Column

No sooner did it become apparent on Thursday evening that Mumbai’s voting percentage was slightly less than the last time round, than the television channels went into overdrive. Anchors started hyperventilating, experts started opining and reporters went around thrusting mikes in people’s faces. The question on everybody’s mind was—why, after the terrible terrorist attacks of 26/11, Mumbai did not turn out to vote in large numbers.

This strident breast-beating was a sight to behold. Having recently discovered politics, the beautiful set, who had stayed away from downmarket activities like voting all these years, felt a bit let down that their enthusiasm was not shared by the rest of the city. The glamour brigade — filmstars, models et al — proudly showed the latest fashion accessory, an ink-stained finger. Voting was ‘in’, but the final percentages shockingly low. There could only be one reason — “there was not much of a choice between all the crooks that were contesting”.

But there were other reasons too. Many voters couldn’t find their names on the electoral lists. The four-day holiday meant that manyjust left the city. Poorer Mumbaikars had gone off to their villages. The heat kept people in. All plausible reasons, but ultimately dissatisfying for those who had convinced themselves that record numbers would vote because of the trauma Mumbai faced in the last week of November.

Cast your mind back to the days after the 26/11. Facebook groups were set up, associations were formed, candles were lit and spontaneous marches were held at Gateway. The politician was a hated figure for having let down the people. People swore they would teach these politicians a lesson come election time. Some advocated not paying taxes. For a few days it looked as if a genuine revoliution was in the offing on the lines of the fall of the Bastille or even the Tianenmen Square protests of oppressed Chinese students. Simultaneously, there was a gradual realisation that by not participating in the political process — voting — we citizens allowed the wrong kind of people to go to Parliament and consequently got poor governance. Ergo, if we wanted good government, we must vote. Various publcitity campaigns were launched to bring home this message. Some professionals also decided to contest to show they wanted to be involved in politics and “clean it up”. It was expected that the turnout would be far better than in 2004. The final numbers turned out to be a huge let down.

But is there a connection between terror and elections? To put it differently, do voters think terrorism is as big a political issue as is being made out? Mumbai has been attacked many times before 26/11; in July 2006 the train bombings killed over 200 people and injured over 700, more than the total number killed in the November attacks. There was no public outpouring of grief at that time. Yet people must be angry. So why did they not come out and vote?

Terrorism is a scourge that must be fought and eliminated but it may not occupy minds of voters in the same way as say jobs, or basics like paani, sadak and bijli. Many a candidate who had set out to campaign on the security issue found that to his or her surprise, even dismay. People wanted to know what the candidate, once elected, would do for them personally; being tough with Pakistan meant nothing to them.

Last year, elections were held, inter alia, in Rajasthan and New Delhi, just days after the Mumbai attacks. The BJP government in Rajasthan got absolutely no electoral benefit from 26/11. At that time the pundits had claimed that the attacks in Mumbai were too far away and too recent to have much of an impact on the results. What possible connection could a voter in Delhi have with an event, however terrible, at the Taj Mahal Hotel in Mumbai? But barely two months before the elections there were five synchronised bombings in Delhi. Jaipur had its own bombings in May 2008. Yet there was no discernible impact on the voting.

The same thing seems to have happened in Mumbai. To cast your vote may have become a trendy thing to do for those who had never bothered to do so before, but the rest of the city did not feel the same urge. This time round, there was a dip in voting in the slum areas too, where received wisdom tells us that there are “vote banks” of poor people who are bought off every election with bribes and sops. We should ask ourselves if they feel connected to the electoral process any more or indeed find terror such an overwhelming concern.

All those politicians and parties who constantly bring up the subject of security and terror thus may want to rethink their strategies. Yes, people do think about the safety of their near and dear ones and yes, terrorism is very worrying, but it is not the obsession with voters that it is with political parties. Even those in Mumbai who thought 26/11 was the end of the world misread the situation; the general populace did not feel personally affected enough. Many other factors played into the decision to vote or not vote. Call it apathy or whatever, but the 26/11 effect, which launched a thousand Facebook groups, is long gone.