In February, when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said, Abki Baar, 400 Paar (this time, [BJP] will cross 400 seats), I was scared. Very soon, Abki Baar, 400 Paar, was echoing everywhere in India, even in my state, Kerala, where the Bharatiya Janata Party, at the time, neither had an MP nor an MLA.
As I have been reading more of Dr BR Ambedkar's work for the last two years to enlighten myself and empower my community, I realised that Abki Baar, 400 Paar this election season is not for the common good.
On 14 April, in Chittar, a hilly town in the Western Ghats of Kerala near the famous Sabarimala Shrine, I was the main speaker for Ambedkar Jayanti. I could have spoken about Ambedkar’s life and his tireless efforts to acquire academic excellence to inspire the Dalit-dominated audience, especially the youngsters.
Instead, I chose to focus on the speech made by Dr Ambedkar 75 years ago, in which he thanked the Constituent Assembly after completing the drafting of the Indian Constitution. I emphasised what he said about how hero worship in politics and political parties trying to place their creed above the Indian Constitution would threaten independence.
On hero worship, Dr Ambedkar said that there is nothing wrong with being grateful to the great men who have rendered life-long services to the country. But there are limits to gratefulness, as has been well said by the Irish Patriot Daniel O’Connell, that no man can be grateful at the cost of his honour, no woman can be grateful at the cost of her chastity, and no nation can be grateful at the cost of its liberty.
“In politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and eventual dictatorship,” Ambedkar famously said.
I Worried That '400 Paar' Would Destabilise the Constitution
Hearing "Modi, Modi, Modi" everywhere and seeing him rise above the BJP leadership while sidelining the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the parent organisation of the BJP, I could see Modi as an autocrat in the making. This was confirmed when he claimed he was God-sent.
On political parties placing their creed above the Indian Constitution, he said, “It is certain that if the parties place creed above country, our independence will be put in jeopardy a second time and probably be lost forever. This is an eventuality we must all resolutely guard against. We must be determined to defend our independence with the last drop of our blood.”
I worried that Abki Baar, 400 Paar would lead to destabilising the Indian Constitution. Many Keralite BJP leaders were also promoting the narrative that they would change everything, from names of places to equal rights and social justice for all. In short, everything was revolving around majoritarianism holding the upper hand.
Kerala BJP State President K Surendran triggered the first controversy when his candidature was announced in Wayanad against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Even though Surendran talked about climate change in the poll campaign, he promised to change the name of Sulthan Bathery town in Wayanad to Ganapathi Vattam.
Sulthan Bathery reportedly got its name after 18th Century Mysore ruler Tipu Sultan stocked his ammunition and artillery battery in a temple in the locality. Tipu is also said to have built a fort there during his invasion of the Malabar region.
On changing the name of Sulthan Bathery, Sree Padmanabhan, a Kerala BJP debater, told during a TV debate, “We will get 400 seats; we will change it. These are all small things. We will do it like how we removed Article 370."
Shockingly, if you browse through the comment box of the specific debate clip, Padmanabhan was appreciated for showing “boldness” in changing things. The Kerala BJP leaders have had the urge to change the Constitution in the past too. In 2022, Kerala BJP leader PK Krishnadas said that numerous additions and corrections were necessary for the Indian Constitution.
“There is no doubt the Indian Constitution envisages a very distorted ideal of secularism. Real secularism means neither should the government interfere in religious matters nor religions should interfere in government affairs. However, in India, governments interfere in religious affairs and provide reservations on religious grounds. This should change. Allowing religious rules in civil matters is anti-secular. Secularism means a uniform civil code," Krishnadas said in a Facebook post. He wanted to Indianise the Indian Constitution.
In addition to sparking controversy over name changes and threatening over 400 seats, two Kerala BJP parliamentary candidates were also booked on hate speech charges.
Former Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar and BJP National Secretary Anil Antony, candidates in the Thiruvananthapuram and Pathanamthitta parliamentary constituencies, respectively, were booked under Sections 153 and 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 120(O) of the Kerala Police Act for disseminating hate speech against Muslims.
Additionally, Modi campaigned in seven parliamentary constituencies in Kerala. In each constituency, he displayed overconfidence about securing a third term with a brute majority, which alarmed people like me.
Nitish and Naidu Show Greater Solidarity With the Downtrodden Than the BJP
Overall, Modi made 20 visits to Kerala and Tamil Nadu in an attempt to make inroads in both states and achieve the 400-seat target. However, when the results were announced, the BJP won only one seat from both states, and that seat was in Kerala through actor-turned-politician Suresh Gopi.
Now, Modi, who hasn’t led a coalition government in his political career, is forced to forge alliances with the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) from Andhra Pradesh and the Janata Dal (United) (JDU) from Bihar to continue in power.
Even though Chandra Babu Naidu, the leader of the TDP, and Nitish Kumar, the chief of the JD(U), are infamous for changing camps, they are more inclusive than the BJP and Modi. Both Naidu and Nitish support conducting a caste census, oppose implementing the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), and are reluctant to back the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). This will force the BJP to tone down its radical stance.
If the aforementioned policies are vital for ensuring equality and social justice, Naidu and Nitish show much greater solidarity with workers than the BJP. The BJP has compromised the labour reforms achieved through the long struggles of Dr Ambedkar and other leaders decades ago by consolidating over 40 labour laws into four labour codes.
Interestingly, Modi didn't even know that the Sunday holiday for workers was a right gained by unionist Narayan Meghaji Lokhande in 1889. Modi had mistakenly linked the Sunday holiday to Christianity.
History has taught us that under tyranny, labour rights are also compromised. Adolf Hitler banned trade unions in Germany, and Benito Mussolini, the fascist ruler of Italy, failed to protect workers' wages and allowed arbitrary dismissals.
In short, when Indian voters didn't give 400-plus seats to the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA), it forced them to forge alliances. I believe this will push the BJP to compromise on their radical ideas, which could otherwise harm social harmony, endanger equality, and hurt workers.
In a 2005 interview with McKinsey Quarterly, Dr Manmohan Singh, the former Prime Minister of India, said, "We are a coalition government, and that limits our options in some ways. Privatisation happens to be one such area."
He was responding to a question on reforms in India. Despite being in favour of privatisation, it was difficult for Manmohan Singh to advance these policies seamlessly because the Left, which opposes privatisation, was part of the coalition government.
In 2024, Modi will also face similar hurdles if he tries to implement the BJP's radical ideas and policies. As a Dalit and a journalist covering workers' rights, this brings me joy.
(Rejimon Kuttappan is an independent journalist, labour migration specialist and author of Undocumented [Penguin 2021]. This is an opinion-explainer piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)