The post Today a courier package can be tracked electronically but not EVM machines : Teesta Setalvad appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: Facebook

VBA was founded by Prakash Ambedkar on March 20, 2018 and registered on March 15, 2019, just before the general elections. Apart from Asauddin Owaisi’s AIMIM, VBA also garnered support from over 100 small political parties and social organisations. Talks of a pre-poll alliance with the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) fell through earlier in 2019, with the older parties labelling VBA as the B-team of the BJP… and this is what cost the Cong-NCP alliance dearly. The Congress won one seat and the NCP just four.

VBA upsets the Cong-NCP applecart

In many constituencies that have hitherto been considered stronghold of the, VBA candidates won a significant number of votes, often placing third and denting the vote share of INC-NCP candidates. This is true in constituencies like Buldhana, Gadhchiroli-Chimur, Nanded and Parbhani. Additionally, the VBA turned it into a legitimate three cornered fight in Sangli, which is a major Congress bastion and the constituency of another former chief minister Vasantdada Patil! Even in Akola and Solapur, the two seats from where Prakash Ambedkar contested, the Congress would have benefitted from a pre-poll alliance with the VBA. Let us take a closer look at the numbers here.

Buldhana: In Buldhana, VBA candidate Siraskar Baliram Bhagwan won 1,72,627 or 15.41 percent of the votes, coming in third behind Shiv Sena’s JP Ganpatrao (5,21,977) and and NCP’s Dr. Rajendra Shingane (3,88,690). VBA’s votes thus, exceeded the margin of victory.

Gadhchiroli-Chimur: VBA candidate Dr. Rameshkumar Gajbe won 1,11,468 or 9.75 percent of the votes coming in third in this constituency. Once again this was higher than the margin of victory with BJP’s Ashok Nete winning 5,29,968 votes and INC’s Dr. Namdeo Usendi getting 4,42,442 votes.

Nanded: In Nanded, INC’s star candidate and former Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan lost by a narrow margin of just over 40,000 votes to Prataprao patil Chilkhalikar. While Chavan won 4,46,658 votes, Chilkhalikar won 4,84,806 votes. VBA’s YN Bhinge won 1,66,196 votes that could have made all the difference. Had the Congress entered into a pre-poll alliance with the VBA, Chavan would not have suffered such a humiliating defeat on his home turf.

Parbhani: In Parbhani, the VBA candidate Alamgir Mohammed Khan came in third with 1,49,946 votes, a number that is far greater than the winning margin that was just over 42,000 votes! While Shiv Sena’s Sanjay Jadhav won 5,38,941 votes, NCP’s Rakesh Vitekar wasn’t far behind with 4,96,742 votes.

Sangli: VBA’s Gopichand Padalkar won an impressive 3,00,234 votes here snapping close at the heels of Swabhimani Paksha’s VP Patil who won 3,44,643. Though BJP’s Sanajaykaka Patil emerged victorious with 5,08,995 votes, the close contest between the candidates who placed second and third made it a three cornered contest.

In Akola, combined votes of VBA chief Prakash Ambedkar (2,78,848) and INC’s HB Patel (2,54,370) would have given BJP’s Sanjay Dhotre (5,54,444) tougher competition. In Solapur, Ambedkar ended up playing spoilsport for another former chief minister Sushil Kumar Shinde. INC’s Shinde who won 3,66,377 votes, lost to Siddheshway Shivacharya who won 5,24,985 votes. The victory margin of 1,58,608 was under the 1,70,007 votes won by Ambedkar!

VBA also performed admirably in Beed, Hatkanangle, Osmanabad, Maval, Amravati, Chandrapur, Hingoli, Latur and Yavatmal-Washim.
But it wasn’t just far flung semi urban or rural areas where the VBA made its mark. VBA candidates also won an impressive number of votes in Mumbai. Sanjay Bhonsle won 63,412 votes coming in third in Mumbai South Central. Niharika Khondalay won 68,239 votes bagging the third spot in Mumbai North East.

Given that the VBA had decided to contest all 288 seats in the upcoming assembly elections in Maharashtra, perhaps it is time that secular parties start taking the party seriously and forge alliances to improve their electoral prospects.

The post Does the VBA’s performance in 2019 signal Maharashtra’s subaltern sunrise? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

We have been conducting post poll analyses of voting patterns in different states across India and if the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) coveted one state the most, it was West Bengal. Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well as BJP president Amit Shah made more visits to this state than even their own home state of Gujarat! The party cadres also worked towards not only mobilising voters, but also keeping their rival TMC cadres on their toes. Their efforts paid off and the BJP improved its tally in the state from a measly 2 in 2014, to 17 in 2019!

But what was even more surprising was how the party won seats in several communally sensitive regions along the border with Bangladesh, especially in light of Amit Shah’s statement suggesting minority populations in the region comprised infiltrators who were like termites. While there are whispered allegations of CPI (M) cadres working to support BJP candidates, one cannot ignore the three and often even four cornered contests in some of the constituencies. The votes won by INC candidates were often greater than or equal to the difference between the BJP and TMC’s candidates. CPI (M) candidates have also won large chunks of the vote in many constituencies.

But it is interesting to note, that though the BJP won the northern constituencies along the border, the further south we go, the vote became progressively anti-BJP. Also, although many of the BJP victories have been due to the splitting of the secular vote, the TMC victories are more decisive with wider margins. Let us have a look at how the border constituencies, which have significant minority or tribal populations, voted. We examine them from North to South.

BJP wins in three cornered electoral battles in the northern border constituencies:
Cooch Behar: In this constituency BJP’s Nisith Pramanik won, mainly due to the division of the ‘secular’ vote. Cooch Behar voted in the very first phase of the elections and Pramanik won 7,31,591 or 47.98 percent of the votes. TMC’s Paresh Chandra Adhikary was close at his heels with 6,77,363 or 44.43 percent of the votes. Had All India Forward Block’s Gobind Chandra Ray (46,810) and INC’s Piya Roy Choudhury (28,215) not played spoilsport, TMC could have won this constituency. 

