Democracy is not just voting; it’s sustained citizen participation to ensure justice and accountability- Amartya Sen
In many Third World countries, democracy has an odd five-year cycle. Election seasons provide people a brief but tremendous sense of empowerment, but the years between often neglected and despairing. Third World politics, which value transactional relationships between governments and citizens over democracy, fuels this “five-yearly democracy”. Citizens often focus on political parties’ tangible benefits rather than democratic ideals.
Transactional Democracy and Voter’s behaviour
In Third World nations, elections are more than just a democratic process; they are a time for negotiations during which voters use their combined influence to gain advantages. With the exception of elections, when parties compete to outbid one another with promises of freebies, welfare programs, and financial incentives, democracy in these countries frequently feels far away. Citizens “cashing in” every five years, reducing democracy to a marketplace of votes due to this incentivised competition. India is a prime example of this phenomenon. Elections, known as Panchvarshiya Loktantra (five-yearly democracy), have turned into a time for voters to profit. Political parties prioritise providing immediate, voter-specific rewards above promoting sustained democratic engagement. A political ecology driven by transactional incentives rather than ideological alignment is created when voters evaluate their options and select the party that makes the most lucrative promises during elections.
The Role of Corporates in Financing Elections
Corporate election campaign finance fuels this competitive politics. Corporations donate heavily to political parties in India. Since electoral bonds were introduced in India in 2018, corporate donations have skyrocketed. During the 2019 general elections, political parties collected over ₹12,000 crores in corporate donations, with the ruling party obtaining the majority. These monies often fund lavish campaigns, benefit announcements, and media outreach, favouring well-funded parties. Corporates often influence policy decisions in exchange for support, creating another grey area. Critics say this corrupts democracy by turning elected officials into corporate agents.
Horse Trading and Post-Election Dynamics
The effect of money in politics goes beyond elections. Another example of transactional politics is horse trading, where elected officials are bribed with money, positions, or other incentives to leave their party. Recent horse trade in Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Madhya Pradesh has interrupted democracy. Representatives are apparently given crores of rupees to switch allegiances, undermining electoral faith. As parties form opportunistic alliances and defections to gain power, governments become unstable. Governance crises result from voters’ wishes being ignored.
The Case of Jharkhand and Maharashtra
The recent elections in Jharkhand and Maharashtra highlight this trend. Jharkhand, where the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) alliance appears set to achieve a second term, exemplifies the complex dynamics of regional identity politics intertwined with welfare-oriented electoral approaches. The success of the JMM is significantly anchored in its capacity to integrate focused welfare initiatives with resonant local sentiments. Prominent initiatives like the Mayya Yojna, Samagra Pension Yojna, Abua Awas Yojna, and the Sarkar Aapke Dwar program have notably influenced voter sentiment. These initiatives tackle fundamental concerns, offering pensions, housing, and direct governmental engagement, which profoundly connect with rural and tribal communities.
In contrast, Maharashtra reveals a more intricate scenario owing to its multifaceted social dynamics. The state’s elections, characterised by their complex interplay of caste, community, and urban-rural distinctions, serve as a microcosm of the larger discourse surrounding identity politics and the commitments to welfare initiatives. In spite of the variety present, the fundamental motif persists, electorates selecting political factions predicated on assurances of tangible benefits rather than adherence to ideological principles.
Implications for Democracy
The concept of “five-yearly democracy” affects democratic frameworks. It gives voters negotiating power but undermines accountability, government, and strategic planning. Governments often favour populist ideas with short-term electoral rewards over sustainable development and structural improvements. These democracies’ election behaviour often relies on immediate rewards, according to research. During the 2019 Indian general elections, political parties allocated around ₹60,000 crores, with a substantial amount going towards voter incentives. Welfare initiatives, while beneficial, are often used to achieve electoral allegiance rather than lasting administration.
The Way Forward
Third-world countries face many challenges, but to compete with the first world, they must be inclusive, participatory, and replace cyclical, transactional democracy with democratic institutions, civic education, and government accountability between elections. Addressing poverty and inequality can lessen election-time incentive dependence. “Five-yearly democracy” may suit to present politics. It may temporarily benefit citizens, but it risks weakening democracy, enveloping countries in populist politics, and delaying growth and development.
Dr Khwaja Md Afroz, Researcher/Author and a faculty in the department of Political Science, (MANUU), Hyderabad. He has penned many articles in Journals, research papers in national/international seminars/conferences and regularly writes on socio-political subjects for various online/ print domain.
Contact,
Email: [email protected].
Twitter: @khwajaafrozsidd
