Jhadoo sweeps Delhi, expectations galore

The results of the Delhi 2015 elections shows a landslide for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). Congratulations to the common man! Congratulations to Arvind Kejriwal!

In a two-sided contest AAP has got 67 of the 70 seats and 54 per cent of the popular vote share. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has got 3 seats and 33 per cent of the vote share while the Indian National Congress  (hereafter, Congress) has won no seats and got about 10 per cent of the vote share.

Compared to the general election in May 2014, this situation has reversed because at that time AAP led in only 10 of the assembly segments and got 33 per cent of the vote share. BJP had then got 46 per cent of the vote share and led in 60 segments. The Congress like now had not led in any of the assembly segments but had received a 15 per cent vote share.

In December 2013 state elections, AAP had got 28 seats and 29 per cent of the vote share. The BJP and its ally had got 32 seats at 34 per cent of the vote share while the Congress had got 8 seats and 25 per cent of the vote share.

It needs to be mentioned that in the 2008 state elections AAP did not exist. At that time the BJP and its ally had won 23 seats and got 37 per cent of the vote share while the Congress had won 43 seats with 40 per cent of vote share.

One can state the following.

• In December 2013, compared to 2008, the vote share that AAP got is a shift from other parties: Congress (15 percentage points) BJP (4 percentage points) and others (10 percentage points).
• In May 2014, compared to December 2013, AAP increased its vote share by a further 4 percentage points while BJP increased its vote share by 12 percentage points. During this period, Congress lost another 10 percentage points in its vote share. This means that nearly 6 percentage points of the overall gain in vote share by AAP and BJP would be attributed a net shift from others.
• In February 2015, compared to May 2014, AAP increased its vote share by 21 percentage points, BJP decreased its vote share by 13 percentage points, and Congress decreased its vote share by an additional 5 percentage points. In short, AAP gained from BJP, Congress as also others.
• In February 2015, BJP's (including its ally) vote share is only one percentage points lower than what it had got in December 2013. In some sense, its core voter base seems to be intact.
• The net gain that the BJP had during the general elections of May 2014 is lost. A large section of voters that swung from the Congress and others to the BJP in May 2014 seems to have now posed their faith in AAP in February 2014.

Now, a question to ask is who are the core voters of BJP. Are they the ones who like BJP's socio-cultural thinking. Or, are they the ones favouring their economic thinking. It is difficult to make such neat bifurcations. But, it is possible that the shift is from among those who may support their economic policies, but are not happy with their socio-cultural thinking.

While this being a state election, one need not use it as a reflection on the public mood on the policies by the central government. Nor is it a referendum again Prime Minister Narendra Modi. But, then the BJP has to rethink about its policies and bring about a balancing act that should satisfy both the set of core supporters.

Having said that, should BJP (particularly, the central government) not be concerned about those who did not vote for it to begin with. Or, those that have sided with AAP to begin with. What is it that they want. Not, in terms of politics, but in terms of their economic thinking and what do they mean by development.

AAP is outside the left versus right ideological divide, but if it has to succeed it has to be pro people. It is here that the challenge lies in an alternative articulation of an economic thinking that enhances the livelihood of all. It also needs an articulation of what is the constitutive component of development. It is not about facilitating big ticket growth with the 'hope' that it would some day trickle down. But, it is rather about an enabling environment where the common man contributes to this growth. 

The expectations from AAP are many. While in terms of policies and their implementation this need not be to the left, but it certainly is not necessarily towards the right. The challenge for AAP is to maintain this middle ground. Otherwise, the jhadoo that has swept it into "5 saal kejriwal" will sweep it away from the common man.

Delhi Votes 2015

Today (7 February 2015), Delhi is voting again. In December 2013, the 15-year rule of the Congress came to an end with BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and its allies getting the maximum number of seats (32/70), but fell short of a majority. A minority government by AAP (the newly constituted Aam Aadmi Party) with 28 seats formed a government, but gave up this responsibility in 49 days; it has been nearly an year since then. 

In the interim, the Lok Sabha elections in May 2014 gave a resounding victory to BJP that gave India its 15th Prime Minister, Narendra Modi. And, in Delhi the BJP won in all the seven parliamentary constituencies and were leading in 60 of the assembly segments. Thus, immediately after that the writing on the wall was that BJP would have a convincing majority in the next assembly elections when it would be held.

Recent pre-poll surveys have shown that the competition is likely to be close finish between AAP (with Arvind Kejriwal as its Chief Ministerial candidate) and BJP (with Kiran Bedi as its Chief Ministerial candidate) and many of them giving AAP an edge. After an experience in the previous two elections, AAP was better prepared and did not allow the debate to be set in terms of how BJP wanted it to be. For instance, it did not engage with the BJP's five questions per day. It was also able to counter and defend some (rather most) of the allegations. There were some internal differences within AAP and a lesson that they have learnt from previous elections is that while respecting internal democracy they do not want to go into the details when elections are ongoing.

