HOW LONG WILL THE POLITICS OF EXCUSES CONTINUE?: AJAY KUMAR

HOW LONG WILL THE POLITICS OF EXCUSES CONTINUE?: AJAY KUMAR

30-OCT-ENG 20

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

ARA--------------------------The failure of the Congress to achieve the expected success in elections conducted using ballot papers serves as a serious warning for the party. The results for 28 Legislative Council seats across four states have proven that the strategy of blaming EVMs for electoral defeats will no longer work. Even when elections were held using traditional ballot papers, the Congress failed to hold its political ground—most notably in Karnataka, a state where it is currently in power.

Despite being in power in Karnataka, the Congress lost all four seats to the BJP-JD(S) alliance. Teachers and graduate voters—often regarded as the 'enlightened' or intellectual segment of the electorate—did not place their trust in the ruling party. This is not merely an electoral defeat; it is evidence of an organizational void. Key factors likely include flawed candidate selection, the inertia of local party units, and dissatisfaction among the educated class regarding the government’s performance.

In Nagpur, Congress candidate Abhijit Vanjari defeated the BJP’s Sudhakar Kohale by 3,271 votes. Vanjari secured 67,231 votes, compared to 63,960 for Kohale. While this victory in the city that houses the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) headquarters is a morale booster, a single win cannot mask deep-seated organizational weaknesses. In Bihar, while the Congress’s alliance partners tasted success, the party itself failed to establish any meaningful influence. There is a world of difference between relying on the crutches of an alliance and building a genuine, independent base of support.

When Prime Minister Narendra Modi took a dig at the results of these ballot-paper-based elections, Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh and spokesperson Supriya Shrinate hit back, pointing to the BJP’s defeat in Varanasi and the Congress’s own victory in Nagpur. While their argument that the BJP should also engage in introspection is valid, highlighting the failures of others does not absolve the Congress of its own losses. The BJP’s defeat in Varanasi does not equate to a victory for the Congress. In April 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed petitions questioning the reliability of EVMs, effectively rejecting the demand to return to a ballot paper-based voting system. This does not mean that questions cannot be raised; however, serious allegations require substantial evidence. Merely repeating a suspicion does not transform it into a fact.

The number of voters in teacher and graduate constituencies may be limited, but their influence is far-reaching. Teachers help shape public opinion, while graduates evaluate political parties based on issues like employment, inflation, and governance. If the Congress is losing its influence among these groups, it must critically examine both its political messaging and its organizational structure. Elections are won not through slogans alone, but by earning the trust of the voters.

The BJP, too, should not fall into the trap of believing it is invincible based on these results. The Samajwadi Party’s victory in Varanasi and the Congress’s success in Nagpur demonstrate that even strongholds can falter. Yet, the Congress must realize that the BJP’s weaknesses do not automatically translate into its own strengths. To serve as an effective opposition, mere criticism is insufficient; one must offer a concrete alternative. While raising questions about unemployment and inflation is necessary, presenting a solid policy framework to address these issues is even more critical.

The Congress faces a choice: it can either seek refuge in new allegations after every defeat, or it can honestly address the shortcomings within its organization, leadership, and policies. The first path is easier but politically hollow; the second is difficult, yet it holds the only real possibility for a comeback. Whether through ballot papers or EVMs, voters ultimately make their decisions based on their own experiences and trust. The public does not want excuses—they want a credible alternative. And trust is built not through rhetoric, but through tangible work done on the ground.