Indian Politics and Political Parties - General Discussion

[jaichind]

I'm wondering if there are actually any remaining ideological differences between the CPI(M) and the CPI. They seem to operate as a single party for all intents and purposes.

Very well written.  The original reason for CPI and CPM split was the Sino-Soviet split in the Communist world with CPI for USSR and CPM for PRC.  Now that is completely over I really see no reason other than ego why these two parties does not just merge.  In theory CPI allows for alliances with progressive bourgeoisie parties like INC or JD and CPM does not.  But in reality both does it so they should drop this and merge.

[jaichind]

Some comments on this very well written write-up.

BSP also formed an alliance with SP in the past as well as INC and BJP.  Although BSP had pre-election alliances with SP and INC but never the BJP.

AUDF is mostly an Assam political party that appeals with Muslims.

The history of JD(U) is a bit more complex.  First Samata party split from JD and formed an alliance with BJP in Bihar in 1994.  Then in 1999 JD itself split into JD(U) (pro-NDA) and JD(S) (anti-NDA).  After that Samata party merged into JD(U).  Of course now JD(U) broke with BJP.  So I do not see reasons other than ego that stops JD(U) and JD(S) from merging again. 

Actually INLD originates from the Haryana branch of the LD party which itself split from JP in 1980.  Of course the proto-INLD merged with JD and then split from it again.

I would also add in Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Prajatantrik) also known as JVM.    This is a BJP splinter led by a former BJP CM of Jharkhand  Babulal Marandi. JVM used to have alliance with INC but that got dropped when INC went with JMM.   JMM and JVM are rivals of each other and are fighting to be THE Jharkhand regional party.  One thing that is funny about  Babulal Marandi this election cycle is that he recently attacked Modi's record of development saying that if BJP was that great at economic development then how come with Jharkhand under BJP rule for 8 out of the 14 years its has been existence and it is still doing so badly economically.  What he does not mention is that out of the 8 years of BJP rule, 4 of them was with himself as CM.  So he is really attacking his own record with that remark.  I almost fell out of my seat when I read that comment by Babulal Marandi.

[jaichind]

I am pretty sure Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party stands for Maharashtra Goan Party.  Since Goa was annexed to India, there has been an movement to merge Gao with Maharashtra.  Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party led that movement which was made up of lower caste Hindus.  UGP has opposed it wanting a distinct which is mostly made up of Christians and upper caste Hindus.  UGP has then merged with INC and BJP has mostly taken up the political space of MGP although we find MGP jump ship between UPA and NDA. 

[jaichind]

As for NCP it really comes down to the political ambitions of Sharad Pawar.  He along with BJP's Advani, and DMK's Karunanidhi are the "old men" of Indian politics.  Sharad always had ambitions to lead INC and had bad relationship with the Gandhis, especially Rajeev Gandhi.  He broke away from INC back in the 1970s and only came back because his political movement was going nowhere.  He tried to become PM back in 1991 after Rajeev's assassination but Sonia Gandhi seems to have sided with the Rao faction.  In 1999 when it was clear that Sonia Gandhi was going to be president of INC it seems like a nightmare for Sharad Pawar who took on the foreigner cause to try to stop it.  When that failed he created NCP.  In 1999 Maharashtra assembly elections, the NCP and INC fought separately and as a result neither was able to get a majority even though the BJP-SS was beaten.  So out of political compulsions INC and NCP formed an alliance which lasted ever since.  I suspect once Shard Pawar retires from politics NCP will merge with INC.  NCP used to have a Northeastern faction led by Sangma which was more pro-NDA but Sangma has since formed his own party NPP which now is part of NDA so the eventual INC NCP merge should have no issues.

