India Shining? Not Quite.

As a proud member of the Indian diaspora, I used to think that the world's largest democracy was also its most sophisticated. Now, I'm not so certain.

India just voted for its fifteenth Lok Sabha or "People's House." If there is anything to be learned from this largest exercise of franchise on the planet, the always-insular US media are certainly not interested in reporting it. Carrie Prejean's vacant mind gets more news time here.

As an Indian Muslim and a former journalist who used to cover the heat and dust of this remarkable spectacle of democracy, a part of me is happy that the self-proclaimed standard bearer of "secularism" -- the Congress Party -- has defeated the Hindu nationalist and anti-Muslim BJP. But huge problems remain.

As always in India, it's about staggering numbers. 700 million of its 1.2 billion masses were eligible to vote and close to sixty percent did. Once again the world's largest middle class remained largely apathetic with the poorest of the poor in rural outposts voting with greater gusto. The Congress re-embraced its cause for the Aam Admi or Common Man. For the BJP in 2004, "India Shining" was the theme song. For the Congress, the Slumdog Millionaire anthem "Jai Ho" was seen as a better formula for success, with the entire nation gripped by the Oscars' finally deigning to acknowledge the bastardized Bollywood of that film, never mind if it was not an "Indian" film or had been accused of "poverty porn" by the intelligentsia.

India's frantic, disorganized and often elitist English-language media even dubbed Vote 2009 as Election 2.0, with hopes that Facebook and Orkut would Obama-ize their election as well. That was not to happen.

My home country and its politics are complex, to say the least. Many different Indias now jostle for space in the increasingly urban settings of air-conditioned shopping malls and the shantytowns and slums that surround them. Election time is perhaps the greatest equalizer. But dig deeper and you find that the dynastic politics of the subcontinent remain unchanged, for the most part.

The family you are born into makes all the difference at election time here but unlike Pakistan, where it turns into a kind of feudal chaos with no real democracy, India has had 15 successful elections since Independence or Partition in 1947. The newly elected caste of characters is as colorful as ever and includes mothers, fathers, sons and daughters in the highest numbers ever. Politics in India is a family business.

Among the hundreds of politicians braving the heat and dust of this vast nation in their air-conditioned Ambassador cars (this sturdy elephant of a vehicle has been synonymous with political power in India since 1957) were 38-year old Rahul Gandhi and his sister Priyanka, with the former whipping up a media frenzy every time he opened his dimpled mouth and was proclaimed India's Obama. Like Obama, Rahul is mixed-race. His Caucasian, Italian, Roman Catholic mother is today India's most powerful woman. In 2004 she was ridiculed for her roots and her accented Hindi (and English) but this widow of the "martyred" Rajiv Gandhi (a former prime minister) and daughter-in-law of the also assassinated Indira Gandhi, having already inherited the dynastic mantle of the President of the Congress, renounced prime minister-ship and gave it to a soft spoken Oxbridge-educated Sikh economist who had been credited with ending the socialist economic principles of previous regimes when he was a Finance Minister. Dr. Manmohan Singh, now 77, had never run for political office and was therefore not seen as a threat. Today, having held just one press conference in the last five years, he is seen as a stable, if puppet-like (with La Gandhi pulling the strings), alternative to the rantings of the Hindu nationalist BJP and often waxes eloquent about "secularism," seen by the Congress to be the very heart of the Indian nation state crafted after 1947.

It is no accident that in remarks to the Press right after the election results were announced, Singh rushed to thank Sonia and Rahul, grateful to them in a cloying way for his very existence. He takes all his orders from them, after all. The noisy and often hysterical television news channels had pundits claiming that Rahul would be anointed Prime Minister in as little as two years after Singh made him a Minister in his soon to be announced cabinet. It is hoped that in two years, at age 40, Rahul will have the sagacity for the highest office, apparently a birthright.