Alipurduars: John Barla of the BJP secured 7,50,804 or a whopping 54.4 percent of the votes here, leaving behind TMC’s Dashrath Tirkey who won 5,06,815 or 36.72 percent of the votes. Barla, an Adivasi, interestingly started sporting a saffron turban ever since he filed his nomination papers. He told The Statesman, “I never wore such ‘pagri; on my head before. My supporters made me wear this on the day I went to submit my nomination papers at the Alipurduar district election commission office, and I decided to wear it all the time during my election campaigns. I am an adivasi by caste and a pagri can attract attention of the voters.” This appears to be doubly disturbing as it not only exoticises an Adivasi, but also saffronises his identity for greater acceptance.

Jalpaiguri: Even here the secular vote got divided between TMC, CPI (M), INC and the BSP. While BJP’s Dr Jaynta Kumar Roy won 7,60,145 or 50.65 percent of the votes, TMC’s Bijoy Chandra Barman who won 5,76,141 or 38.39 percent of the votes would have had a fighting shot had others like CPI (M) candidate Bhagiratha Chandra Roy (76,166), INC’s Mani Kumar Darnal (28,562) and BSP’s Jiban Krishna Majumar (8,134) not cut into his vote share. This shows that this constituency had a large number of secular voters, but was lost to the BJP only because the opposition parties failed to unite and come up with a joint strategy.  

Darjeeling: In this constituency voters gave BJP’s Raju Bista a decisive mandate with close to 60 percent of the vote. Even the combined votes won by the INC’s Sanakar Malakar (65,186), CPI (M)’s Saman Pathak (50,524) and the TMC’s Amar Singh Rai (3,36,624) would fall miserably short of his huge lead. This wasn’t completely unexpected though given how the Bimal Gurung faction of the Gorkhaland Janmukti Morcha as well as the Gorkhaland Nationa Liberation Front, both supported the BJP candidate, who interestingly doesn’t even belong to the state. Raju Bista is from Manipur! Meanwhile, he BJP for itself had only mentioned in its manifesto that that it would recognise 11 sub-tribes of Gorkhas as Scheduled Tribes, conveniently skirting around the wider Gorkhaland issue. But it remains to be seen if the matter would be allowed to fester and tensions will boil over once again like in 2017 when 14 people were killed and normal life completely thrown out of gear during a violent 104 day strike.

Raiganj: Even in this constituency the TMC candidate lost because a large chunk of the secular vote went to the CPI (M) and the INC. BJP’s Debashree Chaudhuri won 5,11,652 or just over 40 percent of the votes. TMC’s Kanaiala Agrawal wasn’t far behind with 4,51,078 or approximately 35 percent of the vote. But the CPI (M)’s Mohammed Salim took away 1,82,035 votes, while INC’s Deepa Dasmunshi chipped away 83,662. Has the secular parties played it smart and thrown their support behind one consensus candidate, BJP would have found it harder to win this constituency.

Balurghat: It was an extremely tight race in Balurghat. While BJP’s Sukanta Majumdar won 5,39,317 votes, TMC’s Arpita Ghose was snapping at his heels with 5,06,024 votes! The gap was wafer thin and this is where the votes won by Revolutionary Socialist Party’s Ranen Barman (72,990) and the INC’s Abdus Sadek Sarkar (36,783) could have made all the difference.

Lines begin to blur in the two Maldahas:
Maldaha Uttar: The parliamentary constituency is often wrongly associated with the communal riots that took place in Kaliachak in 2016. But that region is actually located in the Maldaha Dakshin parliamentary constituency. Maldaha Uttar covers the assembly segments of Maldaha, Habibpur, Gazole, Chanchal, Harishchandrapur, Malatipur and Rauta. Of these the last four have majority Muslim populations. The candidates here also have an interesting background. Mausam Noor, who was elected MP in 2009 and 2014 was a member of the Congress. But she switched over to the TMC in January 2019. Noor ended up winning 4,25,236 votes. But the INC fielded her cousin Isha Khan Choudhry who won 3,05,270 votes. BJP’s Khagen Mumru gained in this three cornered contest and won 5,09,525 votes. The CPI (M)’s Bishwanath Ghosh also won 50,401 votes. Given the thin margins, it could have been anybody’s game in this constituency.

Maldaha Dakshin: This is the constituency where communal tensions had boiled over in the Kaliachak in January 2016. A protest march, against derogatory remarks about Prophet Mohammed allegedly made by Hindu Mahasabha leader Kamlesh Tiwari, had turned violent. The rampaging mob ransacked a police station, a block development office and destroyed public property including government and police vehicles. Since then, this region has remained under the scanner for it communal sensitivity. In the 2019 general elections, INC’s Abu Hashem Khan Chowdhury won by a very narrow margin in a three cornered fight with the BJP and the TMC. While Chowdhury got 4,44,270 vote, BJP’s Shreerupa Mitra Chaudhury was close at his heels with 4,36,048 and TMC’s Mohammed Moazzem Hussain got 3,51,353 votes. With such a thin margin, this constituency perhaps had the least predictable electoral outcome and it could have been anybody’s game.

Tide begins to turn as one heads south:
Jangipur:  TMC’s Khalilur Rahaman scored a decisive victory here winning 5,62,838 or 43.15 percent of the votes. Even the BJP’s Mafuja Khatun (3,17,056) and INC’s Abhijeet Mukherjee (2,55,836) came nowhere close! CPI (M)’s Dr. Mohammed Zulfikar Ali also scored an impressive 95,501 votes.

