Congress prepared the way for Yogi Adityanath's rise

The party got ten years from 2004 to 2014, but the time was not used to equip its cadre with its core ideology.

Sahil Joshi

I don't understand why the choice of Yogi Adityanath as UP CM is shocking. Except for the 1984 elections, when the BJP briefly embraced Gandhian socialism, its ideological position has never changed. And the ideology has yielded leaders who have been loyal to Hindutva and cultural nationalism.

I am surprised with the new wave of analysis that Yogi Adityanath will be taking off the mask of “sabka saath, sabka vikas”. I think there is no mask or “mukhauta” in BJP; even AB Vajpayee had objected to then BJP general secretary Govindacharya's remark about him being a “mukhauta” and hardliner LK Advani being the real face of BJP. He had found these remarks derogatory.

However, those who kept calling Advani the true face of BJP changed course with the rise of Narendra Modi and started calling Modi the true face of BJP, especially after Advani's ideological debacle within the Sangh Parivar – he had called Mohammad Ali Jinnah “secular” – so the real face of BJP in the eyes of analysts has always been changing.

In reality, the BJP's or Sangh Parivar's true face has never changed and Yogi Adityanath is not a surprise – it is the face which was meant to be in the ruling position whenever they got full mandate.

Advani and Modi were accepted by the public. I don't think Yogi's face is different from that of the BJP and Sangh ideology, in which Advani and Modi also believed in. His saffron robes don't make him different from other BJP leaders.

Before Modi's elevation as a national leader, many analysts kept predicting that he won't be accepted nationwide for the simple reason that a hardline face is normally avoided by the average voter. Because of that, Modi came up with “achhe din”, to get a massive mandate from the voter who may not be supporting hardline cultural nationalism or what we can call Hindu nationalism. But I think it's not that simple.

The rise of Hindu nationalists began with the end of the Nehru-era in the Congress.

After Nehru, the secular and liberal culture of the Congress started eroding. The party cadre started moving away from the basic ethos and ideology; the culture of open debate was replaced by flattery of the supreme leadership in the party, which gave rise to authoritarianism in the party. And somewhere there, soft Hindutva also started rearing its head.

Victory in the Bangladesh War took the idea of nationalism to its peak – it turned PM Indira Gandhi into “Durga” and then she tried every tactic to remain in power, which gave rise to the Khalistan movement in Punjab. To quell the movement, she ordered Operation Bluestar to fish out Sikh militants from the Golden Temple in Amritsar. Her political tactics to defeat the National Conference in Jammu & Kashmir also supported soft Hindutva.

Her murder at the hands of her Sikh bodyguards gave rise to Hindu retaliation against Sikhs in Delhi, which was supported by then Congress. This mania of Hindu nationalism was used by the Congress in the 1984 general election to get a massive mandate which was termed by Congress analysts as a sympathy wave for Rajiv Gandhi. But Hindu nationalism was on the rise. The atmosphere in the country was ready to nurture Hindutva politics.

Opening the gates of Babri Masjid to play the soft Hindutva card was the opportunity the BJP and hardliners were waiting for, to push their agenda. And then there was no looking back.

With the Congress cadre in disarray, not equipped with the understanding of the party's “secular” ideology, the BJP and the Sangh were ready to change the fabric of the country, with socialists marginalised by infighting and communists confined to two states. There was no one to take on the BJP and Sangh ideologically.

By wearing the “mukhauta” as well as the “real face” as and when it suited them, the Sangh went on from winning battles to winning the ultimate war with the Congress.

Despite everything, the Congress got ten years from 2004 to 2014, but the time was not used by the party to equip its cadre with the core Congress ideology (which Rahul Gandhi is speaking of now) to take on the BJP.

The Congress didn't change from the days of post-Nehru. Its ideological battle with BJP had no takers. Its core values had no supporters left as the Congress itself in the last 30 years demolished that support. So the coming of Yogi Adityanath to power hasn't brought any surprise; it has just underlined the tough battle the other side will have to face if they want to change the situation.

By merely saying that “Congress's battle with the BJP is ideological”, Rahul Gandhi can't gear up his party cadre – he will have to start at the basics to rebuild not only the organisation but also the secular atmosphere of the country which was created as well as destroyed by his party. (courtesy: dailyO.com)

(The Author is a Senior Editor – Editorial TVTN)