Subscribe

Popularise CC

Join News Letter

Read CC In Your
Own Language

CC Malayalam

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis

Iraq

Peak Oil

Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections

Palestine

Latin America

Communalism

Gender/Feminism

Dalit

Globalisation

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Environment

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

WSF

Arts/Culture

India Elections

Archives

Links

Submission Policy

About CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name: E-mail:

Printer Friendly Version

An Analysis Of 2009 General Election And Some Recommendations For Secular Parties

By Dr. Satinath Choudhary

12 June, 2009
Countercurrents.org

The following facts suggest a grand-coalition of all secular parties with a 5 to 10 member Chief Ministerial Council (CMC) that would have equal power vested in each of the members of CMC. It should include one or more Dalits, Upper Castes, Muslims, members of UBC (Upper of BC) and members LBC (Lower of BC) as members of the UP-CMC on the pattern of Swiss Federal Executive Council. If that happens in UP, it may become a precursor of making each of Indian states as well as India itself towards becoming a South Asian Switzerland!

From the first table shown below it is clear that currently there are four parties with nearly equal share of votes in UP. Actually in most states there are two dominant local rivals (X & Y) for power in addition to the two national rivals: The Congress Party (C) and BJP/RSS (B). The two local may be each OBC in most cases, a Dalit party arrayed against an OBC party in UP, and a Muslim party against another Muslim party in Kashmir. As for the two main national parties, both have a core constituted of Upper Castes individuals and hence not very fond of social justice. However, one wears the armor of monstrous and vulgar communalism while it tries to hoodwink the gullible poor oppressed castes with the help of fear and nightmares; on the other hand, in trying to attract the votes of impoverished the other main national party is more amorous and wears a softer mantle of more civilized, secular and pro-social justice genteel person. In any case, one can't lose sight of the fact that neither of the two main national parties are true lovers of social justice, all they want is their votes, because otherwise the masses would not have remained in tatters, so poor, ill-fed, shelter-less, or almost so, and shamelessly illiterate.

From the second table below we should note that most of the time the party getting largest percentage of votes is beneficiary of disproportionately larger number of seats, which is characteristic of FPTP election system.

From the above two facts it should be clear that for any of the future elections if B, C, X and Y do not form alliances, the results are likely to be very unpredictable, as can be seen from the results of 2009 parliamentary election: In spite the largest percentage of vote of 27.4%, BSP was third in the number of seats won. With a similar distribution of seats in any of the future Assembly elections none of the parties will be able to form a government all by itself. It is also clear that if any two of the parties form an alliance, the other two will be forced to form a counter alliance even if they are ideologically far apart because otherwise the latter two would be wiped off from the Assembly. This is what happened in Bihar in 1995 state Assembly election. Janata Dal (Lalu) + Congress wiped off Samata and BJP, which were not allied to each other. Even though BJP/RSS have been and continue to be hated by most people as well as parties, Samata felt forced to join BJP, and the result was a very creditable performance from them in the 1996 parliamentary election. Samata, currently under the name JD(U), continue to be in uncomfortable forced alliance in spite of sharp ideological differences.

I am glad to note that the fact and deductions mentioned above were clear to Behen jee, and hence she has thrown her “unconditional support” behind the UPA government at the center, in spite of the fact that SP too is supporting UPA from outside. Thus currently UPA government has outside support of both of the local rivals BSP as well SP in UP.

However, Congress party may be thinking that it is a resurgent party in ascendancy. If it thinks of going it alone in 2012 state election of UP, that will be most unfortunate. That is because having seen the uncertainties of 2009 parliamentary election, both of the local rivals will be aggressively looking for an alliance with one of the major parties. With Congress going it alone, both BSP and SP will be willing to join the NDA alliance led by BJP. As a result, NDA will be in a position to extract agreement with one of the two local rivals favorable to itself. If that happens, and Congress continues to be in a mood to go it alone, NDA is likely to sweep the election. On the other hand, if Congress comes to senses and accepts the other party into UPA alliance, the two sides (UPA and NDA) will be fairly balanced and the outcome will be hard to predict. Even if NDA does not win, it will continue to be power to reckon with.

The Congress Party has a good many covert supporters of BJP, who are looking forward to a bipolar situation when UPA and NDA are the only entities ruling India , with power some times going in the hands of UPA, other times in the hands of NDA. As such, it will not be inclined to see BJP go off the horizon. Nonetheless, Congress will never join hands with BJP because then it will not be able to wave the secular flag and the other two local parties will join hands, which, together is likely to command support of a good majority of voters.

