Electoral politics is intriguing because it is a combination of local and particular features such as caste calculations, candidates, booth management, etc, and intangible factors such as narratives, perception and mood. We can never arrive at a definitive conclusion as to which of them finally clinches the race for a party or alliance. Both kinds of factors vie for space and therefore, given the context of general elections in 2024, the outcome of the Karnataka assembly polls will hold some clues for the emerging picture at the national level. The Karnataka polls have all the ingredients of a closely fought election and may well have a bearing on upcoming elections in other states.
The BJP’s rise and electoral success over the last 10 years have been the result of a certain deft combination of social justice politics reflected in inclusive caste equations along with a larger narrative of Hindutva mobilisation. The BJP has succeeded to a large extent in including contending caste groups under the umbrella of Hindu mobilisation. This is the essential departure from the “politics of accommodation” pursued by Congress. Congress manages a loose alliance of various caste groups without an overarching identity. It has been unable to find a new formula to counter the BJP.
In Karnataka, too, Congress is depending on its old AHINDA (Minorities, OBCs and Dalits) combination without a guarantee about bringing together the various fragments among OBCs within its fold. A similar formula – KHAM — proved ineffective in Gujarat. Will this be enough to combat the BJP, especially at a time when it can accommodate all these factions as effectively as any other party? The BJP, in fact, managed to woo the Lingayats, a community that emerged as a protest movement against “Brahminical Hinduism”. It has managed to do this by digging deeper into the various fragments within a hold-all identity. It is the same with the mobilisation of Dalits and OBCs: The BJP mobilises individual fragments and connects them to a unified Hindu identity.
The outcome in Karnataka will also shine light on the durability of Hindutva politics at a time of economic and governance crises. The nature of polarised mobilisation has changed in Karnataka over time, especially from the heydays of the BJP under B S Yediyurappa’s leadership. Under Yediyurappa, the party’s politics was more Vajpeyee-esque — going soft on polarisation, and mobilising Hindu identity without necessarily targeting minorities. That has changed under the current dispensation at the Centre. Karnataka has witnessed shrill campaigns around hijab and azan. In fact, they attracted national attention.
Historically, this kind of aggressive posturing has found little purchase south of the Vindhyas. It did not work even in West Bengal to the degree it seems to in Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat. So, while bulldozers stood for a new “crackdown” to maintain order in some places, it could well be read very differently in others. This was reflected in Biocon Chief Kiran Shaw`s public statement about the growing communal polarisation in Karnataka. BJP Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai had to call upon all sections to observe restraint. It was an example of how majoritarian mobilisation could be seen as hampering prospects for economic growth. Will the BJP be able to manage such subtle regional sensibilities in its bid to project a muscular approach to politics? Such aggressive posturing is also necessary to give or create overbearing space for the central leadership over regional leaders.
Further, as political scientist James Manor had observed, Karnataka is relatively less steeped in caste hierarchies compared to some other states. There was less rampant landlessness because of which people from “lower” castes and religious communities had greater economic independence and autonomy. This makes it more difficult to create durable fissures between communities. People have a lot more to lose than gain from polarised politics.
Finally, there are governance-related issues of corruption that get reflected in campaigns around “40 per cent commission”. This is significant for the BJP, which has claimed clean governance as its highlight. Will such campaigns manage to trump movements around socio-historical figures (such as Tipu Sultan) and community-related issues? Will changing poorly-performing candidates at the last minute impact the voters’ decision?
The elections are also significant because of the issue of Rahul Gandhi`s disqualification, as the case against him concerns a speech he had made in Kolar in Karnataka. It has become somewhat symbolic of the resistance and resurgence of the opposition coming together in 2024.
Karnataka may not have a direct impact on the outcome of the general elections in 2024 but it will certainly hold clues on how certain factors – both local and national – might play out.
The writer is with Centre for Political Studies (CPS), JNU
