Indian politics: Reasons that people keep electing politicians, leaders repeatedly irrespective of performance

Shams Ur Rehman Alavi

It's often seen as a mystery that people keep electing non-performing or bad performing leaders and then lament, yet, continue to support them. 

I would start with an example. The story of a politician. This 'neta' or leader belonged to a group that was backward but members of this community didn't like the tag.

They felt that their community [caste group] was forward. This happens quite often, every group tries to find groups that are more backward to position itself as 'forward in comparison'. 

So the leader and his party were pro-poor and pro-backward. However, his own community didn't like him, as they felt he was pro-other castes. He remained in politics and after struggle, he became big leader. 

This was the turning point. Everything changed. His people fell in love with him now, the community was suddenly proud, even got too possessive about him. No personal benefit came for the members of the community in the long run either. This was 'Pride' Factor! 

All those years, he was agitating, they didn't even like him, but once he 'arrived' as big leader on the scene, he readily gets 'adopted' by the same community. So everyone in the caste group feels happy as if it is their own success, as if till then community was poor. 

Isn't it something about the inferiority complex too that we need success of someone like us to feel that 'our community too matters'. Even his decisions do not benefit and even hurt now, the community members justify everything. 

READ: How 'identity interests' override personal interests in Indian society and politics

They support him fully. They immediately come with such one liners: 'It's politics so he has to make adjustments'. Even in big failures or blunders, everything is justified, no anger or frustration, because ultimately he is 'own', a 'reflection of me'. 

The sense that due to him our community and in turn we have got respect. He is there, so 'a part of me in him'. A collective 'sense of kinship' or 'community pride'. Not just for representation sake. A new Thakur or a Brahmin, new Kurmi or a Jat leader is emerging, becomes CM or powerful minister, then it evokes such  sentiment within groups--OUR MAN, PRIDE. 

Other leader may do good, but he remains 'other'. A person who as leader or Chief minister brings qualitative change in lives through efforts or schemes will not be rewarded despite his work, as he is 'not your own'. 

READ: Why rogue politicians, goons and musclemen are elected in India?

Historically backward communities have aspirations. It is understandable. But certain strong communities have leaders, still they too fall in this system, as t hey feel their voice no longer matters [compared to the past and their own hegemony], the past imagined as 'golden era' [not necessarily true].

There are groups that are numerically small but get higher representation, yet they're not happy despite progress. They are doing well but compare selves with 'other communities' in own cities, who seem doing even better. So that's a strange cycle. 

You elect leaders just for your 'identity', kinship and because you feel good that a person of your clan or caste or community has reached a point, even if he has no vision or plan and this doesn't even bring a change in your life. That's how these things continue, year after year, decade after decade.

[The photographs are just for representational purpose. It is not a reflection of their performance.]

2.5 lakh votes polled, Congress candidate gets just 1,000: Where has Congress' traditional vote gone?

Indscribe

Isn't it shocking that more than 2.5 lakh voters exercise their franchise in an Assembly constituency and while the candidates who come first and second secured well over 1 lakh votes each, the Congress candidate who comes fourth gets just 1035 votes.

NCP candidate had got 1.23 lakh votes and Shiv Sena candidate got 1.17 lakh. Just 0.4% of the voters in the constituency chose Congress.The question comes naturally that where has Congress' traditional vote disappeared?

This happened in Kagal constituency in Maharashtra. But that's not the lone example.

Such trends were witnessed in many other seats in the recently held state elections in Maharashtra, which was seen as a traditional Congress' state.

I find it shocking because we all know there were [are] people who are traditional Congress voters.

Irrespective of their caste or community, they were staunch 'Congressi', and whenever they went to the polling booth, they simply pushed the button and voted for 'hand' [Congress symbol]. But it seems this breed has now vanished.

READ FIRST PART: 

Why Muslims don't want to vote Congress, willing to 'waste' their vote but not vote for Cong?

In the first part, we had analysed the reasons Muslims are angry with the Congress. The issues, which the community has with the party, especially, the long-standing grievances and party's failure to even give a patient hearing to Muslims, let alone take action.

