I see the Maharashtra and Haryana results as the logical conclusion of a broader political movement that started in 1967. For the first time then, the anti-Congress vote got polarised. The consolidation increased further in 1977. Somehow, because of individualistic pulls and pressures, the process of formation of a two-party polity did not happen.
By 1996, the BJP had become the single largest party, but it didn’t have a presence in many places. The NDA was formed. Congress had always been a pole of Indian politics from the start, but the formation of an alternative took 62 years, from the first elections of 1952.
However, until now, regional parties used to get the support of national parties on a platter. The BJP gave away its support. For example, in 1999, BJP made Chandrababu Naidu’s fortune in Andhra Pradesh. It had polled over 20 per cent of the vote in Andhra. Even in 1984, when the BJP won two seats, one of the seats was from Andhra, so it had a presence there even then.
The politics then was of a front led by the BJP versus the Congress. Now it has become a front led by the Congress versus the BJP. The situation has reversed.
In the case of Maharashtra, where the BJP went against its oldest ally, the Shiv Sena, they snapped ties and proved they are the bigger partner. In Haryana the result was even clearer. The support they got was clear indication of consolidation of anti-Congress vote.
These elections have proved that the BJP does not need a face in every state. Haryana showed this; though in Maharashtra BJP does have a very credible second line of leadership. The RSS has a system of picking up and grooming talent and taking them to the top.
In Congress, 10 Janpath politics has prevented the emergence of regional and local leaders.
Now anti-BJP parties will start to get together. The BJP will try to go it alone, and expect it to continue its march. I see it as the logical end of what started in the summer of ’67.
Mr Deshmukh is a psephologist. Views are his own.
