Yet it would be naïve to conclude that the BJP's resurgence is the only important message from these elections. There are at least seven other key takeaways from the election results in these four states. Indeed, so significant are these messages that they provide a new perspective to the apparent rise in the BJP's electoral fortunes as evident in its performance at the hustings.
One, these elections have shown that popular discontent with lack of governance and rising inflation, made worse by a slowing economy, can turn voters against any government.
Also Read
Two, freebies or sops do not always ensure electoral victories. The voter today is much more astute in differentiating between a sustainable growth model that gives him real gains and a free ride with the help of subsidies. Most importantly, the voter wants better governance.
Three, the nature of political discourse has changed. Greater focus now is on governance, local administration with popular participation, greater accountability of legislators and decentralised democracy.
Four, voters are looking for alternatives to existing political parties such as the Congress and the BJP. If there are credible alternatives, voters are willing to try them out. The increasing number of young voters may be one of the reasons why more and more people are willing to experiment with an alternative to the traditional political parties.
Five, the rise of the BJP has not taken place at the cost of the Congress in all the states. In both Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the BJP may have won, but the Congress has not been wiped out. On the contrary, it has actually increased its vote share in both states. In Rajasthan, the Congress has lost vote share only marginally. The sole state in which its vote share loss is substantial is Delhi, where the electorate had the option to experiment with an alternative party that promised improved governance and administration. The electorate seems to have got more mature and astute. This is a lesson for both the Congress and the BJP.
Six, it is ironic that even 22 years after economic reforms, political parties have made no conscious effort to package these changes to the people in a way that they are convinced of their need to secure growth. One of the reasons why the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) could promise 700 litres of free water to all residents of Delhi and still strike a chord with the voters is that ordinary people do not yet accept the logic of economic reforms. Political parties over the years have failed to educate the voters to make them understand that free water is bad policy, both economically and environmentally.
Seven - and this is the most important takeaway - the transformation of a popular anti-corruption movement into a political outfit, the AAP, is the most dramatic political development in post-reforms India. The question it must now answer is whether it would like to remain only a protest movement or play the role of a political party by accepting the responsibility of forming a government.
It is the same dilemma that the Left parties went through many years ago. Finally, they chose to take part in governance. Even at the Centre, the Communist Party of India chose to be part of the United Front government and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) led the Left's support to the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) from 2004 to 2008. In both cases, the Left parties played a crucial role in shaping policy and convincing its vote bank that they were relevant in a variety of ways. When the CPI-M withdrew support to UPA-I and decided not to support the UPA during its second stint, it definitely undermined its own effectiveness as a political party in influencing government policy. That move is something the CPI-M may well be regretting in retrospect.
The BJP is now unwilling to form a government even though it is the single largest party in Delhi. Nor is the AAP keen on forming a government, though it won 28 seats (just eight short of a majority). In the process, both the parties have gone against the spirit of the people's mandate for a change of the government. For the AAP, the dilemma is even more acute: should it continue to stick to its principled stand of not offering issue-based support to any political party that wishes to form the government or try to form a minority government? The choice is between exercising an opportunity to govern or influence governance and running the risk of becoming irrelevant. It is a risk that the AAP can ill afford at this stage.