But, it is not just about Muslims. It seems everybody is upset with the way Congress is functioning. During election campaign, it often happens, that on the eve of polling, it gets clear that only two candidates are in the race, and the remaining candidates are relegated to the background.

Still, if Congress' candidate gets just 1,000 votes, it shows how much ground Congress has lost. One after the other, the Rural voter, the Poor, the Dalits, the Tribals, the Minorities, all have left the Congress. 

Even the most committed traditional Congress voter seems getting disenchanted with the party. 

We earlier talked about Muslim dominated constituencies in Haryana, where Congress' Muslim candidates came 4th and 5th.

In Maharashtra too, there is a trend. It is not about Muslim voting for a 'Muslim candidate or a Muslim party'. In Aurangabad, there was clear Muslim support for MIM, and hence one can understand Congress' poor show.

In Aurangabad east, BJP's Atul Moreshwar Save's victory over Dr Abdul Ghaffar Qadri. Both got over 60,000 votes. But a veteran like Congress' Rajendra Darda got just over 20,000 votes. On Aurangabad central, Congress' MM Shaikh came 6th.

Shaikh got just 9,000 votes. Shiv Sena, BJP, NCP, MIM and even BSP candidates got more votes than the Congress. It is clear that Congress' core vote bank has diminished. At many Muslim majority constituencies, Muslims overwhelmingly voted for non-Muslim candidates of parties other than Congress.

In Mumbra, Jitendra Awhad is a popular man and hence the NCP candidate was favoured heavily by Muslim electorate, who didn't choose Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) or any other Muslim candidate from here.

Awhad got 86,000 votes and won by a huge margin from Mumbra. The Shiv Sena candidate came second with 38,000 votes. MIM and BJP came third and fourth. Congress' Muslim candidate Yasin Qureshi came 5th with just over 3,847 votes.

IS IT TEMPORARY PHASE, WAVE?

Many feel that the fall in Congress' vote share is a temporary phenomenon. The examples of Janata Party era [1977], the National Front's rise [1989] and the loss of Congress in late 90s, are given, to prove that Congress will again bounce back.

There may be some merit in this argument. Also, BJP's rise can't be permanent. But the fact is that BJP has expanded its voter base. On the other hand Congress has disenchanted its voters, due to a host of reasons.

From inaction to poor communication with its electorate, Congress has a lot to do to get back the 'connect' with the people. Congress' organisational structure has weakened across the country. In the sixties and seventies, the party had Indira Gandhi.

Congress had a charismatic leader like Rajiv Gandhi. After its defeat in the 90s, Sonia Gandhi rejuvenated the party. But today, its leaders don't inspire, don't instill any confidence, and that's the sad reality.

Party has lost its voters' confidence in large parts of the country. To reclaim it is a colossal task, and what Rahul Gandhi is doing about it> It is this situation which brings Congress candidates to just 1,000 votes in an Assembly election, less than its candidates used get in a municipal ward election.

Religion as a factor in Indian elections: Muslim, Sikh, Christian majority seats and constituencies that elect Upper Caste Hindu candidates

With elections round the corner, newspapers have again focused on factors like caste, community and religion, which do affect the choice of candidates as well as voting in polls in India.

Dainik Bhaskar, a leading Hindi newspaper, has come out with an interesting report on page 1.

The report tells us about how certain seats are perceived as 'Muslim seats', 'Sikh seats' or Upper Caste Hindu seats.

Most of these are constituencies that have large percent of voters of the group.

We all know that the religious or caste affiliation of the voter and the contestants do matter to some extent.

Sometimes the constituency may not have the particular group as majority or a block.

Yet, it is seen as the constituency where candidate belonging to that group is given ticket and wins easily. Interestingly, while focus is often on Muslim votes, because of a myth that Muslims vote 'en bloc'. In election season, such reports come too often. Journalists seem to enjoy filing such reports and discussing them.

But this report interestingly talks of Savarnas vote [Upper caste Hindu population] too. It says that though the Upper Caste aren't a numerical majority in most seats, still, they command wide influence and around 125 constituencies regularly send Upper Caste contestants to the Parliament.

