Nehru's Word: Reflections on the results of first general election

Elections in five states have been completed and their results are announced. The Congress party has fared rather poorly in these and this has led to the initiating of a process of serious appraisal in the party of the need to review the organisation, strategy and programme. In this context, we bring to you this week a very comprehensive review done by Jawaharlal Nehru after the First General Elections in 1952 in his regular letter to the CMs of the states. He lists the weaknesses and strengths of the Congress as shown in the emerging results and very honestly and frankly acknowledges its failings. He also tries to objectively analyse reasons for these.

My dear Chief Minister,

I have at last finished my tours. Just a week ago I returned to Delhi. The general elections were, by and large, a leap in the dark. Nobody could prophesy the result of an appeal to a new and vast electorate. The Congress had some advantages and many grave disadvantages.

The advantages were obvious — some kind of an organisation, tradition and its past record. Even these advantages had their countervailing disadvantages, because tradition and past prestige gave rise to an easy optimism; the organisation became loose and complacent; and the past record included also the past hopes and aspirations which became a standard to judge the more recent record.

There were also positive disadvantages, the obvious one being the close association with the governmental structure and the inevitable dissatisfaction with a government in office for a number of years of economic stress and hardship. It was easy for any opposing party to lay stress on these hardships and difficulties and practically to confine its programme and propaganda to one of condemnation of the Congress. Of course, errors and mistakes had been committed by the Congress and the governments. These were exaggerated and the achievements of government were conveniently ignored. Indeed, some of the propaganda against the Congress and the Governments made them appear to be monsters of evil.

The last five years had let loose many forces. There were those represented vaguely by different kinds of so-called leftists who laid stress on far-reaching economic changes. There were also strong communal elements among the Hindus and the Sikhs and others, and a growth of casteism in our politics. Relatively small constituencies encouraged an appeal to a dominant caste in that area.

More specifically certain state governments had become very unpopular, as subsequent events showed.

Broadly speaking, the Congress stood as a kind of progressive centre party pledged to economic changes but cautious in its approach. On the one side, there were the communal parties which were socially reactionary. There were also parties which definitely represented social conservatism like the jagirdars, zamindars and in some places, big capital. On the other side, there were the so-called leftists of various shades and grades from Socialists to Communists. There were, of course, other groups too, such as the K.M.P.P. But it would require a very wise man indeed to say where exactly the K.M.P.P. was or if it was anywhere at all, because while vehemently anti-Congress, it was otherwise all things to all men and made alliances indiscriminately with other groups.

The Congress by tradition and historic necessity stood for the unity of the country, anti-communalism and fought against disintegrating tendencies. It is true that evils had crept into it and even some elements of communalism were to be seen within its ranks. It had also developed, as large political parties are apt to do, a certain boss-type of local politics. This had discouraged the development of local leadership and thus greatly lessened its contact with the people. In the elections, however, it stood four-square for unity and against communalism. On the whole, it can be said that it achieved success in this respect and communal parties fared badly against it…. Where communalism has succeeded, it has generally done so with the help of the jagirdars and like elements.

Undoubtedly in south India the Congress has largely failed, although it is still the biggest single party in any state there. There are a multitude of reasons for this failure in the south, but I think in the main they are four: dissatisfaction with the existing state governments; the food shortages and specially the lack of rice; disintegration of the Congress organisation; and caste groupings.…But the major fact is that in spite of the notable success of the Congress in many parts of the country, its failure in the south has great significance. It is something which encourages a certain inherent disintegrating tendency in the country against which the Congress has fought throughout its long career.

Also, it is clear evidence of dissatisfaction with the Congress on the ground that it has not been able to meet adequately the challenge of economic conditions. That feeling, I think, is widespread, though it was more concentrated in the south. Perhaps the south has also experienced the feeling that it was rather ignored by the north and that the north did not pay enough attention to its problems.

Another significant feature of these elections has been the success in socially backward areas, like Rajasthan, of the jagirdari element. Old rulers and their numerous relatives have stood as candidates, usually supported by the Hindu communal organisations, and it has become evident that they still have considerable prestige in their own states. The Governments of those states had effectively alienated these ruling classes and, at the same time, had not gone far enough to win over the peasantry who were still afraid of their feudal lords and influenced by the glamour of royalty.

It was no small matter when the ex-ruler, and even more so his wife, went canvassing or making personal appeals for votes. There is little doubt that many of these rulers and their supporters aimed at some kind of united effort to get back their lost privileges or to re-establish themselves in some way. In particular, there was opposition to the abolition of the jagirdari system.

You will forgive me for these odd reflections on the elections. Purely from the organisational point of view, they have been a tremendous success. Adult franchise has been a success and, on the whole, there has been freedom and secrecy of voting. The electorate has also shown a great deal of discipline and has exercised its judgment. A particularly pleasing feature has been the interest that women have taken [in voting].”

(Selected and edited by Mridula Mukherjee, former Professor of History at JNU and former Director of Nehru Memorial Museum & Library)

(This was first published in National Herald on Sunday)