As the voting for the 18th Lok Sabha progresses, the incumbent BJP and its challenger Congress, along with their allies, are heavily resorting to negative campaigning. Such campaigns not only have an impact on voting behaviour but also have long-term differential effects on marginalised communities. I examine the underlying assumptions behind the politics of fear in the ongoing election, their impact on voting behaviour, and future consequences on marginalised communities, particularly Muslims and Dalits. It hurts them badly in terms of long-term policy measures.
There has been widespread discussion on positive versus negative campaigning. Positive campaigning builds on the reputation of a candidate or party, whereas negative campaigning builds on damaging the reputation of a rival candidate or party. Positive campaigns invoke positive emotions that humans typically find pleasurable to experience, whereas negative campaigns lead to emotions that humans typically do not find pleasurable to experience. Love, joy, satisfaction, contentment, interest, amusement, happiness, serenity, and awe are positive emotions whereas fear, anger, disgust, sadness, rage, loneliness, melancholy, and annoyance are negative emotions.
But emotions were not envisioned to play a role in democratic politics. The ancient Greek philosopher Plato defined politics as an arena of rationality rather than emotion. However, there is increasing evidence of the use of emotion in democratic politics, particularly negative emotion in modern-day campaigning. The negative emotions and fear whipped up in this campaign are assumed to play a very significant role in shaping the decision-making capacity of citizens, especially how they vote.
Also read: Congress can’t deny Modi’s charge of Muslim quota. Karnataka & 2009 manifesto are proof
Negative campaigns of BJP and Congress
The ongoing campaigns and counter-campaigns of the BJP, Congress and their allies are primarily built on evoking negative emotions. This can be seen in the dominant electoral narrative of Opposition parties—that the victory of the BJP would bring fascism to the country and undermine democracy. The Opposition has also alleged that if the BJP comes to power again there is a threat to the Indian Constitution, free and fair elections, and reservation. Opposition parties have further alleged that the BJP would replace the Indian Constitution with the Manusmriti. These allegations can be found in social media posts and election speeches of Opposition leaders. They are designed to evoke negative emotions such as fear, anger, and rage among Dalits, Muslims, women, and Backward Castes.
Nevertheless, BJP’s response to the Opposition’s allegations of it undermining the Constitution, democracy, and reservation also invokes negative emotions. Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself has alleged that the Congress party is planning to end SC/ST/OBC reservations and give them to Muslims. Although the Congress party did not make such provisions in its 2024 election manifesto, such provisions were mentioned in the 2009 election manifesto of the Congress party and the reports of Justice Rangnath Misra.
The BJP seems to have taken a clue from the mentioned documents. Following this line of thinking, BJP leaders have also alleged that the Congress party is planning to redistribute wealth to Muslims. The PM has alleged that the Congress party is even planning to take away Hindu women’s mangalsutras and give them to Muslims. He has further alleged that the Opposition parties are planning to take away people’s buffaloes for redistribution. The BJP’s campaign and counter-campaign are clearly built on invoking negative human emotions. Its target is to break the potential consolidation of Dalits, Muslims, and Backward Castes with Opposition parties.
Also read: Muslim politics is shifting from religion to reservation. All due to Modi’s Pasmanda outreach
Implications of negative campaigns
The ongoing negative campaigns and counter-campaigns have resulted in the sidelining of core policy issues and promises that parties are making to the voters. The manifestos of other parties—apart from BJP and Congress—are nearly absent from public debate. Election campaigns devoid of policy debate are gradually becoming serious concerns for democracies around the world, and this is visible in India. Negative campaigns play a significant role in this shift.
The impact on marginalised communities starts with changes in the way they vote. Muslims are one such group in India that votes strategically, often voting for the Opposition candidate who can potentially defeat the BJP candidate. Such strategic voting behaviour is harmful to the communities in two ways. First, it can reduce the representation of such communities in the legislature. If parties know that the community’s concern is to defeat a particular party, they will nominate candidates who can defeat that party, rather than candidates from that community. Presently, we are witnessing this phenomenon in states such as Maharashtra, where the Opposition has refrained from nominating Muslim candidates.
Second, strategic voting behaviour can make parties think that such communities are not concerned about policies. As a result, parties might avoid offering policies that can materially benefit them. This is a possible explanation for why Muslims are socially and educationally lagging.
The issue of negative campaigns and counter campaigns, such as ending reservation and changing the Constitution, can have a severe psychological impact on Dalits who are gradually becoming part of mainstream society because of constitutional measures such as reservation. This community has long faced untouchability, and the stigma of it has damaged their self-respect and self-esteem. However, in my recent field visit, I found that negative campaigning is impacting the Dalit middle class in such a way that they are becoming disinclined towards education and jobs. The social memory of Manusmriti is such that people are worried about the future of their children as well as the community. The growing fear, anger, and anxiety might turn Dalits into a community that votes strategically, like Muslims; devoid of consideration for material empowerment and representation. Such transformation might be dangerous for Dalits in their growth and empowerment in the near future.
The ongoing negative campaigns and counter-campaigns of political parties are not only bad for Indian democracy but also detrimental for Dalits, Muslims, and other marginalised communities. It is high time that we talk about the potential impact of such campaigns.
Arvind Kumar (@arvind_kumar__), Assistant Professor in the Department of Law and Criminology, Royal Holloway, University of London. Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)