Murshidabad: The TMC also won this constituency, leaving all rivals far behind. TMC’s Abu Taher Khan won 6,04,346 or 41.57 percent of the votes. The second highest number of votes went to the INC with Abu Hena winning 3,77,929 or 26 percent of the votes. BJP’s Humayun Kabir was summarily trounced winning only 2,47,809 or 17.05 percent of the votes and CPI (M)’s Badaruddoza Khan got 1,80,793 or 12.44 percent of the votes.  

Krishnanagar: TMC’s Mahua Moitra clinched a decisive victory leaving the BJP trailing behind in this constituency. Moitra won 6,14,872 or 45 percent of the votes. BJP’s Kalyan Chaubey was close at her heels with 5,51,654 or 40.37 percent of the votes. Even the CPI (M)’s Shantanu Jha could not play spoilsport despite winning 1,20,222 votes.

Ranaghat: This is one of the only two constituencies along the southern stretch of the West Bengal – Bangladesh border where the BJP won. BJP’s Jagannath Sarkar won a whopping 7,83,253 or 52.78 percent of the votes. His closest contender was TMC’s Rupali Biswas with 5,49,825 or 37.05 percent of the votes. CPI (M) Biswas Rama got the third largest share with 97,771 or a measly 6.59 percent. The BJP’s victory here was a decisive one and not due to a fractured secular vote.

Bangaon: In this constituency again the BJP won by a margin of over one lakh votes! BJP’s Shantanu Thakur won 6,87,622 or 48.85 percent of the votes, leaving his closest contender TMC’s Mamata Thakur trailing with 5,76,028 votes. CPI (M)’s Alakesh Das seems to have taken away 90,122 votes, a significant chunk that would have ensured a tighter contest.

Bashirhat: In this constituency TMC’s Nusrat Jahan left everyone else behind by a wide margin of over 3,50,000 votes! She won 7,82,078 or 54.56 percent of the votes. The actor is the youngest MP elected this year and her closest contender in the constituency, BJP’s Sayantan Basu, trailed far behind with 4,31,709 votes. This was a decisive victory for the TMC with a huge margin.

Jaynagar: Here TMC’s Pratima Mondal summarily trounced BJP’s Dr. Ashok Kandary. While Mondal romped home with 7,61,202 votes, Kandary trailed far behind with 4,44,427 votes… a margin of more than 3 lakh votes!

Mathurapur: This is the southernmost constituency along the West Bengal – Bangladesh border and here too the TMC defeated the BJP with a wide margin of over 2 lakh votes! TMC’s Mohan Chaudhry won 7,26,828 votes, leaving BJP’s Shyamprasad halder trailing with 5,22,854 votes. Even here the CPI (M)’s candidate Dr. Sharat Chandra Halder won an impressive 92,417 votes to come in third.
 

The post WB post poll analysis: Saffron fades as one heads South along the Bangladesh border appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This issue had been brought to the forefront by the recent Supreme Court directive (February 2019) on land of forest dwellers and Adivasis and the failure of the Modi regime to defend the Forest Rights Act, 2006 before the Supreme Court. Worse it had plans to enact a draconian Forest Law worse than the colonial forest act of the 1920s. All the more reason for the Opposition to make the crucial issue of forest dweller and Adivasi rights a sustained and critical campaign in this general election. As the results show, the issue simply did not figure in the electoral discourse.

Take for instance Robertsganj in eastern Uttar Pradesh which saw a spirited if splintered battle. The margin between the winner from the Apna Dal (Soney Lal), Pakauri Lal Kol who polled 4.47,691 votes and Samajwadi Party’s Bhai Lal who got3,99,3304 votes is 54,387 votes. And the Congress with 35,222, the CPI with 17,445 and other candidates (from the ‘progressive opposition’) with 18,333, 11, 029 and 9120 together got 41,149 votes. A concerted campaign around forest rights cohesive against the ruling regime’s assault may well have dented this seat.

Critical Value Constituencies
Definition: These are i) tribal (ST) constituencies where more than 10% of the eligible voters are also potential Forest Rights Holders or ii) non-tribal constituencies where more than 60% of the eligible voters are also potential Forest Rights holders.

High Value Constituencies
Definition: These are i) tribal (ST) constituencies where more than 10% of the eligible voters are also potential Forest Rights Holders or ii) non-tribal constituencies where between 50%-60% of the eligible voters are also potential Forest Rights holders.

Good Value Constituencies:
Non ST Constituencies where potential forest rights holders voters are between 30%-50% of the eligible voters in the constituency
 

 
 Tribals across several states had called for Bharat Bandh to protest against the Supreme Court order that might lead to mass-scale evictions of tribal and forest-dwelling families. Among the demands made is the demand for an immediate ordinance by the Modi government to correct the controversial eviction order of the Supreme Court delivered on February 13. The Congress, RJD, SP, AAP and Sharad Yadav’s party supported the bandh call. The order of the SC that was temporarily stayed a week later, after the Modi government was compelled to move the same bench for review had resulted in shock waves since its effect was that 1.3 million families living on forest lands, and nurturing them would have been evicted. Significantly, the case was heard for several years’ on a ‘PIL’ filed by wildlife groups.The Modi-led central government was criticised for not defending the Forest Rights Act of 2006, a liberative central piece of legislation.The FRA of 2006 recognises the earlier invisibilised rights of the forest dweller and is known as a ‘recognition of rights’ law. It was the first time that the Vth and VIth Schedules of the Constitution were given statutory teeth. Hence, Adivasis in states like Gujarat, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, and other states in Northeast led a peaceful bandh on March 5. At the time and before, the BJP government was also criticised for its policies related to land acquisition and dilution of land rights of Adivasis.

