The divided caste vote in UP

IN INDIA, “caste needs politics and politics needs caste.” This observation, made by the political scientist Rajani Kothari 50 years ago, may seem relevant even today.

Caste played a major role in the UP assembly elections 2022. During our fieldwork many villagers complained of price rise, unemployment, Covid and loss of livelihood, but declared that they would still vote for their caste (vote to jati-viradari ko hi denge).

In this election, caste worked in two ways. Brahmins and other dominant upper castes, upwardly mobile castes like Jats, Yadavs and Kurmis, and the Jatavs among the dalits worked as a base vote for their own political parties. Many other OBCs, most backward castes (MBCs) and non-Jatav dalits, who are still not a base vote for any political party, worked as supplementary votes.

The base vote emerges from castes or communities that find their community resonance in the leaders or the agenda of a political party. The BJP built up its base vote among upper castes and Vaisyas over a long period. Its base vote has now extended towards some OBCs and MBCs, too. The Samajwadi Party got its base vote from the legacy of the socialist movement and the long political struggle of Mulayam Singh Yadav, and it includes Muslims, besides Yadavs. Dalits in UP flocked to the BSP when they were disillusioned with the Congress. Kanshiram and Mayawati worked hard to get Jatavs and a few other dalit communities as the BSP’s base vote.

All three parties have tried to form rainbow social alliances to gather the support of castes and communities that are not yet the base vote of any party. Among these caste votes are the smaller upper castes, many MBCs and many dalit communities. These are supplementary caste votes. Mostly the castes that have small numbers, not yet politically mobilised, or not evolved their own caste leaders or caste based party, appear in this category. A certain section of voters of these castes showed the swing nature in this election. They favoured parties that might give them space in the organisational and electoral politics and respond to their political and developmental aspirations.

Their votes, however, got divided on the basis of their relations with the political parties at the local level, and the benefits they got from the party in power or are likely to get from the aspirant for power. In one village, the people explained it as the phata hua vote (divided or not fixed vote). A villager in Mungari near Allahabad said “our votes are fixed for the BSP and the votes of the Yadav patti (hamlet) are fixed for the SP. But the votes of the Kol community in this village are not fixed. Ye phata hua vote hai.” Communities such as Hari, Nat, Sahariya, Kuchh Badhiya and Basore may have shown swing nature in this election.

On the other hand, many voters in the base vote hamlets told us, “Hare ya jite (we will vote for our party). Yes, we get ration and benefits of various government schemes, but we will vote only for our party. We are known as voters of our own party, and even if we vote for another party, no one will believe it. So, we will vote for our own party.”

In the making of phata hua vote among non-base vote castes, the beneficiary consciousness plays a big role. This consciousness makes them move towards the party which delivers them welfare schemes. The free ration, pension schemes and PM Aawas Yojana have had a lot of impact of their electoral choice. The beneficiary consciousness, however, has not worked well among base vote social groups, such as Jatavs, in political mobilisation in the favour of the party in power.

The election result shows that party that won evolved its rainbow social alliance broader than others, by attracting smaller communities that are not yet base voters. The master key to power in democracy lay with the formation of caste based social alliances and transforming them to electoral vote.

The writer is director, G.B. Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad.