Election Spotlight

New Delhi, 2 April 2014

Vote Bank Politics

MUCH ABUSED TERMINOLOGY

By Dr S Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

From the start of the day to its end, thoughts, talks, and actions of leaders of all political parties these days are on a single track -- towards garnering votes. It requires basic intelligence to understand the advantages in directing every stroke in this political game to collect votes not singly – one by one - but by blocs – group by group wherever possible.

Consolidation for and canvassing of bloc votes has earned an odious label as “vote bank politics” in India because of the divisive nature of this politics. It has come to be associated with communalism, casteism, ethnic separatism, identity politics, linguistic chauvinism, freebies culture, etc. On the field, it encourages mobilization of people in groups/categories through bonding ties of positive or negative dispositions. It also promotes division by cutting wedges on the basis of perceived and actual differences sharpened by aggressive “hate speeches”.   

Vote bank politics is a variation of “client politics” – a term used to denote political favouritism to an organized or a minority group at the cost of general public interest. It has wide scope to flourish in plural societies where minority groups can have considerable political leverage to influence political parties. Clients do not like to give up their separateness.

In India, another term in common usage is “identity politics” which refers to the political inclinations of  numerically significant groups with identifiable social-economic characteristics to claim, assert and promote their independent ambitions through political dispensation. Ethnic groups, for instance, cling to their ethnicity and bargain for good returns for their bloc votes.

The coining of the term “vote bank politics” is attributed to the eminent sociologist, M.N. Srinivas, who deciphered this phenomenon in his intensive anthropological research on social life in some villages in southern India. In the early decades following independence, studies on villages and caste attracted sociologists and political scientists who revealed the contours of    sociology of politics in India.

The term is specially used by critics of the Reservation Policy ever since the implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations on reservation for backward classes by V.P. Singh government at the Centre in 1989. Every aspect of the Reservation Policy - its contents, identification of the eligible castes, the relative proportion of reserved seats and open seats, jobs and institutions coming under the policy, rules governing implementation of the policy, etc., is having its political repercussions. No political party can ignore the impact of this policy in electoral politics in national as well as State levels as it can fetch bulk votes – the substance of “vote bank”.

The word “quota” has indeed become the buzz word for vote bank politics. New demands for quota are made on the eve of elections; old demands are revived; lists of backward classes are enlarged - all in the period just preceding elections to keep memories fresh in the minds of the voters.

The 1990s saw the political emergence of the Backward Classes and Dalits particularly in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Some political parties were clearly identified with these classes among which are the Samajwadi Party, Janata Dal, and Bahujan Samaj Party. They represented the rise of clusters of caste-based groups at middle and lower rungs of the traditional caste ladder. They earned popularity and became formidable forces to win elections and form governments in the States and whose support was indispensable to coalition governments formed at the Centre.

The Janata Dal split into many groups. Each one carries some solid caste votes. The split also shows that it is wrong to presume any fast tie of a caste politically. No caste makes a single vote bank. As a result, there is proliferation of vote banks making vote bank politics not a simple affair.  Moreover, gain for one group may result in loss for another group. It, therefore, requires expertise in playing divisive politics.   

True, numerous single caste-based political parties have also existed and have wielded significant electoral power in many States. They have encouraged development of the politics of appeasement - an important feature in national politics. Caste politics, which is a prominent part of vote bank politics rises where acknowledged caste leaders nurse political ambitions.

Minority groups are particularly pampered by political parties with extraordinary affection during election time. Efforts to draw Muslim votes  by harping on the theme of quota and postures of a secular stunt against  communalism go on as part of selective vote gathering.

But, Muslims do not present a united front. Two major Muslim political parties – the All India Muslim League and the Indian Union Muslim League - do not see eye to eye. The voting behaviour of Muslims also does not make a single pattern even within a State. Muslims are also divided like Hindus by caste, language, economic status, educational qualification, etc. They support different ideologies and are in different parties.

Backward classes are also disunited – the major divide being the extent of backwardness separating the “Backward” and the “Most Backward”. The existence of “creamy layer” is denied by the forward among the backward – a situation reflecting dissensions within and branches sprouting from the vote bank of the Backward Classes.

There are always disputes over new additions to the list – an exercise generally prompted by electoral calculations. Leading castes among the backward in most States are political adversaries to each other.

Certain categories of the population have always attracted the special attention of political parties and received tall electoral promises. Among them are agricultural labour in general, poor farmers, people below the invisible poverty line, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, slum dwellers, weavers, fishermen, unorganized labour, etc. They are lured by promises such as loan waiver schemes, social security measures, etc.

Professional categories like teachers, government employees, and bank staff are also rewarded with redress of long pending grievances. In their case, vote bank politics is played in the form of urgent promises on old issues, sudden announcement of sops and privileges, and appointment of commissions to examine forgotten grievances. These categories represent different layers of the middle classes and are split in different national and regional political parties. Their unified support is transient, doubtful, and short-lived and hence it is full-time job for political parties to keep them satisfied.

It seems that in vote bank politics, the “banks” need not be given groups, but may be created and favoured by resourceful political forces. Some NGOs, for instance, consciously try to address displaced persons as a category of voters.  Some try to appeal to women specially.

Many political parties, which stand for progressive ideas, are not harsh on Khap Panchayats despite frequent reports about their illegal activities. It is difficult to attribute this to the cultural moorings of these parties. The soft attitude can only be linked to the local influence of the Khaps (by whatever name they are known in different States) and their potential to mobilize bloc votes.  Indeed, naked vote bank politics!

In short, the term “vote bank politics”, which is so frequently used in election times, seems to be a much abused terminology. It is losing its value in every application and its price is correspondingly going higher and higher.----INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)