When Alliances Take Away Voter Choices: The Voter’s Dilemma in Bihar
When Alliances Take Away Voter Choices: The Voter’s Dilemma in Bihar
In the world’s largest democracy, the most powerful instrument a citizen holds is their vote. But what happens when that power is quietly taken away — not by law, not by force, but by the complex game of political alliances?
This question feels especially relevant today in Bihar, a state where alliances have become so frequent and unpredictable that many voters no longer feel they are truly choosing their representatives — they’re simply choosing between groups formed for convenience.
The Voter’s Frustration: When Choice Becomes Compulsion
As a voter in Bihar, I find myself caught in a moral and political dilemma.
I may admire the BJP for its national vision, but I cannot bring myself to vote for JD(U), whose governance in Bihar I deeply disapprove of. Yet, because they are in alliance, my vote for BJP indirectly strengthens JD(U). On the other side, I might respect the Congress for its national secular ideals, but I cannot accept the corruption and dynastic politics within the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD). Still, if I vote for Congress, I am also empowering RJD — because both stand together in the same Mahagathbandhan (Grand Alliance).
In this web of partnerships, where is the real choice left for the voter?
Bihar’s Alliance Politics: A Game of Power, Not Principles
Over the years, Bihar has seen every possible combination of political alliances — BJP with JD(U), RJD with Congress, JD(U) switching sides from NDA to Mahagathbandhan and then back again. These constant shifts are less about ideology and more about electoral arithmetic.
-
The BJP–JD(U) Alliance: Once fierce rivals, Nitish Kumar and the BJP came together again before the 2020 assembly elections. Many BJP supporters were unhappy, recalling how Nitish broke the alliance in 2013 and joined hands with RJD in 2015. Yet, when the alliance reformed, voters had little option — supporting BJP meant indirectly supporting Nitish Kumar too, even if they were dissatisfied with his governance.
-
The RJD–Congress Partnership: On the opposite side, the RJD and Congress have maintained a long-standing alliance under the Mahagathbandhan. But this partnership too has its contradictions. Congress voters who want a clean, progressive image often struggle to justify their association with RJD, which carries the burden of corruption scandals from the Lalu Prasad era. Still, they have to vote for the alliance as a “package deal,” losing their ability to separate the good from the bad.
-
The LJP and Its Splits: The Lok Janshakti Party, once led by Ram Vilas Paswan, is another example. After his death, the party split into two factions — one aligning with BJP, the other contesting separately. Many Paswan supporters felt lost: should they vote for the LJP faction loyal to BJP or remain faithful to the Paswan legacy? Once again, individual choice was replaced by alliance confusion.
When Politics Becomes About “Against Whom,” Not “For Whom”
In Bihar, alliances often form not around shared vision or development goals but around a single idea — how to defeat a common opponent. The Mahagathbandhan exists primarily to oppose BJP, while the NDA unites to keep RJD out of power.
The result? Elections become battles of arithmetic rather than ideology.
Parties no longer talk about education, healthcare, or jobs — they talk about caste equations, vote banks, and seat-sharing. This turns democracy into a mathematical contest where the voter is just a number, not a voice.
The Impact: Weak Accountability, Confused Mandate
When alliances blur the lines between parties, accountability suffers.
If JD(U) performs poorly in governance, who is responsible — Nitish Kumar or his alliance partner BJP? If RJD leaders are involved in controversies, should Congress defend them as allies or criticize them as opposition?
This confusion allows parties to escape responsibility. They share power but not blame.
Moreover, voters can’t send clear messages through the ballot. Suppose someone wants to reward BJP’s national performance but punish JD(U)’s local mismanagement — the system doesn’t allow it. The alliance forces a packaged vote, and democracy loses its nuance.
The Voter’s Silent Anger
Many Bihari voters quietly express their anger.
“I don’t want to vote for JD(U), but I have to because it’s part of BJP’s alliance.”
“I support Congress, but I can’t accept RJD’s corruption — yet they are one team.”
These aren’t isolated complaints; they reflect a deeper democratic frustration. When people are compelled to vote for alliances instead of individual parties, elections become less about conviction and more about compromise.
The Way Forward: Let Democracy Breathe
Alliances are not inherently bad — coalition politics is part of democracy. But in Bihar, they have become a permanent crutch, used not for stability but for survival. The state deserves better.
Political parties should have the courage to contest independently and earn people’s trust on their own merit. Let every party present its own manifesto, its own candidate, and its own accountability.
If alliances must exist, they should be based on clear ideological alignment and transparency — not last-minute seat-sharing deals made for power.
Conclusion: Democracy Needs Real Choices
Democracy loses meaning when voters lose choice.
In Bihar, every election now feels like déjà vu — the same faces, the same parties, reshuffled into new combinations. The alliances may change, but the voter’s helplessness remains.
As a citizen, I want the freedom to vote for BJP without endorsing JD(U). I want to support Congress without empowering RJD. I want my vote to reflect my belief, not the arithmetic of alliances. Until that happens, democracy in Bihar will remain incomplete — a democracy of numbers, not of choices.
Bihar, the land of political awakening, must reclaim its democratic clarity. Because in the end, the right to choose is not just a part of democracy — it is democracy.
Awesome
ReplyDelete