JP Nadda: Vote Bank Politics Rejected, Youth Want Opportunities, Not Obstacles

On April 18, 2022, News18 published an opinion piece by JP Nadda, president of the Bharatiya Janata Party, addressed to "my fellow Indians." Its central claim is that the results of the recent Assembly elections should make the Opposition rethink. It is an argument from a party leader, and it should be read that way.

Nadda places the piece in a larger moment. India is marking 75 years of independence under the banner of Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav, and he asks readers to think about what the country should look like in 2047, a century after independence. He says the world is watching India. A nation of 135 crore people, which he says was expected to be a weak point in the global fight against COVID-19, is now respected as the pharmacy of the world. He describes the economy as open and transparent, says recent reforms have spread prosperity, and says poverty is being reduced faster.

He then argues that Indian politics has changed rapidly over eight years. Vote bank, divisive and selective politics, which he calls dusted and rusted, no longer work. He credits Prime Minister Narendra Modi's formula of Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas and Sabka Prayas. He says parties he calls rejected and dejected are resisting the shift toward development. He describes two styles of politics: the NDA's, visible in its work, and a group of parties whose politics he calls petty and visible in their sharp words. He refers to a recent joint letter from these parties, and says time will tell whether they are united in spirit as well.

Much of the piece turns the vote bank charge back on opponents. He asks why they are silent on what he calls the shameful happenings in Karauli, Rajasthan. He lists episodes from the Congress past: Indira Gandhi's 1966 firing on Hindu sadhus who had marched to Parliament demanding a ban on cow slaughter, and Rajiv Gandhi's remark that "when a big tree falls, the earth shakes," after the killing of thousands of Sikhs following Indira Gandhi's death. He names communal violence in Gujarat in 1969, Moradabad in 1980, Bhiwandi in 1984, Meerut in 1987, Bhagalpur in 1989 and Hubballi in 1994, along with attacks on Hindus in the Kashmir valley through the 1980s, and the 2012 Assam and 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots. He also criticises a Communal Violence Bill brought by the UPA, which he says was controlled by an extra-constitutional National Advisory Council, and says Dalits and tribals suffered massacres under Congress governments and that the party got Dr Ambedkar defeated in parliamentary elections.

He turns to the present as well. In Tamil Nadu, he says, elements aligned with the state's ruling party have verbally lynched and humiliated one of India's greatest musical maestros for holding views they dislike. He cites political violence in West Bengal and Kerala and the repeated targeting of BJP workers. In Maharashtra, he notes, two Cabinet ministers have been arrested on charges including corruption, extortion and links with anti-social elements, in the state that houses India's financial capital. He argues that opposition parties long patronised lumpen elements who bullied ordinary people, and now panic as those elements face the law.

On the elections, Nadda says India's largest state, a western coastal state, a Northeast state and a hill state all gave the BJP a resounding mandate. He describes a pro-incumbency sentiment rewarding development. He adds that the BJP became the first party in many years to cross 100 seats in the Rajya Sabha and won an absolute majority in the Uttar Pradesh legislative council. He asks the parties that ruled for decades to reflect on why they now sit at the margins.

His closing appeal is that the youth want opportunities, not obstacles, and development, not divisions. He urges the Opposition to change track and embrace development politics, saying the country owes this to coming generations. The claims here are the author's own and are not independently verified. What to watch is whether opposition parties answer his charges point by point, and how this framing shapes the argument over governance and communal politics.