top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Resorts, Rallies, and Rebellion

Inside Mahayuti’s high-stakes firefighting for legislative council polls Mumbai: The public posture of ruling Mahayuti alliance radiates supreme confidence. Leaders from the BJP, Shiv Sena led by Eknath Shinde, and NCP led by Sunetra Pawar are predicting a clean sweep. Voting is scheduled for Thursday. Yet, beneath this calm exterior lies intense backstage panic. None of the alliance constituents are leaving any loose ends. No leader wants to take any risks, as everybody is trying to ensure...

Resorts, Rallies, and Rebellion

Inside Mahayuti’s high-stakes firefighting for legislative council polls Mumbai: The public posture of ruling Mahayuti alliance radiates supreme confidence. Leaders from the BJP, Shiv Sena led by Eknath Shinde, and NCP led by Sunetra Pawar are predicting a clean sweep. Voting is scheduled for Thursday. Yet, beneath this calm exterior lies intense backstage panic. None of the alliance constituents are leaving any loose ends. No leader wants to take any risks, as everybody is trying to ensure their real value is recognized and past political scores are waiting to be settled. This volatile environment has triggered widespread fears of cross-voting. It has given a massive boost to resort politics across the state. The upcoming contest spans 17 local self-government constituencies. The unique composition of this electorate makes the election highly unpredictable. The voters are not regular citizens. They are elected corporators, municipal councillors, and Zilla Parishad members. This setup makes the election hyper-localized. It offers a perfect shadow arena for local politicians to exercise leverage. Consequently, ruling alliance leaders are taking extraordinary measures to protect their flocks. Every single vote is being heavily guarded. Poaching Game Political parties have quickly locked down their voters to prevent poaching. Sources reveal that local body members from Sangli, Nanded, and Nagpur are already gone. They have been taken on special tours to Goa under tight supervision. Meanwhile, corporators from Nashik have been moved elsewhere. They are currently staying at a secluded luxury resort near Bhiwandi. These defensive tactics show how deeply the party bosses distrust their own members. Political managers are monitoring every voter’s movement around the clock. The ground reality across key cities highlights this deep regional friction. In Nagpur, the stakes are incredibly high. This by-election became necessary after state BJP chief Chandrashekhar Bawankule vacated the seat. He did so after winning his election to the state assembly. The BJP cannot afford a defeat in its primary ideological stronghold. Similarly, the Wardha-Chandrapur-Gadchiroli constituency presents a tough challenge. The BJP has fielded Arun Lakhani for this crucial seat. However, managing the intricate web of local body representatives in Chandrapur is testing the party machinery. Shifting Loyalties Other regions show similar vulnerability. In seats like Jalgaon, Nanded, and Sangli, traditional political loyalties are shifting. Compounding these internal threats is the BJP’s aggressive campaign strategy. The party chose to treat this council election as an opportunity. They wanted to expand their standalone organisational footprint across the state. Instead of relying on traditional top-down bulk voting through alliance bosses, the BJP targeted the electorate directly. The party organised an array of localised rallies, town hall meetings, and gatherings of the electorate. Some of these events registered an excellent response. However, this unilateral approach deeply irritated their alliance partners and many of these events saw dismal attendance by BJP’s alliance partners. Apart from this general apathy, the real challenge was that of open rebellion within the ruling alliance’s internal ranks. Disgruntled local leaders, disappointed ticket seekers, and ignored district presidents had expressed loud resentment. Even sitting MLAs and MLCs have signaled their displeasure over candidate choices. State BJP leaders had to spend considerable energy for the firefighting and ensuring that rebellion is contained. Yet many leaders are still unhappy with current regional power equations. Frantic Firefighting Fearing massive internal sabotage, the BJP top brass has launched a frantic firefighting operation. Senior leaders have been entrusted with strict responsibilities to oversee specific seats. They are managing all local arrangements personally. Top party managers are literally crisscrossing the state using helicopters and chartered flights. They are conducting last-minute pacification drives in every sensitive district. These leaders are holding urgent, closed-door meetings to placate angry regional chieftains. They are working hard to neutralize rebel factions. No disgruntled leader is being left unattended before Thursday morning. Promises of future political rewards are being distributed generously. Leaders are promising state-run board appointments and fresh development funds to buy peace. The frantic resort lockdowns and endless late-night negotiations reveal the true story of this election. The Mahayuti may still win a majority of these 17 seats through sheer resource dominance. However, the visible fractures in cities like Nashik, Sangli, Chandrapur, and Jalgaon reveal a fragile coalition. This council election has ceased to be a routine legislative exercise. It has mutated into a brutal internal audit of the ruling alliance’s unity. The final results will offer a definitive look at who holds the real power.