125 Upper Caste influence constituencies or 'Savarna Seats'

The report says that Lucknow may have a large Muslim population and also strong Shia populace, but most of the parties always fielded Upper Caste candidates from here. Either Shivrajwati Nehru, Hemwanti Nandan Bahuguna or Sheela Kaul who won thrice and later, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee who won five times from here.

It also lists Indore as an 'Upper Caste' seat from where 'savarnas' have been winning for 45 years. Then, there is Allahabad constituency, that elected Pt Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Murli Manohar Joshi, Amitabh Bachchan, VP Singh and Revti Rama Singh, all upper caste Hindus.

It lists 36 seats in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, where only Upper Caste candidates win. While Punjab has 32% Dalits, more than half  of the seats in the state are cornered by the Upper Castes.

The 'Upper caste' seats often have a strong Muslim population too but no party risks fielding Muslim here.

There are 172 constituencies that have Muslim, Sikh and Christian influence.
Really!

But in the 125 upper caste seats, the factor of religion doesn't work, it says.

There are 79 constituencies reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC) and 42 for Scheduled Tribes (ST) out of 543* (545) seats in the Lok Sabha. Of  course, Dalits (SCs) and Tribals (STs) can contest from un-reserved seats too.

So out of the remaining 432 seats, Bhaskar has identified seats that have a trend of winnability among a particular religion or a group. Many places have huge backward (OBC) population too but there isn't focus on their voting and election pattern.

Muslim vote can tilt balance in 92 constituencies 

The report says that 92 constituencies have Muslim influence. There are many constituencies in Kashmir, Kerala, UP and West Bengal that have 65-95% Muslims.  Then, there are constituencies like Laccadives, Kishanganj (Bihar), Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh) too.

The example is Assam's Dhubri where Muslim candidates win. AUDF's Badruddin Ajmal contested and won from here, defeating the Congress. Over all, seats that have more than 20% Muslims are included in list where the minority swing can make or mar candidates' chances.

An interesting example is Araria seat in Bihar. Now, Araria has 41% Muslim population. Yet, seven Muslims were in the fray, and hence BJP's Pradeep Kumar Singh, won Loktantrik Janshakti Party's Zakir Husain by a margin of 2,000 votes. Of these 92 seats, most of them are in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Assam, West Bengal and Kerala, apart from J&K.

16 seats have Christian electorate's influence

There are 16  seats that have Christian influence. An example is Ernakulum in Kerala that has 38.8% Christian vote or South Goa. Then, there are many constituencies in North East and some other places in central and eastern India where Christian vote is decisive.

The Christian candidates win from Nagaland, Mizoram and Manipur. Also, there are pockets in certain regions of South Indian states like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. In a few constituencies in Jharkhand, Orissa and Chhattisgarh, too they have limited impact. 

Sikhs are a major factor in 16 constituencies

Also, there are 16 seats where Sikhs are an important factor and decide outcome of the election results, like Bathinda that has over 75% Sikh voter. Sikhs are mostly concentrated in Punjab-Haryana region in North India.

The other seats include Amritsar 77%,  Sangrur 74%, Jalandhar 38%, Ludhiana 58%, Anandpur Sahib 57%, Fatehgarh Sahib 58%, Firozpur 51%, Patiala 55%, Gurdaspur 44%, Hoshiarpur 39%. Also, there are constituencies liek Chandigarh, Sirsa (Haryana) and Sri Ganga Nagar (Rajasthan).

FOR THE READERS:

Now, that you have seen these trends and statistics, there is a message for you. You don't need to blindly believe every 'fact'. Anything can happen in election. It is not purely religious or regional line on which a person votes always. With polls barely two months from now, you will see analyses and more reports.

See more on elections 2014 in upcoming posts.

[Report published on March 10, 2014. Link to Dainik Bhaskar's Epaper. See page 1 and with graphic on inside page of the same day's edition, if they remain in archive. Alternative text link is HERE]

[*India's lower house of parliament, the Lok Sabha has 545 members, 543 of them are elected while two are nominated]