The media is also agog with the news of New York writer and former UN official Shashi Tharoor, who lost his bid for Secretary General, getting a cabinet post. Mr. Tharoor descended upon the state of Kerala, not speaking the language and appealing to the masses as Mr. Clean from someplace else. His patriotism rediscovered after a lifetime of living abroad, he now hopes to bring "Change." To his critics he is a firangi (a pejorative for "foreigner"), just like Madam Gandhi.

India is by no means a two-party system like the US, and this was the primary reason I used to attribute a superior democracy to it. But in 2009 many regional parties -- and there are more than a hundred -- have seen erosion in their support. The nouveau riche middle classes, however, are glad that the Communists, who had a strangled hold on the Singh 1 government, have been soundly defeated. Even the party of the downtrodden and "Dalits," the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) or Majority People's Party, have seen losses -- even though polls had predicted that its leader, a mostly uncouth woman called Mayawati, would have played kingmaker this time.

The keys to power are often given by India's largest state, Uttar Pradesh, the heart of the Hindi heartland and an often-accurate predictor of electoral tides. With a population equaling Brazil, UP this time was a surprise. The Congress here has made remarkable gains in areas where, much like the pre-Obama Democrats in the Bible-Belt states, it had given up all hope. For the first time in many years, it has 21 winners from here and is viable in the heartland again. It is unfortunate, though, that Uttar Pradesh ("UP" for short) is sending 31 MP's with criminal records to Parliament, which will now have an astounding 150 members who are also criminals. Above all, I remain conflicted to learn that the Muslims of UP, the most coveted voting block in that state, have voted predictably for the Congress, even though it is clear that they cannot vote for the BJP.

A quick look behind the numbers is instructive. The BSP fielded 14 Muslim candidates, two won. The second regional party, the Samajwadi Party (Socialist Party) fielded 12 and all lost. The Congress had the least Muslim representation on its ticket at 9, and only two won. The losers (the BSP and the SP) argue that the final vote share means a return of the Muslim vote to the Congress. Others say that the Muslim vote remains fragmented. For me, Muslims not voting for Muslim candidates presents an interesting phenomenon and the hold of dynasty (the Gandhi's) on the Muslim voters (like others) remains unchallenged.

BJP head honcho, LK Advani, the angry old man of an all encompassing "Hindutva" ideology is now 81-years old and much like the Republicans in the US, the BJP in India is floundering for a message beyond religious rhetoric to appeal to a forward looking, outsourced-and-loving-it population. His party amongst others is sending another Gandhi dynasty offspring Varun Gandhi to parliament. In prison recently for his hate speech, this young Gandhi said that the "Lotus" (symbol of the BJP) would "cut the head of Muslims".

In 2004, when the BJP was first defeated, I felt a sense of optimism. It was a vindication, I felt, for us Indian Muslims, massacred by a BJP government in the state of Gujarat in 2002. It was a remarkable moment indeed. A Sikh man (Manmohan) was anointed to power by a Roman Catholic woman (Sonia) and administered the oath of office by a Muslim President (APJ Abdul Kalam).

Now, as the circus of this prolonged election ends, I am not so sure. I know that Muslims remain a much-courted voting block and, at 13 percent, give India the world's third largest Muslim population. This year, more than two-dozen Muslim parties contested the election. Many said this was evidence of a fifty-year healing process after a bloody partition into a majority Hindu and majority Muslim nation. But Muslims remain India's most reviled minority, often in a state of poverty and illiteracy, and certainly the targets of "racial" profiling, ending up as prison majorities, much like African-Americans in the US prison system. The damning Sachar Commission report in 2006, initiated by the outgoing and now incoming Congress government, was seen as a way to identify the problems of the Indian Muslim. It did. But two years later, little has been done.

Ironically the loser BJP is already proclaiming that it "should have courted the Muslim vote" in Uttar Pradesh, where the largest Muslim populations live. How it could have done that is perplexing. Picture the Republicans trying to get pro-choicers to vote for them.

