The question is being asked because its chief minister, handpicked by Narendra Modi, is stepping down. The short answer is: no, and I'll explain why in a moment. But first, let's speculate on the reasons why Anandiben Patel is going.
First: The all-must-retire-at-75 rule is not applicable to Kalraj Mishra. It is true that he may be asked to go after the Uttar Pradesh elections, but till then he is important. So it should be accepted that Patel is not seen as an asset in the same way.
Second: Any leader would have suffered being a follow up act to Modi. The most charismatic and popular Gujarati leader since Vallabhbhai, Modi has left a leadership void hard to fill. Anandiben Patel was seen by many as unable to fill it, but it's not easy to see who might have been able to.
Third: Gujarat was synonymous, rightly or wrongly, with competent and clean governance. It was a state that was consistently delivering double digit growth, focussed on industries and manufacturing, unlike other successful hubs focused on services, like Bengaluru, Gurgaon and Hyderabad. Now it is seen, rightly and wrongly, as any other Indian state, with a chief minister accused of favouring family, mismanaging of social violence and possibly Hindutva fatigue. The perception had to be corrected, and changing the leadership is the best way.
Fourth: The Gujarat model is rubbish, according to Gujaratis themselves. The Patidars, the most politically powerful, wealthy and globally connected peasant caste in India, have rejected Modi's claim that Gujarat is a model state for economic growth.
If this privileged community is not just unhappy but angry, the rest are not buying the dream either. This is a serious problem and if not managed properly, will lead to questions that will not be limited to Gujarat. Someone needs to step in and bring the joy back. That means recreating the perception of an energetic state with a world-beating economic model. That person, very sorry, is not old Anandiben Patel.
These then are the reasons she is leaving. Let's return to the original question. If all of the above is true, why is the BJP not in trouble?
The answer is that it has been here many times before. Patidars angry? The Keshubhai Patel rebellion against Modi was a flop. Social unrest? Well, 2002 did not affect the BJP. Intra-party squabbling? Happens all the time. The fact is that an opposition is needed to exploit unrest in ruling parties.
The thing stopping the BJP from falling when it stumbles is the inadvertent support of an incompetent Congress.
It is an astonishing and possibly unique fact that in a two-party state, the Congress has not won an election, either Lok Sabha or Vidhan Sabha, for more than two-and-a-half decades. This despite the fact that it regularly clocks above 35 percent of the vote. This vote is comprised of those communities, like Muslims and Dalits, who suffer under Hindutva, and it includes those communities, like Kshatriyas, which are traditional rivals of the Patels. This vote is permanently locked in against the BJP, and one could legitimately call it a base.
In any other state, a base of 35 percent would mean an easy win. Not in Gujarat, where the BJP holds on to its 40 percent plus, helped by the incompetence of the Congress.
The Gandhis do not have the talent, energy and imagination to push that 35 percent up by three or four points. If they had done it in one election, the invincibility of the BJP would have vanished. And it is not as if the Gandhis have had no opportunity. Just take a look at all the times the BJP has stumbled. Given the circumstances, Mamata, Jayalalithaa, Mulayam or Nitish might have made kheema out of the BJP. Modi was lucky to go up against the most lazy and uninterested opposition in history. For a decade he was given the political freedom to shape his image in the way he liked. And, to his credit, he did.
The Gandhis, on the other hand, have failed because they haven't really tried.
They have put an RSS man, Shankarsinh Vaghela, in charge of the party and despite losing every election since taking over, he is persisted with. Why? Nobody knows.
The Gandhis seem happy with permanently coming second in Gujarat (though Arvind Kejriwal might have a thing or two to say about that soon). If they remain second and pick up an extra seat here or there because of the BJP's current woes, their chamchas will declare victory on the channels.
This is why, despite accepting that Anandiben Patel has failed, the BJP is not in trouble in Gujarat.
Source:-firstpost
Viewmore:-Punjab Mobile Number Database
First: The all-must-retire-at-75 rule is not applicable to Kalraj Mishra. It is true that he may be asked to go after the Uttar Pradesh elections, but till then he is important. So it should be accepted that Patel is not seen as an asset in the same way.
Second: Any leader would have suffered being a follow up act to Modi. The most charismatic and popular Gujarati leader since Vallabhbhai, Modi has left a leadership void hard to fill. Anandiben Patel was seen by many as unable to fill it, but it's not easy to see who might have been able to.
Third: Gujarat was synonymous, rightly or wrongly, with competent and clean governance. It was a state that was consistently delivering double digit growth, focussed on industries and manufacturing, unlike other successful hubs focused on services, like Bengaluru, Gurgaon and Hyderabad. Now it is seen, rightly and wrongly, as any other Indian state, with a chief minister accused of favouring family, mismanaging of social violence and possibly Hindutva fatigue. The perception had to be corrected, and changing the leadership is the best way.
Fourth: The Gujarat model is rubbish, according to Gujaratis themselves. The Patidars, the most politically powerful, wealthy and globally connected peasant caste in India, have rejected Modi's claim that Gujarat is a model state for economic growth.
If this privileged community is not just unhappy but angry, the rest are not buying the dream either. This is a serious problem and if not managed properly, will lead to questions that will not be limited to Gujarat. Someone needs to step in and bring the joy back. That means recreating the perception of an energetic state with a world-beating economic model. That person, very sorry, is not old Anandiben Patel.
These then are the reasons she is leaving. Let's return to the original question. If all of the above is true, why is the BJP not in trouble?
The answer is that it has been here many times before. Patidars angry? The Keshubhai Patel rebellion against Modi was a flop. Social unrest? Well, 2002 did not affect the BJP. Intra-party squabbling? Happens all the time. The fact is that an opposition is needed to exploit unrest in ruling parties.
The thing stopping the BJP from falling when it stumbles is the inadvertent support of an incompetent Congress.
It is an astonishing and possibly unique fact that in a two-party state, the Congress has not won an election, either Lok Sabha or Vidhan Sabha, for more than two-and-a-half decades. This despite the fact that it regularly clocks above 35 percent of the vote. This vote is comprised of those communities, like Muslims and Dalits, who suffer under Hindutva, and it includes those communities, like Kshatriyas, which are traditional rivals of the Patels. This vote is permanently locked in against the BJP, and one could legitimately call it a base.
In any other state, a base of 35 percent would mean an easy win. Not in Gujarat, where the BJP holds on to its 40 percent plus, helped by the incompetence of the Congress.
The Gandhis do not have the talent, energy and imagination to push that 35 percent up by three or four points. If they had done it in one election, the invincibility of the BJP would have vanished. And it is not as if the Gandhis have had no opportunity. Just take a look at all the times the BJP has stumbled. Given the circumstances, Mamata, Jayalalithaa, Mulayam or Nitish might have made kheema out of the BJP. Modi was lucky to go up against the most lazy and uninterested opposition in history. For a decade he was given the political freedom to shape his image in the way he liked. And, to his credit, he did.
The Gandhis, on the other hand, have failed because they haven't really tried.
They have put an RSS man, Shankarsinh Vaghela, in charge of the party and despite losing every election since taking over, he is persisted with. Why? Nobody knows.
The Gandhis seem happy with permanently coming second in Gujarat (though Arvind Kejriwal might have a thing or two to say about that soon). If they remain second and pick up an extra seat here or there because of the BJP's current woes, their chamchas will declare victory on the channels.
This is why, despite accepting that Anandiben Patel has failed, the BJP is not in trouble in Gujarat.
Source:-firstpost
Viewmore:-Punjab Mobile Number Database