona for Narendra Modi, with a positive spin (development,
the Gujarat model, governance, decisive, etc) covering up
the negatives (centralisation of power, authoritarian tendencies,
and being the chief minister of a state when some of the countrys
worst communal riots took place). It was an election, which,
because of the spin and the promise of a business-friendly
government, most of the corporates in the country ended up
endorsing one candidate. It was an election that consequently
saw an unprecedented amount of funds ow to one party, which,
according to one independent estimate, ended up spending more
than Rs 5,000 crore on just advertising, only a little less than the
$986 million that United States President Barack Obama spent
on his 2012 presidential campaign in a country where the per
capita income is more than 30 times that in India. It was an elec-
tion where the media months ago bought into the message of the
well-funded party and had no compunction about either refusing
to interrogate the claims of past achievements and future promis-
es of its prime minister aspirant, or about promoting a collective
amnesia about Gujarat 2002. It was an election where the vast
resources that were collected were used to mobilise, motivate
and monitor the victors campaign down to the last detail, with
no small help from the organiser par excellence the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). It was an election that can, with
some justiable exaggeration, be called the biggest corporate
heist in history. When Indian capital embraced its natural ally, a
right-wing party that promised to be pro-business.
This is not to gloss over the sins of commission and omission of
the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government in particular
of the Congress Party that have helped the BJP march to victory. A
party that headed a venal government and now more than ever
before has been converted into family property stood little chance
against the BJPs military-like campaign. The UPA governments
dismal record on ination control and employment generation
more than overshadowed its limited achievements by way of some
rights, some improvement in human development and some so-
cial security legislation, which in any case were all drowned by
the promises of the Narendra Modi machine.
The Modi campaign was organised around the message of
development, all gloss and empty of content, and aimed at
taking full advantage of voter fatigue with the UPA government
and anger against its corruption. Yet, it was not always possible
to keep the mask in place. It was not the vitriol that the prime
minister aspirant (now prime minister elect) used during the
campaign that should worry us but the messages he occasionally
sent to the Hindu vote bloc. Talk about sending back migrants
from Bangladesh, about who benets from pink (that is beef)
exports and half-hearted criticism of statements such as those
opposed to Modi should go to Pakistan were clear signals that
the prime minister aspirant had not moderated. It is also in-
structive that not once in his campaign did Modi reach out to the
minorities to assuage any misgivings they may have had about
him as a prime minister. There is therefore good reason to worry
about the future of a pluralistic India under a Modi government
that will enjoy a commanding majority in Parliament but without a
single Muslim member of Parliament in its ranks.
If a prime minister, who as chief minister of Gujarat oversaw
no more than a middling improvement in human development
indicators, disappoints his voter base on development, the
danger of Hindutva raising its ugly head is ever present. Modi is
an RSS pracharak but he has not always done his organisations
bidding. However, there is a renewed closeness between the two
and even before the results were announced, senior ofcials of
the RSS were already speaking about the Ram temple and
the Uniform Civil Code.
As the Modi campaign gathered momentum there were signs
that the BJPs prime ministerial candidate was becoming
acceptable to a number of important political agents as well as
intellectuals. Those who should know better claimed that New Delhi
EDITORIALS
may 24, 2014 vol xlix no 21 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
8
will tame the Narendra Modi of Gandhinagar. The argument is
that as prime minister of a vast country, Modi will be unable, even
if he tried, to undermine democracy because institutions such as
the Supreme Court, the Election Commission and the Comptroller
and Auditor General have demonstrated their independence from
the Executive. Th ere is little to defend in this head-in-the-sand view
which is worrying not so much for the resignation it conveys as
for its unwillingness to ght a dangerous force in Indian democracy.
If one thing is apparent in the Republic, it is that 60 years after it
was formed, the institutions of democracy at many levels remain
fragile and open to capture. We see how from panchayati raj,
the lower judiciary and the Executive at the district upwards,
right up to New Delhi, institutions can be subverted and are
vulnerable to capture by forces like the RSS that work with a
vision and mission. We also see how even autonomous institu-
tions of democracy can be quick to abandon their independence
when they come up against a powerful and organised force.
Why, our apparently independent media showed this very trait
once it smelt that Modi was on the ascendance. The higher judi-
ciary is not very different. While its independence and power in
recent years ran alongside a weak Executive, a strong Executive
(as during the Indira Gandhi regime of 1971-76) has shown that
it can make even the Supreme Court bend to its will.
Perhaps of greatest concern is that we now have the Sangh
Parivar being presented with a clear opportunity to reshape the
Indian polity in line with its decades-old Hindutva project. The
majority the BJP will enjoy on its own in Parliament and the
decimation of the opposition must therefore be viewed with
apprehension, rather than as a positive development. In the NDA
government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the BJP was, in comparison,
hobbled by allies and a small majority in Parliament and could
go only so far and no further with Hindutva.
Other than in states where the regional parties showed their
strength (Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh),
the election was about Narendra Modi (his promises versus his
divisive personality) who, in turn, easily turned it into a refer-
endum on the incompetence of Congress Vice-President Rahul
Gandhi. The future of India did revolve around the suitability of
a divisive and polarising personality to head the Government of
India but it should have also revolved around the concrete agenda
that political parties were offering the electorate. And here
conspicuous with their absence, perhaps more than in the past,
were discussions and debates about what the main political parties
could place before the people of India. What we witnessed in-
stead was a campaign that mobilised an electorate thirsting for
change and that was run in an aggressive fashion without much
concern and respect for all communities and classes.
If there is a message from Elections 2014 it is that India has
been changing. It is becoming a society where those with a
voice are becoming less tolerant, less compassionate and more
aggressive towards those without a voice. This is just the atmos-
phere for an aggressive mix of religion and nationalism to nd
expression. It will therefore be a huge challenge for individuals,
groups and parties concerned about democratic and human
rights who have been marginalised in Elections 2014 to
monitor and keep a check on the BJP/NDA government so that a
pluralistic India can look forward to a peaceful future in which
the well-being of all is at the centre. The new era that the BJP
has declared is not something to be viewed with optimism, it
should perhaps be viewed with scepticism and apprehension.