Given this potentiality, there were possibilities of these seats giving a tough fight to candidates from the ruling regime. In many seats, important from the point of view of Forest Rights saw a direct face-off between the Congress andthe BJP. The shocker however is that a chunk of the vote went to the BJP.  What does this show? That Adivasis and Forest Dwellers did not vote on what is most crucial for their survival but on other issues and identities? That the Congress failed to claim credit for its own emancipatory legislation, the FRA of 2006 brought in by the UPA I regime? That there was a division of vote?

Of the 86 constituencies analysed, the BJP has won by a larger margin as compared to 2014 in 37 constituencies. In another 22 constituencies, its margin reduced as compared to 2014, and in 28 constituencies where FRA 2006 has some influence, parties other than BJP won.

It does seem like the areas in which people’s movements were strong, either the BJP lost or its winning margins reduced significantly. A splintered and non-serious Opposition also fragmented the Opposition vote.

Bastar, Chhattisgarh which tops the chart of critical value constituencies seemed a shift of power from BJP to INC, with latter winning by a margin of 38982.

In Chhattisgarh’s Korba constituency, INC trounced BJP by 26349 votes. Last time, the BJP had won this with a small margin of 4265 votes.

Though the BJP won in the critical value constituency, Khunti, Jharkhand the winning margin was significantly reduced from 92248 in 2014 to 1445 in 2019.Earlier we had indicated that Khunti is a stronghold of Pathalgadi movement. It appears from the figures on the EC website that here in Khunti, the BSP was the ‘spoiler’ ( BSP Got 7663) and wining vote margin is only 1445.
 
Kandhamal in Odisha saw the reduction in winning margin of BJPby half. Here the winning BJD got 49% of the vote share, the BJP 33% and the Congres about 14%. Around 2% of the votes fell to NOTA.
 
In Telangana’s Adilabad, BJP came to power, winning by 1,12100 margin. Here in the Adilabad seat, the BJP Got 35% of the total votes while the TRS 29%, and the INC 29%.

West Bengal’s Jhargram, which is an ST constituency, the BJP came to power defeating All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) which had won last time. The BJP’s winning margin was 11,767 votes. Here in Jhagram, the BJP consolidated its position grabbing 44% of the votes polled while the TMC got 43%,  the CPI 5% and the INC 1.5%.

In Maharashtra’s Raigad, NCP defeated Shiv Sena by 31,438 votes.In Maharashtra’s Shirur, NCP defeated Shiv Sena by 58483 votes. In MP’s Chindwara, INC maintained its hold but its vote share reduced to 37536 from 116537.

In Kerala, INC trounced CPI(M) in all seats relevant for forest rights such as Alathur, Palakkad, Alathur and Wayanad.

Jharkhand’s Singhbhum, which is an SC constituency and termed as a good value constituency and was recently in news for its poor record in malnutrition, saw INC trouncing BJP by over 70,000 votes.

Kanker in Chhattisgarhfamous for mining projects, saw BJP coming back to power but this time with a significantly reduced margin of 6914 votes as compared to last time’s margin of 35158 votes. In terms of criticality, Kanker features at second number in the Critical value constituency list with nearly 50% voters eligible for voting.

The results from various places require a deeper reflection on how the BJP was able to secure the Adivasi vote, if at all. Or did many Adivasis face challenges in voting?

Because of their traditional settlements, many voters did face the challenge of access, that is in actually reaching polling booths. At some places Adivasis chose to boycott elections because of the ever present state repression. A case in point was Khunti, the bedrock of Pathalgadi movement in Jharkhand. There were also reports of Adivasis being duped in the name of Ujjawala scheme prior to the elections. It was also that many of the opposition parties failed to put FRA prominently as their campaign agenda and despite Congress having enacted the law, it performed poorly in both 2014 and 2019 polls.

On February 28, the SC had stayed its order on eviction and posted the matter for hearing on July 10. States had been asked to file their responses on what was the process followed for rejection for the claims. While human rights defenders such as Roma had argued that the FRA, 2006 is not about rejecting but recognising land rights of the forest dwelling communities. The fates of several forest dwelling communities hangs in air right now and it seems like the struggle has to start afresh!

The post Forest Dweller rights missing from Election 2019 discourse appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The BSP won Ambedkar Nagar, Amroha, Bijnor, Ghazipur, Ghosi, Jaunpur, Lalganj, Nagina, Saharanpur and Shrawasti. The SP won Azamgarh, Mainpuri, Moradabad, Rampur and Sambhal. While BJP ally Apna Dal picked up Mirzapur and Robertsganj, the rest were all won by the BJP.

Ever since the election results were declared, political pundits, professors and senior journalists have been feverishly trying to explain how the caste quotient worked in UP.

The caste conundrum: What do experts say?
According to Athar Husain, Director, Centre for Objective Research and Development (CORD), “More than 70% Muslims, Jatavs and Yadavs and 35% Jats voted for the Gathbandhan. On the other hand, more than 70% upper castes and non-Yadav OBCs, and around 55% non-Jatav Dalits and 55% Jats backed the BJP.” Explaining the significance of these numbers, he explains, “Muslims, Yadavs and Dalits constitute around 49% in UP. Remove non-Jatav Dalits, which is around 10% of the population, and that reduces the Gathbandhan ‘s core constituency to 39%. This percentage is not spread evenly across the state. The BJP ability to draw non-Jatav Dalits on its side was crucial. So, here I want to emphasise that Gathbandhan was hugely successful in garnering its core vote and reached the figure of 40% which is huge by any count, but overwhelming consolidation of Upper Caste Hindu vote with huge chunk of MBC’s (non-Yadav OBCs) and non Jatav Dalits went to BJP which gave it roughly a lead of 9-10%.”

Which means that the Gathbandhan’s simplistic assumption that, to consolidate their main caste base –and also tactically give representation to those among the Kurmis, Nishadhs and Patels – would work, was simply not enough. That the ‘grand old party’, the Congress chose this particular election ‘to effect a comeback’ in UP and go it alone, also did not help. Our calculations show that in at least 13 seats it was the INC that stole victory from the Gathbandhan. Which assumes then, that even if it had been within the alliance, of the 80 parliamentary seats in UP, only approximately 28 were assured. Simple vote and caste arithmetic appear to have been beaten by the gross use of a money and resource funded publicity campaign and attendant dissemination/organisation.
Meanwhile, Christophe Jaffrelot and Gilles Verniers have made another important observation about upper castes dominating the new Lok Sabha in this piece in the Indian Express. Citing data from the Trivedi Center for Political Data (Ashoka University) and the CERI (Sciences Po), the duo have chosen to focus on the Hindi belt calling it the “crucible of the Mandalisation of Indian politics in the 1990s”.

Jaffrelot is Senior Research Fellow at CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS, Paris, Professor of Indian Politics & Sociology at King’s India Institute, London, and non-resident scholar at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Gilles Verniers is Assistant Professor of political science, and Co-Director, Trivedi Centre for Political Data, Ashoka University.

They go on to write, “This decade saw the percentage of OBC MPs doubling – from 11% to 22% – at the expense of the upper castes, largely because of the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party, but also because of the nomination of lower caste candidates by the Congress and the BJP, a party that used to be known as a “Banya/Brahmin” party, but which realised in the 1990s that OBCs could not be ignored anymore – as evident from the appointment of Kalyan Singh as Chief Minister in 1991.

“However, the last decade has seen the return of the savarn (upper caste) – and the erosion of OBC representation – along with the rise of the BJP. This trend started in 2009, but the Modi wave of 2014 has confirmed it and the last elections have resulted in a certain consolidation of this come back to the pre-Mandal scenario.

Data from SPINPER project – The Social Profile of the Indian National and Provincial Elected Representatives. 
 
Highlighting BJP’s return to its savarna heavy cadre, they say, “BJP has nominated 88 upper caste candidates out of 147 non-reserved seats in the Hindi belt and 80 of them have been elected.”
Jaffrelot and Gilles also highlight how the BJP has chosen to stick with Brahmins and Rajputs. They write, “… out of 199 BJP candidates in the Hindi belt, 37 were Brahmins and 30 were Rajputs – 33 and 27 have been respectively elected.”

It appears that the BJP has also tried to counter the Yadav votes (that typically go to the SP) by pitching eight Kurmi candidates (7 got elected) and many others from smaller OBC ‘jaatis’. Similarly, to counter the Jatav votes (that typically go to the BSP) the BJP fielded candidates from non-Jatav communities. The BSP has increasingly been come to be known as solelyu representative of the Jatav section among Dalits. The BJP also fielded 14 Jat candidates.

This chart shows the caste distribution of BJP and INC candidates.

Data from SPINPER project. 

What do the subalterns want?
Both these analyses are on point when it comes to statistics, but understanding the motivations and sentiments requires a more complex and layered approach. Are the needs of the Yadavs different from those of the non-Yadavs? Has the SP by being seen as solely a “Yadav” party self-limited itself ? Have the Jatavs and non-Jatavs Dalits experienced different forms of oppression and exclusion? Or is it that by being exclusive of other Dalit sections the BSP has itself not followed the ‘Bahujan’ concept as politically conceptualised by Kanshiram? How homogenous are these caste identities? Is there scope for heterogeneity even within the same caste? Do they all vote alike? What do they want from their elected representatives?

Is it still just an existential struggle about roti-kapda-makaan and bijli-paani-sadak? The BJP famously drove home the ‘success’ of their many populist schemes including Ujjwala Gas, Swachha Bharat and PM Awas Yojana through an ingenuous misuse of advertisement and marketing resources.  In this piece in Firstpost Parth MN shows how the BJP showed it all as work in progress and used that to encourage people to vote them back into power.

He writes, “I travelled through the Hindi heartland for three months ahead of the results on 23 May. It was impossible to not hear the paeans of Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana and the Swachch Bharat Abhiyan, especially in rural areas, where the Opposition expected to make inroads using agrarian crisis and unemployment.”

He goes on to say, “I met families who benefited from these schemes. I met people who are waiting for the schemes to reach them. More importantly, those who have not yet availed of the schemes know it has reached their neighbourhoods.” Comparing the BJP’s strategy to Hirschman’s Tunnel Effect, he says, “… if people belonging to your class, caste or religion are seen to be part of a sort of a transformation, you tend to be more patient towards the process. Hirschman’s Tunnel Effect has played a significant role in Narendra Modi’s success during the 2019 Lok Sabha election.”

Parth MN also echoes the longstanding belief that the BJP targets specific castes. He writes, “The politics of welfare has also helped Modi consolidate his caste arithmetic. In Uttar Pradesh, for example, the BJP’s focus has been on the non-Yadav OBCs, and non-Jatav Dalits. They are the ones largely considered to be the swing factor, with Yadavs and Jatavs firmly behind the Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party respectively.”

Also one cannot ignore the aspirations of young Dalits, Adivasis and Bahujans, and their idea of India. Did the feverishly jingoistic pitch of the BJP’s post-Pulwama ‘nationalist’ campaign capture the imagination of the savarna and subaltern voter alike?

Let us also not forget this piece in The Caravan that highlights the caste of Pulwama martyrs saying, “…the Hindutva nationalism of the urban middle-class, largely spearheaded by right-wing groups, conveniently exploits the sacrifices of the downtrodden.” Given how many men from socio-economically deprived backgrounds, including several from historically oppressed castes end up enrolling in various defence and para-military forces, the ‘nationalist’ sentiment among the youth in these communities cannot be ignored.