[jaichind]

I think Lok is Popular and Janata is People although I am not 100% about that.  BTW, when you see LD (Lok Dal) in any party's name, like INLD and RLD, the word LD should translate into, from a practical point of view, Jats.  RLD and INLD these days are Jat outfits.  Charan Singh who help found the JP and then split it to create LD was a Jat himself and what remains of his political movement are based on Jat farmers although his movement never advance into Punjab where there are a lot of Sikh Jats who in turn follow SAD.

[jaichind]

As for Dravidian parties, it is one of those things that came full circle.  First we had DK which was mostly an atheist movement to fight against the Hindu caste system and  Brahmin domination.  DMK split from and displaced DK which was more focused on Tamil Nadu independence although still mouthing the atheist anti-Brahmin line.  DMK came to power as it toned down the independence line and kept itself in power mostly through populist schemes to help the lower castes.  AIADMK split from DMK mostly due to rivalries between MG Ramachandran (MGR) and Karunanidhi.  Note that Karunanidhi was a screenwriter and MGR was an actor.  The DMK and AIADMK political discourse was based on the cinema which projected their parties as a defender of the poor and their government bring material well being to the poor.  AIADMK vs DMK really then became competitive populism based on personality cult.  Not much difference between AIADMK and DMK as INC would take turns taking them on as allies.  DMK, later on in order to distinguish itself also latched on the the Sri Lanka LTTE struggle as a way to appeal to Tamil nationalism.  MDMK split from DMK because of this as MDMK felt that DMK was not extreme enough in their defense of Sri Lanka Tamils.  What is funny about the DK anti-Brahman roots that the leader of AIADMK whcih still claims to be the rightful successor of the original DK government is led by Jayalalitha, a Tamil Brahman.  All three parties AIADMK DMK and MDMK all took turns at competitive populism and support for LTTE depending who is in power.  PMK is more of a party for the Vanniyar caste and is for the bifurcation TN so Northern TN could be a state dominated by Vanniyars.  DMDK was merely a me-too party that took on the same platform of AIADMK DMK and MDMK of competitive populism centered around the actor Vijayakanth.  In that sense DMDK follows a very similar path as AIADMK DMK MDMK as a party that sees support by projecting an image of list actor leader with the inference that the hero actions of said actor portrayed in movies will come true when the achieve power.

[jaichind]

As for various socialist parties that end up supporting BJP (like JD(U), BJD, allowing BJS to merge into JP in 1977, JD tactical alliance with BJP in 1989, JD(S) alliance with BJP in Karnataka, and now LJP), yes, it is mostly opportunism.  But the way these socialists justify it is to first claim that the BJP is under "moderate" leadership like Vajpayee.  Of course that does not work today with Modi at the helm.  Another argument is to talk about the ideas of Ram Manohar Lohia.  Lohia was really the father of the Indian Socialist movement post-independence.  He was with INC but then help from the CSP from which all these socialist parties spring.  He propounded the strategy of Anti-Congressism.  His point was that the INC pretended to be a progressive party when it was controlled by big capital.  But since INC mouthed the words of progressive reform, INC was a much greater danger to the growth of socialism than right-wing parties.  So first INC had to be smashed to remove the delusion of reform within the capitalist system.  To do that alliance with right-wing parties was acceptable.

[jaichind]

One thing I always found interesting is the power of caste in politics in India.  Take the example of Kerela, where the Communist movement is quite strong as well as having a large number of Christians.  In Kerela, many Christian Churches have different seating arrangement for people of different castes.  So even after conversion to Christianity there is still caste.  Also inside the CPM and CPI one find that they are rife with caste differences with certain castes always holding leadership positions and blocking advancement within the party for certain lower castes.  Both Christianity and Marxism are based on universal ideologies, yet in India caste manage to make its way into these movements.   

[jaichind]

Maharashtra Navnirman Sena I believe means Maharashtra Reformation Army.  BTW, you define Shiv Sena as an extreme Hindu Nationalist party, then MNS is even more extreme.  MNS adds Northern Indians to Muslims as objects of attack.

[jaichind]

Thanks for clearing all that stuff up.

