I tend to wonder, on what basis do citizens select a political partisanship in a country like India. India, to my knowledge is by far the most complex democracy. This country has a varied demography with its people speaking a great number of languages(~22), wide range of caste systems, different customs, traditions etc. To have a government satisfy all the peoples is not an easy job. A decision in favor of a majority people wouldn't necessarily keep a minority one happy. Unlike the United States, United Kingdom or just any other democratic nation, the demography in India is just too complex posing too many problems for a government to cater to.
My thought is that citizens chose a side more often because of a particular psychic inclination rather than actually evaluating a governments capability to deliver and prosper the country. For examples, the Christians along the western coast of Karnataka. This anglo-Indian population would rather vote for congress than the BJP(based on words from friends/colleagues). And this is because of a stereotype built around the religion and the party since independence. Similarly, I am yet come across someone following the Hindu religion and not supporting BJP. Again the stereotype. . . These factors play out only in India unlike other western democracies. For a candidate to really break these barriers and win a vote of someone who does not support his party would demand strategic campaigning (which I haven't seen much here in India). Leaders who come to power because of any such religious/cultural inclination seldom succeed in delivering a quality governance.
There should be a mechanism where the people get to assess and evaluate the accomplishments, failures and promises of a leader/party before they chose a partisanship. In fact, it is the educated citizens who fail to caste vote during elections. In this era of technology and social media boom, it wouldn't be a great deal to have such an evaluation reach them and help them take cognizant decision in choosing a side.
My thought is that citizens chose a side more often because of a particular psychic inclination rather than actually evaluating a governments capability to deliver and prosper the country. For examples, the Christians along the western coast of Karnataka. This anglo-Indian population would rather vote for congress than the BJP(based on words from friends/colleagues). And this is because of a stereotype built around the religion and the party since independence. Similarly, I am yet come across someone following the Hindu religion and not supporting BJP. Again the stereotype. . . These factors play out only in India unlike other western democracies. For a candidate to really break these barriers and win a vote of someone who does not support his party would demand strategic campaigning (which I haven't seen much here in India). Leaders who come to power because of any such religious/cultural inclination seldom succeed in delivering a quality governance.
There should be a mechanism where the people get to assess and evaluate the accomplishments, failures and promises of a leader/party before they chose a partisanship. In fact, it is the educated citizens who fail to caste vote during elections. In this era of technology and social media boom, it wouldn't be a great deal to have such an evaluation reach them and help them take cognizant decision in choosing a side.
