Manifesto: Is Modi transforming BJP into a company?

The BJP has come a long way from a party under collective leadership to a party led by a single leader. The recently released manifesto of the party confirms this change. If the title and the content of the manifesto speak of anything very loudly, it is the overwhelming presence of Modi. The title is ‘Modi ki Guarantee, the slogan is ‘Phir Ek Bar, Modi Sarkar’ and the programs are guarantees from Modi. Modi is everywhere. The manifesto has been prepared in a different format to accommodate Modi’s ad-like photos. It looks like the brochure of a high-profile brand ambassador for a corporate company. A political party has metamorphosed into a company, and Modi is its CEO.

The metamorphosis is itself intriguing, keeping in view the party’s background. Its predecessor, the Bhartiya Jan Sangh, was floated as a joint political initiative of the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha in the early fifties to wash away the twin stigmas of being involved in the killing of Mahatma Gandhi and non-involvement in the freedom struggle. The party grew as an anti-minority outfit in a backdrop that was shadowed by post-partition communal violence and hatred for Pakistan, the new nation carved out from an undivided India. The Hindu Mahasabha soon abandoned it, and the RSS took control. Since then, it has been sending its people to oversee the party organization. The organizing secretary is invariably selected by the RSS. Has the RSS, an advocate of Swadeshi, approved the transformation?

The RSS has been particular in showcasing the Jan Sangh and its later version, the Bhartiya Janata Party, as a unit of Sangh Parivar that has many other constituents. It has been very clear that no individual should present himself as the sole leader of the party. No one, including founders like Din Dayal Upadhayay, Balraj Madhok, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and LK Advani, could defy the RSS. Any breach in the ideological or organizational arrangement was unacceptable. The classical case is of Advani, who was soon dethroned after his blunder of terming Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, as secular. Dindayal Upadhyay and Atal Bihari Vajpayee did not pick up any quarrel with the parent organization and maintained their position in the party. Vajpayee remained at the top until his ill health made him immobile. The BJP contested election after election on his face, yet he never claimed any superman status. Modi did it, and soon he occupied the top position. In fact, he had started it way back in 2010, when he propelled his so-called Gujarat Model into the somewhat uncertain sky of Indian politics. The question is how the RSS allowed a model of leadership that has many similarities with Putin’s Russia. One person is controlling the country and making every single decision. Putin is doing all these things with the help of businessmen and intelligence people. His opponents are in jail. Recent arrests of two chief ministers when the elections are midway say everything. The RSS has been a votary of the Deshi model. How could it allow an utterly Western model? How could a Parivar be run in this fashion?

The vital question remains as to how Indians will respond to this transformation of a political party into a corporate entity. Will they understand that this entity allowed pharma companies to market substandard drugs after extorting money from them? This corporate entity accepted money from the company that made a tunnel that collapsed in no time. Is it not strange that the CEO does not have any remorse that he presided over corruption that involved the lives of common people? The Electoral Bond was a scam of scams, and the CEO is unperturbed! Can the BJP win an electoral battle on his face?

It is immaterial whether the BJP survives this transformation. The vital question is whether the democratic structure of the country is being threatened by it. Modi and Amit Shah are ready to dismantle everything elegant in our democracy. They have divided every single party in the country. They frequently say unpalatable things against individuals, political parties, and communities. They openly use religion, caste, community, and the sacrifices of the armed forces to promote their electoral prospects. This is what they are doing with impunity. The Election Commission of India or any other institution is unable to prohibit them.

However, we can find out the fault lines between ideologies in an era of blurred political atmosphere. Team Modi could not hide its preference for corporate and big companies. Modi’s pro-poor rhetoric could hardly find visible space in the document, which has been named Sankalp Patra. It has been done despite the challenges from the Congress and its partners. The Congress has promised 30 lakh government jobs to youths, a Minimum Support Price to farmers, an Urban Employment Guarantee scheme on the lines of MGNREGA, and social security schemes for women and senior citizens. Other parties, including DMK, RJD, and others, have also come out with such schemes. It is strange that his team could not visualize these challenges and chose to ignore them. Is it overconfidence or a lack of ideas? Why is it that Prime Minister Modi has failed to protect his image as a pro-poor politician? His manifesto speaks of programs such as social infrastructure and physical and digital infrastructure. However, he fails to promise anything concrete to improve the existing social infrastructure of the country. He talks of extending the Ayushman Bharat facility to senior citizens above 70 years of age. Is it big enough of a scheme to be mentioned in the speeches of the Prime Minister? His manifesto should cause concern to the people who want democracy to survive in India. After all, the extinction of political parties will certainly affect democracy. The extinction is not evident because the party is ready to transform into an apolitical formation.

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)