In any case, there has been a surge in AAP and its Chief Ministerial candidate's popularity (I have heard some BJP sympathizers also arguing in their favour). However, with my two pence of understanding, I somehow had a feeling that the day before elections (when there would be no official campaigning) would matter. In this sense, Imam Bukhari's statement in favour of AAP (it is immaterial whether this was a personal statement or because of some backdoor parleys) came to BJP's advantage even while AAP was quick to deny that support. The BJP volunteers, while not officially campaigning, would have made all efforts to convey their side of the story in their voter-level micro-management.

The aggressive position of BJP that AAP is appeasing minorities could veer some voters if the atmosphere gets charged and also get their sympathizer's back to their fold. With the experience of two recent elections, AAP would have been aware of keeping their volunteers in preparation for this last minute need. Today's election would also depend on how they would have countered on this as also other aspects of BJP's last minute micro-management.

I also have a feeling that the Congress (with Ajay Maken as its Chief Ministerial candidate) will also restore some of its vote share that it lost during the 2014 general elections, but not sure whether it would help them better their performance compared to December 2013. 

Whatever be the outcome, the focus of this elections has been either to support or oppose Arvind Kejriwal/AAP. With voting getting completed in a few hours from now, all eyes and ears till the 10th  of February will be between AAP and BJP.

An open letter from an ordinary citizen

The general elections have been concluded in India. It is a foregone conclusion that her next Prime Minister will be the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP's) Mr Narendra MODI. Much has been said and there are two broad possibilities that one foresees. The best-case scenario is the 'Making Of Democratic Institutions', an euphemism that I use for development, governance and all that the supporters are enthused about. As against this, the worst-case scenario is that it would 'Mar (nay, M...) Our Democracy Inevitably', an euphemism that I use for crony capitalism and divisiveness among others that many others fear. For both these scenarios, the acronyms match with the last name of our Prime Minister.

In this MODI vs MODI diatribe, the development vis-a-vis crony capitalism discussion will continue to remain a matter of interpretation and ideological moorings and the debate will be difficult to conclude. There will also be differences of opinion from withing the ruling party and its affiliates and one has to see which direction it takes. The so-called Gujarat-model or the trumpeted Kerala-model. Well, one has to take the best of both worlds and make Jagdish Bhagwati and Amartya Sen come to an agreement.

The contentious part will be juxtaposing governance and divisiveness. Ideally speaking, any polarization leading to divisiveness anywhere should be considered as a failure of governance. However, from a practical consideration it is possible that the government reaches out to a larger section while ignoring a smaller section. What is more, the principle of exclusion could be based on caste, class, gender, religion and other such identities. If these fears are addressed they will definitely not exorcise the ghosts of the past, but they will bode well for the country's future. Where will we head to? Only time will tell.

In reality, the actual path will be somewhere in between. Politically, if extreme adversities do not come in the way, the future looks like advantage BJP. It is hear that I am concerned as an ordinary citizen because for an effective democracy we need a credible and responsible opposition, which is missing. True, the drubbing of 2014 will lead to soul-searching by all parties, but it is difficult to know what would emerge.

The Congress still seems to have a proportion of population voting for them. Perhaps they identify them with the freedom movement or because of their loyalty to the family. However, if the party has to come-back then it has to go beyond these loyal voters and for that it needs to get out of dynastic politics and develop its grassroots organisation - a tall order indeed.

This is also true for the multitude of regional parties that have lost. They need to get back to their drawing board and re-invent themselves. Those who have withstood the change will end up supporting the ruling alliance because of the dynamics of centre-state relationships, but also because of their personal vested interests. 

Today, the only party that seems to be articulating against vested interest in word and deed is the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). But then some of their elected representatives from Delhi seem to have developed cold-feet with the prospect of loosing a fresh election and are clamouring for a fresh go at government-formation. If hastily resigning was a sign of immaturity then their trying to get back to power again when they do not have the strength and after the recent drubbing will be identified with opportunism. This is a catch-22 situation for them.

AAP may try their old style referendum to know what people in Delhi want, but even if people want they cannot form a government because either BJP or Congress has to agree to that arrangement. In any case, BJP fresh with a victory may now like to go for a fresh election and this time AAP will have a tough time.