There are people who say that Congress, with covert oppressors of the oppressed segments of India , is worse than an overt enemy like BJP/RSS. That an overt enemy is easier to see and can be eliminated as long as we see it and are aware that it is a monster. I beg to differ vehemently. This is because, with the overt oppressive policies, attitude and slogans, BJP/RSS is likely to fully polarize its supporters into powerful monsters. On the other hand, with the relatively more civil Congress in power, the same group of people is likely to behave in a more civilized fashion, and have fairly good number of genuine democrats in favor of truly uplifting the lower segments. Given that we cannot totally marginalize the powerful BJP party, the oppressed sections of the society would be better off being in alliance with the milder and more democratic variety of them like the Congress Party. It will keep most of the common constituents of Congress and BJP from becoming howling monstrous supporters of BJP.

In view of the above, best option for the local state level opponents would be to share power and try to pull Congress into their alliance. If Congress does join the alliance of the local allies, they will totally marginalize NDA. Otherwise the Congress itself will be marginalized together with BJP/RSS. It will be worth keeping in mind that BJP/RSS is the truest enemy of the oppressed segments of India as well as of India itself. It will be easier for the local parties to totally marginalize BJP/RSS with the help of Congress than without the Congress. Thus what I am advocating is a grand coalition of all parties other than BJP/RSS. If a party like BSP can form alliance with BJ/RSS, they can certainly form alliance with other more civilized parties.

While BSP as well as SP have both resolved to support UPA from outside the Indian Government, this is the right time for these parties to start coalition negotiation. Basically “negotiations” entail seat-sharing formulas or agreements. Needless to say, in the seat-sharing negotiations each of the parties try to maximize the number of seats from which they will contest the elections. With 27.4% of votes in the parliamentary election against 23.3% and 18.2% for SP and Congress respectively, BSP would seek to get a lion share of seats. Congress appeared to be a resurgent party in ascendancy in UP, so its workers and supporters are going to seek better seat proportion than the proportion of 18.2 to 27.4. SP would like to claim to be spokesperson for the whole OBC segments, and would want bigger share of seats than what their vote share shows. Under these circumstances the negotiations would be tough and chances of their breakdown would be very high. Difficulties in reaching an understanding over seat-sharing should be apparent from the fact that in spite of their genuine intentions to form an alliance, Congress, RJD and LJP could not reach a mutually acceptable agreement in Bihar. In UP too, Congress and SP failed to reach an agreement. BJP and BJD could not reach an agreement in Orissa, and so forth.

If they could pay a little attention to the situation beyond the election, about who would be the Chief Minister, perhaps it may help them reach a seat sharing agreement more easily. If there is going to be a single CM for the whole of five years after the election, each of them would try its best come out with the largest number of seats after election. In fact, so much so that even after some kind of hobbled seat-sharing agreement, they will try to defeat as many of their other partners as possible so that the former would emerge as the largest party and hence claimant of Chief Ministerial position. This can be best resolved with some kind of sharing of Chief Ministerial position. They could time-share the CM position, as has been done earlier in UP. It may be hard for someone working as a CM, suddenly to lose the privileges of an autocratic CM, and reduce himself or herself to the position of a mere minister. I think it may be easier for someone to spend the whole five year as a less than autocratic CM in a Chief Ministerial Council (CMC), with equal power vested in all, and try to run the State Government in a consensual manner. A Chief Ministerial Collective would have other advantages like transparency, congeniality and healthier democracy.

With just three persons (one each from SC, OBC and OC (Oppressor Castes)), there is greater chance of coalition wrecking disagreement. Besides, in the above formula of one each from the three caste groups, a significant group like Muslims would be left out because they don't even have a party. Further, Lower of the Backward Castes (LBC) separate from the Upper of BCs (UBC) also deserve empowerment. In view of these major subdivisions, the CMC should consist of 5-10 members, but probably no bigger than 10. They should be able to pick them (CMC) from inside the Assembly, or from both outside as well as inside. It may be best for the whole Assembly to cast two votes for two individuals, declaring the highest vote getters from the five segments: SC, LBC, UBC, MBC and OC to be winners of the CMC seats. For a bigger than 5-member CMC, they could allow up to a max of two from each of the social groups mentioned above. Different states may need different formulas. Wherever they have Scheduled Tribe (ST) groups, they have to be included, obviously. If it were not for the Assembly as a whole to decide, a question would arise as to which party is going to have the right to nominate a Muslim or LBC individual(s) within the CMC.