What women want?
Add to this the calibrated approach of the women’s wing of the RSS in reaching out to women voters in UP, recognising their need to be recognised as a part of the political process. The communication was customised to appeal to urban women, rural women and even Muslim women. Speaking to us exclusively on the condition of anonymity, a woman who is a part of the Rashtriya Sevika Samiti and went door to door speaking to women voters, told us, “Before the campaigns, the members of the women’s wing were given some tips on talking to the women voters. We were even provided with specialised and specific data that cannot be collected by the common man.” Although the women’s wing didn’t explicitly request the women voters to vote for BJP, their meetings were designed  to hint towards the Modi government and its policies. They discussed the various schemes launched during Modi’s regime such as ‘Beti Bachao Beti Padhao’, ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’, ‘Swachh Bharat Abhiyan’ among others. Read our exclusive story here. 

Women, especially those from historically oppressed castes and socio-economically backward communities, face multiple layers of oppression on account of their gender, caste and economic background. With a gradual but steady increase in awareness and education, and also after surviving domestic violence and sexual harassment for generations, it is ludicrous to presume that these women will vote only as directed by the men in their families and communities.

Remember how the women’s vote had swung the election in favour of Nitish Kumar who promised prohibition if he came to power during the Bihar assembly elections in 2015. It remains to be seen how the Dalit, Bahujan and Adivasi woman voted.

The post What upset the Gathbandhan’s applecart in UP: Caste quotient or something else? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

There have been multiple debates and discussions on news channels over the strategy adopted by the BJP and RSS. Earlier, there were reports of RSS sending around 80,000 volunteers in nine states during the last three phases of the election. But what stands out this time, is the Sangh’s strategy to deploy its women volunteers in urban as well as rural areas to mobilize and influence women, albeit implicitly.

The women’s wing of RSS, Rashtriya Sevika Samiti, has been actively involved throughout the elections and has played a crucial role in the positive results. Though their work wasn’t publicized much, it is a strategy worth studying! We have found that the women’s wing was directed by the RSS leaders to handle the women voters, conduct meetings and discussions with them, while not directly telling them to vote for a particular political party. A RSS member along with his wife, who is a part of the women’s wing, on condition of anonymity, gave us an insight into their organisation’s strategy pertaining to women voters.

Directive of RSS to the women wing:
The Rashtriya Sevika Samiti were given special instructions this time. Giving details on the instructions, the woman member said, “Before the campaigns, the members of the women’s wing were given some tips on talking to the women voters. We were even provided with specialised and specific data that cannot be collected by the common man.”

While describing the instructions given to them, another woman member, again on the condition of anonymity, told us, “We were directed to hold small unofficial meetings in one household after every 10 to 12 households. Further, we were told to create awareness among women about their voting rights and appeal to them to take the decision in the best interest of the nation. However, we were advised not to directly appeal to them to vote for the BJP.”

Although the women’s wing didn’t explicitly request the women voters to vote for BJP, their meetings were designed to hint towards the Modi government and its policies. They discussed the various schemes launched during Modi’s regime such as ‘Beti Bachao Beti Padhao’, ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’, ‘Swachh Bharat Abhiyan’ among others.

It is significant to note that the women’s wing was also directed to visit the Muslim-dominated areas and speak to the Muslim women. However, they were advised to not enter into any scuffle with the residents.

Approach towards the urban women voters:
The woman member told us that the meetings were unofficial and were held over tea where general discussions on the welfare schemes used to take place. She then described the manner in which they used to appeal the women voters- “We are the citizens of this democratic nation and we have the right to vote. How should we exercise this right then? We then used to leave this question on them and start discussing women-specific schemes. We used to further tell them that irrespective of the religion or caste you belong to, we all will survive only if our country is secured. Who keeps our nation safe? Who is paying attention to the the needs of the women? They all then used to give one common answer (hinting at BJP).”

Further, during the evening, women used to gather in the nearby park and hold discussions on various welfare schemes. The discussions also included the Modi government’s fearless attacks on the terrorists, air strikes and surgical strikes.

Despite the Election Commission’s (EC) directive to not use the defence forces in the election campaigns, there is certainly no possibility of curbing such small scale discussions, irrespective of the huge effect they might have had.

Approach towards the rural women voters:
In what could be a very clever move, RSS strategically deployed its women voters in those rural areas where toilets were built under the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan or houses under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana. Making the beneficiary women a precedent, the other women voters were shown how they will also benefit from these schemes and how a bright future awaits them.  This way the existing as well as the potential beneficiaries were influenced.

Approach towards the Muslims women voters:
The women’s wing was advised to go to the Muslim neighbourhoods in groups for maximising the impact of these visits. The woman member said, “If only one person speaks then it is less effective. However, if an entire group is together making an appeal, people tend to listen.”

However, they were strictly told to not enter into any religious or communal discussions. Instead, they used to just appeal them to vote for the nation’s security.

Unravelling Rashtriya Sevika Samiti’s strategy:
While the strategy may appear to be very simple, but it has proven to be a very smart move by the RSS.

Firstly, the women wing, on the directions of the RSS, adopted a very safe approach of not naming any particular party so as to make itself appear as a neutral body working for the benefit of the target audience as well as the nation. The women voters were just made aware about their rights and the importance that it holds for our country’s future. Simultaneously, the ideology of RSS was also promoted.

Secondly, the meetings were given a very unofficial angle in the form of general discussions so as to not make it look like a propaganda. The discussions surrounded over the welfare schemes and then were smartly diverted to the Uri and Balakot air strikes.

Thirdly, every discussion would start with the appeal of voting in national interest. In the course of the discussion, even the target audience might have failed to notice the effect it was having on their thinking.

