Ayesha jalal: uses terms in slightly unusual ways. Shows some limitations of the indian democ.
Some limits to the free franchise cos of powers of landed elites
Problems with early indian democ:
- Govt violated democ norms when they feared secessionist movements
- Or in relation to property rights
Naga land in Kashmir national conference came to power in Kashmir by 1953 indian govt
decided that when the Kashmiri said autonomy they really meant secession and so cracked
down and imprisoned the leader sheikh abdullah
Kerala: communist party voted to power. National govt overthrew the state govt and eventually
the congree party came back to power. 20 years after independence: 2 states where other
parties than congress came in power but congress couldn’t accommodate them and so this
showed weak democ and weak federal structure
Economy strategy followed: long term projects. That’s y benefits weren’t that widely distributed.
So some rural groups were dissatisified with this. 50’s voter participation rate were quite low
(less than 50 percent)
So some groups (lower classes and castes) participated less in politics. some better off land
holding groups were vary of the signals that the govt wanted to push through land reforms even
though land reforms dint happen that much. The industrial classes benefitted from state
involvement in some ways but also felt that govt involvement also restrained them in some way.
Education groups were looking for alternative identities. These dissatifiction weren’t that open till
late 1960s but then more groups begain to move away from congress by late 1960s.
War with china 62 india lost Nehru popularity down died 2 years later congress party
down political system gradually changed from 70s to 90s. by 90s it wasn’t the dominant party.
Regimes in south asia slide.
India: democ except 75 to 77. But even in good times, sometimes democ was seriously
curtailed cos of armed insurgency. In naga land, in Kashmir (mid 50s to 70s), in Punjab (80s),
the secessionist insurgency from 70s to 2008 in kashmir. Since early 90s, another secessionist
armed scene from borders of Nepal to some part of center india. Some limits to democ. Much of
the country has basic democ.
Pakistan: full democ since 2008. Armed insurgency limits the control of national govt.
Authoritarian from 55-70. 77-88. 99-2008
Bangla democ only first 3 years
Awami league suspended stuff. Then dictatorship cos of a military coup. Alternatation of power
then btw 2 parties.
Sri lanka: democ 48 to 83
Semi democ from 83 to 95 95 to 2008 democ
2008 to 14 semi democ
Nepal: monarchy 47 – 91 2001 – 6
91-2001 and 06 07 elections and parli which shared power with monarchy
2008 republic established, monarchy demolished
- Modernization theory (lipset)
- States and social class (moore): it helps if there are no peasants. Peasants shouldn’t be
around as a class.
- Institutionalism (Huntington): institutions matter and have to be strong enough to
accoomodate the levels of mobilization that are going on in the society. If u don’t have
that you don’t get order. With no order doesn’t matter if you have liberty cos iots not
stable. To have order and stability you need a multi party system.
- With high levels of industrialization and urbanization strong middle class democracy
- It helps industrialization and urbanization diminish the power and influence of elites. And
weakens traditions that may act against democracy
- Balance of power btw nobility and crown (state) before a soverign state gets fully
formed. Why? initially bfre industrialization, the nobility was the main social force in the
society, if any one was to take on the crown, it will be the nobility and so nobility had to
be indepenedent. Brit nobility formed parli and then later parli became representative
- Strong town dweller class bourgeoisie commercial trader groups no bourgeoisie no
democ. You need a specific kind of middle class an urban commercial middle class
- It makes a difference depending on how these two classes act which depends on how
land owners act. Some of the land owners may choose to improving agri and through
that make money and so they develop an interest in commercialization and so have a
common aik with bourgeoisis and so the two classes can have same ai