Once the parties have settled the issue of government formation after election, and they would know that they don't have to be the top vote getter to be a part of the CMC the election contest would become much more civilized, non-violent and non-traumatic. However, they still would have to tackle the question of which party would contest from how many and which seats. It would be best for them to let the public decide these things for the parties in a primary election. Otherwise they would end up trying to hoodwink each other by threatening to go their own way. Free-list-PR (fl-PR) based primary election would be the way to go for the public to decide the question of which party would contest from how many and which seats, as outlined below. We should also keep in mind that if it is the public that is going to decide nomination via a primary, not the political bosses, new as well as old politicians have to please the public, not the old political hacks. Public will be served with phenomenal increase in the number of social workers with political aspirations together with extraordinary desertion in the number of sycophants and court-jesters from the courts of political bosses. Dynastic grip on politics will also reduce.

Each of the voters could be given five votes to cast for five different candidates. The candidates may all be from the same party or different ones. The voters could do so by saving the fliers of five candidates they happen to like best, or have their names written on a piece of paper, take them to the polling booth, stuff them into an envelop supplied there, seal it and drop it into the ballot box. Votes for individuals would also be added to respective party the candidates are affiliated with. Each party would be assigned a number of seats (party-quotas) in proportion to the number of votes they collect via their candidates. One could then make a master-list of all candidates in order of votes received by the candidates. Candidates may be declared elected off the top of the master-list. As each of the candidates is declared elected, status of party-quotas and various other kinds of quotas would also be kept in mind. As soon as a particular quota is filled, candidates within that category would be dropped out of the master-list. Also, as a candidate is declared elected, s/he would be free to pick a constituency (not taken so far by the preceding candidates with higher votes) from which s/he would like to contest the following general election. In this way finally all of the party-quotas as well as Assembly seats would be allocated to one or the other candidates.

There is one little snag in the process described above. Suppose women's quota happens to be 33.3%. There is women's party that received 30% of the total votes cast, giving it a party-quota of 30% seats. The women's party does have women with good number of votes; however, its party-quota of 30% is already filled. Suppose in the other parties no other women receive significant number of votes (say, none receive more than a fourth of what top women's party candidates not yet elected have – that is as if none of these other women received any votes at all.) In that case, to fill the women's quota women from the women's party should be elected as over hang beyond the total number of seats supposed to exist in the Assembly. Similar overhang is allowed in German Reichstag. If a party wins more seats in via FPTP part of their MMP election than what their PR seat quota allows, the party is allowed to keep the excess of seats won via FPTP part of election process.

After the free-list-PR process described in the above two paragraphs, the parties are not left with any scope for negotiation. Everything has been decided for them by the vote of the public. The public has to feel happy that nominees of the grand party alliance have been nominated with their votes in a very transparent manner. They will elect the grand alliance nominees with overwhelming number of votes in the following main election. The process would also familiarize public, political leaders and political workers with the fl-PR process. It will enable the parliamentarians to give fl-PR an educated consideration as the method for holding the nation's main general election in the future.

Goal of all peace and development loving parties should be marginalization of BJP. BJP is most inimical towards Dalits, even more than it is against Muslims or Christians. It is primarily to keep SC/ST/OBC in subjugated position they attack Muslims and Christians.

In view of the last paragraph above, it would make sense for BSP to try to make friends with SP. This would not only put BSP in a better position to bargain with Congress as well as SP, it may lead to a grand coalition of BSP, Congress, SP, and rest of the secular parties all together! If such a coalition becomes a reality, BJP/RSS would be totally wiped off the map of UP. It would also improve relationship among their constituents Dalits, OBC, Muslims and the oppressor castes.

Such a coalition would be beneficial for Dalits, as BSP will try to restrain OBCs with the help of Congress, and BSP will try to extract better terms for SC as well as OBC from the upper/oppressor castes with the help of SP. As already stated, (BSP + Congress + SP) grand alliance would be better than (BSP + Congress) alliance. This is because simply (BSP + Congress) alliance would almost certainly force (SP + BJP) alliance, just like (RJD + Congress) alliance forced (JD(U) & BJP) in Bihar. (SP + BJO) alliance would be of nearly equal strength to that of (BSP + Congress). This would not only make the election outcome an uncertainty, it will unite OBC + oppressor castes against Dalits and Muslims.

