BJP marches out

democracy in India, plus a follow on to Wednesday’s words

As the world watches the Strait of Hormuz (I am always amused by how it proliferates into Straits in so many statements, but it’s a single point on the map) to see whether petroleum supertankers can bring petroleum to the world, an election worth observing occurred this week. Hence, I offer a few words on the world’s largest democracy.

Narendra Modi’s increasingly one-party India was on display when his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) swept the West Bengal state elections. Careful readers will remember I wrote two years ago about the Indian Prime Minister’s power seeming to wane when voters slapped him down in favor of the long-standing Congress (I) Party, long associated with the Gandhi family, but that now appears an aberration in his history leading the subcontinent.

This week’s results led the New York Times to question whether he has any serious opposition left, since West Bengal had been an outlier over the 12 years since the BJP broke through, overcoming concerns about Hindu nationalism to govern.

The BJP’s victory in elections over the weekend was notable as it indicates a systematic march of victories across the large nation. These wins were hardly controversy-free, as critics assailed the purging of voter rolls in various areas, yet many confess to the need for such actions. Indeed, hints of anti-democratic means, including voter roll-tampering and violence against Muslims, provide constant discomfort about the nature of Modi’s supporters’ determination to seize India from the millions in the non-Hindu minority population.

But, as the Times states, the scale of BJP successes far outpaces the number of voters tossed off the voting rolls. In short, the Party’s victories show a serious embrace of the ruling movement Mr. Modi embodies.

For comparison’s sake, just a smidge under 80% of the country’s 1.7 billion people identify as Hindu. Muslims, Christians, and a raft of other ethnic/religious populations inhabit this subcontinental power, but Modi built his BJP to focus on Hindu control over the future. So, a nationalist movement perhaps should not surprise anyone, but Modi motivates his supporters for their ethno-religious self-identification rather than as Indians as citizens of the whole country.

India, despite its many challenges over nearly 80 years since independence, has shown itself to be a resilient democracy. Congress (I), a party rather than the legislative branch, ruled for the first several decades but surrendered power, perhaps a surprising development to some, following scandals and failures in the late 1970s and 1980s. Successive relatively free elections marked this country as dramatically different from neighboring China or Pakistan, ultimately allowing Modi to rise to the Premiership in 2014.

No party ever relishes losing power, but Modi’s ability to consolidate his party’s rule marks a turning point because his supporters, like those of other strongmen and strongwomen rulers, are ignoring his government failures on policy to focus on the shared characteristics of Hindus alone. The sense of ethno-religious identity appears more important than socio-economic improvements—or much of anything else. Consolidation of his Party’s control over government at all levels across the country obviates the need to disenfranchise opposition as he did early in his rule.

Modi, at 75, does not have unlimited years in office, so the most interesting question will be the sustainability of his movement when he relinquishes leadership. His remaining governance, however, appears likely to focus on the nationalist promises he has made to a wildly supportive base.

Opposition parties will need to create viable, alluring alternative policies if democracy is to succeed in the subcontinent in the long term. Single-party governance, as U.S. Democrats learned painfully after controlling the Legislative Branch more or less nonstop from the Eisenhower to Reagan administrations, leads to the atrophy of ideas and, ultimately, public expectations.

Democracy, like a garden, needs constant attention, which too often established systems forget at their peril. India’s future will be a fascinating one on this score alone, as the BJP, of course, could suffer the same fate of ignoring its base as it consolidates power. Time, of course, will tell.

Wednesday’s column discussing anticipated World Cup hotel bookings lagging dramatically in Kansas City yielded reader comments worth noting. Two opined that the low petrol prices in this country, including the Midwest, compared to Europe, are a reality that won’t deter visitors. One of those comments, in particular, cited $14 per gallon petrol in the Low Countries as evidence of a disconnect between perspectives (I am not certain what prices are in Hawai’i, but am confident that they are a good 30%, if not more, below that).

Instead, a subscriber in South Carolina offered a plausible, if uncomfortable, alternative cause for the paucity of foreign attendees to this global fandango over the next couple of months: a problem with visa acquisition. The Charleston subscriber recounted that friends from Britain were denied visas to visit the United States, World Cup or not, because of a prior holiday in Cuba.

As I noted on Wednesday, however, visas are required for foreigners to visit the United States for these football fixtures. U.S. officials are checking both past visits to other countries and social media comments before granting temporary entries for the World Cup (or any other reason).

Current U.S. officials are unaware—or more likely don’t care—that the rest of the world decades ago left behind any obsession with the Communist orientation of its Havana regime. Visitors from elsewhere who go to Cuba are not violating anyone’s laws except those of the United States, as their countries have relations with the regime in Havana. Tourism may not be the healthiest way to sustain the economic well-being of millions of people on a small island. Still, it’s been a lifeline for Cuba since the 1970s, when tourists discovered the Caribbean nation. Millions of visitors, including some Americans, have spent their holidays on the island, where prices were lower than in some places. I suspect many also chose Cuban vacations as deliberate support to the regime in the face of a seven-decade-plus U.S. embargo against the island.

Washington’s decision to reject visa applications for those seeking to enter the United States is a sovereign choice by our elected government. I suspect, however, that it will neither discourage non-Americans from choosing to visit the Communist-led state nor will it convince the handful of nations supporting our embargo (largely Israel) to adopt our position. Instead, the visa issue will highlight one of the many ways Washington sees the world differently from many of our traditional allies and partners, if not the rest of the world.

I welcome your thoughts on visas, Modi, the BJP, democracy, and anything else in our largest forum. Actions create consequences is a forum for discussion. I do not pretend to have all of the answers, but welcome your thoughts or rebuttals. Please join in.

Thank you to the subscribers who put resources into this column as you make a difference for me daily. I appreciate everyone’s time, however, as readers.

Wishing you, whether you are a mother or were born of a mother, a joyous Mothers’s Day this weekend.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Alex Travelli, Hari Jumar, and Pragati H.B., “Where have Modi’s Rivals Gone? India Under One Party“, NewYorkTimes.com, 5 May 2026, retrieved at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/05/world/asia/india-modi-congress-west-bengal-elections.html