In regards to Goa, isn't it odd that upper caste Hindus back Congress and lower caste Hindus back the BJP? Isn't that the opposite of how it is normally?

Across the whole country, what is the caste breakdown in general?

Historically the INC coalition has been Upper Castes + Dalits + Muslims + Tribals.  INC has historically been weak with the OBCs which are around 40% of the population.  Only after the Ram  Temple movement in the late 1980s did the Upper Castes drift toward BJP.  At the same time the Dalits drifted toward BSP.  Note that Upper Castes still can and still sometimes do vote INC if they detect that the BJP is taking them for granted by going after OBC.  This is actually why the BJP must stroke up anti-Muslim communal tensions from time to time.  For the BJP to win they need Upper Caste and OBC votes.  But for both to vote BJP at the same time they must vote as Hindus and not as separate castes where Upper Caste-OBC rivalries would prevent them from voting for the same candidate.

As for caste breakdown in India this is a politically explosive question so there has not been a comprehensive count since 1931.  There has been a count for Dalits and Tribals recently.  My estimates are

Upper Caste 18%
OBC              38%
Muslims         14%
Dalits             17%
Tribals             9%

Rest are non-Tribal non-Dalit Christians Sikhs Jains Buddhist etc etc.


Note that by law for one to be counted as a Dalit one has to be Hindu or Sikh.  No such constraint for Tribals as they can be Christians or Hindus. In reality a lot of Dalits are Christians  but report themselves as Hindus so they can retain Dalit status.  Dalits along with Tribals have special reservation quotas for educational and civil service positions.  Dalit Christians do not want to give that up so they still report themselves as Hindu. So even though Christians are 2% of the population (mostly Tribals) in reality the number is a lot higher.  The worst is to be an official Dalit Christian.  From a social point of view they are still looked down upon and they also lose various quotas and benefits from the government.

The trend has been that Muslims and Dalit populations will rise faster relative to the general population so the Muslim and Dalit proportion will rise in the future.  This is why the issue of conversion is such a controversy.  Know that a lot of Dalits are really Christian and Dalit and Muslim population are rising relative to other Hindus poses a threat to the concept of a super majority Hindu India for Hindu nationalists.  There have been laws and movements banning conversion to Islam or Christianity mostly by Dalits or Tribals.  

Also the definition of Dalits seems to be growing as well.  Among OBCs the most backward of them are often labeled as MBC (Most Backward Castes).  Various state governments have lobbied over time to have some of them included in the Scheduled Caste list.  Scheduled Castes is the technical term of Dalits but now seems to include other disadvantaged castes at the bottom of the OBC social hierarchy.  Doing so allows politicians to get the votes of these groups as now they qualify for additional quota help in educational and civil service admissions.

[jaichind]

This is a great thread.

And let's add to the greatness.

Yes.  Also I love this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Lu_Hitler_Marak

[jaichind]

This write-up is great.  I will over the next few posts try to put some extra info where I can to add this this great write-up.

The roots of the Janata/Socialist political tradition in modern India starts with the CSP which was started in 1934 a Socialist faction within INC.  After independence CSP broke with INC to form its own separate party.  CSP was mostly made up of OBCs and began an exodus of of OBC support which left INC to be a party of Upper Castes, Muslims, Dalits, and Tribals.  After this KMPP which was a party for OBC peasants also broke away in 1951 and merged with CSP to form PSP in 1952.

In 1959 Swatantra Party which is a free market party split from INC.

Then in 1964 SSP split from PSP led by George Fernandes which you refer to as a proto-JD(U).  In 1972 SSP and PSP merged again into Socialist Party.  

