8.5. Emergence of a New Consensus

The period after 1989 is seen sometimes as the period of decline of Congress and rise of BJP.

After 1989, the political scene in India changed significantly. The Congress party, which had been dominant for decades, started losing its sway, while the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) began to rise as a formidable competitor. This shift indicates a transition in political power dynamics.

Imagine a long-standing football team that consistently wins the league. Suddenly, a new team appears with young, energetic players and starts winning games. This scenario reflects how the BJP gained strength in Indian politics while Congress saw a decline in influence.

If you want to understand the complex nature of political competition in this period, you have to compare the electoral performances of the Congress and the BJP.

To understand this political shift, comparing the election results of Congress and BJP is essential. Analyzing how their vote shares fluctuated over time reveals insights into their popularity and the changing sentiments of the electorate.

Think of two rival athletes in a sports tournament. By comparing their scores over the years, you can see not only who is winning but also who is improving or struggling, which reflects their training, public support, and other factors that influence their performance.

You will notice that since the 1989 election, the votes polled by the two parties, Congress and the BJP, most of the time, add up to more than fifty per cent except in 1996, 2004 and 2009.

An important observation is that Congress and BJP combined often secured more than half of the total votes in elections since 1989, indicating a two-party dominance in Indian politics. However, in specific years like 1996, 2004, and 2009, this trend did not hold, suggesting variations in party strategies or public opinion during those times.

Picture a popular school talent show where two students consistently win most of the votes. If suddenly, in a few years, one of them doesn't get enough votes, it indicates various changes—perhaps new contestants or changes in the audience's preferences.

The political competition during the nineties is divided between the coalition led by BJP and the coalition led by the Congress.

During the 1990s, both Congress and BJP led coalitions to govern, marking a shift from single-party dominance to a multi-party system. This change underscores the complexity of governance, as forming stable coalitions requires negotiating and compromising with different parties.

Imagine two clubs in school attempting to win the championship together by joining forces. They must work out their differences, set shared goals, and plan strategies to succeed, much like political parties in coalitions must align their agendas in governance.

Acceptance of the role of State level parties in governance of the country – the distinction between State level and national level parties is fast becoming less important.

In recent times, state-level parties have gained significant influence in national politics, diminishing the rigid boundaries between state and national level parties. This trend reflects the importance of regional representation in the central decision-making processes.

Consider a relay race, where each runner represents a different region or state. The performance of each runner (party) affects the overall success of the team (national politics). As all states are interconnected, their contributions become vital regardless of their geographical standing.

However, on many crucial issues, a broad agreement has emerged among most parties.

Despite competition, there has been a significant emergence of consensus among political parties on critical issues. This consensus indicates a shared understanding of certain policies that align national interests, suggesting a mature political framework that prioritizes stability and governance.

Think of how different stakeholders in a community might come together to agree on a major local improvement project, even if they have differing views on other issues. Their consensus on the project's benefits demonstrates collaboration for the greater good, similar to political parties finding common ground.

First, agreement on new economic policies… acceptance of the political and social claims of the backward castes.

The new consensus includes a collective acceptance of economic reforms that most parties believe are essential for national prosperity. Additionally, there's a recognition of the need to address the rights and claims of backward castes, leading to support for affirmative action and reservation policies.

Imagine a community deciding to build a new park. Initially, there might be disagreements on its design, but once everyone agrees on key factors—like creating a playground and greenery—they can move forward cooperatively, just as political parties must find commonalities on policy decisions.

Fourth, emphasis on pragmatic considerations rather than ideological positions… coalition politics has shifted the focus of political parties from ideological differences to power sharing arrangements.

Coalition politics has introduced a more pragmatic approach where parties prioritize functionality and governance over strict ideological alignments. This flexibility allows for more inclusive and diverse coalitions that can effectively govern despite varying ideologies.

Consider a cooking competition where chefs from different culinary backgrounds team up to create a dish. Instead of focusing on whose style is superior, they collaborate, blending their techniques to produce a delightful meal. Similarly, political parties must focus on what works best for governance rather than ideological purity.

--