Yes, AAP did increase its vote share in Delhi, but it has also lost some supporters and the BJP has increased its share by a larger proportion. Will AAP be able to get back those votes that moved away from it if there is a fresh election? Will it be able to add votes from those who did not vote for them or BJP? Will it be able to counter the new BJP campaign that will also have their government at the centre? Will it have resources and volunteers to campaign for it if there is a fresh election? 

At the national level, obtaining resources and volunteers will be essential for building up a strong organisational structure. Where are they going to get this from in the next five years? How does it plan to address vested interests within their organisational structure? Does it plan to build alliances or at least seat sharing or not putting up candidates if another party seems to have a reasonable candidate who may have disagreements with them but subscribes to some people-centric principles and is not corrupt?

What are the plans that they have for the four constituencies that they have won in Punjab. In principle they are against use of MP and MLA funds. This will be an ideal set-up if the government is also theirs. However, with the conventional governance structure it would be better if the candidates for these four constituencies use the funds in a meaningful way. 

As an outside lay citizen, the advantage of AAP is that it has taken into its fold people with different views and ideologies. This would give space for internal deliberations and space for multiple views. This itself makes it like the Congress party of yore and it should take advantage of this.

Idealism is good and people respect AAP for that. However, practical considerations are also important. For instance, emphasis need not be on legislation always and that too when one does not have a majority, but rather focusing on governance and achieving many other things that could be possible without legislation.

To sum up, the future seems to be advantage BJP. Congress and the multitude of regional satraps need soul-searching. AAP that once provided hope and aspirations to some will have a lot of questions to answer. It is a churning between the Congress, the regional satraps and AAP that could perhaps give a reasonable opposition. Let us wait and see.

My other recent election related musings are:

A tall order there for pluralism to resurface

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

Rawlsian veil, Smithian impartiality and Indian Elections of 2014

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

I have already discussed about the elections under a veil. Now, let me open the veil a bit and discuss the ABC of Indian Elections 2014. A is for AAP (Aam Aadmi Party), B is for BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and C is for the Congress or INC (Indian National Congress).

The Congress has a national following because it is identified with the country's independence movement. It is this identity that made the Congress to be the ruling party for about 50 year's in the nation's 67 years democracy. The Congress party of yore was thought to represent all kinds of views - the left, the right, the centre, the left of centre. the right of centre and so on and so forth. Over the years, the party's leadership got identified with a single family - the Nehru-Gandhi family (they have no relationship with Mahatma Gandhi) and its current President and Vice-President are Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi respectively. They have also been the leading party of an alliance that has been ruling for the last ten years that was marred with corruption. In the current election the Congress faces serious anti-incumbency on account of corruption and dynastic politics.

Taking advantage of this, the BJP and its allies have made a head start. They have announced Narendra Modi to be their Prime Ministerial candidate. This itself charged the adrenalin of many extreme right wing party cadre and supporters while for some others it brought back the memories of divide and misrule aligned with one of the worst communal violence of India that rocked Gujarat in 2002 only a few months after he was sworn in as its Chief Minister.  Today, after being in charge of the state for more than 12 years, he is being championed as a poster boy of development whose report card by Arvind Panagariya drives the punters with one feet in the share-bazaar gong-ho, but independent analysis by Maitreesh Ghatak and Sanchari Roy show that the claims of development do not add up. 

The BJP is not leaving any stones unturned and has set up pre-poll alliances, taken back into its fold people who were recently distanced on account of corruption and given tickets to candidates who are turncoats from the Congress and other parties. Thereby, making it obvious that it is NOT a party with a difference. What is more, BJP's campaigning has made use of Modi's persona to such an extent that many supporters are not keen to know who the party's candidate is from their constituency. This should be an important case study in marketing, but then the basis of representative democracy is made to stand on its head.

To bolster the case for representative democracy, to be a party with a difference, to question dynastic politics and to rake up the case for corruption is a recent entrant in India's democratic polity, the AAP. For many, this party is identified with another poster boy - Arvind Kejriwal who was the Chief Minister of Delhi for 49 days as a minority government. His sudden resignation from this has become a scoring point for the other parties and a sore point that its candidates have to answer the electorate. But then those interested in these answers should keep a watch on Varanasi where Kejriwal has pitted himself against Modi and it is dubbed as the mother of all battles for elections 2014.

While many opinion polls have dismissed AAP in the current elections, my lay guestimate is that they could reach at least 10 to 15 per cent of the popular vote share. Many of my friends and colleagues with whom I discuss may not agree, but let me explain the reasons that I have.

First, AAP is beyond Arvind Kejriwal. It is a conglomerate of views. There are people who are to the left, some other with views to the right and many others that are spread between the two. While this may look like cacophony to someone at one end of the spectrum but then this is what democratic polity is all about - reasonable pluralism.  It gives space to deliberations for a wide spectrum of views. It is like the Congress of yore. Different political entities, including the BJP to a very limited extent, tried to take this space that Congress lost long back, but they have not been successful. This space is being taken over by AAP.

