Caste is ever centre stage in India’s dance of ‘democracy’. Politicians invariably keep caste equations in mind when addressing rallies. One slip of tongue can cause an irreversible slide.
Which is where Rajya Sabha member Parshottam Rupala, MoS for fisheries, animal husbandry and dairying, may have found himself after his comment on Kshatriyas. But that’s not what’s happened, so far.
Post-Godhra Gujarat had adjusted to a new reality where castes stuck together to create a bigger umbrella of religion.On Modi’s watch as chief minister, caste faultlines seldom surfaced.
It was only after Modi moved to Delhi that communities began to get reorganised to extract the most out of the power pie. Patel quota agitations, Dalit stirs and show of strength of Thakors in 2016-17 were manifestations of this churn.
These agitations were brought under control once two of the three key people behind them — Hardik Patel and Alpesh Thakor — joined BJP. Patel belongs to the powerful Patidar community, a bulwark of BJP’s success since 1980. BJP’s rise in Gujarat is largely due to the Patels, who wholeheartedly backed the saffron party in retaliation to the social-engineering formula KHAM (Kshatriyas, Harijans, Adivasis and Muslims), brainchild of former CM Madhavsinh Solanki.
Gujarat’s one-sided parliamentary poll battle — BJP won all 26 seats in 2014 and 2019 — turned a tad interesting after Rupala’s take on Kshatriyas, Rajputs in particular. BJP’s fielded the RS member in LS elections. Kshatriyas demanded the party revoke his candidature from Rajkot constituency in Saurashtra, a region where caste divides run deep.
But protesters limited their demand to recall of Rupala’s candidature, at the same time expressing their loyalty to BJP, and asserting they had no issue with Modi. But despite Rupala’s apology, and the party’s appeals for ‘forgiveness’, protesters stuck to their demand.
An anxious Rupala rushed to New Delhi, returned confident, and threw himself into campaigning. As he filed his nomination, it was abundantly clear BJP wasn’t going to yield to Kshatriya protesters’ demands.
Why did BJP choose to back Rupala at the cost of antagonising a community? The answer lies in numbers and reverse consolidation of non-Kshatriya votes in its favour. The Kshatriya vote is not predominant in any of Gujarat’s LS seats. While they may reduce BJP’s vote share, they cannot cause its defeat.
Kshatriyas strictly adhere to hierarchy. Those less privileged economically and socially within the community see the inherent inequality, but the privileged strata are oblivious to it. Hence, the protesters who identify themselves as Rajputs within the larger Kshatriya fold in Gujarat barely received the support of other aspiring Kshatriya castes like the Thakors or the Kolis. Together, the Thakors and Kolis form the largest electoral group in Gujarat.
Efforts by organisations such as Gujarat Kshatriya Sabha (GKS) to unite all sub-castes under one umbrella have not borne fruit. When GKS sought unification to push for reservation benefits, they met with resistance from erstwhile ‘royals’ who strongly opposed the bid for reservation, emphasising their higher status. Later, Thakors and Kolis were included as OBCs.
BJP has little to worry about any possible electoral fallout from the protests. These protests cannot disrupt the party’s plans in the manner that the annoyed Patidars had, after the quota stir, which pushed BJP’s tally to below 100 in Gujarat’s 182-seat assembly in 2017’s election.
This time, BJP’s support for Rupala, a Patel, is resulting in consolidating the Patidar votes in towns and villages. Competition between Kshatriyas and Patels is intense in villages. Kshatriya protest has also united two Patidar segments, the Leuvas and Kadvas. Rupala is a Kadva Patidar. His comment targeted Rajputs, which Thakors and Kolis barely related to.
Sociologist Ghanshyam Shah says the protesters cannot mobilise resources in the same way the Patidars did during 2015’s quota stir. To exploit the inequality among Kshatriyas, BJP’s encouraged patriarchs of erstwhile ‘royalty’ to appeal to the protesters.
BJP is also angling to swing another caste equation. Kshatriya anger is directed towards its Patidar candidate. The agitation could therefore electorally blur the distinction between Leuva and Kadva Patidars in Saurashtra. BJP may also consolidate support of so-called lower castes, who will support its unyielding stance on Kshatriyas. It thus has little reason to heed Rajput protests.
