THE SAFFRON WAVE MEETS THE SILENT REVOLUTION: WHY THE POOR VOTE FOR HINDU NATIONALISM IN INDIA A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Tariq Thachil August 2009 © 2009 Tariq Thachil THE SAFFRON WAVE MEETS THE SILENT REVOLUTION: WHY THE POOR VOTE FOR HINDU NATIONALISM IN INDIA Tariq Thachil, Ph. D. Cornell University 2009 How do religious parties with historically elite support bases win the mass support required to succeed in democratic politics? This dissertation examines why the world’s largest such party, the upper-caste, Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has experienced variable success in wooing poor Hindu populations across India. Briefly, my research demonstrates that neither conventional clientelist techniques used by elite parties, nor strategies of ideological polarization favored by religious parties, explain the BJP’s pattern of success with poor Hindus. Instead the party has relied on the efforts of its ‘social service’ organizational affiliates in the broader Hindu nationalist movement. The dissertation articulates and tests several hypotheses about the efficacy of this organizational approach in forging party-voter linkages at the national, state, district, and individual level, employing a multi-level research design including a range of statistical and qualitative techniques of analysis. In doing so, the dissertation utilizes national and author-conducted local survey data, extensive interviews, and close observation of Hindu nationalist recruitment techniques collected over thirteen months of fieldwork. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Tariq Thachil was born in New Delhi, India. He received his bachelor’s degree in Economics from Stanford University in 2003. He began his graduate education in the Department of Government at Cornell University in 2004, and will be a postdoctoral fellow at Yale University’s MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies from August 2009. iii To Ma and Suvir for inspiring me to follow in your footsteps iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Contrary to popular opinion, writing a dissertation is far from a solitary activity. During the course of the past three years I have incurred too many personal and intellectual debts to acknowledge everyone who influenced this work in a few short paragraphs. However, there are a few individuals without whose support this project would quite literally not have been possible. My advisor, Ronald Herring, has guided me through each stage of this project with a potent cocktail of encouragement, intellectual engagement, and much-needed plain speaking. Intellectually, he pushed for this project to be broader than my initial conceptualization, which focused almost exclusively on the perspective of a political party, the BJP. It was Ron’s intervention that compelled me to equally consider how the BJP’s efforts could be viewed from the perspective of ordinary voters. Personally, his constant encouragement took the edge off of the humbling transition from a ‘consumer’ to a ‘producer’ of scholarship. Other members of my dissertation committee were also extremely important sources of intellectual support. Christopher Way was an ideal committee member, from his early and critical inputs on issues of research design, to his patience and pragmatism through numerous sessions discussing the statistical analyses in the project. This study would have suffered greatly without his exhortations to anticipate and deal with weak links in my central argument. Ken Roberts provided essential guidance on how to frame the dissertation theoretically, and his knowledge of literatures on political parties and social movements proved essential for a dissertation that examines the nexus of the two. His good humor and calm demeanor were equally crucial in bringing me back from the precipice on more than one occasion. Thomas Pepinsky graciously agreed to read the entire dissertation on short notice, and offered both valuable critiques and genuine excitement about the project, both of which were greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank Mary Katzenstein, Irfan Nooruddin, v Ashutosh Varshney, and Devashree Gupta, all of whom took time to read and comment on various sections of this project. The research for this dissertation would not have been possible without the financial support of the Social Science Research Council, whose International Dissertation Research Fellowship provided the bulk of the project’s funding. Additional support was received from Cornell University’s Lafeber Collaborative Fellowship, Graduate School Research Grant, and Einaudi Center Travel Grant. In New Delhi, the Center for the Study of Developing Society offered me a much needed institutional home. I am particularly grateful to Yogendra Yadav, Sanjay Kumar, and Himanshu Bhattacharya, for generously sharing portions of the National Election Study (1996, 2004), and to Dhananjai Joshi for providing perceptive insights into Indian politics during many conversations in our shared office. My research in Chhattisgarh is indebted to Bupendra Sahu for his excellent assistance during the