The message behind BSP’s loss in UP polls
The verdict of the 2022 elections in Uttar Pradesh is a latent function of deep community and caste mobilization. However, it is camouflaged under the guise of development and good governance. On the one hand, there was “Kairana, Kashi, Ayodhya, Mathura, Jinnah, Assi-Bees, bulldozer (against this or that community), Teen Talaq”, and on the other, the mobilization of Brahmins, non-Yadavs (Kurmi, Lodh, Gujjar, Jaat, Rajbhar, Maurya, Saini, Nonia, Chauhan, Nishad, Nai), and non-Jatavs (Pasi, Dhobi, Kori, Khatik, Valmiki, Dhanuk) became the backbone of the election campaign . Crucially, mainstream corporate media, YouTube media, pollsters and so-called intellectuals, based on flop rallies by leaders of two political parties, described the UP elections as bipolar. Once this perception crystallized among the masses, they forgot unemployment, rising prices, Covid deaths, the Hathras case, the Unnao case, etc.
This false awareness has created a strong perception that the fight is between the BJP and the SP and that the BSP is not in the fight at all. Thus, Muslims, OBCs and some upper caste voters who traditionally voted for the BSP deserted it. If this section had voted for development and good governance, for which the BSP had the best record during its 2007-12 tenure in the UP, they would have chosen the party again.
It is a fact that in this election, the BSP lost about 74 lakh votes compared to 2017. The SP won 1.26 crore and its ally RLD won 10 lakh votes. In the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the BSP had allied itself with the SP and the RLD, and as Dalit voting is often based on ideology, so in all likelihood, the BSP votes shifted to the SP and the RLD to defeat the BJP.
So, has the BJP increased its balance sheet? Of course, because of the Congress (which lost around 32 lakh votes) and the Shiv Sena (did not contest). The voters of these parties do not hesitate to vote for the BJP. It is in this context that the theory that the Dalit vote shifted to the BJP is nothing but an ignorance of history.
Historically, non-Jatavs have always voted for the BJP (or the Jana Sangh). At one point, they were also considered a Congressional vote bank, before moving to the BSP. This narrative was constructed to avoid the so-called upper castes being questioned – why did they vote en bloc for the BJP.
That the BSP is the B team of the BJP is another story that speaks volumes about caste prejudice. In Goa, the Trinamool Congress contested the polls for the first time and won no seats, and in turn helped the BJP retain power. Yet no one calls the TMC a BJP B team. Mamata Banerjee also went to UP to campaign for the SP.
Caste bias in Indian politics is not just about the Mayawati of the BSP. Take Charanjit Singh Channi from Congress. In the Punjab polls. Jat Sikhs and Hindus did not vote for Channi despite being an educated and seasoned politician. It is established that in Punjab, the Akalis and the Congress come to power alternately, and the Jat Sikhs, Hindus and Dalits have voted for the Congress for 70 years. However, this time AAP weaned Jats, Hindus and non-Ravidasis and Ramdasis from Congress by projecting a Jat Sikh as CM.
So, what is the way forward for BSP? The answer lies in the fact that the BSP is not only a political party, it is a social movement. Losing and winning an election is part of the move and until the gaps in democracy are closed, BSP will remain relevant.
Nevertheless, after five elections (UP polls – 2012, 2017, 2022 – and two parliamentary elections – 2014, 2019), it is established that the majority society is not ready to accept the BSP as a centrist party, even if it is hailed for its good governance, social justice (land distribution), pro-poor projects (Ambedkar Village, Kanshiram Housing Schemes) and development (state GDP being equal to national figures from 2007 to 2012) .
Therefore, it must reinvent its old ideology and identify the elements that exploit the Bahujans in the institutions of governance, education, production and social life. It must repeat its performance of 2007 to ensure the representation of the Bahujans in the institutions of governance in order to strengthen democracy.
Kumar is a professor of sociology at Jawarharlal Nehru University
Suraj Yengde, the author of Caste Matters, runs the fortnightly “Dalitality” column