If not Hinduism then what?

There is a stir in the opposition sector over who will lead the opposition in the upcoming 2024 elections. In this enthusiasm lies the idea that Prime Minister Narendra Modi needs to face a major challenge. There is some justification for this idea. With the increasing complexity of governance and the fragmentation of public discourse, the privatization of elections has become a way of simplifying choices for the voter. There is a feeling that ‘if not Modi then who?’ The answer to this question will be the main challenger of the opposition. However, this is only half the question. The more important question is, ‘If not Hindutva, then what?’ It is only by articulating an electorally dominant counter-narrative that the question ‘if not Modi, who is?’ may emerge.

Highlights of the sermon

There are two obvious aspects to the opposition discourse. The first is that the Modi government is ‘murdering democracy’ by revising norms on centre-state relations and parliamentary procedures, and toppling governments through misappropriation of central agencies and funds. However, it is not clear whether these issues, especially in their current manifestation, form the basis of an electorally resonant agenda. Not only is there some preference for a strongman, but even the opposition has not been able to show that the predatory strategy is somehow unique to the Modi government. The second stage is the collection of complaints against the government. Inflation, unemployment, economic slowdown and pandemic mismanagement are important, but the articulation lacks a broad framework and the opposition’s tendencies on many issues end up as noise rather than undermining Mr. Modi’s credibility.

There is a clear counter-narrative missing with a pan-India imagery. This is a central contradiction between the opposition ranks and the liberals. Apart from state welfare, the opposition has no narrative to capture the imagination of voters. As a national narrative, the problems of welfare are manifold. First, the narrative does not differ substantially from the narrative of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which mixes welfare and Hindutva. Second, the state has a poor track record of implementing its mandate. Third, welfare is not aspirational. Youth who spend a lot of time on social media may not feel excited about unemployment allowance of ₹3,500 per month.

Regional parties have been able to fight against the BJP juggernaut by doubling their regional identities, but this makes it difficult for them to establish a coherent narrative on the national stage. A strong cultural identity or a basic caste base may be the basis for victory at the state level but the affordability for a national narrative is not. The leader of the Janata Dal (United), Nitish Kumar realized this and sought to use prohibition to cross Bihar’s borders, but his own opportunism undermined his national aspirations. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has a more multifaceted narrative – a welfare model driven by the income of savings from honest governance. However, it may not bring all the opposition parties together as it requires you to establish yourself as a distinctly honest party among your peers.

An agenda that confuses people

Failing in its own national narrative, the opposition is losing sight of an agenda set by the BJP – open Hinduism and ultra-nationalism. The opposition may attempt to provide specifics within this framework, but nuance neither lends itself well to mass communication nor is it an electorally core strategy – voters can be confused. Most importantly, this strategy appears to recognize that Hindus, as long as they are ‘good’ Hindus, have some special right to rule India, rather than hold to the non-negotiable bottom line that India With citizenship granted equally to all Indians. Birth and not religion.

This brings us back to the question, what if not Hindutva? It is clear that the opposition needs a coherent national narrative to garner public opinion. National elections are not the sum total of elections in different states. It is also easy to say that Mr Modi got only 37% votes in 2019 as BJP made its majority by securing more than 50% vote share in 16 states. This completely underscores the extent of a plank built around anti-BJP because even if the opposition came together, it would not have changed the outcome. The next step is not a backroom parle to anoint the Leader of the Opposition, but a narrative on political events and deliberations on cooperation. Public leaders lose their legitimacy if they fulfill their individual ambitions without a wider appeal to the public interest. It is now a threat to the opposition in the absence of a broader public agenda.

Ruchi Gupta is the co-founder and director of the Future of India Foundation and an advisor to the Samridhi Bharat Foundation. Twitter: Gupta