Newsletters
@Evening:❓Was Karnataka BJP Goverment Soft In Protecting The Core Interests Of Its Voters?
Questions have been raised of the BJP after the Congress' dominant performance in the Karnataka assembly election, in particular this one:
Context: Did the regime fail to adequately protect the cultural and religious — or ideological — interests of its voters?
There are various reasons why the BJP government was voted out of Karnataka, but it would be incorrect to suggest that they were soft in stance or action on ideological matters.
Allegations of the outgoing Karnataka government 'not having done anything' for their Hindu support base do not stand scrutiny.
The hijab ban, abolition of religion-based reservation, law against forced conversion, anti-cow slaughter act, and the move to free temples constitute just some of the state government's actions.
Ban on hijab. A row arose around December 2021 in Udupi when some students belonging to the minority community decided to demand the right to sport the hijab inside classrooms.
Soon, it snowballed into a matter of public order, whereby classes were disrupted by those in ‘solidarity’ with hijab-donning students.
The Karnataka government then banned wearing clothes that 'disturb equality, integrity, and public order in schools and colleges'.
Despite opposition to the move and the matter going national, the state government stood by their ban.
The ban was later stayed by a court order.
Abolition of religion-based quota. The BJP government in Karnataka deftly carried out a reconfiguration of the reservation matrix in the state.
The two politically influential communities secured reservation of 2 per cent each in jobs and admissions in educational institutions.
This abolition of religious quota for the minority was a move that flies in the face of allegations of 'minority appeasement’.
With the Congress back in power in the state, the quota for the minorities looks set to be restored.
Attempt to free temples. The Karnataka government earlier last year proposed the removal of state control from temples in the state.
They said state control was a British-era system that sought to place temple wealth in the hands of the government, which was no longer relevant or suitable.
The move was not only opposed by the Congress party, but by an association of temple priests as well.
Their argument was that most temples of Karnataka did not have the resources to sustain themselves without government support.
A bold step, nevertheless.
>> Do read the original story on Swarajya, where many more such instances of BJP government action in Karnataka are detailed.
Bottom line: These instances are not only indicative of their pro-Hindu stance, but also a rejoinder to claims that it indulged in ‘minority appeasement’ or was lacking in ideological commitment to its voter base.