As you pointed out, in the meantime, BKD was formed by Charan Singh in 1967 also split from INC taking more OBC peasant support from INC.  Then a bunch of INC regional parties split from INC which all merged into Janata Party.  They are 1966 Orissa Jana Congress (Orissa INC splinter),    1967 Bangla Congress (WB INC splinter), and 1969 Utkal Congress (another Orissa INC splinter and you correctly calling it a proto-BJD)

Of course the INC itself had a massive split in 1969 where INC split into INC(R) (pro-Indira Gandhi) and INC(O) (anti-Indira Gandhi)  INC(R) ended up being the stronger party so we ended up calling INC(R) INC.  This took place as Indira Gandhi was trying to take INC to the Left in an attempt to defeat her internal INC enemies.

This trigged, BJS, which was the ancestor party of BJP formed an alliance with INC(O), BKD,  Swatantra Party, SSP, and PSP in the 1971 elections as a center-right opposition to INC.  CPI tended to side with INC in this election.  Indira Gandhi's INC won a massive victory in 1971 as India trended Left.  But this 1971 center-right opposition grand alliance was the basis of the Janata Party of 1977.

Of course in 1977 the various regional INC splinters all joined BJS, INC(O), BKD, Swatantra Party, Socialist Party to form Janata Party to stop the Indira Gandhi's INC.  CFD also split from INC to join Janata in 1977 which won the 1977 elections.

[jaichind]

Note that the 1977 Janata party was a massive anti-INC alliance to stop INC after Indira pretty much had emergency dictatorial powers in 1975-77 and not doing so risked complete INC domination of the political scene.  

As soon as Janata won and came into office it started to fall apart as it started to split into Right and Left factions.  The factions that was from BJS INC(O), and Swatantra Party was on the Right and mostly support PM Desai who was from INC(O).  The factions that was from BKD, Socialist Party, various INC splinters were on the Left and supported Charan Singh.  Charan Singh wanted to be PM and this led to all sorts of internal battles within the Janata government.

What was interesting is that as Janata Party was falling apart, so was INC.  What remains of INC after the 1977 defeat was split into pro- and anti-  Indira Gandhi factions.  INC(I) led by Indira Gandhi split from INC.  The 1977-1978 regional elections showed that INC(I) somewhat more popular than INC but both still well behind Jananta.  Then Urs of INC(I) also broke with Indira Gandhi and took his faction to join INC to from INC(U).  To many this seems like the end of Indira Gandhi.

Indira Gandhi's comeback from this is one of the greatest political comeback stories of India.  Exactly because she was seen as politically dead given her party split twice, that only added to the Janata Party civil war thinking that Indira Gandhi along with INC(I) and INC(U) are not a threat.  Indira Gandhi approached Charan Singh offering to support him to be CM if his Left faction split from Janata. Charan Singh took the bait and split Janata Party and formed Lok Dal (LD).  For LD to now form a majority it needed the support of INC(I) and INC(U) and he thought he bad it based on his deals with Urs and Indira Gandhi.  Then after his government is formed Indira objected to the fact that so many of her INC(U) rivals were given top jobs and withdrew support.  This triggered  the 1980 election.  In this election it was Janata (really BJD, INC(O), Swatantra, and some CFD) led by CFD leader Ram vs INC(I) vs LD allied with INC(U).  INC(I) to everyone's surprise swept the polls and INC(I) was called INC after that as it established itself as THE INC.  In order words, Indira Gandhi conned  Charan Singh into her political comeback by taking advantage of his ambition to be PM.

After the election INC(U) became INC(S) but most members re-joined INC.  BJS faction of Janata split to form BJP and then after that Janata mostly declined as most members joined BJP or INC leaving it being active only in Karnataka, Gujarat (mostly because of INC(O) faction), Orissa (mostly due to proto-BJD), TN (mostly due to INC(IO).  LD still became an active force in Jat dominated areas like UP and Haryana as well as place likes Bihar (due to Socialists Party).  Eventually INC(S) which was only really active in Maharashtra merged back into INC.

After three years, INC was supreme in Indian politics again as the first Janata experiment ended.

