Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site crystal.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!uwvax!crystal!ravi
From: ravi@crystal.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.nlang.india
Subject: Re: Political maturity of the masses
Message-ID: <413@crystal.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Mar-85 12:28:46 EST
Article-I.D.: crystal.413
Posted: Mon Mar 11 12:28:46 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Mar-85 21:32:19 EST
References: <2458@hplabsc.UUCP> <173@sbcs.UUCP>
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Lines: 79

> > 
> > Here is a letter from an American-born professor who was in India
> > at the time of the last elections.  You all might find it of interest.
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > India and the U S
> > 
> > Sir, - As a political scientist - with the University of Washington -
> > on my first visit to India, I have been amazed to witness at first
> > hand, the virility and maturity of Indian democracy in the general
> > elections. ...
> 
> Give me a break!  Does this guy have any idea of what factors influence joe
> villager's vote?  Weighty non-issues such as the candidate's religion, caste,
> community, mother tongue, and whether or not he pees facing the wind are
> all important factors; thugs passing for "student leaders" are at their
> persuasive best (count how many candidates died in pre-election violence
> these recent assembly elections); and booth-capturing is common enough to
> merit but passing mention in newspapers (yes, the last parliamentary
> elections were remarkably free of this, but that, to me, speaks of good
> organization, not necessarily of political maturity).
> 
> As an Indian, I'm proud of the fact that India is the world's largest
> democracy, and a functioning democracy at that, despite all its poverty.
> But it irks me that Indira Gandhi's defeat in the 1977 elections is seen by
> some pundits as some sort of victory of Democracy and The Forces of Light
> over Tyranny and The Forces of Darkness: she lost because nasbandhi wasn't
> a hit with the people ... but you don't have to look at profound ideologies
> for that, people can become surprisingly recalcitrant when threatened with
> forcible sterilization!  Mrs. G. actually did pretty well in the
> South, where Sanjay Gandhi's N-point programmes hadn't been quite so
> harshly implemented.
> 
> I'm especially flabbergasted at talk of "political maturity" when political
> nonentities like Amitabh Bachhan win landslide victories over veterans like
> H N Bahuguna and Chandra Sekhar.  Whither maturity when the only factors
> that matter are a celluloid reality and caste and party stickers?
> -- 
> Saumya Debray
> SUNY at Stony Brook
> 
> 	uucp: {allegra, hocsd, philabs, ogcvax} !sbcs!debray
> 	CSNet: debray@sbcs


Does it occur to you that every one of your arguments applies equally well
to this country and Reagan?  Lots of Americans feel Reagan lacks "political
maturity", and that his forte is that he is able to create an illusory "TV
reality" much like the "celluloid reality" that you speak of.  But that is 
no reason to say that this country is not democratic!  What about the reaction
here to Jesse Jackson's candidacy?  Were you not flabbergasted at the racist
reactions that were so overt at times?  How about the reaction to Gerry 
Ferraro?  Do you doubt that many did not vote for her simply because she was a
woman?  Were you then equally flabbergasted coming from India where we have no
such biases?  Are you not aware that a Roman Catholic running for president
here starts with a severe handicap because most of the voting public is
Protestant?  Other societies may not have a caste system like ours does, but 
that is not to say that bigotry and bias are absent.  In our country, political
stakes are much higher than here because there is so much less to go around,
and we lack the resources to get everything right.  Do you seriously believe
that thugs in this country would NOT capture voting booths if they thought they
could get away with it?  Is the attitude of thugs an index of "political
maturity"?  Or, are you suggesting that the actions of thugs in India has the
sanction of the voting masses?

Sure, Mrs. G did well in many parts of India in '77.  But that is because
people don't always vote for Freedom and the Higher Truth; there are always
other exigencies.  Many Americans may not have liked the fact that Reagan
imposed restrictions on the press in Grenada and that he wants to run
lie-detector tests on government officials, but they still probably voted for
him, simply because they thought he had what was most needed at that point.

The point of a democracy is simply that the people have the CHOICE of
electing whom THEY want, whether or not it jibes well with your (or anybody 
else's point of view).  Besides, "political maturity" can only be judged in 
the context of a specific environment:  A lot of people think this country 
has a very immature voting population; besides, they have biases against 
Catholics, women and minorities.  But would you say that the vitality in the 
democracy is illusory?  Does it make you clamour for a "break"?