Saturday, October 24, 2009

ELECTION ANALYSIS IN INDIA: THE PITFALLS

Another round of elections are over- this time in three states- and we had the usual dose of analysis from experts after the results came out. Out of the three, focus was on Maharashtra, followed by Haryana and we heard the same old phrase of index of opposition unity, attributing the lack of it to Congress’ victory. Though it’s true, but I don’t subscribe to the application of the yardstick in the context of the party system in India.

Even for Haryana, at the risk of sounding like holding a flag for the Congress, I would still describe its performance as a victory over the political rivals in the state. Many of the experts across television news channels and in print compared the Congress’ performance in the Lok Sabha elections in the state with the showing in the assembly polls. The INLD which drew a blank in the parliamentary polls, bagged many more seats than projected in the assembly polls. Though the figures are true, I beg to differ in my analysis of the data. After all statistics can often be like a bikini that reveals everything but conceals the essentials.

In India, while analysing polls, we sometimes compare issues or data that shouldn't be compared. Take the case of Haryana first. In the Lok Sabha elections, it could be seen as a vote for/against the performance of the Manmohan Singh government. In the assembly elections, it was surely for/against the Bhupinder Singh Hooda government. That’s a big difference and is reflected in the results. So it may not be prudent to compare the two results- an outcome of voters applying two different yardsticks.

The snapping of ties between INLD and BJP was seen as the other reason for the Congress emerging as the single largest party in Haryana. It was described in terms of the index of opposition unity.

The same logic was applied to Maharashtra where Raj Thackeray’s MNS played the spoiler for the BJP-Shiv Sena combine as the Congress-NCP alliance came to power for the third time in a row. Raj Thackeray was even described as the ‘Man of the Match’ in the elections.

While it’s a fact that MNS was the party-pooper for Shiv Sena-BJP combine, I think an analysis of the poll results shouldn't overlook the multi-party system.

With a plethora of parties, the nature of democratic choice in the Indian polity-both at the Centre and in states- is different from the bipolar democracy of the US and Britain. The attempt to apply the ‘index of opposition unity’ logic only takes one away from the political reality on the ground and amounts to analysing the results in context of a non-existent bipolar system.

In a multi-party system, the single largest party should be seen as a political victor unlike in a two-party model where one of them is bound to cross the half-way mark.

Perhaps that’s the reason why crossing the half-way mark is always described as ‘absolute majority’ in India’s multi-party context and rarely as ‘simple majority’ though going by the political dictionary, both mean the same.

No comments:

Post a Comment