[jaichind]

In the aftermath of 1980 there was no real organized opposition to INC.  By 1983 as INC started to stumble the opposition started to stir.  In AP a new regional party TDP came out of nowhere to capture power from INC with support from BJP on the right and CPI/CPM/Jananta on the Left.  In Karnataka, old INC(U) supported merged into Janata Party which also formed a grand Right-Left alliance with BJP on the Right and CPI/CPM on the Left to defeat INC.

In 1984 due to the sympathy wave for INC due to Indira Gandhi's assasination there was no real opposition to INC landslide.  There are regional opposition to INC.  BJP was trying to grow into a center-right national opposition to INC.  It had strength in MP (old BJS bastion), HP (old BJS bastion), Delhi (old BJS bastion) Rajasthan (due to Swatantra) and pockets of support across Northern India.   TDP opposed INC in AP, LD took on INC in UP, Haryana, and Bihar.  Left Front took on INC in WB and Kerela, INC(S) took on INC on Maharashtra, and Janata took on INC in Gujarat and Karnataka.  It was no avail as INC swept all before it in 1984.

But what took place in 1983 where there were successful Left-Right alliances to defeat INC left a mark.  As Rajeev Gandhi stumbled in 1987 the anti-INC coalition reformed.  First VP Singh of INC split to create Jan Morcha (JM).  Then JM mereged with Janata, LD and what remains of INC(S) into Janata Dal to take on INC.  What JD did was quite cleaver.  It know that Left Front and BJP cannot coexist, especially as the Ram Temple movement was starting up and BJP had polar opposite positions relative to Left Front on this issue.  What JD did was to work out deals with BJP so neither party will compete with each other in 1989.  It made the same deal with Left Front.  So BJP and Left Front could end up competing with each other but on the whole the anti-INC block was making tactical alliances with each other.  This worked in 1989 even as INC won the most votes by far, they were stopped short of a majority.  With outside support from Left Front and BJP, a JD minority government came into power in 1989.

[jaichind]

After 1989 elections and a JD government is in place, tensions begin again.  BJP is growing in power with the Ram Temple movement, so VP Singh tries to check this with a push for higher quotas for OBCs in education and civil service.  This threatens the BJP strategy of Hindu consolidation and turns Upper Caste voters against JD and into the lap of BJP.  JD then splits on Left-Right lines with a Left wing SJP led by Chandra Shekar splitting out of JD on the premise that JD was too weak on BJP.  Just like in 1979 INC promises support for a SJP government only to withdraw it leading to 1991 elections.  LD also splits from JD which later becomes INLD which is a force in Haryana.

The 1991 elections starts with both JD, SJP, INC losing ground to BJP in the first couple rounds but the assassination of Rajeev Gandhi turns the tide in the later rounds as the sympathy vote moves to INC.  Had Rajeev Gandhi not been assassinated I suspect 1991 election results will be very similar to 1996 and we could have seen a BJP minority government.  As it is INC manages to come close to a majority and forms a government.

After the 1991 elections SP splits from SJP in 1992 which pretty much means the end of SJP is a political force.  JD continues to be a political force although diminished from the split of SJP.  JD(G) also split from JD in the 1991 elections and then merges with INC.  JP in a much smaller form continued to exist but is a non factor in politics.

In 1993 Bihar Peoples Party (BPSP) was formed as a small Bihar splinter of JD as a party of lower castes and in turn was not aligned.  In 1994 Samata Party which is mostly based in Bihar split from JD and forms an alliance with BJP.  Also the Ajit Singh, son of Charan Singh, led the proto-RLD and merged it with INC after the 1991 elections.  

[jaichind]

It doesn't even look like the SJP ran in the 1991 elections, which is weird since they were kind of the ruling party.

Several sources say Chandra Shekhar, again, the incumbent PM, ran for re-election to parliament as a member of the Janata PARTY.

In 1996 he was apparently a member of the Samata Party.