Which is where Rajya Sabha member Parshottam Rupala, MoS for fisheries, animal husbandry and dairying, may have found himself after his comment on Kshatriyas. But that’s not what’s happened, so far.
Post-Godhra Gujarat had adjusted to a new reality where castes stuck together to create a bigger umbrella of religion.On Modi’s watch as chief minister, caste faultlines seldom surfaced.
It was only after Modi moved to Delhi that communities began to get reorganised to extract the most out of the power pie. Patel quota agitations, Dalit stirs and show of strength of Thakors in 2016-17 were manifestations of this churn.
These agitations were brought under control once two of the three key people behind them — Hardik Patel and Alpesh Thakor — joined BJP. Patel belongs to the powerful Patidar community, a bulwark of BJP’s success since 1980. BJP’s rise in Gujarat is largely due to the Patels, who wholeheartedly backed the saffron party in retaliation to the social-engineering formula KHAM (Kshatriyas, Harijans, Adivasis and Muslims), brainchild of former CM Madhavsinh Solanki.
Gujarat’s one-sided parliamentary poll battle — BJP won all 26 seats in 2014 and 2019 — turned a tad interesting after Rupala’s take on Kshatriyas, Rajputs in particular. BJP’s fielded the RS member in LS elections. Kshatriyas demanded the party revoke his candidature from Rajkot constituency in Saurashtra, a region where caste divides run deep.
But protesters limited their demand to recall of Rupala’s candidature, at the same time expressing their loyalty to BJP, and asserting they had no issue with Modi. But despite Rupala’s apology, and the party’s appeals for ‘forgiveness’, protesters stuck to their demand.
An anxious Rupala rushed to New Delhi, returned confident, and threw himself into campaigning. As he filed his nomination, it was abundantly clear BJP wasn’t going to yield to Kshatriya protesters’ demands.
Why did BJP choose to back Rupala at the cost of antagonising a community? The answer lies in numbers and reverse consolidation of non-Kshatriya votes in its favour. The Kshatriya vote is not predominant in any of Gujarat’s LS seats. While they may reduce BJP’s vote share, they cannot cause its defeat.
Kshatriyas strictly adhere to hierarchy. Those less privileged economically and socially within the community see the inherent inequality, but the privileged strata are oblivious to it. Hence, the protesters who identify themselves as Rajputs within the larger Kshatriya fold in Gujarat barely received the support of other aspiring Kshatriya castes like the Thakors or the Kolis. Together, the Thakors and Kolis form the largest electoral group in Gujarat.
Efforts by organisations such as Gujarat Kshatriya Sabha (GKS) to unite all sub-castes under one umbrella have not borne fruit. When GKS sought unification to push for reservation benefits, they met with resistance from erstwhile ‘royals’ who strongly opposed the bid for reservation, emphasising their higher status. Later, Thakors and Kolis were included as OBCs.
BJP has little to worry about any possible electoral fallout from the protests. These protests cannot disrupt the party’s plans in the manner that the annoyed Patidars had, after the quota stir, which pushed BJP’s tally to below 100 in Gujarat’s 182-seat assembly in 2017’s election.
This time, BJP’s support for Rupala, a Patel, is resulting in consolidating the Patidar votes in towns and villages. Competition between Kshatriyas and Patels is intense in villages. Kshatriya protest has also united two Patidar segments, the Leuvas and Kadvas. Rupala is a Kadva Patidar. His comment targeted Rajputs, which Thakors and Kolis barely related to.
Sociologist Ghanshyam Shah says the protesters cannot mobilise resources in the same way the Patidars did during 2015’s quota stir. To exploit the inequality among Kshatriyas, BJP’s encouraged patriarchs of erstwhile ‘royalty’ to appeal to the protesters.
BJP is also angling to swing another caste equation. Kshatriya anger is directed towards its Patidar candidate. The agitation could therefore electorally blur the distinction between Leuva and Kadva Patidars in Saurashtra. BJP may also consolidate support of so-called lower castes, who will support its unyielding stance on Kshatriyas. It thus has little reason to heed Rajput protests.