Author: Ajoy Bose
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: May 17, 2004
Several myths perpetuated by political
strategists and media pundits have been blown apart by the astounding outcome
of the 2004 Lok Sabha polls. For instance, everyone now acknowledges the
hollow basis for glib assertions made in the past about "India Shining"
and the impossibility of a foreign born to gain acceptance as the Prime
Minister of the country. Yet the myth-spinning mills are still in business,
with a fresh mythology springing up overnight even as the old one is being
laid to rest in the dustbin of history.
Let us subject some of the new myths
to the reality check of actual poll facts and figures.
Myth: The NDA was trounced in the
polls because its policies overtly favoured the urban metros while neglecting
impoverished sections of rural India.
Reality: Virtually all the big urban
metros including Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Hyderabad and Kolkata, the NDA
suffered a humiliating rout. In sharp contrast, the ruling alliance won
an overwhelming majority of the seats in the most poor and backward areas
of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and the Vidarbha region
in Maharashtra.
Myth: The BJP hardliners and their
sponsors in the Sangh parivar now claim that the reason for the party's
defeat is that there was too little Hindutva in the NDA campaign.
Reality: The BJP did terribly in
the two states where Hindutva was a major issue in Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh.
Hindutva icon and Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi failed to prevent
major reverses for the BJP in his State. Nor did his vitriolic campaign
in Uttar Pradesh for the last two rounds of polling in the State succeed
in stemming the slide of the BJP. Finally, some of the most prominent Hindutva
hardliners in the BJP like Murli Manohar Joshi, Swami Chinmaynand and Vinay
Katiyar lost the elections.
Myth: The 2004 verdict was a mandate
for the Congress and represents a dramatic revival of the party.
Reality: Apart from the fact that
the Congress failed to win even a third of the Lok Sabha seats that went
to polls, its actual voting percentage has come down compared to its vote
share in the 1999 elections. Even if one explains this in terms of the
party contesting less seats this time because of more electoral allies,
what about India's largest State, Uttar Pradesh, where the Congress contested
on its own but lost more than three per cent vote share as compared to
the last parliamentary polls? And how about Kerala where the Congress for
the first time in its history failed to win a single seat?
Myth: It was basically bad alliance
arithmetic that led to the downfall of the BJP.
Reality: While this may be true
in Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, Assam and Haryana, the country's largest state
Uttar Pradesh once again proves everyone wrong. In a four-cornered contest
in the State where the anti-BJP vote was badly fractured, the party still
won a pathetic 10 out of 80 seats.
Myth: The campaign by the young
Gandhis, Rahul and Priyanka, managed to swing the elections back in favour
of the Congress.
Reality: Quite apart from the fact
that Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi hardly campaigned except in select areas
of Uttar Pradesh, they do not seem have cast any particular spell on even
the two constituencies adjoining Amethi and Rae Bareli. The Congress lost
in both Sultanpur and Pratapgarh.
Myth: Sangh hardliners blame tactical
voting by Muslims and other minorities against the NDA for the latter's
defeat.
Reality: Uttar Pradesh is a classic
example of why this blame game is spurious. The Muslim vote in the State
split three ways towards the Samajwadi Party, Bahujan Samaj Party and the
Congress. Yet, the BJP failed to take advantage. In Lakshadweep where the
Muslim vote is decisive, it was the NDA candidate who defeated veteran
Congress winner PM Sayeed. And in the strangest result of all, in Kerala,
where Christian and Muslim votes make all the difference, the sole candidate
to defeat the Left Front is not from the Congress but the NDA.
Myth: A leader who cannot speak
the local language fluently suffers a major disadvantage during elections.
Reality: Sonia Gandhi's faltering
Hindi or Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik's virtual absence of Oriya
did not seem to have posed any handicap to them. The first is poised to
become Prime Minister of the country while the second has been swept back
to power for a second term in Orissa.
Myth: Voters are primarily concerned
about good administration that is accountable for grassroots issues, like
the state of roads, availability of electricity and water, primary heath
facilities and law and order.
Reality: Bihar is infamous for its
terrible administration and no facilities for its people. But it has given
a verdict in favour of the Laloo Prasad Yadav-led alliance. On the other
hand, SM Krishna and Chandrababu Naidu certainly improved grassroots infrastructure
both in towns and villages but still were defeated.
Myth: The ideal candidate is one
who has close links with the local electorate and capable of looking after
their basic day to day problems.
Reality: Glamorous filmstars like
Dharmendra, Govinda, Jayaprada, etc., have defeated candidates with far
better constituency credentials.
Myth: Psephologists make a big deal
about vote share swings comparing the figures of the voting percentages
for different parties and groups in the last election and the present one.
These are supposed to determine the varying political fortunes of each.
Reality: The comparative statistics
of the 1999 and 2004 Lok Sabha elections are just in. They make interesting
reading. The parties which show a loss in vote share include the BJP, Congress,
RJD, NCP, PMK, BJD, JD(U), TDP and the CPI. The ones who have increased
their vote share include SP, BSP, ADMK, DMK, TRS, MDMK, SAD, Shiv Sena,
CPI(M) and Independents. The biggest loss has been suffered by the BJP
with 1.54 per cent and the Congress with 1.48 per cent. The most handsome
gainers have been Independents with 1.44 per cent and the BSP with 0.92
per cent. It would be interesting to use this criteria to choose the winners
and losers of the 2004 elections.
The above myth and reality game
is not necessarily a true reflection of what happened in the polls. Yet
it does tell us that instant analysis and artificial spins churned out
by leaders and experts on television shows and newspaper columns often
artificially try to project the big picture when there is none. Even after
the amazing verdict of the 2004 election, the truth of the matter is that
the only big picture is that there are several small pictures spread across
a complex and fractured electoral mosaic like a jigsaw puzzle. And the
winner is one who either calculatedly or inadvertently manages to put the
right pictures together in a pattern.
