Battles Half Won -- India’s Improbable Democracy - By Ashutosh Varshney-

 

                                      

 It is said that the purpose of books is to help understand, and this collection of essays, published in 2013 by Political Scientist Ashutosh Varshney, Professor at Brown University in the USA, helps us do just that. The focus of the essays is, as the title suggests, on various aspects of India’s ‘improbable’ democracy.

 Historically democracy had come to its ‘home’ in the developed world only after an economic revolution that raised living standards significantly and an associated social revolution. So how did democracy happen in a poor society characterized by widespread illiteracy and enormous diversity in language, religion, caste and tribe? And having arrived, how did it survive when in many places in the post-colonial world it met a fairly early end?

For creating a nation with an overarching sense of nationality out of a huge geographical area characterized by extensive ethnic, linguistic and social diversity the credit goes to the freedom movement led by Gandhi and the Congress Party. It was a political achievement of the freedom movement that created a national identity that subsumed other local identities and brought about a unity -- imperfect and a trifle fragile, but real nonetheless -- in all the diversity of the subcontinent.

Having created a sense of nationhood, a charismatic leadership with widespread public support successfully implemented electoral democracy. A primary requirement of democracy, the author argues, is that ‘societal objectives are subjected to an elective principle’. In effect, universal adult franchise and free and fair elections define democracy. The ‘depth’ of democracy may depend on issues like freedom of speech, gender equality, efficient and corruption free politics and governance, but if the elective principle is adhered to, democracy exists. Indian democracy, therefore, is real, having survived serious bumps in the road -- the Emergency and insurgency in particular areas were a few such issues.

A democracy, the author argues, ‘cannot function if the institutional logic of the system is made subservient to the personal ambitions or ideological predilections of political leaders.’ The first generation of post-independence leaders largely accepted ‘institutional constraints on their decision making’ and hence enabled democratic institutions to emerge and grow. They displayed, to a significant extent, a ‘democratic temper’ and this contributed significantly to the survival of democracy in India.

The critical significance of the personal, ideological predilections of charismatic leaders in determining the path taken by a nation needs emphasis here. While underlying socio-economic factors are crucial determinants of choices made and directions taken, the role of the Popular Leader in history must never be forgotten. A prescient observation(the book was published around 2013) by the author is that, ‘If in the future, the ideology of Hindu nationalism were to somehow triumph at the polls, the hard work of the first generation of leaders and the many structural strengths of Indian democracy would be severely tested.”

The author then proceeds to ask if India has become more democratic over time. The political space earlier occupied almost entirely by the Congress shrank significantly after Indira Gandhi and was occupied by Hindu nationalism, regionalism and political parties encompassing, primarily, the OBCs and the SC and STs. Indian democracy has therefore been characterized by a growing empowerment of castes traditionally ranked the lowest in the Hindu caste hierarchy. The change came earlier to South India and later to the North, but come it did. As a result, social inequalities have reduced a great deal, while economic inequalities have not changed to the same extent. Democracy has indeed deepened, though much more still needs to be done.

A thought-provoking essay in the book is an analysis of ethnic conflict and civil society. The author argues, on the basis of data, that communal violence in India is concentrated primarily in urban centers and within the urban space;, eight cities accounted for a disproportionate share of communal violence in the country. These cities represent only 18% of the urban population. Given this pattern, the author compares the violence prone cities with those not prone to communal violence but otherwise very similar, demographically and otherwise. The conclusion he arrives at is that where strong organized civil society networks exist, communal violence is either absent or very limited and quickly controlled. Where, however, civil society networks are primarily intra communal, violence is endemic. This explanation is derived from a limited comparison and leaves many questions unanswered. Why, for instance, do strong inter communal networks exist in some cities but not in others in the same state. Does history provide any answers here? Is economic development or the lack of it the answer, or economic inequality? The primary purpose of research is to raise serious questions and this essay does just that.

A data-based essay on social order and entrepreneurship concludes that the OBCs are reasonably well represented in entrepreneurship (ownership of enterprises) while the SCs and STs are not. Also, the South has ‘stolen an entrepreneurial march over the North’ in this context. The conclusions seem intuitively obvious, but the use of Survey data gives it some heft. Just how the Survey defines entrepreneurship and enterprises is of course one of several questions that arise.

Two essays on economic development raise interesting issues. Theoretically, the political leadership in poor democracies should feel enormous pressure from the poor bulk of the electorate to eliminate poverty urgently. In reality, however, the record of poverty alleviation in India and other such polities is poor. The author attributes this to the short-term focus of politicians looking for electoral victories. Effective policies for poverty removal tend to be long term capacity building exercises, whereas garnering votes requires direct short -term measures that have immediate impact, but are  not very effective in the long run. It is much easier and quicker to distribute fish (or revdi) and has a much more immediate impact than teaching people how to fish.  Capacity creation takes time and has no direct immediate and visible effect on income and consumption.

Furthermore, the poor do not act as a class, politically, in India. Cross cutting identities based on religion/caste /tribe fragment the political orientation of the poor and this weakens the pressure on the ruling classes to initiate serious but difficult, long term developmental policies.

Economists may like to debate the significance of such issues in policy making for growth and development.

 

Space constraints do not permit all the essays to be discussed. However, in summary, the author concludes that while

Indian democracy has battled for dignity, justice, equity and development, the battles are only half won. A great deal remains to be done.

A rather obvious conclusion for those living in India, if not for those in the cloisters of US Academia, but the data and the reasoning do help clarify significant issues and more importantly, raise interesting questions for debate and research.

 

Happy reading.