[Reader-list] The "Sickular" History

[Rakesh Iyer]

Dear Venugopalan jee

With full respect to your views and perceptions, I think making comments
like the way you have made in your post, is something akin to what Mr. Bipin
usually used to do on this forum. Then also, I had stated that such general
comments should not be made particularly since there was no proof of certain
things he said.

The BJP may have lost vote share in all the states (except Karnataka and one
more state, which I don't remember, their vote percentage went down in all
the states, compared to 2004 Lok Sabha elections), but the reasons can vary
from state to state. Even in Gujarat, the reasons for their vote share going
down need not be attributed to secularism without looking at the ground
level response. And so from the technical point of view, as I see it myself
and you will also accept, it's difficult to say that the BJP lost because
people voted for secularism. If that were the case, and if the people feel
the BJP is communal, it should not have got a single vote, nor should it
have won any seat in India.

The problem here is that there is a difference between the conclusions of
the election verdict, and the reasons for the verdict. I accept that the
conclusion drawn is that the verdict has broken the back of the Left and the
Right. But I can't accept that the reason was that the people wanted to
throw both of them away, otherwise the BJP would also have suffered the
plight of the Left and it's seats would have gone down below 100 or even
50.(Like the Left went down from 61 in 2004 to below 30 this time)

Secondly, the assumption you have made is somewhat tricky. As the Congress
has won, you congratulate people for having voted on secularism. If the BJP
would have won, you say people were misled! This way, the BJP supporter can
argue for the vice versa! Whom should I believe?

The fact is that the Lok Sabha has 543 constituencies, and each constituency
has its own set of issues and ideas based on which people vote. These are
determined by numerous factors. People vote based on caste, religion, sex,
sometimes money or other gifts obtained, the reputation of the candidates
standing from the constituency, the party which they belong to, the ideology
they believe in(Marxism/Hindutva/secularism/others), the national issues,
local issues like bijli-sadak-pani-roti-kapda-makan-etc., and so on.

To say that people were misled because one party won or because people are
intelligent because they voted for the other party, I don't think is a fair
thing to say about any verdict, whether the Congress wins or the BJP.

Most importantly, I believe the Congress is not a secular party. It can
change colours from being communal in 1984 to being 'secular' now. As for
the others, it's just the Muslim vote they want, if they can get that
through riots then they will definitely try to do so. (The Mau riots in UP
during Mulayam's rule or the Bhagalpur riots in which RJD men were also
involved is a testimony to this. Infact, if I am not wrong, one of the
convicted persons in the Bhagalpur riots was contesting on RJD ticket in
assembly elections in 2005 from Bhagalpur)

The BJP's rise has forced the Congress to remain secular, otherwise it would
have been a B-team of Hindutva on the national scale. Of course, their idea
of a 'Hindu consolidated vote', also an idea of the RSS, started with Indira
Gandhi during her second reign and the riots which took place every year
somewhere in some part of the country with police involvement both directly
and indirectly, which was a huge shame.

As for the Congress majority, the fact is that the Congress has just got 206
seats, not 272 on its own. And the DMK and the Trinamool Congress have
already shown that it's a 'coalition' govt, not a one-party govt. Plus of
course, the Congress should not forget to thank Raj Thackeray in Maharashtra
and Chiranjeevi in Andhra Pradesh (I would not name DMDK here because
according to a survey done by CSDS which is also a part of Sarai, the DMDK
snatched voters from both the DMK and the AIADMK allliance. How much was it
true in the final verdict is something only God knows)

The Left unnecessarily stopped some steps which could have helped the nation
at large. Infact, the Left's implementation of the NREGA was a huge
disaster. And about their politics, the less said the better. It's been a
long time since they were associated with a non-electoral mass movement to
improve the lives of the downtrodden and the poor. A point probably for the
Karats, the Yechurys, the Biman Boses and the Buddhadevs to ponder about.

The silver lining in this verdict is that the verdict has given the UPA to
actually conduct some important economic reforms (like making a common
consumer-based inflation index instead of the wholesale price index we use,
refrain from being in sectors like hotels and making beedis or even airlines
etc.), major governance, police and judicial reforms (in other words the
administrative reforms as stated by the ARC under Veerappa Moily, the
current Law Minister), and bring about transparency and accountability in
the system, to give relief to the 'aam aadmi'.

Otherwise be ready for the people to be misled in the next elections. (In
your own words, sir)

Regards

Rakesh