It wasn't until the 1998 that he ran under the Samajwadi Janata Party (Rashtriya) banner.

SJP did run in 1991 but ran under the Janata Party symbol.  SJP was too new and was not a "national party" so they ran under Janata Party symbol since JP was still considered a national party.  Kind of the same as Janata running under BKD in 1977.

As for  Chandra Shekhar he was PSP and then joined INC.  But he ran afoul of Indira Gandhi and joined Janata Party.  He was with SJP since.  I do no think he ran under Samanta in 1996.  He would not join a party allied with BJP since that was the reason he split with JD.

[jaichind]

Also, I don't think Jagjivan Ram was still with Janata in 1980. I'm pretty sure he had his own Congress splinter group at that point.

I know Indian parties often don't officially have PM candidates, and I wouldn't be surprised if JP didn't in 1980, but they must have at least had a public face.

Ram did lead Janata Party in 1980.  I think my narrative did miss something that led you to believe what you believe.  After the defeat of Ram-led Janata he split with Janata and created INC(J).  I believe that Ram re-joined INC before his death in 1986 but I am not sure about that.  For sure his  daughter later became a leader in INC and ran in the 1984 elections as an INC candidate.

[jaichind]

It did seem weird but I'm just finding several sources that list Chandra Shekhar's 1996 affiliated as "SAP." I've so far been unable to find any other parties that could have that acronym besides Samata or Samajwadi. I suppose it could just be a mistake that spread across the internet though.

On the other hand, didn't Shekhar stick with the Janata Party in 1980 despite it being the more right-wing of the two Janata factions? Also Fernandes was Janata Secretary General during the 80s when I'm pretty sure Shekhar was Janata leader. So maybe there were just close personally.

I think what it could be is that  Chandra Shekhar's SJP did not have national party status it was not as easy for SJP to run UP so he made a deal with Samanta where SJP in UP ran as Samanta.  I know that  Levi Lal's proto-INLD make the same deal with Samanta in 1996 to do the same in Haryana.  This deal did not affect the fact that SJP will not ally with BJP since he is just borrowing a party symbol in a state that Samanta does not plan to contest in anyway.

[jaichind]

In 1996 elections JD vote share and seat share fell further from 1991 mostly as result of losing a lot of its Bihar unit to Samata Party which was allied with BJP as well as attrition of support.  SP did well and a Third Front government which contained JD SP and other was installed with INC outside support to stop the BJP from forming a government.  This actually moved the political center toward BJP as many saw this deal as unfair and robbed the BJP of its right to form the government as the head of the largest front.  

The United Front government was rocked by intra-bloc rivalries as well as sniping from INC.  As BJP became a second pole in addition to INC in Indian politics, JD faced polarization. First in Bihar a significant part of JD under Lalu Yadav split to form RJD in 1997.  RJD was anti-BJP and aligned with INC as well as SP depending on which day it was.   LS also split from JD when a significant bloc of the JD support in Karnataka in 1997 and formed an alliance with BJP.

Eventually INC withdraw support to United Front and elections were called for early 1998.  In Orissa BJD was split from JD and allied itself with BJP.

The 1998 elections began with INC falling apart and NDA looking like it will capture a majority on its own. When Sonia Gandhi decided to come in to active politics the tide turned and UPA was able to hold its own as the Third Front lost ground and NDA was stopped short of a majority.  JD support collapsed due to the various defections over last year.  A NDA government was formed with outside support from TDP who also defected from Third Front after the elections.  Also, after the 1998 elections RLD split from INC which its base with Jats in Western UP.

