writer: Anshu N. Chatterjee
Modi’s victory doesn’t come as a surprise, as the polls for the past six months illustrated his continued support. The surprise lies in BJP’s expansion into the leftist Bengal and the anti-Hindi South that held off such influences for decades. Sources suggest that this is due to Modi himself, his personality. There are no doubts about his political savviness; garbed in an orange shawl, an all-seeing yogi peacefully awaited election results.
Optimistic post-election analysis of why INC failed so miserably suggests that its failure signals India’s departure from dynastic politics towards a more interest-based voter. But the victory of Dushyant Singh, son of the grand old dame in Rajasthan and others such as BJP’s Priyush Goyal, Ravi Shankar Prasad, and Maneka Gandhi and more associated with political families, show the continued love for dynasties. So one can conclude that at least for now, voters have decided to give up only on the Nehru dynasty.
Explanations for Modi’s victory require a different approach than INC’s mis-strategies or personalities. In times like these, one must turn to larger frameworks for consolation and in this case, one particular one stands out: the glocal one. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, the notion argues that due to liberalization of the economy, the global and the local shape views rather than the national.
Not to suggest that nationalism didn’t play a role; on the contrary, it was the driving force. The new form of nationalism, however, was built around global threats to India. As Barkha D. writes, in 2014, Modi ran on aspirations, now it ran on fear.
The BJP promoted a global playground filled with dangers that require a hawkish party, i.e., China at the border, Bangladeshi migrants, meddling NGOs, Kashmiris radicals with their neighborly and middle eastern supporters, OIC, Americans who have historically supported Pakistan, and the Russians seeking new alliances. External players will take advantage: governments, corporations, and NGOs alike. The response to this was to reject the foreign strategically, including methods of measuring economic growth that international institutions offer. A self-fulfilling prophecy.
Interestingly, high levels of receptivity to Modi’s message are linked to the expanded relationship between Indians and the world. While less than half of India’s GDP is linked to global trade, a much higher percentage of middle-class aspirations are linked to the global. Their consumer desires reflect this as do their perception of India’s role in the world.
Had the voter reflected on the country’s growth in the past two decades then Congress would have done better. After all, it was the Congress who promoted these aspirations starting in the 1990s by implementing a more liberal economic policy that produced a larger, global-social-media-connected middle class who seeks protection from global threats and simultaneously, global recognition of its consumer and strategic prowess.
Congress party’s’ increasing failure to mobilize this middle class lies in the continued use of Indira’s strategy; it remains the party of the downtrodden, the minorities and the party of non-violence and secularism – not what most globally-oriented middle-class Indians are focused on anymore. As Varshney suggests, Congress opened the doors to India’s economy when the public was focused on something else; it has yet to gain credit for that.
Add to this story, the business Indians overlooked by the Nehruvians. Particularly in north India where they historically aligned with the opposition (i.e., BJS). As Joy DeGruy writes, generations can pass down fear and anger based on such histories. Perceptions or anger may not be part of our genetic make-up, but definitely can reside in our memories and practices. If India is an elephant, its children lug memories they are not ready to shed. So despite the fact that demonetization hurt, trashed their cash, GST is a pain, and the consumer sector remains grudging, they voted for Modi.
Then there is the local. India is many sub-countries, that one-size explanations are impossible. There is no denying that Modi et al. brought up issues facing the individual, such as toilets, medical bills, gas in every kitchen, and some vague anti-corruption fixes. According to Association for Democratic Reforms, of the 301 elected BJP MPs, 116 face criminal charges. Why should that matter when all the parties show a similar ratio? But the promise of reducing corruption caught the imagination of the masses, even those who themselves skim some or do it because others are doing it. The man who is willing to protect India using satellites will fix this problem too.
Did they vote this way because they are Hindus? Not necessarily but the symbols utilized were Hindu with an occasional courtesy towards minorities. The PM seeks to reproduce ramrajya (Ram’s kingdom) led by a patriarchal, benevolent king, and change the idea of secular India. The consequences seem to be distant, but are actually quite real.