Second, being open to a conglomerate of views has allowed AAP to connect to different kinds of movements that various groups have been independently spearheading - anti-nuclear, crisis in agriculture, displacement, slum housing, and tribal rights among others. This may not lead to an outright increase in votes for AAP by all these disgruntled groups, but it cannot be ignored that there is a consolidation happening.

Third, some people would be interested in a candidate's capability to address issues that matter for the constituency. Many candidates of AAP have done this - they have made attempts to directly engage with their voters and this will be an important motivation for some to vote for these candidates.

Fourth, AAP is contesting in 434 constituencies that is spread across the country. Given the limited resources (time, people and money) they have spread themselves thin and if voters would not like to waste their vote then they may cast it in favour of an winning candidate. While such an impression creation is possible, but this does not cut much ice because most of the winning candidates could get less than half the vote share (say, around 35-40 per cent) indicating that more than half the voters still may not cast their votes for the winning candidate. In short, those who have decided to vote for AAP because of the first three reasons could still vote for them and this would be spread across the country and this will add to their vote share.

Fifth, because of efforts by the Election Commission of India, the Association for Democratic Reforms and Satyamev Jayate there has been an increase in people coming out to vote in this elections. If this increase is by people who did not want to vote because they were disillusioned by the system then it is quite likely that many of these first time voters may cast their preferences in favour of AAP.

It is possible that my guestimates are on the higher side and even it it is correct then it may not transfer into seats. But, if my guestimate is correct then the other parties may better watch out for AAP in the next elections. And, yes the next election could happen very soon if this election gives us a hung parliament, which seems more likely.

To sum up, AAP seems to be a party that gives space to multiple views and also one that makes a difference. The former makes it like the Congress and the latter makes it like what BJP would have  perhaps wanted to be. It is in this sense that AAP is a B team of Congress and a C team of BJP.

Rawlsian Veil, Smithian Impartiality and Indian Elections of 2014

I have decided to come out of my blog hibernation with the  General Election 2014 in India having traversed two-thirds of its path. Six phases of elections are over and another three phases are left and the results would be known to us in another 20 days time by 16 May 2014. 

The immediate reason for my writing is my being at the International Conference on Global Justice and the Global South where I presented a paper on "A Possible Defence of Rawls" where one of the points was to show that Rawls' original position under a veil of ignorance would give the same outcome as that of the Smithian impartial spectator that Amartya Sen invokes. To explain this, I used an old example that I have been discussing in a related context.

There are three candidates contesting to represent the citizens of a democratic polity. The citizens have to elect one person to represent them. Whom should each citizen elect. The details of the three candidates is as follows.

• X has moved up the political ladder, is with experience and seems to have the support base among some important sections.
• Y belongs to a family that has sacrificed for the upkeep of democratic values and institutions in the country and has been groomed to be a leader.
• Z works for the people sincerely and makes genuine efforts to be inclusive and can be identified with an ordinary citizen.

Both the thought experiments take out the personal slant or vested interest associated with it and the conclusion with both the thought experiments will be the same. The three candidates in the above example have an uncanny resemblance to some candidates in the ongoing elections.

X may be identified with the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its alliances. Y seems to resemble a prominent leader from a prominent family of the Indian National Congress (INC). Z could be identified with the leader from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) who was the Chief Minister of Delhi for 49 days. These resemblances, if any, are coincidental as I have been discussing this example in my classes and lectures for at least the last five years and much before AAP was formed or BJP declared its Prime Ministerial candidate. It is true that dynastic politics had already taken roots in India by then, but then, it is not limited to the INC alone.

While discussing with people over the years there are many who have tried to go under a veil or be impartial and they invariably come out with arguments in support of Z. But, now, it is election time and with the blitzkrieg marketing paraphernalia that some parties have at their disposal it is difficult for people to be under a veil or be impartial. It is this that may not augur well for a democracy.

Why should coming out of a veil be a problem in a democracy where citizens ought to vote for themselves. True, citizens should come out of their veil when it comes to information - their decision ought to be an informed choice and being under a veil of ignorance does not prevent that. The veil of ignorance is about caste, class, religion and other such identities that could be detrimental for a democratic polity.

I must say that I have had long discussions on the current elections with many and while most of them think that I am a member of a particular party, I must make it clear that I am not. It is, however, quite possible that my thoughts, arrived at independently under a Rawlsian veil or Smithian impartiality or Gandhiji's Talisman, would be closer to one particular party over the others.