Lens may be caste but all eyes are on development

They say elections in UP are about nothing except caste. But if you look between the numbers from The Indian Express-CNN-IBN-CSDS pre-poll...

They say elections in UP are about nothing except caste. But if you look between the numbers from The Indian Express-CNN-IBN-CSDS pre-poll, if you take the trouble of asking people what matters most to them while voting, the answer might surprise you: as many as 30 per cent mention development, followed by 15 per cent for price rise, 9 per cent unemployment, 7 per cent for bijli-sadak-pani and so on. Considerations of caste and religion find almost no mention.

Contrast this with hard data which underlines how Uttar Pradesh continues to provides evidence for one of the highest degrees of caste polarization in voting in post-independence India.

About three fourth of Yadav voters are going to vote for the Samajwadi Party, the share of Bahujan Samaj Party among Dalit voters is about the same. The BJP gets about half of upper-caste votes, less than it used to get but three times more than it gets in any other social group. Notwithstanding the high-decibel propaganda, only one in 10 upper-caste voters is open to the possibility of voting for the BSP. A majority of the Muslims are still with SP, though their level of enthusiasm is less than before. Similarly, Ajit Singh continues to attract about half of the Jat voters.

Story continues below this ad

So does this mean that caste determines electoral fortunes? Not quite.

For one thing, all groups counted above still leave out one-third of UP’s voters. These come from peasant OBCs other than Yadavs and Jats and from lower OBC castes. They do not have a party of their own. Their vote can be decisive in a close contest.

Also, caste loyalty determines the general level of support of a community or caste for one party. But the level does not remain the same in each election. Parties gain or lose votes across caste groups. For example, in this election, the BSP appears to have consolidated its Dalit vote and gained votes across the upper castes. The BJP has lost a sizable support base, not just among its upper-caste supporters but also among lower OBCs. This shift from established loyalties takes place on the basis of people’s perception of governance and leadership.

Take leaders, for example. No doubt, popularity of leaders follows voting pattern very closely. Yet, there is a shared assessment of the leaders cutting across the party divide. Mulayam is considered good for the overall development of the state, Mayawati is appreciated for being a tough administrator.

Kalyan Singh does not manage to match his rivals in any respect. People do not appreciate anyone in particular for their honesty and trustworthiness. Not even if you look to other leaders outside these three. Amar Singh emerges as the political leader least trusted by the people in the state. So, why is it that Mulayam Singh Yadav is not facing voters’ ire after five years of what appeared like an indifferent rule?

Story continues below this ad

Perhaps because the voters have a more nuanced sense of governmental performance than the analyst or the activist. The voters of Uttar Pradesh do believe that crime and corruption increased during SP’s rule. There are few takers for Amitabh Bachchan’s punch line in the famous ad. In fact the voters directly hold the SP responsible for criminalisation of politics. Electricity and irrigation are also sore points with the voters.

But what perhaps saves Mulayam is his record on some other developmental indicators. His government is credited with greater overall development of the state, an improvement in the quality of roads and improvement in the quality of government schools and hospitals. Experts and activists might dispute these figures. It might well be that people look at development and governance through caste lenses. But the fact remains that the people think that they are voting for development. Even in Uttar Pradesh.