Following the coalition of Dalits and OBC in 1993, which led them to power, upper/oppressor caste establishment were shaken to the core and they started peddling theories of “natural enmity” between Dalits and OBC, and that they can never unite. If one objectively looks at the relationship between OBC and SC/ST, one will find that it is just a couple of land owning upper of the OBC castes that have bought land from the upper/oppressor castes and together with the land they have bought enmity as well. However, major chunks of land still continue to be in the hands of the upper/oppressor castes, and hence the major burden of enmity against the landless or nearly landless SC/ST and most of OBCs and Muslims still lies on the shoulders of the upper/oppressor castes. Further, SC/ST as well as OBC, each have a lot to gain from reservation policies, which continues to face stiff resistance from the upper/oppressor castes. In this very crucial struggle, SC/ST/OBC, and Muslims since the Sachchar Committee recommendations, have become most natural allies. The sooner all these oppressed constituents including Christians all other minorities recognize and nurture friendship and alliance with each other in their uphill struggle for social justice, and extend this alliance towards political alliance, the sooner will they see their emancipation and salvation of the country from its miseries.

Starting from UP, the above kind of grand alliance could become a pre-cursor of nation-wide grand-coalition to uproot communalist BJP/RSS, just as Swiss have a grand coalition of all parties allied against their racist SVP party. (Over the past decade or so SVP has become strongest party in Switzerland by stoking racist fear and discrimination against increasing number of immigrants.) The grand alliance of all secular parties in India may either force BJP/RSS to give up their anti-minorities and anti-oppressed caste orientation and attitude, or go out of existence.

 

UP Parliamentary Election 2009

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

SP

23

23.3

28.8

Congress

21

18.2

26.3

BSP

20

27.4

25.0

NDA

15

20.8

18.8

Independents

1

0.5

1.3

Total

80

90.2

100.0

 

 

 

 

NDA = BJP + RLD

 

 

BJP

10

17.5

12.5

RLD

5

3.3

6.3

NDA tot

15

20.8

18.8

 

 

 

Seats won by parties getting largest percentage of votes in UP Assembly elections from 1991 through 2007

Year

Party

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

2007

2 . BSP

206

30.43%

51.12%

2002

7 . SP

143

25.37%

35.48%

1996

2 . BJP

174

32.52%

41.04%

1993

1 . BJP

177

33.30%

41.94%

1991

1 . BJP

221

31.45%

52.74%

 

 

 

UP Assembly Election results, major party-wise, 1991 - 2007

UP Assembly Election 2007

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

BJP

51

16.97%

12.66%

BSP

206

30.43%

51.12%

INC

22

8.61%

5.46%

RLD

10

3.70%

2.48%

SP

97

25.43%

24.07%

Total

386

 

 

Ind & others

17

 

 

Total seats

403

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UP Assembly Election 2002

 

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

BJP

88

20.08%

21.84%

BSP

98

23.06%

24.32%

INC

25

8.96%

6.20%

SP

143

25.37%

35.48%

Total

354

77.47%

87.84%

Ind & others

49

 

 

Total seats

403

 

 

 

 

 

 

UP Assembly Election 1996

 

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

BJP

174

32.52%

41.04%

INC

33

8.35%

7.78%

BSP

67

19.64%

15.80%

SP

110

21.80%

25.94%

Total

384

82.31%

 

Ind & others

40

 

 

Total seats

424

 

 

 

 

 

 

UP Assembly Election 1993

 

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

BJP

177

33.30%

41.94%

INC

28

15.08%

6.64%

JD

27

12.33%

6.40%

BSP

67

11.12%

15.88%

SP

109

17.94%

25.83%

Total

408

89.77%

 

Ind & others

14

 

 

Total seats

422

 

 

 

 

 

 

UP Assembly Election 1991

 

PARTY

Seats won

votes %

% seats won

BJP

221

31.45%

52.74%

INC

46

17.32%

10.98%

JD

92

18.84%

21.96%

JP

34

12.52%

8.11%

BSP

12

9.44%

2.86%

 

405

89.57%

 

Ind & others

14

 

 

Total seats

419

 

 

 

 

 

 



Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights

Comment Policy

Fair Use Notice


 

Share This Article



Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands of people more. You just share it on your favourite social networking site. You can also email the article from here.



Disclaimer

 

Feed Burner

Twitter

Face Book

Subscribe

CC on Mobile

 

Search Our Archive

 



Our Site

Web