[jaichind]

The NDA government lasted only one year before the defection of the AIADMK brought down the government and forced the 1999 elections.  The sense of injustice of how the NDA government was brought down started the 1999 elections with many seeing the NDA as having the advantage.  The bipolar nature of Indian politics with NDA vs UPA forced many in JD to pick sides.  JD ended up splitting into JD(U) and JD(S) with JD(U) (mostly based in Bihar and somewhat in Karnataka) aligned with NDA to try to cash in on the NDA wave and JD(S) (based in Karnataka) taking an equidistant position between NDA and UPA although with a subtle pro-UPA bias.  RLD ended up forming an alliance with INC as well as RJD.  JD(U), INLD, Samanta Party, BJD, BPSP, and LS allied with BJP.

The 1999 elections saw NDA winning a majority and UPA losing ground in terms of seats although UPA gained vote share as part of the NDA-UPA polarization.  

[jaichind]

After the 1999 election we had a stable 5 years of NDA government.  LS, Samanta and JD(U) all merged into JD(U).  One of the reasons for that is to increase the JD(U) leverage over BJP within the NDA.  Then in 2000 LJP (based in Bihar) splitting from JD(U) indicating that the lower of the OBCs were not being respected in JD(U) but stayed in NDA.  Then came the Gujarat riots of 2002 and in protest LJP left NDA and aligning with INC and RJD.

The 2004 election started with NDA with a massive lead, but good alliance strategies by INC which included roping in RJD and LJP led to a surprise plurality for the UPA.  RLD allied with SP and both did well in UP.  Also in Haryana INLD broke with BJP and divided both were defeated by INC.  What was left of JP under pro-BJP Subramanian Swamy also allied with BJP in 2004 but with very little impact as JP was without any real political influence.

After 2004 and with a UPA government in place, there was a slow falling out between INC and RJD and LJP over the Bihar Assembly elections of 2005.  As a result in 2009 elections RJD and LJP ran as a Fourth Front along with SP which was pro-UPA but ran separately from UPA.  In Orissa BJD broke with BJP and joined Third Front.  In Karnataka due to a hung assembly JD(S) first formed an alliance with INC and then BJP with both alliances falling apart.  In 2009 BJP and INLD was able to reform their alliance in Haryana and was able to form an alliance with RLD.  In 2009 elections UPA won with a greater plurality and came close to an absolute majority and was a 1998 with UPA and NDA having their roles reversed.  Although in Bihar BJP-JD(U) crushed INC and RJD/LJP whom fought separately and paid for this split. 

For 2014, RLD is with UPA as well as RJD.  JD(U) broke with BJP and LJP in a total surprise joined NDA as LJP felt that it was losing out in alliance talks with INC and RJD.   JD(S) will fight by itself in Karnataka against BJP and INC, in Haryana INLD will fight separately against INC and BJP, and in Orissa BJD will fight separately against INC and BJP.

[jaichind]

Subramanian Swamy (the last leader of the Janata Party) is an interesting guy.

The last time the Janata Party had a seat in parliament was him in 1998. He won from a district in Tamil Nadu. His platform was that he didn't believe in the Aryan-Dravidian divide and he opposed the Tamil Tigers.

Well, Subramanian Swamy is a Tamil Brahmin so he is obviously opposed to the Dravidian narrative style of politics. He was in the BJP for a while and then manage to get himself to become the head of the defunct Janata Party.  He is mostly pro-AIADMK (Jayalalitha herself is a Tamil Brahmin) and pro-BJP but between the two he is closer to Jayalalitha.  He merged JP into BJP mostly because he cannot join a party with the word DMK in it.  He is most famous for making various attacks on the Gandhi family, especially Sonia Gandhi.  His claims about the Gandhi clan are

1) Sonia Gandhi faked her Oxford degree
2) Sonia Gandhi who is Italian is most likely a bastard child of a German soldier as she was born   when her father was away and her town under German occupation in WWII.
3) Gandhi clan is involved in massive corruption
4) Rahul Gandhi is a rapist and obsessive gambler
5) Sonia Gandhi never got Indian citizenship should not be allowed to be MP

[jaichind]

Praja Socialist Party means Peoples Socialist Party and  Samyukta Socialist Party means United Socialist Party.