Thus, the RSS has played a crucial and influential role in the massive victory of the BJP, apart from it being the ‘citizens choice’. However, the concerns about unemployment, rising petrol prices, poverty, agrarian distress and many other things continue to prevail. Are we then entering in the sequel of ‘acche din’? Time will tell!

(The translation from the original in Hindi is by Bhumika Jain)

Original in Hindi:
RSS की चुनावी रणनीति: सेविकाओं ने संभाली थी महिला वोट की कमान
 
 

The post Unravelling RSS’s women wing, Rashtriya Sevika Samiti’s election strategy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Maharashtra. These three states have been at the centre of people’s movements in the last few years with farmers protests over loan waivers, onions, MSPs (minimum support price) and forest rights. Many became spectacles that awed the nation and brought the government to heel. It would be obvious that if the leaders of these people’s movements stood up for election, they would win a decisive mandate. But this was not to be.
 
Amra Ram from Rajasthan is the AIKS vice-president and has been at the forefront of farmers’ agitation. He has contested all the Lok Sabha elections since 1996 but has never won.
 
Hours before filing his nomination on April 15, Amra Ram, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) candidate from Sikar, Rajasthan, said in a public meeting, “The government has money for the big businessmen. They have money for the Adanis and Ambanis. But what do they have for the farmers? Nothing. Which is why we farmers have to fight now.”
 
This public meeting happened in the same Krishi Upaj Mandi where the farmers from the Shekhawati region of Rajasthan, under the banner of All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS), the farmers’ body of CPI(M), and led by Amra Ram, had created a massive movement that lasted 13 days, in September 2017. The farmers had protested demanding better prices for their crops, loan waiver, and relaxation in the strict rules that now govern the trade in farm animals. Farmers from the districts of Sikar, Churu, and Jhunjhunu sat in protest in the main markets, surrounded government offices, and blocked roads. After the 13-day long agitation, the Vasundhara Raje-led BJP government in the state was forced to give in to the farmers’ demands.
 
He got about 30,000 votes while the sitting BJP MP got around 8 lakh votes. Even Bollywood actress Swara Bhasker campaigned for Amra Ram in Sikar but this high powered celebrity-driven campaign did not convert to votes for the grassroots leader.
 
Congress won seven of the eight seats in Sikar in the previous assembly polls, with an independent candidate emerging victorious in the other. It fielded Subhash Maharia, a Jat candidate and a three-time BJP MP from Sikar, against the BJP’s Swami Sumedhanand Saraswati, the current MP.
 
In 2014, despite the Modi wave, Maharia fought as an independent candidate and was able to garner at least one lakh votes.
 
BJP candidate Sumedhanand Saraswati, who contested the Lok Sabha elections from the same constituency in 2014, on the demand of Baba Ramdev, won. However, the local leadership of BJP consider him an outsider as he hails from Haryana, and his candidacy had reportedly made them resentful.
 
On May 3, Modi addressed a public meeting in Sikar. He only talked about national security –not once referring to the agrarian crisis — once again using the Pulwama attack and Uri surgical strike to provoke the people. Modi has again and again used hyper-nationalism as a campaign weapon to garner votes. It sits well with his autocratic, strongman image. Even in Sikar, it looked like his main focus was on finding out how loudly the crowd could chant “Bharat Mata Ki Jai.” Clearly, this farmer dominated seat saw the vote fall prey to this hyped sentiment with farmers themselves overlooking their own hardships and issues.
 
While India’s reprisal action after the Pulwama terror attack impressed the families of youth recruited in large numbers every year from Shekhawati’s villages to the Army and paramilitary forces, farmers were unhappy over the incomplete waiver of loans by the Congress government in the State despite its promise. Farmers in the three Jat-dominated Lok Sabha constituencies have complained of banks rejecting their waiver claims.
 
Many a people’s candidate fielded by the CPI (M) has faced a similar fate.
 
In Dindori, Maharashtra, one of the farm leaders of the memorable Kisan Long March that made the Devendra Fadnavis govt take notice, stood up for elections. He could garner only 9% of the total votes and suffered defeat against BJP.  

 
JP Gavit came in third in his Dindori constituency. He has emerged as one of the most hard-working and influential tribal leaders, having represented the Kalwan Surgana constituency seven times. He is both an Adivasi and a farmer. He was the driving force behind the two Farmers’ Long March, called by the CPI(M)-affiliated All India Kisan Sabha in the state over the last one year. He has been at the forefront of the farmers’ protests over the past two years, and is the lone leftist MLA in the assembly.
 
He was pitted against BJP’s Bharati Pawar (now MP) and NCP’s Dhanraj Mahale in this constituency reserved for ST candidates due to the significant tribal population.
 
The CPI(M) had been keen that the Congress and NCP set aside their claim on the seat as part of their plans of forging a greater opposition alliance in the state. Of the total six legislative constituencies that are part of the Dindori Lok Sabha seat, the NCP is in control of three and was unwilling to let go of its claim on the seat.
 
In Jharkhand, the Mahagathbandhan has been swept away like sand castles on a beach.
 
The infighting and refusal to give up seats for the greater good meant that votes and voter shares were divided. Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Prajatantrik) candidate, Pradeep Yadav, who was at the forefront of agitations against land acquisition for a proposed power plant promoted by the Adani Group, was painted as one who was opposed to the “real development” of Godda, his constituency. He had vowed to not let Congress win come what may when the grand old party refused to remove its candidate from the contest. 

Senior member of the CPI(M) Brinda Karat told Sabrangindia how the entire election had been managed and organised by the Adani group. A clear example of how Indian democracy is now almost completely at the mercy of money power and corporate capital.
 
