The Business Of Bjp

The partys product differentiation exercise vis-a vis the Congress has traditionally been carried out entirely in the domain of religion. Hence, it brought to the fore the concept of Hindutva. But with the BJP deciding to tone down that element of its ideology, the focus will now have to be on the content of economic policy.

In the current framework of economic discourse, all positions on economic policy tend to get narrowed down to either being pro- or anti-liberalisation. This is a gross simplification of issues. There are different ways of liberalising an economy, and there is a large variation in the quality of reforms and government intervention. As such, being opposed to a particular kind of liberalisation, which in the Indian context can be referred to as Manmohanomics, is not necessarily regressive or protectionist. But like in the seventies, when any anti-Congress activity was seen as being anti-national, any criticism of Manmohannomics is seen as being anti-liberalisation in general.

 

Being pro- or anti-liberalisation is not the issue; nor is it that important. What is important is to have an internally consistent set of economic policies. The advocates of Hindutva would do well to present a distinct policy of economic management in their forthcoming election manifesto.

This is more important than convincing the Muslim electorate of their noble intentions which seems to top the BJPs agenda today. The party would do well to recall that as early as 1923, in its first important session, the Hindu Mahasabha had held direct talks with the Muslims. Indeed, in 1924 at Belgaum, the Mahasabha meeting was even attended by prominent Muslims like the Ali brothers and Maulana Hasrat Mohani. These people had more standing in their community than the Aslam Sher Khans of today that the BJP is wooing.

The BJP is seen by most observers as a Hindu right-wing party. The emphasis that the BJP places in its pronouncements, is on the word Hindu. Hence, the need to address the Muslims. The emphasis instead should be on defining the label right in the context of economic policy.

But the BJPs world-view on all matters other than communal continues to be determined by what the president of the Hindu Mahasabha, Lala Lajpat Rai, declared at its 1925 session. The Sabha, he said, should not make any encroachment on the province of the Congress, except so far as purely communal questions are concerned.

To start with, the BJP needs to explicitly state its views on two of the most basic changes that have taken place in the realm of the political economy. First, is the altered framework of economic policy management and second, the decentralisation of political decision-making.

But in line with the past the intellectual predecessors of the BJP had made a virtue of endorsing the economic policy of the Congress the BJP continues to endorse the economic agenda of the Congress. Indeed, historically, the Hindu right has always been a Pavlovian dog of the Congress as far as economic policy is concerned.

After disastrous defeats in the general elections of 1951-52 and 1957, leaders of the Hindu Mahasabha gave serious thought to a revision of the partys ideology especially with regard to economic policy. In response, the Congress induced a general swing towards socialism, and the Mahasabha discovered Hindu socialism.

Less than a year before the 1962 general elections, V G Deshpande announced this discovery in his inaugural address to the 46th session of the Mahasabha. For the first time he articulated the view that the caste system was based on the socialist principles of from everyone according his capacity and to every one according to his needs. According to the then ideologues of the party, the exploitative system of feudalism had no place in the Hindu socio-economic system. Indeed, landlordism had been introduced in India by Muslims rulers, specifically the Mughals. Shivaji was credited with having introduced land reforms and was, in fact, the founder of Hindu socialism.

In an interesting modification of the socialist classless society, the Mahasabha manifesto declared that the present classes, based on economic exploitation, would have to go and their place would have to be taken by divisions based on spiritual, intellectual and ethical values analogous to the Hindu varnas.

The 1962 manifesto of the party naively affirmed that economic policy must be framed in such a way as to avoid on the one hand the evils of capitalism and on the other to secure all the benefits of socialism.

The approach of the ideological progeny of the Mahasabha and the Jan Sangh the BJP has remained the same. The economic content of the BJPs election manifesto in 1996 was similar in spirit as well as substance to that of the Congress. There were only some changes on the margin which were more in the nature of product differentiation.

It is not enough to promise, as it had done in the manifesto of 1996, a new economic order based on the principles of surasksha, shuchita, swadeshi and samrasata. Here its approach to economic policy seems to be to incorporate all worthwhile ideas, negate or resolve all contradictions, make all necessary exceptions and qualifications; yet, offer no unambiguous and distinct path of transition from the perilous present to the glorious future that is delineated. For, it is not even possible to have this order using the same methods and materials as was done first by the Congress party and later by the United Front, with a reasonable degree of success in the last seven years or so.

The BJPs acceptance of the current regime of economic management, which will lead to increasing political decentralisation, is in basic contradiction with the partys political view. What is being supported by the BJP by endorsing the current economic regime is a political decentralisation along with economic centralisation. This is exactly the opposite of what the BJP has stood for so far. A serious contender for power, which the BJP believes it is, the party needs its own brand of economic management: Saffronomics is the solution.