India last went to the polls in 2019. It will go to the poll again in 2024. The general elections to the Lok Sabha in 2024 will be a significant event for India’s democracy as the dominant political ideology or the dogmatic underpinnings of the ruling dispensation will undergo an endurance test at the hustings. Considering that the current dominant ideology has many incompatibilities with the national values as enshrined in the nation’s constitution and yet has found mass acceptance for over a decade is in itself a reason for the 2024 polls to be a defining moment in the course of India’s democracy.
The political discourse in the country has considerably transformed in the last half a decade or more. The current national political landscape is the scene for a unique distribution: a formidable party is in power with considerable financial heft at its disposal and mass mobilisation in its favour, followed by another national party in perennial decline and a motley crowd of numerous regional parties with proven strength in their pockets and yet unable to figure out a common ideological platform that could unite them for a common cause. A fourth player had emerged in the last decade which does not fit the description of a regional party. With clear national ambitions, it has been making small but steady inroads outside its initial areas of influence.
The dominant political narrative in the country, however, largely revolves around the performance records, past legacies and the popularity (or lack of it) of the two major players only. Despite their best efforts and many sporadic attempts to unite and create political formations, regional parties have struggled to gain a decisive space in the national political narrative. This could partly be on account of their ideological identities and political projects that are intrinsically regional. Few of their key leaders have been able to transcend their regional or linguistic identities.
Notwithstanding their disparate presence, the urge among the regional players to break out on the national scene has begun to show some urgency. A few of them, like Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress, are gradually attempting to spread tentacles outside their traditional spheres of influence. The erstwhile attempts of the parties like Samajwadi Party (SP), Bahujan Samajwadi Party (BSP), Janata Dal (United) and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) to expand their hinterlands beyond their immediate pockets of influence remain a key inspiration for the new aspirants.
The Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS), meanwhile, recently, attempted a rebranding by jettisoning its ‘Telangana’ identity and adopting a new ‘Rashtriya’ nomenclature. Erstwhile national players like Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Shiv Sena, having ceded considerable space to the national and regional challengers in recent years, are striving to hold on to their traditional bastions. New players like Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), while making attempts to break new ground, are realising the challenge inherent in breaching formidable political forts.
This being the overall milieu of regional parties in the Indian political scene, what augurs for them in 2024?
We have had regional parties in the hot seat in several states. We have quite a few reference points to gauge their performance as well. We have had the SP and the BSP in U.P. and judging by the pace of development both parties did fairly well. We have had Tamil Nadu flourishing since 1967 under the Dravidian parties. The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) was in power in Andhra Pradesh for a long time. The stupendous growth that the state has achieved, especially in the information technology (IT) section, was the subject of envy for years. The Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS), with its re-election and firm foothold over the newly-formed state’s electorate, indicates that the progress achieved has been well received. The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) is on the verge of completing twenty years of rule in Orissa. That the party has been voted to power four times in a row, is proof enough of its success.
The abovementioned states have had national parties ruling them at one point in time or the other. Why the electorates of these states preferred to shun the national parties and firmly consolidate behind the regional entities is worth a great academic exploration. While the national parties are considered to be hallowed and the regional ones are looked down upon, should one look into the history of the development of many of these states one would easily see the fallacy underlying such belief.
Hence, the scope for these comparatively ‘minor’ players to come on the national scene by forming a core body through a democratic process has always remained moot. The fact that the country’s electorate has long rejected the concept of a ‘third front’ remains an irrefutable challenge though. Yet, the need to check the possibility of a single-party or dual-party dominance at the national level remains the key rationale for such formations to take root.
Beyond such rationale, my contention in favour of regional parties forming a national alternative is primarily based on the logic of empathy, which, in fact, should be the desired factor for any party that seeks to form a government in a democracy. For, a government despite all the good intentions may fail miserably in the absence of empathy. For example, the policies and schemes devised by the government of a national party sitting in Lutyens’ Delhi cannot be expected to have an in-depth knowledge of the geographical, socio-cultural and demographical landscape of an interior region. No amount of research and expert opinion might bring one close to reality as its physical proximity to reality does.