Selective Outrage

India’s left-liberal media has long prided itself on being the torchbearer of secularism, dissent and moral rectitude. In the aftermath of ‘Operation Sindoor,’ the precision military strike launched by the Modi government against Pakistan-based terror camps, it has revealed its not a principled commitment to peace or truth, but a disturbing penchant for ideological prejudice, performative sanctimony and selective outrage.


The operation itself was a textbook display of calibrated force and geopolitical prudence. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, often caricatured as ‘authoritarian’ by the ‘liberal’ English-language commentariat, chose patience over provocation. He consulted opposition leaders, held detailed discussions with defence chiefs and took key international stakeholders, notably the United States and Russia, into confidence before authorising limited military action. The symbolism of ‘Operation Sindoor’ was also carefully crafted: a pointed reminder that the attack’s real victims were Hindu women widowed by Pakistan-sponsored militants in Kashmir. The government’s briefings were also strategic and symbolic as two ranking female officers, one of them Muslim, were made the public face of the mission, underlining a new Indian confidence that blends military muscle with democratic pluralism.


But this was unacceptable for India’s entrenched ‘left-liberal’ press, steeped in academic jargon, Western validation and a knee-jerk hostility to anything remotely ‘Hindutva.’ That a Muslim officer briefed the nation on ‘Operation Sindoor’ was branded ‘tokenism’ by such commentators. Others crudely alleged that the April 22 Pahalgam massacre was the logical culmination of reported atrocities against Muslims since Modi came to power in 2014.


The semantic nitpicking over ‘Operation Sindoor’ was maddening. An editor of a prominent magazine dubbed the operation’s name as ‘patriarchal’ and coded in Hindutva tropes. In a bizarre case of moral inversion, sindoor was likened to symbols of ‘honour killings’ and gender oppression, ignoring both its cultural resonance and the cruel reality that these women had lost their husbands in cold blood. For years, India’s ‘secular’ commentariat nurtured a preordained binary: the Congress may be flawed but was at least ‘secular’ while the BJP was an inveterate ‘fascist.’ Thus, the 2002 Gujarat riots are always focused upon but the Congress-backed pogrom of the Sikhs in 1984 is either downplayed or rationalised. Terrorism in Kashmir is tragic, but state retaliation is ‘jingoism.’ A strong Muslim voice in government is ‘tokenism’ but its absence is ‘exclusion.’ Even journalistic rigour is selectively applied. When Pakistan claimed to have downed Indian jets, some Indian outlets rushed to amplify the story before verification, inadvertently echoing enemy propaganda.


Dissent is vital in any democracy. But when its becomes indistinguishable from disdain, when editorial choices are dictated by ideological conformity, then the press becomes a caricature of itself. Ironically, many of these journalists enjoy robust free speech and loudly lament India’s supposed slide into ‘fascism’ from the safety of their X handles. Yet they turn a blind eye to Putin’s repression, Erdogan’s purges or Xi Jinping’s camps. In their eyes, Modi remains the greatest threat to democracy even as they broadcast their outrage freely, without fear of censorship or reprisal. ‘Operation Sindoor’ was a statement of cultural self-confidence. That confidence has rattled those who have spent their careers gatekeeping Indian discourse. Today, their monopoly is over. The people are watching and they no longer believe that the emperor has clothes.

Comments

bottom of page