- >>
- OPINION
Not far from Prayagraj (Allahabad) are two contiguous villages of Dadupur and Sarangapur in Chhoka block, across the Jamuna river. The two are in the Allahabad constituency. Prayagraj’s name is not being used for elections.
Next door Phoolpur was in the news because two star campaigners were whisked away for security as unbelievably large crowds threatened a stampede. Rahul Gandhi and Akhilesh Yadav had to be protected. Such massive crowds are indicators which way the electoral balance is tilting.
Dadupur is dominated by Shia Muslims and a sprinkling of Dalits. All Muslims, irrespective of sectarian divisions are presumed to be in opposition to Modi. An aggressive Shia cleric of Lucknow, Saiyyid Kalbe Jawad, has created some confusion. He has gone and tied an Imamzamin or an amulet on the arm of the candidate from Lucknow, Defence Minister, Rajnath Singh. Was it a signal to Shia voters?
Voting in the constituency was on May 25, but on May 22 three busloads of Shias left for Jogipura Dargah in Najibabad for the annual Urs abandoning their Congress candidate Ujjwal Raman Singh.
Meanwhile, at Sarangapur, dominated by Brahmins, events took a different turn. Erstwhile Pradhan Lakshmi Shankar Mishra received a call from the police station.
As soon as Mishra turned up, he was given an option: either cool your heels at the police station or go home and not be seen in public. Then at Karchhana police station, a worker of the same Congress candidate Ujjwal Singh’s much respected father Rewati Raman Singh, was detained.
When reports reached the veteran leader, he drove to the Police station to seek his loyalist’s release. Not only did the police not release his friend, the officer issued a terse note to him: “you are not allowed to step out of the thana”. Word soon spread and a crowd began to menace the police station. Rewati Raman Singh was allowed to go home.
Going by the words of reliable journalists in Lucknow and others who travelled through the state, strong arm behaviour of the police has been something of an epidemic. As I finish writing this sentence, I receive a call from Ambedkarnagar that the police scaled the walls of the opposition candidate’s house to restrain his supporters from stirring out to exert influence.
Employing the police in any circumstance has become Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Adityanath’s almost natural habit. It may also be to make assurance doubly sure because the stakes have become high since his name has begun to circulate as a Prime Ministerial candidate should such a situation arise. Excessive police action could also be a sign of nervousness because reports from the field are not flattering.
In Hindutva circles, there is pronounced disappointment that building the Ram Temple has not been an electoral draw. Building a temple does not stir emotions on the same scale as pulling down a mosque does. Standing with folded hands in front of Rama’s image is a spiritual experience; breaking a mosque to build a temple is an angry emotional experience, translatable into political action.
If you watch the photograph of Uma Bharati clambering onto Murli Manohar Joshi’s back watching the demolition of Babri Masjid, the expression on their faces is ecstatic, even orgasmic. They were celebrating a violent victory over the Moghuls. It was this kind of experience the nation felt over Balakot in 2019. It helped Modi win the election.
Why has something like Balakot not happened this time? What is on trial therefore is pure, undiluted communalism, a sort of Muslim hating not seen before as a means to mobilising crowds.
“Mangalsutra that Hindu women wear ritually will be snatched by the Muslims. They will also be handed all the reservations meant for the lower castes”. All these ‘anti Hindu monstrosities’ (goes the allegation) “will be the handiwork of the I.N.D.I.A, a band of Muslim lovers who will go to any lengths to please them. They will even do the mujra made famous by nautch girls to rouse the Muslims”. All these wonderful nuggets are part of Modi’s speeches.
From this 24 carat communalism observers have drawn different conclusions. One school of thought suggests that plunging headlong into mindless communalism is a sign of nervousness.
In other words, the venom in his utterances is rearguard action on his part because he is doing badly in the field. The second school believes the outcome will not be determined by the ballot box but by tricks and stratagems.
Careful attention must be given to what Jawed and Bharati Bhargava have to say after their ritual visit to the Sangam ghats. Covering the 1977 elections, Laiq turned up in Sangam: he found the boatmen and the pilgrims from every part of the country a huge resource.
That is how he got a world scoop: Indira Gandhi would lose the election. He made the Sangam his regular hunting ground for election results. He came up trumps most of the time.
This time he has returned with intelligence not available to others, after speaking to such diverse Sangam pilgrims as devotees from the North East, tribals from Rajasthan and umpteen other places. Laiq and Bhargava were surprised to discover what looked like a wave for Modi.
Laiq concluded that the excessive and stark communalism of Modi’s election utterance was not a function of despair and nervousness. They were part of a well crafted strategy: the more vicious his speech the greater his popularity.
Muslim baiting pleases this lot, but I must insert a caveat: venom alone may not translate into electoral success. For this to happen, I have maintained a consistent theory: communalism has to be tied to nationalism to give political results.
Mangalsutra or even the cow by itself is not enough. There has to be the menacing shadow of Pakistan lurking in the background to generate a post Balakot like election changing mood. Let me abide by my theory until June 4 when the results come in.
Saeed Naqvi is a senior journalist and writer. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.