administration of the local surveys. I also benefitted greatly from conversations with Baba Mayaram, Shashank Sharma, Sunil Kumar, Louise Tillen, and Mayank Tiwari . In Kerala, Sajad Ibrahim was exceedingly generous in recommending his excellent students Aneesh, Shaan, and Shihab, without whose research assistance, perceptive criticisms, and translation skills, my study of the state would have been infeasible. Thanks are also due to the librarians at the Nehru Memorial Library, Parliamentary Library, and India Habitat Center Library in New Delhi, and Deshbandhu Press Library in Raipur, all of whom went out of their way to help access materials for this project. Special thanks are due to the many politicians and activists who took the time to speak with me about their work. I was often surprised by the candor with which they answered sensitive questions, and their willingness to share information with a researcher whose political affiliations were unknown to them. I have only cited those vi interviews which were expressly on the record, and have completely avoided quoting those interviewees who preferred their identity be kept anonymous. However the latter are as deserving of thanks, as their insights often guided my fieldwork and subsequently the argument made in this thesis. An equal measure of gratitude is due to the many individuals who agreed to participate in the survey, and who answered a series of questions posed by complete strangers with great patience and tolerance. While I cannot ever repay this debt, it is my sincere hope that this work will serve as a token of my appreciation. Lastly, in researching and writing this dissertation, I have relied most heavily on my family and friends for emotional strength and moral support. The graduate student community in Ithaca was as warm as the winters were cold. Jaimie Bleck and Danielle Resnick provided support and amusement in greatly contrasting, but equally valued styles. Steve Nelson’s willingness to walk the path before me and reach back to help was greatly appreciated at every stage. Julie Ajinkya and Benjamin Brake became family and made the middle of the tundra feel like home to a boy from New Delhi. Ameya Balsekar read every word, sometimes thrice over, and walked with me each step of the way. In Delhi, Kaushalya Kaul and Urvi Puri provided good food and watchful eyes. Thanks also to Primla Loomba, who was my harshest critic, but with the sweetest smile, and to Tahira Thapar who gets what no one else does. I also owe an immense debt of gratitude to Smitu Kothari, who shared equally his wealth of knowledge and affection, and who continues to inspire me. To Bindia Thapar there are no thanks possible for a lifetime of love, for keeping Delhi home. My greatest debt goes to Ania Loomba and Suvir Kaul, who have been parents, teachers, and friends, and who made the world of ideas irresistible. Finally, this project would have been abandoned were it not for Piyali Bhattacharya, whose unstinting support saw it through its bleakest times, and who makes its end seem like the beginning. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . iii DEDICATION . iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . v TABLE OF CONTENTS. viii LIST OF TABLES. x LIST OF FIGURES . xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS . xiv CHAPTER ONE: THE PUZZLE OF POOR VOTER CHOICES . 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Poor Voters in India: The puzzle for party systems theory 1.3 How Do Parties Connect with Poor Voters? Applying Comparative Frameworks to the Indian Case 1.4 The BJP’s Dilemma 1.5 The Turn to Social Services 1.6 Research Design and Chapter Outline CHAPTER TWO: RECASTEING HINDUTVA. .. 39 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The Upper Caste Roots of Hindu Nationalism 2.3 The Politics of Polarization: The Ram Movement 2.4 The Impossibility of Programmatic Ties 2.5 Social Engineering 2.6 Running Out of Options: Electoral Outsourcing and Attempted Appropriations 2.7 Conclusion CHAPTER THREE: ORGANIZING NATIONALISM UNCOVERING THE POTENCY OF SEVA . .76 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The Turn to a Service Strategy 3.3 Specifying the Hypotheses and Data Sources 3.4 State-Level Analysis 3.5 Individual-Level Analysis 3.6 Pruning the Sample: A Matched Analysis of Membership Effects viii 3.8 Comparisons with Other Parties 3.9 Conclusion CHAPTER FOUR: SAFFRON FORESTS: THE RISE OF HINDUTVA IN CHHATTISGARH . .. .. 134 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Setting the Context: State Formation and Party Politics in Chhattisgarh 4.3 Wooing the Poor: Social Service Provision in Chhattisgarh 4.4 Survey Results: Looking at organizational presence: 4.5 Potential Variables Impacting the Organization-Voting Link 4.6 Regression Results 4.7 Organizational Strength and Electoral Support: The Chicken and the Egg 4.8 Extending the Social Service Strategy 4.9 Conclusion: Internal Democracy and Opportunity CHAPTER FIVE: HINDUTVA HALTED: KERALA AND THE LIMITS OF THE SERVICE STRATEGY. 186 5.1 Introduction 5.2 The Trajectory of Hindu Nationalism in Kerala 5.3 Survey Analysis 5.4 Regression Results 5.5 Hindu vs.