
The very brigade of saints who canvassed openly for the BJP in 2002 have a faction campaigning predominantly in central Gujarat headed by Avichaldas Maharaj with a simple slogan: it is time for parivartan, change. The split is embodied in Shanta Parmar, whose husband and son have been awarded life sentences in the Eral rape and murder case during the 2002 riots, standing from Kalol constituency. And each has a different reason to be anti-Modi, even at the risk of being anti-BJP. In 2007, there are press advertisements by VHP chief Ashok Singhal to clarify that they stand united in the Hindu cause, while a section of the sadhu brigade canvasses with the Congress.
The 2007 polls are just not a referendum on Narendra Modi’s rule and his brand of politics, but also on the predominant urban middle class which aspires to acceptability for its development claims, but Hindutva style. Yet something seems to have changed.
Regional parochialism, be it of the Bal Thackeray or Karunanidhi brand, began to take on a different hue as Modi heaved Gujarat above the rest of the country. In the process, the chief minister, his electorate and even his party started believing that they needed no one else in Gujarat and also in some measure that Gujarat could do without the rest of India.
Modi in 2007 might have moved away from the ‘Mian Musharaf’ and ‘Hum Paanch, Humare Pachees’ rhetoric of 2002. But then his constant focus is Sonia Gandhi — if in 2002 she was ‘Italy ki beti’, in 2007 she becomes Soniaben, but one who is a liar, whose government at the Centre is colluding. And when the going began to get tough, he enmeshed his efforts of being Gujarat’s development messiah, taking credit for the killing of Sohrabuddin in the controversial encounter case as well as the Ram Setu controversy. But the national BJP leaders are not found defending Modi-speak this time with the Election Commission having issued a notice — instead they are resorting to development claims, sometimes seeking a vote for the BJP, sometimes for Modi.
... contd.