Problem with the Indian voter: Lessons from past for future
Somewhere in Bihar in 2015: "If he wants our vote, the solar panel should be free!"
The idea of wanting things for free is in existence to date. Any and everything is given for free will be accepted with a big smile; even if the source is a crook. In exchange, the so-called "beneficiary" barters his faith and his willingness to vouch for the source. This behavior of free rewards reflects in politics in India majorly in voting behavior.
In the minds of an Indian voter, biases, be it social or caste still remains. The air to this state of mind is supplied by the igniting factors that exist around the voter; the never-ending construction of a road, and ill-broken bridges, to name a few.
Indians have traditionally cared more about their own personal well-being that the country’s broader macroeconomic health
A helping hand: good or bad?
A voter thinks about the importance of his vote on or 2-3 days prior to the voting day. This reflects how gravely the 'election vibe' is perceived in society. Generally, a voter extends his support to the figurehead who has faces everywhere; through the age-old mediums of banners, posters, and whatnot.
Lack of information about the local government also diminishes the voters confidence in finding information
Tale from Tamil Nadu
The example of Jayalalitha, former CM of Tamil Nadu shows the bravery of the voter. Amma, as she was popularly called championed the art of giving free utilities; from kitchen appliances to food and more.
During the time of 2016 State Elections, the Tamil Nadu government obtained 25% of its total revenue from the state alcohol stores. State officials obstructed the sugar mill owners to convert their molasses into anything other than alcohol.
The drowsy effect of alcohol profited the exchequer but hurt the audience and local government employees. Absenteeism extended on a much wider scale since drunkards were still to recover from their hangovers.
College students use to hide and drink but now they were stumbling right in front of the elders. Kids too!
Simultaneously, the growth had fallen to half, and sales of the major industries such as textile and automobile had fallen.
Despite the above-mentioned hitches, Jayalalithaa won (with a very close margin). It appeared that voters were ignoring economic performance and casting ballots on community loyalties.
(In the 2011 State Election, the then-CM M.Karunanidhi was discarded; despite a 9% growth and Jayalalithaa was back to power)
The tech CM
N. Chandrababu Naidu came to power in 1995 with the goal of revamping Andhra’s economic fortunes. He spoke the language of economic reforms and quickly developed a reputation as a leader committed to good economic governance and the kinds of promarket reforms typically favored by international donors and multilateral financial institutions.
Doubling down on this image, Naidu even took the unusual step of hiring Western consulting giant McKinsey to develop reform ideas. Global leaders like Bill Gates and James Wolfensohn (the then-Word Bank president) would come to Andra Pradesh and hear Naidu's powerful presentations.
Former RBI Governor C. Rangarajan said," Naidu is the kind of leader India needed: Focused on development than on caste and welfare populism"
Although Naidu won reelection in 1999, aided by an alliance with the BJP (which catapulted them to power in that year’s national elections), his state’s voters dismissed his government at the next state election in 2004.
Why the voters of Andhra Pradesh threw Naidu out of office is unclear; research suggests that a whole range of factors likely played a role, from alliance dynamics to caste calculations and perceptions that Naidu had a “pro-corporate” or “pro-rich” bias.
Caste over economics
During the 2002 State Elections in UP, Mayawati, the leader of the Bahujan Samaj Party, who had been a 2-time CM (only to be toppled by the alliance parties) stood confident of her Dalit supporters. She had erected her giant statues over Lucknow and portrayed herself as the 'Queen of UP'.
Media reports suggested that Mayawati had sidelined upper-caste bureaucrats and charged some for hostility to Dalits; under the Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. In addition, her hate towards other castes ignited her vote bloc of Dalits. Hence, she came to power as the CM with support from her erstwhile enemies in the BJP (strange!).
Although, the same age-old story shadowed Mayawati and her government fell after a year with BJP pulling out of the alliance.
Mayawati's tale continues
The changing air
(Shivraj's tenure as the CM had seen the worst. In the northern region of Malwa, villagers could not afford a Voter ID card (they have to pay a bribe of INR 100). Also, under the Open-Defecation, the bureaucrats charged INR 10,000 to build a toilet)
Is the future the same as the past?
On the one hand, it is clear that there are important changes afoot, necessitating revision, if not a full-scale replacement, of many commonly held notions. While the 2014 election was a watershed in terms of the outcome it produced, many of the changes it appeared to herald were actually in the works well in advance of the landmark polls.
The empirical evidence suggests that nuanced changes in the nature of economic and ethnic voting had already been underway. What the 2014 election may have accomplished was to crystallize these changes.
Even when the states grew faster, at 8-9% the incumbent government was thrown from power. Growth helps but even spectacular growth is no guarantee of victory.
Indians have traditionally cared more about their own personal well-being that the country’s broader macroeconomic health - True words! The fact suggests every Indian is anti national. Bjp is right! 😂
ReplyDelete