Godda, largely known for Lalmatia coal mines of Eastern Coalfields Limited, which helps run two super-thermal power stations in Bihar and Bengal, has been facing a serious problem of displacement due to land acquisition.
 
Even as the oustees clamour for compensation, there is another unrest brewing over the Jharkhand government’s approval to Adani Power Plant, intended to sell power to Bangladesh, which could add to the number of native oustees.
 
Pradeep Yadav in Godda received around 38% –an impressive number –of the votes against the 53% votes that the sitting BJP MP got. Many say he lost because Congress refused to leave the seat and cut into his vote share. The Congress seems to have played spoiler here, too.
 
The alliance of Congress, JMM, JVM and RJD was hoping to bag as many as eight seats by fighting together and ensuring the transfer of core and cadre votes across constituencies. But it did not work in the face of the proverbial “Modi Tsunami”.
 
In Godda, the BJP had worked on a strategy to counter the Muslim-Yadav combination of the Mahagathbandhan while simultaneously emphasising on the development initiatives of party candidate Nishikant Dubey. Even an alleged sexual harassment case was opened up against Yadav before elections.
 
Left’s flop show
Many people’s candidates who lost were fielded by CPI (M).
 
In West Bengal, a state ruled by the CPI(M)-led Left Front for 34 uninterrupted years, the party drew a blank in its worst performance ever and lost its deposit in 40 of the 41 seats it contested.
 
The CPI(M) played a pivotal role in government formation at the centre in 1989, 1996 and 2004, based on its stupendous performance in Bengal. In 2004, it bagged 26 of the 42 seats in the state, the maximum.
 
Since the formation of the CPI(M), following a split in the Communist Party of India (CPI) in 1964, the party never drew a blank in the state in Lok Sabha elections.
 
The CPI(M)-led Left Front, which ruled the state for 34 years from 1977 to 2011, has bagged a measly 7.8 per cent of votes so far, with its candidates being decimated to third and fourth spots in the seats it contested.
 
The CPI(M)’s slide in Bengal started from 2009 with TMC’s surge, and in 2014 it got only two seats.
 
Stunned by the defeat, most state CPI(M) leaders declined to comment but said it would introspect the results and take corrective measures. trends showed that the Left was virtually routed in its bastions of Kerala and Bengal. General Secretary Sitaram Yechury said it was time for the entire opposition to introspect.
 
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) is led in two seats in Tamil Nadu — Coimbatore and Madurai — by more than one lakh votes each and one in Kerala by around 9,000 votes.
 
The results of the Lok Sabha elections dealt a blow to the Left parties which have already been on the decline across the country. The CPI(M) lost its last bastion of Kerala where it trailed in all seats it contested.
 
In 2014, the party had nine seats and the CPI one. By 12 pm on May 23, both parties together were leading only in five seats. This was a steep fall from the 2004 high of 59 seats. Both the parties are struggling to provide a credible justification for this decimation.
 
In the run-up to the elections, the Left parties struggled to find allies. CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury proposed to the Congress a “no-contest policy” in West Bengal. The Congress snubbed his proposal and going one step ahead fielded their party president Rahul Gandhi from Wayanad which swept away all the hopes that the CPI(M) had from Kerala too.
 
Barring Alappuzha, the Left was trailing in all the seats. The CPI(M)’s internal assessment was that they would get at least seven seats.
 
All eyes were trained on Begusarai in Bihar where the Left hoped for a miracle with CPI candidate Kanhaiya Kumar. While Kumar ruled the news cycle, he could not get enough votes to sail through. He was trailing at a distant second to Union Minister and BJP leader Giriraj Singh.
 
Tamil Nadu is the only exception as the Left was ahead in four seats.
 
Another Left party, the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP), was leading in one seat in Kerala, where it is a part of the ruling Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF).
 
Ambedkar rising
The tallest leader of the people, a candidate who was the son of Indian soil through and through and gifted the country with its constitution could not win any election he contested. People’s candidates have seldom had such luck
 
Babasaheb Ambedkar contested in the Bombay North first Indian General Election of 1952, but lost to his former assistant and Congress Party candidate Narayan Sadoba Kajrolkar. He tried to enter Lok Sabha again in the by-election of 1954 from Bhandara, but he placed third (the Congress Party won). According to current terms, the Nehru wave then had taken away his chances.
 
“It is a strange phenomenon of India’s democracy, that one of its most distinguished sons, highly accomplished academically, a scholar and fearless leader and champion of the rights of the downtrodden, could not win a popular election,” Ajit Ranade wrote in Mumbai Mirror. Ambedkar still became a member of Rajya Sabha and served the country.
 
In 2019, his grandson has made a dent politically with the newly formed Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA.) The newly formed VBA garnered about 41 lakh votes in the Lok Sabha election. That is about 14% of the total votes polled in Maharashtra.
 
Prakash Ambedkar told News 18, “We secured about 41 lakh votes in this Lok Sabha election, which is about 14% of the total votes polled in the state. We have enough votes to get the status of a regional party.”
 
The emergence of a new party founded by Prakash Ambedkar, grandson of Dalit icon and social reformer BR Ambedkar, adversely affected the vote-share of the Congress in many seats.
 
In a country where caste-based voting seemed to have taken a back-seat over the issue of nationalism, Maharashtra witnessed a reverse trend.
 
A look at the vote-share showed that the Congress and its allies could have won from at least seven more seats where the VBA’s votes are more than the NDA candidate’s winning margin against the allies.
 
Maybe all hope isn’t lost for the people’s candidate, on the whole. However, faced with a legitimate or contrived ‘consolidation’ of the ‘Hindu vote’, any hope that Indian parliament and the state legislatures will actually see representative voices there seems like a very distant dream.
 

The post Did people’s candidates ever stand a chance against the Modi wave? appeared first on SabrangIndia.