The empathy that works as a great binder cannot be expected from a person sitting in New Delhi who has never seen the distress of a person struggling in a remote area. Whereas, a regional party and its functionaries might be better placed to appreciate the pains and sorrows, as well as the dreams and aspirations of these people with the party’s cadre itself providing the first line of community outreach. This is not to say that the cadre of national parties lack such grassroots connect, but rather that the power of the national government might create a hubris that hastens a disconnect even while in the middle of the grassroots.
Empathy and physical proximity go together because in the absence of physical proximity the intensity of empathy decreases. A regional party not only has an intensive knowledge of the region but also has a better understanding of the social psyche of the area. Regional politics also places the parties under closer scrutiny, and they are more accountable to their immediate vicinity and susceptible to peer competition which could be more from similar regional parties than the national counterparts.
The DMK-AIADMK duo in Tamil Nadu and the SP-BSP equations in Uttar Pradesh are notable examples that are replicated by the TDP-YSR equation in Andhra Pradesh, the NCP-Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, the RJD-JDU in Bihar and so on. Only a few states like Telangana and West Bengal where TRS and TMC respectively compete with the national parties provides notable exceptions.
Also, it has been seen that where the regional parties are at the helm of affairs, the state machinery is more benevolent and less repressive, which, though may become a contested fact in a few cases. Nonetheless, cases of human rights violations and application of draconian laws against people are far too less in number or swiftly investigated as the regional leaders have to countenance the people who elected them from proximity whereas the national parties might always hope to rebalance dipping popularity in one state with surges in another.
Regional parties are seen to have better situational awareness of the ground realities of their states but also know where the shoe pinches. It is because of this that barring a few exceptions, almost all such states have had more responsible governments in the regional parties.
Why a nation that takes pride in its plurality should endorse the idea of singularity when it comes to its government should be thought about and analysed in depth. The fact that this great democracy has occasionally shown dangerous shades of absoluteness by its national parties should be reason enough for us to give serious thought to trying the regional parties yet another shy at a national government.
The only problem one may have with regional parties is that they are limited to one region hence the influence of bigger regions and their priorities can weigh in against smaller states when it comes to the formulation of policies, etc. But then, in a consortium of regional parties, the common interest of several such smaller entities will readily grow into sizes to counter any such bullying which is democratic and spontaneous.
It will be worthwhile to remember that no single stream of political thought has in all these years been able to represent the diversities of this country as envisaged in its founding principles. Hence, what would make it better is a conglomeration of democratic thought processes flowing from all corners and converging at the altar of the Constitution, whose very evolution itself has been a decentralised thought process all these years.
While the essence of any democracy is the decentralisation of the processes and structures applied to its core, we would not be erring to think that diversified political interests can only strengthen its foundation. If we bring the vision of all regional parties to the centre, we may be able to visualize a combination that is perfect for a country that is known for its plurality of people/languages/cultures/demography.
A consortium of regional parties, united under a common minimum programme, making a government in the centre may be an extremely viable option that our democracy needs to explore particularly if the inclination towards national parties erodes by the time of the 2024 polls.
A conglomerate that understands the demographic, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity of a country of this size shall have greater political traction than one with some vested interests. Such a consortium will have representatives from all states. Hence, there will be no ignoring of states that are traditionally supposed to be remote and difficult to manage.
No growth is possible when some parts of the country suffer from a sense of alienation. Issues such as North East, Kashmir, Maoism, and displacement of millions under the garb of development all could be resolved more amicably and pragmatically, peacefully and politically in the rule of a consortium as the basis of the conscience of the government will be a true representation of the interest of the people, not one ideology or voice. Under pressure from the victims and people around how regional politics would have handled the aftermath of an incident like the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy could be visualised as a case in point here.
Therefore, a coalition that has representation from all around could be expected to be more democratic and a solution to the many problems that India faces currently, in more ways than one.
