Tag Archives: majoritarian democracy

Centre watch, Debates, Democracy

Professor Balveer Arora in Democracy Dialogues, 5 th January 2025, 6 PM (IST)

Leave a comment

https://youtu.be/GM6KiF9zwII?si=hA3U2WAY_lh18jLF

Democracy Dialogues Series 35 / Organised by New Socialist Initiative

Theme : India’s Federal Democracy @ 75: Is it Secure?

Speaker : Prof Balveer Arora

Chairman, Centre for Multilevel Federalism and Former Professor of Political Science and Rector, JNU

Time and Date : Sunday, 5 th January, 2025 6 PM ( IST)

Live Streamed on : facebook.com/newsocialistinitiative.nsi

Abstract :As we celebrate the 75th year of the Constitution, it is important to remember that Indian federalism flowered late. In the initial years, the development of democracy overshadowed the federal provisions of the Constitution. Certain formulations of the Constitution and single-party dominance even cast doubts on its very existence.

Dismissed as quasi, much was made of the preference for the term Union to question even the federal intent of the framers of the Constitution. As India’s federal polity developed, it became clearer that federalism was not merely intended but also an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution. It was further defined and refined with asymmetrical provisions to accommodate its burgeoning diversity.Is it being denied today?

The federal fact is central to the understanding of contemporary Indian politics. Federalism has imparted resilience to Indian democracy. Traditionally, the concept of federalism involved relationships between central governments and federated units. Defined in legal- constitutional terms as different power distributions between the central government vis-à-vis the states and local governments, they typically limited relationships to those between governments, notably between various actors in the executive branch. We seek to go beyond this framework to look at federalism as a democratic process.

The threats to the federal essence of the polity are many, majoritarianism being the foremost. Majoritarian democracy is incompatible with the federal principle, which is based on the recognition of the right to self-rule for all constituents of the federal polity. Is this under siege today by an integrationist vision that seeks unity through uniformity? How can federal democracy be protected and preserved under these conditions? Can it be made more secure?

About the Speaker : BALVEER ARORA is Chairman, Centre for Multilevel Federalism and Former Professor of Political Science and Rector, JNU. Earlier, he was a visiting fellow at the National Political Science Foundation, Paris and the Center for the Advanced Study of India, University of Pennsylvania, USA. He has edited / co edited many books : Here is a list of few of his publications :
– Transforming India: Social and Political Dynamics of Democracy
– Multiple Identities in a Single State: Indian Federalism in Comparative Perspective
– Party System in India: Emerging Trajectories ,
– Federalism in India: Origins and Development
– The Value of Comparative Federalism: The Legacy of Ronald L. Watts
– Federalism and Public Health in India: Dissonant Discourses

Culture, Government, Politics, Right watch

Modi 2.0: Majoritarianism Normalised?

3 Comments

This election verdict will have vital ramifications for democracy’s onward journey for decades together, and silencing and further invisibilisation of religious minorities would be its logical outcome.

minorities in india

“The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.”  — – Gramsci

A journalist friends’ prophesy has finally come true.

The day India launched ‘surgical strikes’ across the border supposedly to avenge the Pulwama terror attack, this friend immediately sent a message on a WhatsApp group that Narendra Modi has ensured himself a second term. He stood his ground despite few heated exchanges on the group from Left leaning friends.

In the coming days, this not so expected debacle of the secular camp and the surge of the Hindutva Supremacist camp in newer areas and communities would be further analysed/debated/discussed from various angles. It will be debated why despite the caution expressed by the likes of Amartya Sen, who had concluded how India has taken “a quantum jump in wrong direction since 2014”; how despite being cautioned by leading scholars, intellectuals, scientists of our times that the  very idea of India is at stake in the elections, the people in general did not pay any heed to their appeals and have resolved to continue the journey with a renewed frenzy in the same direction or have fully supposedly embraced this idea of ‘New India’ jettisoning the old one. Remember, not only has the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) been able to garner more seats than last time but its vote share has also increased more than 5%.

(Read the full text here : https://www.newsclick.in/Minorities-India-Silenced-Modi-Reelection-BJP-Majoritarianism-RSS)

Bad ideas, Debates, Government, Right watch

Ideas as Crime in a Majoritarian Democracy

Leave a comment

idea as crime in democracy

Image Courtesy: Vappingo

To such a degree has Religion fuelled conflict, complicated politics, retarded social development and impaired human relations across the world, that one is often tempted to propose that Religion is innately an enemy of Humanity, if not indeed of itself a crime against Humanity … it is time that the world adopted a position that refuses to countenance Religion as an acceptable justification for, excuse or extenuation of – crimes against Humanity.

-Wole Soyinka

A modern critique of Sacred Books of any religion — which are worshipped by its followers — is an act which is full of dilemmas.

What should one say if they have references about burning of infidels, permitting a man to marry many women, instructing the rulers to cut somebody’s tongue or pour hot lead into somebody’s ears if s/he sings/listens to religious hymns, ordering a particular section of its devotees to be kept aloof even from places of worship or spotting a ‘divine figure’ engaged in abusing one’s own daughter or harassing women.

Should a critical intellectual just look the other way, pretending that s/he does not see, decide to keep quiet or rationalise such acts to further re-ensure her/his faith or say few things, albeit in a mild tone, that such acts do not match modern values?

And what should a modern state — which claims to be not based on faith — do in such a case? Facilitate flourishing of such critiques or allow faith merchants/fanatics of different shades to criminalise such acts taking recourse to its own statue books.

( Read the full article here : https://www.newsclick.in/ideas-crime-majoritarian-democracy)