An AAM analysis
With an emphatic and thrilling win in Delhi Elections, the Aam Aadmi
Party has emerged as a viable alternative to the Congress and regional parties
as a voice of opposition against the ruling pro-business BJP. The victory margin has generated a buzz that the jhadoo should now be replaced by a vacuum cleaner.
As there were so many analysis post 16th May-2014, there are bound to be
this time around too, though the reasons for BJP's defeat more or less have
already been mentioned by ‘eminent’ experts at the 24 hours news channels.
Apart from stating some very obvious reasons that led to BJP's downfall,
such as parachuting the candidates, excessive negative campaign, arrogance,
Ghar-wapasi, Sadhvis & Maharajs, and even the Pinstripe suit, the
discussions have been rhetorical (& sometimes confusing – Kiran Bedi being
brought late in the campaign v/s the pathetic speaker that she is). The
twitter-journos have only confirmed their standing on hollow bases, their
euphoria for an AAP victory overwhelming their reasoning abilities. I call
these factors obvious not because their negative impact has been empirically
established, but because they were prominent in the discussion agenda preceding
the election - both as an opposition's offence and BJP's defence, and clearly
in retrospect it can be argued that the defence was rather appalling.
The acknowledged but unanalysed factor has been that of perception - the
perception that BJP has failed in its 9 month rule at the centre and that AAP's
49 day rule was at least satisfactory, if not heavenly; the perception that if
BJP comes to power it is going to be indifferent to say the least and AAP would
truly be a people's government, sans dharnas this time. Here, let me say that
the appealing but unrealisable promises alone do not explain the basis of AAP's
victory. In fact, everyone had their own list of such populisms. What turned
the wave in favour of AAP was that their leader had managed to get the
perceptual upper-hand. The 'obvious' factors continue to be debated in media,
so I will focus on the not-so-attention-generating 'perceptual' factor.
1. As soon as Arvind Kejriwal resigned from his 49 day
dharna-cum-governance stint, AAP supporters were spreading the achievements of
the government in its 49 day rule. Even though little of note happened during
that time, the list looked like achievements of 'Ram-Rajya'. Empathetic behaviour
of government officials, distribution of lifeline water, disappearance of
police-hafta, etc. were endlessly repeated so as now they have the status of
accepted facts. Another initiative of Mohalla Sabhas, which are little more
than Resident Welfare Associations, was cited as a radical step in democracy.
If the experience of RWAs is any guiding step, this was a redundant gesture, if
not futile. But, perception matters and these 'inclusive' steps were billed as
ushering in 'Swaraj'.
2. BJP's perception as an anti-poor party has been
amplified by the reactions to the Land acquisition ordinance and the ongoing
disinvestment program. While the criticism by some policy experts has been
factual and insightful, the discourse has been hijacked by the political
parties, who very well realise that not much can be affected until the laws
have been passed in the Parliament. On the macroeconomic front, the opposition
is shedding croc-tears for tangible outcomes, as if Modi needed to build
certain kilometres of highways and erect some industries to earn a certificate
from them. Even the never satisfying industry bodies echo such sentiments,
ostensibly to extract further concessions. There is a growing current that
nothing has happened in the 9 month Modi rule, but nobody steps forward to
elaborate on this. On the contrary, the recent ordinances suggest that the
government will not be held hostage to the opposition's obstructionist tactics
and is committed to pursue its reform agenda. Again, the perception that has
been created is that this government is little different from the previous one,
with the added baggage of it being favourable to certain industrialists,
especially the punching bags of Arvind Kejriwal.
3. On the front of the promises made, only time will tell
whether this positive expectation turns into legitimacy. The current economic
reading, although, leaves little doubt about the fictitiousness of these
claims. Just like Narendra Modi's victory in Lok Sabha elections created an
atmosphere of heightened macroeconomic expectations, Arvind Kejriwal has
managed to 'push the envelope further'(sic).
To get the impact of perception, a comparison is necessary. When Modi
talked about bringing black money and getting 15L in the accounts of everyone,
very few took notice and ignored it as an election gimmick (honestly, I, who
has listened to so many of his speeches, did not even know he has made such a
ridiculous proposition). When 100 days passed, the Congress made the nation
take notice of this promise and generated a nation-wide debate on the issue, in
process generating an absolute negativity for the government. Making such a
promise was ill-conceived, as it invited a clever reaction from the opposition
which capitalised on this blooper. Here, AAP's case is on a better footing as
it has already got the 'undoable' certificate from the opposition. (Unintentionally)Well
Played!
Similarly, the Jan Dhan Yojana, an excellent scheme with an outstanding
objective and even more outstanding implementation has managed to garner much
negative publicity. More than the incentives given to attract the customers,
the intricacies of the scheme have attracted mocking. As if the people who were
already made to expect Rs.15L from the black money suddenly have Rs.5000 more
to get in doles from the overdraft facility.
I will end by giving an unrelated example which serves as an anecdote to
realise the impact which false perceptions create. The pharmaceutical
industrial units in India which cater to the west have some of the best hygiene
standards found anywhere in the world. Given the stringent norms laid down by
the USFDA and other regulators and also the political-business pressure of
major pharma MNCs, Indian pharma firms adhere to the strictest cleanliness
practices. But because of the Ranbaxy episode, the dominant narrative that has
been established is that there is little regard to hygiene in India. Not only
do foreign MNCs now use this argument to their advantage in USFDA hearings, but
also the prescriptive economic-journalists have elevated this narrative to the
status of a fact, probably without visiting any of the manufacturing
facilities. It is a different matter that Indian firms are consistently ‘disappointing’
the regulatory inspectors with their state-of-the-art facilities. And our
journalists are blind to such information. Perception and prejudice fuel into
each other. (I have visited the premises of an American-German firm in New Jersey.
In India, I have confirmed the practices with my relatives and friends who work
in Indian firms).
The conclusion is that offence wins - on policy front, not on personal
front. On personal front it has only backfired in a growing polity where people
crave more for outcomes rather than personal duels. On the policy front it is
conclusive that whatever you do, you must communicate it sincerely and
proactively, before the opposition gets to you. By you giving the avenues to
the opposition to attack, the narrative gets hijacked and the agenda gets
derailed. BJP has already a lot to learn from the obvious factors of defeat, it
might as well pay attention to its perception in the masses.
