The Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) secured 19 seats in the recent local body elections in Rajasthan, which is a decline from its previous tally of 24 seats. This occurred despite a substantial increase in the total number of seats up for grabs this time. A loss of five seats does not constitute a significant development in national politics by itself, and Rajasthan has never been a key stronghold for the BSP. However, when these 19 seats are viewed in conjunction with the party’s performance trajectory in Uttar Pradesh over the last two decades, this modest figure hints at a much larger political story.During the 2007 Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly elections, the party won 206 out of 403 seats garnering 30.43% of the popular vote. The 2012 elections resulted in a decline to 80 seats with approximately 26% of the vote share. By 2017, the figure had further diminished to 19 seats. The 2022 elections witnessed a dramatic contraction, reducing the party’s representation to a single seat alongside a vote share of 12.88%. In Lok Sabha elections, the party’s performance displayed considerable volatility: it held 20 seats in 2009, declined to zero in 2014, recovered to 10 seats in 2019 through a strategic alliance with the Samajwadi Party (SP), and subsequently returned to zero seats in 2024, with the vote share falling to 9.39%. The situation has now become even more concerning.Umashankar Singh, the BSP’s only Member of the Legislative Assembly in UP – who had served the Rasra constituency in Ballia for three terms – passed away in August 2026. The party now lacks any representation in the 403-member Uttar Pradesh Assembly. In the Rajya Sabha, the party has only one MP, Ramji Gautam, whose term concludes in November 2026.The BSP will have no representative in either House of Parliament afterwards. This will mark the first time since 1989 that the BSP is completely absent from Parliament.What precisely transpired? Did Mayawati’s strategy prove ineffective? Did the organisation weaken? Did the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) successfully penetrate the Dalit voter base? Was the secondary tier of leadership systematically dismantled? All of these factors hold considerable significance. However, beneath these explanations may lie a more profound narrative – the rise and fall of the BSP represents not merely a political episode, but also a broader account of the power of identity politics and its limitations in India.Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) president Mayawati holds a strategy meeting at party headquarters, in Lucknow, Sunday, Sept. 7, 2025. Photo: PTI.The umbrella concept of BahujanKanshi Ram’s greatest achievement was not merely founding the BSP or elevating Mayawati to the position of chief minister. His real political marvel lay in forging a comprehensive political identity that encompassed dozens of distinct caste-based identities without erasing them. This political identity was ‘Bahujan’. From BAMCEF to DS-4, and finally the BSP in 1984, Kanshi Ram’s fundamental message remained remarkably consistent: if a population segment constitutes such a substantial proportion of society, why does their representation in government remain disproportionately minuscule?If Dalits, the Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs), non-Yadav OBCs, and other marginalised communities remained fragmented along caste lines, they would continue to serve merely as vote banks for other political alliances. However, if they consolidated their numerical strength and formed a unified political community, the keys to power could fall into their hands. Kanshi Ram transformed a fragmented social arithmetic into a potent political algebra. Yet, the inherent weakness of the experiment existed within it.The term ‘Bahujan’ was not itself a caste. The Rajbhar remained Rajbhar. The Nishad remained Nishad. The Kurmi remained Kurmi. The Mauryas, Kushwahas, Shakyas, Sainis, Prajapatis, Pasis, and Valmikis – each possessed their own distinct history, their own social standing, their own leaders, and their own aspirations. Kanshi Ram did not eliminate these identities. Rather, he constructed a broad political framework encompassing them. As long as the framework remained sturdy, the movement progressed. Subsequently, when the framework weakened, the constituent groups within began establishing their own separate spheres.Four stories that chronicle the fragmentation of the ‘Bahujan’ movement – examining the political journeys of four individuals is sufficient to understand this process: Sonelal Patel, Om Prakash Rajbhar, Sanjay Nishad, and Swami Prasad Maurya.Sonelal Patel was a close associate of Kanshi Ram and among the founding members of the BSP. Later, differences arose, and in 1995, he floated the Apna Dal party. The Kurmi-Patel social segment, that Kanshi Ram sought to incorporate into the broader identity of the ‘Bahujan’, now had access to a distinct political platform. Following Sonelal’s death, internal conflicts arose within both the party and the family. Ultimately, the political legacy split into two factions: Apna Dal (Sonelal), led by Anupriya Patel, and Apna Dal (Kamerawadi), led by Krishna Patel and Pallavi Patel.MoS Anupriya Patel speaks in the Lok Sabha during the Special session of Parliament, in New Delhi, Friday, April 17, 2026. Photo: Sansad TV via PTIAnupriya Patel became an ally of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and secured a ministerial position at the Centre. Meanwhile, Pallavi Patel contested the 2022 election from Sirathu on a Samajwadi Party (SP) ticket, defeating BJP’s then-deputy chief minister, Keshav Prasad Maurya. In essence, the Kurmi identity first separated from the “Bahujan” fold; subsequently, the political party representing that identity fractured into two factions, and two distinct streams emanating from the same political family ultimately aligned with opposing coalitions.Om Prakash Rajbhar was initially associated with the BSP but subsequently broke away to form the Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party (SBSP) in 2002. Instead of seeking a share within the broader “Bahujan” coalition, Rajbhar now possessed his own distinct party, autonomous leadership, and enhanced bargaining power within the political framework. The SBSP has oscillated by alternately allying with and distancing itself from the BJP, subsequently aligning with the SP, and eventually returning to the NDA. Presently, Rajbhar serves as a minister in the UP state government.Om Prakash Rajbhar. Photo: SBSPSanjay Nishad has himself stated that his political grooming took place within Kanshi Ram’s BAMCEF. His responsibilities in Gorakhpur and surrounding areas encompassed organizing BAMCEF meetings and cultivating new cadres. When the BSP was formed, Kanshi Ram asked him to continue his work with BAMCEF rather than join the party. Later, Sanjay Nishad established his own organisations and ultimately founded the NISHAD Party, centering on the interests of the Nishad community. That is, the person who once cultivated the grassroots cadre for Kanshi Ram, eventually emerged as the leader of an independent political force centered on Nishad identity. Today, the NISHAD Party is an ally of the BJP and Sanjay Nishad is a minister in the Uttar Pradesh government.Swami Prasad Maurya spent approximately two decades with the BSP, establishing himself as one of its most prominent non-Yadav figures. He held significant positions including minister, state president, leader of opposition and national general secretary. In 2016, he left the BSP to join the BJP. Subsequently, he was elected as an MLA in 2017 and served as a cabinet minister in the Yogi government. Before 2022, he parted ways from the BJP and joined SP and later separated from it to forge his own independent political path.When these four pictures are weaved together, a distinct pattern emerges – the Kurmi-Patel leadership functions independently; the Rajbhar leadership operates separately; the Nishad-Mallah leadership remains distinct; and the Maurya-Kushwaha-Shakya politics constitutes a separate major faction; while the BSP retained its most committed social base – the Jatavs. This phenomenon transcended mere defection of leaders. Rather, it represented the decomposition of the Bahujan social coalition established by Kanshi Ram.Identity and representationResearch studies carried out on this process reveal a similar picture. In UP, Apna Dal has been identified as a party with a Kurmi vote base, SBSP as representing the Rajbhar community, NISHAD Party as serving river and fishing communities, and Mahan Dal as drawing support from Maurya-Shakya-Kushwaha communities. This shows that even broader Other Backward Classes (OBC) identity categories further fragment into smaller caste-based political units. This fragmentation exposes the fundamental limitation of identity politics.Identity is an exceptionally powerful political tool because it connects history, humiliation, honour and representation. However, within every identity exists another identity. When one adds the OBC category, Yadavs and non-Yadavs emerge as a distinct group. When one speaks of the non-Yadav category, Kurmis, Mauryas, Rajbhars, Nishads and Kushwahas surface. When one talks of the Dalit category, the question of Jatavs and non-Jatavs arises. Upon examining the non-Jatav category further, Pasis, Valmikis, Koris and other identities assert their claims for representation and recognition. Therefore, while identity may give rise to politics, it does not automatically guarantee lasting political unity.The BJP appears to have identified this weakness with perhaps the greatest precision. Rather than eliminating caste-based politics, it incorporated the political dynamics of various castes within its own framework. It did not ask the Rajbhars to abandon their identity, nor did it demand from the Nishads, to stop being Nishad, nor did Kurmis need to give up their distinctive identity. Smaller political parties could exist, with their own leadership and their own symbols. In elections, they could demand seats, and should government be formed, they could claim ministerial positions and a share in power. However, above these smaller identities, a larger political and cultural identity was superimposed – that of Hindu.Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath with state minister Sanjay Nishad and others during the birth anniversary celebrations of Nishad King Guhya, in Prayagraj district, Uttar Pradesh, Thursday, April 3, 2025. Photo: PTIThis is where an interesting contest between the social engineering strategies of Kanshi Ram and that of the BJP becomes evident. Kanshi Ram’s formula was: smaller marginalised caste identities + social justice + political participation = Bahujan. The BJP’s response emerged as – smaller caste identities + share in power + Hindutva = broad Hindu political coalition.The BJP possessed an additional edge – governmental power – the power to distribute party tickets, allocate ministerial positions, grant posts within boards, corporation and organisation, and confer political prestige and patronage.Mayawati and the mantra of going aloneWithin political circles and among a segment of the BSP’s longstanding supporters, there has existed a persistent perception that Mayawati does not want a decisive confrontation with the BJP and the Union government. This perception is often linked to her previous controversies involving the Taj corridor and allegations of disproportionate assets. However, it cannot be deemed as an established fact that Mayawati refrains from challenging the BJP due to “fear of going to jail”. Yet, her political conduct has failed to dispel this perception.In 2019, her party formed an alliance with the SP and secured 10 Lok Sabha seats and subsequently dissolved the alliance. In 2022, contesting independently, her party won a single assembly seat. In 2024, remaining outside the INDIA alliance and competing alone, her party garnered 9.39% of votes while securing zero Lok Sabha seats. Yet, her political strategy of contesting elections independently continues unabated.At this point, it is essential to understand the difference between the independent trajectory of Kanshi Ram’s BSP and the one followed today. Kanshi Ram led the way alone while the caravan expanded behind him. Today, the BSP is losing its contingent even as it gets lonelier.On top of that, there is a succession crisis. Kanshi Ram did not seek his successor within his family. Mayawati was neither his daughter nor his sister nor niece. He chose a worker from within the movement and prepared her for leadership. Today, discussions regarding who will assume leadership of the BSP after Mayawati revolve around her brothers and nephews. A movement that fought against social status being determined by birth now appears to be searching for its political successor through familial lineage, presenting a clear contradiction.Nevertheless, it is premature to declare the BSP finished. The need for social justice is far from over. Caste-based inequality persists unresolved. Questions of reservation, representation, education, employment and equal access to resources continue to demand attention. That is, the social ground of Bahujan politics still exists. The challenge lies in its political expression. And perhaps this is where the biggest lesson from Kanshi Ram’s experiment emerges.The rise and fall of BahujanIdentity may serve as the beginning of politics rather than constitute the entire politics. Identity can remind one of the historical injustice a community has suffered, can command respect, mobilise an organisation and even lead you to a position of power. But to sustain an enduring political coalition in power, it needs policy frameworks regarding employment, education, healthcare, economic opportunities, land, social security provisions, civil rights protections and a shared vision for the future.Without such commitments, smaller identity groups will continually emerge from within larger identities, demanding their proportionate share of resources and representation.Kanshi Ram did not eliminate castes. Rather, he constructed a vast political umbrella termed “Bahujan” over them. After his departure, that umbrella weakened. With Sonelal Patel, Kurmi-Patel politics forged its own path. With Om Prakash Rajbhar, Rajbhar politics did the same. With Sanjay Nishad, Nishad politics established itself. Prominent OBC figures like Swami Prasad Maurya also departed from the BSP. Subsequently, the BJP accommodated numerous of these scattered factions in within its huge political organisation.Therefore, the 19 seats in Rajasthan represent far more than just numbers. They constitute the latest milestone in a long journey – from BAMCEF to DS4; from DS4 to BSP; from BSP to Bahujan (majority marginalised communities); from Bahujan to Sarvajan (all castes and communities); and finally, shrinking from Sarvajan primarily to the Jatav base.The first BAMCEF meeting in Nagpur in 1971. Gail Omvedt was invited as a keynote speaker. BAMCEF founders Kanshiram and D.K. Khaparde are seen in the background. Photo: Special arrangementThe complete story of the rise and fall of BSP can be encapsulated in two statements – Kanshi Ram united scattered caste numbers into a cohesive political power. After his passing, this political force subsequently fractured back among smaller caste-based numbers. The BJP’s achievement lies in its strategy to not erase those scattered numbers; rather, it integrated them into its larger political equation while preserving their distinct identity.Therefore, now the question is not only about the future of Mayawati or BSP. The fundamental question that arises is whether India’s deprived communities can again come together around a shared agenda involving employment, education, economic justice, social equality and civil rights, while simultaneously preserving their distinct identities and dignity.Or, will they continue to form their own caste-based parties and negotiate stakes with the larger party that possesses the greatest capacity to distribute power and resources at that particular time? Identity can throw open the doors to power. However, without a programme for shared future, that very identity can also shatter that power into pieces. Perhaps the most important lesson of Kanshi Ram’s remarkable political experiment lies precisely in this understanding.Sheetal P. Singh is a senior journalist.Translated from Hindi by Naushin Rehman.This article was originally published on The Wire Hindi.