Suchergebnisse

"India's party system has undergone a profound transformation over the last decade. The Congress Party, a catchall party that brought independence in 1947 and governed India for much of the period since then, no longer dominates the electoral scene. Political parties that draw support from particular castes and religious groups are now more powerful than ever before. Democracy without Associations explains why religious and caste-based political parties have come to dominate the electoral landscape in 1990s India and why catchall parties have declined." "Democracy without Associations will interest scholars and students of Indian politics and party politics, as well as those interested in the impact of social divisions on the political system."--Jacket

How do we understand the nature and diversity of populist politics, in developed and developing countries? 'Righteous Demagogues' provides a novel approach grounded in democratic theory, inequality, and party competition. It argues that populists are successful when they evoke the moral contract - that states are obligated to redress certain types of inequality - and promise its restoration, in ways that resonate across the normal lines of social division and partisanship. These changes in political competition can spur confrontations with the opposition and state institutions, leading to populist rejection or authoritarian governance.

Ideology and Identity shows that party politics and elections in India are a contest of ideas. Using survey data from the Indian National Election Studies (NES) and survey experiments from smaller but more focused studies, the book shows that Indian electoral politics, as represented by political parties, their members, and their voters, is in fact marked by deep ideological cleavages.

1. Religious practices, identities, and political representation 1. - 2. The influence of religious practice 33. - 3. Social domination: caste and political representation 59. - 4. Avenues for the connected: civic associations 87. - 5. Political institutions and the reproduction of inequalities 113. - 6. Party competition, social divisions, and representation 141. - 7. Conclusion 171

Pradeep Chhibber and Ken Kollman rely on historical data spanning back to the eighteenth century from Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States to revise our understanding of why a country's party system consists of national or regional parties. They demonstrate that the party systems in these four countries have been shaped by the authority granted to different levels of government

Pradeep Chhibber and Ken Kollman rely on historical data spanning back to the eighteenth century from Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States to revise our understanding of why a country's party system consists of national or regional parties. They demonstrate that the party systems in these four countries have been shaped by the authority granted to different levels of government.

A long line of scholarship has argued that ideological division structures party politics in many parts of the world. In India, however, there is a long-held consensus that the parties do not sort themselves ideologically, especially regarding economic policymaking. The paper analyses National Election Studies data between 1996 and 2019 by Lokniti-CSDS, and shows that voters cluster around the centre-left position on economic issues. Nevertheless, there are discernible ideological differences among the party members. The Bhartiya Janata Party members are more likely to favour privatisation, and members of Left parties prefer labour rights. These ideological differences are also evident in our analysis of the manifestos of political parties since 1952 and an expert survey conducted in 2022. We argue that these elite differences in economic policy do not translate into mass politics because all political parties present the State as the solution to economic deprivation. The rise of welfare populism in Indian politics in the past two decades, we suggest, is a result of centralisation within political parties in which the welfare promises are directly linked to the party leaders.