Muslim voters do not behave any differently from the rest of India | Sohail Hashmi

Daily News and Analysis

Muslim voters do not behave any differently from the rest of India
Saturday, Nov 9, 2013, 7:07 IST | Agency: DNA

by Sohail Hashmi

The only exception, of course, is their opposition to any form of communalism.

If, and this is a big If, a Muslim Vote Bank (MVB) existed, it would reveal itself in even a cursory study of the constituencies where Muslims are in a position to determine the outcome of the elections. If it did exist it would be very easy to show how 10-12 per cent of the total electorate was behaving in a manner that was different from the general electoral trends. In fact, the existence of a disconnect between the electoral performance of the so-called non-Muslim seats and the so-called Muslim seats would be the clearest proof of the existence of such a vote bank.

Let us take the first three general elections to the Lok Sabha. The Congress party got more than 73 per cent of the seats in all of them. Almost everybody was voting for the Congress and one assumes, so were the Muslims. Bengal and Kerala with about 25 per cent Muslim population and Bihar and UP, with 16 per cent and 18 per cent Muslim population respectively, elected a large number of Congress candidates to Parliament. If a MVB existed at this time it would be hidden behind the general trend that was operating during this period.

Therefore, the only time one could actually begin to see the impact of the MVB on the fortunes of the Congress would be when there is a general loss of faith in the Congress, as reflected in the results of the fourth general elections held in 1967. It is in times such as these that the MVB, if it ever existed, would buck the trend, as it were and come to the aid of the old party.

Let us take a closer look at the goings on in Bengal Kerala, UP and Bihar in 1967 and see if we can discover the MVB in operation. In 1967 the Congress was, in fact, ejected from seven state assemblies and it is here that it also suffered its biggest Parliamentary losses as well. The four states of West Bengal, Kerala, UP and Bihar were among the states that rejected the Congress. Madras, Odisha and Punjab were the other three.

Throughout the life of this argument it has been said that the Muslims are the pocket borough of the Congress. If there was a MVB working for the Congress, it should have stood up to be counted in 1967 but it did not. In fact Kerala with 25 per cent Muslim votes elected the first non-Congress government in 1957. Muslims in Kerala are, by and large, concentrated in the North and it has generally voted against the Congress since 1957.

In Bengal, the areas of Muslim concentration are Malda, Murshidabad, Burdwan, Nadia, 24 Parganas and Kolkata. With the exception of Malda, the rest have, post-1967, traditionally voted against the Congress and mostly for the Communists and now when the Communists have lost out in Bengal they have generally lost in these areas as well. The interesting thing is that these ‘Muslim’ seats have not come back to the Congress; they have gone to Trinamool Congress as they have in other parts of Bengal.

Bihar too, with Muslims concentrated in the districts of Katihar, Purnea, Araria and Kishanganj, demonstrates the same trend. The first break comes in 1967 and then it has been the same roller-coaster ride that the entire country has been through.

Several districts of west UP, where Muslim electors would hold the key if they voted en bloc, demonstrate the same trend. Incidentally, Chaudhary Charan Singh owed his rise to power on the basis of his political base in the same region of west UP.

Now let us see what is happening in the Parliamentary seats where Muslims either do not have a decisive electoral strength or they are in such small numbers that they would not be able to influence the results even if they voted en bloc. Those who swear by the MVB will be more than a little disturbed with the trends. Almost three-fourths of the so-called non-Muslim seats went to the Congress till the third general elections and then turned away from the Congress in 1967.

The point that is sought to be made is the following: Generally speaking, the rule that holds is that Muslims do not betray any tendency to vote differently from the national or major regional trends, and this can be seen and demonstrated again and again through the results of all the general elections.

In 1971 with the rise of Indira Gandhi and the Garibi Hatao campaign, everyone went back to the Congress and so did the Muslims. In 1977 everyone deserted the Congress and so did the Muslims. In the 1980 elections there was a trek back to the Congress and the routine was repeated in 1984 and it has been the same through all the remaining elections. In fact, if Muslims are a vote bank, all of India is a vote bank, because, by and large, the entire lot moves together, non-Muslims and Muslims together.

This rule, too, has an exception: the Muslims try not to vote for communalists. They did not vote for the minoritarian communalism of the Muslim League in the provincial assembly elections in 1936 and they are not about to help their majoritarian kinsmen now. The overwhelming majority of Muslims who chose to stay in India had chosen a secular State over a theocracy; they are not going to help another theocracy come to power. And that, perhaps, is the worry of the votaries of the theory of the MVB.

The author blogs at Kafila.org and conducts heritage walks in Delhi