PSP was formed in 1952 when CSP merged with KMPP.  In 1955 Lohia split from PSP to form Socialist Party (SP).  Then in 1962 SP and PSP mereged into SSP.  And in 1964 the party of SSP that was PSP split from SSP to re-form PSP only to reunited with SSP into the Socialist Party in 1972. 

During the period of split, 1955-1972, the main difference between the two are that the PSP was more representing landed peasants while SSP was more or an urban union based movement.  Also under Lohia SSP saw INC as the main enemy and was not adverse to form alliances with CPI and BJS to defeat INC. 

[jaichind]

As for Gandhian socialists vs Nehruvian socialists, after the death of Gandhi, Nehru's brand of Fabian socialism dominated the INC even though members of INC would mouth the propaganda of  Gandhian socialism.  Opposition of INC have used this against INC over the years.  The mastermind of the Jananta Party of 1977, Jayaprakash Narayan, was a follower and believer of  Gandhian socialism.  Jayaprakash Narayan was in INC but went on to split INC by forming the CSP.  He then retired from politics to work for Gandhian socialism at the village level in the 1950s.  His return to politics was to fight against Indira Gandhi's "betrayal" of Gandhian socialism and started a movement which finally led to the merger of most opposition parties into Janata Party in 1977.  On the Right, the BJP from time to time back in the 1980s and 1990s also used Gandhian socialism as their principle as a way to get OBC votes and expand from their upper caste vote base.

[jaichind]

Now that the election is over I would like to post my own history of Indian elections. I find most literature on this topic somewhat frustrating because when numbers are published they tend not to take pre-election alliances into account which often include independents as well, mostly because it is quite tedious to do.  They just post the seats won and vote share by party and move on with their very interesting and valid analysis.   Also the independent vote share 1967 and before is quite high and that is more of a function of rules of party registration which leads various party candidates to run as an independent even though they are clearly aligned with a party if not an entire front.  But I feel not taking pre-poll alliances and aligned independents into account often leads us to miss certain dynamics of an election.
I did some work on my own to correct this with my own methodology.  I tend to see an election as a battle between various fronts.  These fronts often include independents supported by the parties within the said front.  A front will usually have one or sometimes two pivot parties that other parties and independents would from pre-poll alliances with on a state by state basis.  Of course the concept of fronts in Indian elections is mostly something that developed during the 1971 election but I can retroactively construct proto-fronts before 1971.  
The rules I will use to define a front would be
1)   The name of the front would be a retroactive one.  If a front eventually evolved into something that ended up having a name, I will name the front with the name it would eventually adapt.  So all fronts led by INC would be called UPA and all fronts led by BJP would be called NDA even though UPA as a name did not really come into being until 2004 and NDA as a name did not appear until 1998.
2)   A front is defined as parties or independents that are allied with a pivot party of a said front on a state by state basis.  So a party could belong to different fronts from different states.  Sometimes a pivot party of one front could be very weak in a state and forms an alliance with another pivot party into another front.  In such a case the vote this pivot party captures would count toward the other front.  
3)   On principle, a front could not have more than one candidate per seat.  I will allow for some “friendly fights” when it is clear there is an alliance between the parties in said state for the front but the alliance is not perfect.
4)   I define something called “Regional front” which are made up of the sum significant regional parties or national parties plus independents that are aligned with them which on a state by state basis might not belong to a front.  This will also include rebels from parties within other fronts that I cannot include in the fronts of their mother party since that would violate the one candidate per front rule I have.  The idea is that all votes/seats that are not included in the various fronts and this Regional front are votes and seats won by true independents which are not aligned with any significant party or are truly irrelevant parties.  
5)  Where there is a bloc of regional parties in a significant state that is running as a bloc I will try to identify that as oppose to put them into "Regional Front" especially if they capture a large enough share of the national vote.