“Ten per cent of minority votes were polled for the BJP, mind you, not for Modi,” says J.V. Momin, a senior Muslim Congress leader in Ahmedabad. The youth, he says, haven’t seen any leader but Modi. “Those who were 8 or 9 in 2002 are now ambitious youngsters who think of Modi as an achiever. The minority community has resigned itself to the idea that they owe today’s peace and stability to him,” he adds. In fact, most observers Outlook spoke to insist that 10 per cent of the state’s Muslims voted for Modi’s Hindu-only candidates—the same as every previous election.
All this matters, of course, because the BJP’s victory in Gujarat is being seen (for the third time) as a vote against secularism. Or is it a vote that supports, regardless of community, the state’s free market bent? The answer is a complex one, given the baggage of the riots (cases relating to 2,000 murders by angry mobs in early 2002 have not been settled yet) and the Modi-fuelled perception that Muslims have “moved on”.
Actually, by most accounts, the elections angered and isolated Muslims all over again. Yes, some of them did vote for Modi. The reason they did so, despite Modi’s lack of repentance, says Ahmedabad RTI activist Bharat Singh Jhala, is “bhay aur bhram” (fear and illusion). Muslims also lack a good progressive leadership in the state. “They live under a great fear in Gujarat. They are a suppressed lot,” says Babubhai Desai, an activist based in Surat, adding that small skirmishes are rapidly becoming the norm in his city. “Even a minor accident, a bicycle colliding with a scooter, takes on a communal colour if a Muslim is involved. Tempers are perpetually frayed. This isn’t how it was five years ago.”
Gujarat lacks a viable alternative—credible or otherwise—for minorities to repose faith in. Five attempts in recent history to create a third party, whether for the powerful Patels or other groups like the farmers or workers, have inevitably failed. Here, choices are limited. “While the whole country can complain about a lack of ‘options’, the choice for Muslims in Gujarat is simply whether they would want to be exploited by the BJP or the Congress,” argues Desai.
There were immediate issues too that didn’t work to the Congress’s favour, like the clamp-down on the number of subsidised gas cylinders (six, at the moment). “This became a big issue against them in Gujarat,” says Habib Mev, another Ahmedabad Congress leader. “In villages, non-Muslims dominate. Over there, the minority voted out of fear. But even in cities, some vote went against them,” he says. In Gujarat, Muslims comprise 10 per cent of the population, lower than the national average or that of more populous states such as Uttar Pradesh or Bihar. Gujarat’s Muslims are made up of 8-10 per cent of the wealthier classes, including the Syeds, Bohras, Khojas and Memons, with wide business and professional interests. They have tended to vote BJP for a decade. “There is only a slim chance Muslims other than these sections would support Modi-style economic development. They are the poorer, uneducated lot, who see no benefit in it,” says Desai.
Actually, some 40-50 lakh new voters emerged on the scene this year, and the state’s economic model has raised aspirations as well as created a groundswell of support in urban areas. In rural Gujarat, however, Muslims are a tiny minority—many of them vote for the BJP out of fear of being isolated or targeted.
This time, Modi deftly steered his campaign in a new direction. When required, the M-factor was put into service. On the Sir Creek issue, it was projected to the state’s communally polarised audience that: were Modi to exit, the Congress would collude with Pakistan. “The difference this time was that more than Modi, it was his footsoldiers that carried such messages through,” says Hanif Lakdawala, who runs an NGO, Sanchetna, from Ahmedabad.
Besides, Modi doesn’t need to tom-tom 2002 like before. His brand of leadership ensures the state isn’t secular, and all political interventions follow that assumption. “The other impact of this is that before now, Modi never needed to prove to the country that Muslims are ‘with’ him. He needs this now,” says Lakdawala. Clearly, the pro-vikas veneer the Modi camp put over his old hard Hindutvawadi face—combined with the Patel-versus-others scare created by him and the Congress, ignoring its own grassroots leadership, seems to have sent a percentage of the Muslim voter reluctantly into the arms of the BJP and Modi—yet again.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
The continued existence of these jholawallas and mediapersons is the biggest repudiation of their claim that people in Gujarat, especially those opposed to Modi live in fear. These folks have badmouthed and made wild allegations against Modi every single day since the 2002 riots, but they continue to live there and what's more, thrive.
Total BS article!!
So in the world of jhollawallah CON party supporters, to say that a part of India (Sir Creek or Siachen glacier) should remain in Secular India and not be gifted to THEOCRATIC Pakistan is an act of communalism.
Tomorrow the CONgress party and the media supporters aka paid journalists will tell us that we should also gift our own homes to Pakistan to prove our secularism !!
My only question is - why dont the media worthies first prove their secularism by gifting their own personal assets to the poor people of Pakistan?
Will Vinod Metha do that? Will the owner of this newsmagazine do that?
//“There is only a slim chance Muslims other than these sections would support Modi-style economic development. They are the poorer, uneducated lot, who see no benefit in it,” says Desai//
This is an opinion. This is not information! Do you understand the difference?
They should be directly proportional to each other. Atleast make an attempt.
Did you even get paid for this ?
The progress in Gujarat and the infrastructure development is there for everyone to see.
99% & 76% of the poor in yankland in 2001 had refrigerators and air conditioning resp.
The best way to get people out of gut-wrenching poverty is largely free enterprise.
History proves that!
How the heck this article qualified for print? There is no beginning, no end and no theme-other than "I hate Modi". Forget the content. The prose is pathetic-fifth grade level.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT