Nadda Hits Out Congress’s “Urban Naxal” Links, Calls for a Pro-Poor, Inclusive Vision in Maharashtra Elections

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau

New Delhi, 14^th November. As Maharashtra heads toward the upcoming assembly elections, Union Health Minister and BJP President JP Nadda delivered a fiery critique of the Congress, accusing it of promoting urban Naxal forces. At the heart of his speech was an appeal to Maharashtra’s electorate to reject what he called the “divisive” policies of Congress and to instead embrace the BJP’s vision of “pro-poor” and accountable governance. Nadda’s comments were also directed at Uddhav Thackeray, accusing the Shiv Sena (UBT) chief of compromising Balasaheb Thackeray’s legacy by allying with Congress, a move he implied is out of step with the late leader’s Hindutva values.

BJP’s Vision vs. Congress’ “Urban Naxal” Allegations

Nadda’s statements at the Mumbai event reflect the BJP’s strategy of portraying the Congress as an enabler of forces that, according to BJP leaders, threaten national stability and security. The use of terms like “urban Naxal” suggests a perceived infiltration of disruptive ideologies within urban centers, a concern the BJP aims to highlight to sway undecided voters. By linking Congress’s perceived associations with radical elements to Uddhav Thackeray’s alliance with the opposition, Nadda painted a stark contrast between the BJP’s governance agenda and what he described as Congress’s inclination toward division and instability.

“Mohabbat Ki Dukaan” vs. BJP’s “Transformational Politics”

Targeting Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s “Mohabbat Ki Dukaan” campaign, Nadda criticized it as a front for division, claiming that Gandhi’s rhetoric and campaign tactics seek to manipulate public sentiment for electoral gain. By referencing Gandhi’s shop of “love,” Nadda used a metaphor to liken Congress’s agenda to a “batware ka saman” (product of division), framing the BJP’s alternative as one of unity and progress. Nadda’s rhetoric played into a broader BJP narrative that emphasizes moving away from what it describes as Congress’s vote-bank politics toward a model of governance that prioritizes performance, transparency, and inclusivity.

The BJP’s Vision of a “Pro-Poor” Growth Model

In his speech, Nadda underscored the Modi government’s focus on social and financial inclusivity, which he described as integral to BJP’s philosophy of “empowering” rather than “dole politics.” This approach, he argued, seeks to uplift marginalized communities by promoting self-reliance rather than dependency. According to Nadda, the BJP’s model of governance supports financial empowerment and grassroots development—something he believes has led to a paradigm shift in Indian politics, where voters now expect tangible results rather than rhetoric alone.

Election Framed by Diverging Visions for Maharashtra

As the Maharashtra assembly elections approach, the BJP is clearly framing its campaign around a choice between ideological alignment and developmental politics. Nadda’s statements position the BJP as the custodian of “true” Hindutva and nationalist values, directly appealing to those who remember the legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray. By drawing attention to what he describes as the Congress’s radical leanings and alleged alliances with disruptive forces, Nadda is steering the conversation away from local governance issues and towards a larger narrative of national security, values, and the ideological identity of the state.

This campaign strategy by the BJP could appeal to segments of voters disillusioned by coalition politics, as well as to those drawn to the idea of Maharashtra being governed by a party that projects strength and continuity with central governance. On the other hand, critics argue that focusing on broad ideological issues rather than localized concerns may alienate voters more focused on immediate social and economic challenges.

Conclusion: A Critical Choice for Maharashtra

Maharashtra’s voters face a distinct choice on November 20 between competing visions: one of BJP-led stability, framed around ideology and governance reform, and another of coalition-driven opposition, emphasizing regional priorities and a counterpoint to central policies. As campaigning intensifies, the BJP’s appeal to ideological commitment and nationalist pride stands against the opposition’s emphasis on coalition-building and regional representation. Whichever coalition prevails, the outcome will shape the state’s political future, likely influencing not only local governance but also Maharashtra’s broader relationship with the central government.