India and the Problem of Democracy

The partition of India, on the 14^th of August 1947, was one of the 20^th century’s greatest human catastrophes. Over a million people were slaughtered and upwards of fifteen million were displaced in the ethno-religious strife that led up to and followed partition. If the term then existed, ethnic cleansing would have been the only accurate descriptor. That legacy endures to this day, in the intractable conflict over Kashmir, in poisoned relations between two nuclear armed powers and over innumerable internal religious conflicts, such as Ayodhya’s Babri Masjid, a temple site claimed by both Hindus and Muslims.

While countless books have painstakingly detailed the causes and consequences of partition, few have dared challenge the Kantian idea that that the democratic process is the only road to lasting peace. The two state theory that birthed Pakistan implicitly assumed democratic governance in India – Hindu leaders did not want India’s electoral politics influenced by a large number of Muslims and so acquiesced to partition.

Democracy was indeed seen as a noble system of government, and its moral force was used by British educated Nehru and Jinnah, leaders of the Congress Party and the Muslim League respectively, to push for independence. With independence and democracy however came insurgent political parties, and the sharp contrasts that define them.  After all, immature democratic politics rewards fear and division, and rising stars played on long suppressed religious rivalries to shore up votes.

Sumit Ganguly, in “The Crisis of Indian Secularism”, eloquently illustrates how successive Indian leaders engaged in the politics of religious identity to fuel anger, violence and electoral gain. Indira Gandhi was perhaps the most adept politician in this regard, continuously flouting constitutional restraints to pit voting blocs against each other. To this day, India’s secular constitution attempts to protect minorities by making national law subservient to local customs, but this is breached or its inherent frailties are exploited when political operators eye a gain.

When politics is separated from policy and becomes a pure exercise in group identification, democracy fails. Policy born from such democracy does not serve civilization’s goal of socioeconomic progress but acts to entrench the ecclesiastical whims of a religious majority. India was not ready for democracy, not that it has ever really practiced it. Its politics is still dominated by either patriarchy (the dynastic Congress Party) or Hindu nationalism (the BJP). It got the worse of democracy – division, insecurity and unpredictability – without any real benefits.

India must hold elections by May. Narendra Modi’s  Bharatiya Janata Party  is expected to pick up a majority. Modi can win without picking up a single Muslim vote, and is unlikely to get many. Once again the politics of religious identification and not policy compatibility is likely to play the biggest role in the election’s outcome. What a shame.