In the lull before counting day, India is beguiling itself with poll paraphernalia. Everyone is soaking up exit polls, whose chief function is not to inform but to entertain. We follow them for the same reason that we read horoscopes. On the basis of minimal data, they claim to predict who is going to win on Monday and the talking heads on TV take it from there, spinning a yarn half as long as the Ramcharitmanas, but not half as wholesome as Tulsidas.
But horoscopes, no matter how unreliable, are a comfort in turbulent times. Many democracies, including India, are seasick with turbulence as the foundations of the old order crumble, long-established relations fray, authority gives way to power and it looks like strongmen will rule, and what the people think no longer matters.
There are pleasant surprises, too, in the current turmoil. The rise of China has demolished the Cold-War-era claim that democracy is essential for prosperity and growth. In Italy, a prime minister with a political heritage of neo-fascism is delivering a stable working government.
And West Bengal, which has a dreadful history of electoral violence, saw almost none in the polls that ended this week. Political thugs—who are retained by every party—were said to be intimidated by the presence of reserve police and paramilitaries which have been imported into the state in strength. But so were ordinary voters.
Security forces deployed in West Bengal for the polls number about 10 times the volume of forces sent to violence-torn Manipur. They bear weapons and use vehicles designed for combating insurgency and terrorism, and to protect sensitive installations from military assault. The National Investigation Agency, the apex counter-terrorism body created after the 26/11 attacks, was also sent to West Bengal. What does an election have to do with terrorism? And why keep the forces in the state for two months—well after a new government is formed?
Actually, while there was little physical violence, unspeakable violence was done to democracy by the State and its institutions. The heavy deployment of forces produced an air of menace which will not go away, and greater violence than the summary disenfranchisement of at least 27 lakh voters is unimaginable.
Elections were held in four states and a Union territory, but the focus was on West Bengal, which the BJP sees as the jewel in the crown. To the nation, its campaign demonstrated the State power it can roll out against political opponents—including encounter specialists threatening families of Trinamool Congress candidates in the dead of night and jawans ready to lathi-charge women standing in line to vote. They conducted what looked like flag marches—the show of strength used to overawe rioting populations. There is no riot in West Bengal, but every wing of defence has been called out except the Navy and Air Force.
It’s no coincidence that in the local body elections in Gujarat on April 26, the ruling party was declared uncontested winners in 730 seats—after opponents withdrew nominations en masse. Gujarat Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel is reported to have said that the objective is a condition in which opponents do not file nominations at all. That means one-party rule, like in North Korea. One nation, one election, one foregone conclusion. If that’s the target, militarisation of the election landscape could be seen in other states, too.
Deep uneasiness has been voiced about the invasion of West Bengal, but there is a positive uproar about the surgical strike conducted by the commandeered Election Commission on 91 lakh voters—with a disproportionately high number of Muslims—without leaving time for an appeals process. In elections past, re-polls have been ordered for discrepancies concerning votes in four figures, but here’s a discrepancy in close to seven figures. Then, there are the menacing speeches and flouting of the model code of conduct which the Election Commission has not objected to.
This combination of a disregard for the rules of decency in public life, and the ease with which institutions are being commandeered, is eating away at faith in democracy everywhere. After the Cold War era, international public assertion against warfare has been visible ever since the invasion of Iraq, when millions came out on the streets in many nations—to little or no effect.
Public sentiment has had almost nothing say in the project to turn Gaza into prime real estate. But it has had some success domestically in the US, where huge demonstrations over the span of a year have discouraged the militarisation of everyday life—something like what West Bengal is experiencing now.
Whether in India or any other important democracy, there is a growing sense of a loss of agency among the masses, a suspicion that the decisions which matter to society are being taken elsewhere, by other people, behind closed doors. Even the most significant decision—figuring out who gets to run governments.
This could lead to a dangerous loss of confidence in democracy, which needs a more uplifting horoscope soon. In the meantime, there’s poll paraphernalia.
Pratik Kanjilal | SPEAKEASY | Senior Fellow, Henry J Leir Institute of Migration and Human Security, Fletcher School, Tufts University
(Views are personal)
(Tweets @pratik_k)