And these are only small symptoms in this land of a billion inequalities. The nation continues to obsess about certain "superpower status," which they see as only a matter of time to come. Poverty, dynasty and minorities be damned, they say. India has what China (and certainly the inconsequential Pakistan) do not. And that itself is a reason to celebrate.

Comments

[jaypatel583]

It is interesting how the author derides the 'Hindu Nationalist' BJP party and is so thrilled by its defeat and the country opting for the 'secular' party but does not condemn the rise of the Muslim political parties. Interesting double standard...

[Freenation]

BJP deserves to be derided...like it's other fundamentalist sister parties VHP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena and not to be forgotten the mother of all RSS...

BJP under the leadership of Advani encashed on the religious sentiments of the hindus which resulted in death of thousands of innocents just to get into power...deserves condemnation big time...

[jaypatel583]

You miss the point entirely freenation. I am just pointing out that the author reveals that he is more than ok with Islam being a politically motivating force (in fact points to the rise of such a movement in India as a sign of 'healing') but is completely against Hindus aligning along the same terms.

Islam is inherently (at least empirically in the modern context and also historically) a political as well as religious/­ideologica­l GLOBAL movement which Muslims in India are a part of. If the author truly was a defender of 'secular' values, he would be equally critical of Islamic political parties arising in India and around the world which have and continue to commit gross human rights and other atrocities. I would rather have a BJP than a Taliban or Jamaat-e-Islami any day.

[blue planet blues]

"His patriotism rediscovered after a lifetime of living abroad, he now hopes to bring "Change." To his critics he is a firangi (a pejorative for "foreigner"), just like Madam Gandhi."
You are misinformed. Shashi Tharoor grew up in India and completed his bachelors in Kolkata. He represented India abroad and not 'lived a lifetime abroad'. You are also wrong when you say he doesn't speak the language.He was not seen as a firangi as you put it.
BTW Gandhi, Nehru were also foreign educated and not considered firangi. It is not the same as Sonia Gandhi.

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

Is this from a Shashi Tharoor acolyte? Mr. Tharoor worked at the UN, and was not representing India-he was representing himself and his career. Way too many critics (and note critics) have called him a "firangi". Finally he does not speak a word of Malayalam, which generally should be a prerequisite when you are representing Malayalam speakers. Thanks

[Freenation]

Mr. Parvez a well researched article indeed, and there is no denying of the fact, India has dynasty politics all around.

Just to also mention, in UP most of the candidates with criminal backgroud were defeated which is a miracle...some were able to get through although...

You have summed up everything well, but it all boils down to this: among 2 main stream parties Congress and BJP which would have been a worse choice:

Congress: with some tainted members yet having PM Manmohan Singh a brilliant economist

Or

BJP: with huge list of fan.atics inlcuding Modi who was being projected future PM or Advani arhcitect of India's right win.g ideology and responsible for riots which killed thousands to ensure BJP's success...

In the end, I believe India SHINED BIG TIME...by defeating the bi.gots...

[Logout]

What is democracy? Its two wolves and a chicken deciding whats for dinner. Not matter what this writer or anyone says, its not the MusIims or even the DaIits who are at the receiving end.

Its the reIigeous Hindus who have now become the jews of India. The pitch folk proletariats have taken over control of India the last 65 years. The left congress Party has ruled India 85% of the time since independence and they have again kept control.

No one can be blamed except the MusIims themselves for their predicament, 1. They have gotten their favortie political party 85% of the time, (The congress). They wanted to have lsIamic schools instead of secular schools and they got it. So they cannot blame the rest of the Indians for their siIIy decisions in life.

Sorry!

[Shrinath]

India has a complex fabric and author seems to have stitched this article without much research. Moreover jumping across one point to the other makes it extremely to difficult to assess what the author is trying to convey. When did USA become a two party system? Just because the green party, the independents and the liberals did not garner enough does not make it a two party system. Another point which most the authors do not write about is about the demography and oppression. The north-east, middle-east and and central parts of Indian states has seen the most oppression of the Dalits and other lower castes. In fact states like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have taken great strides in ensuring that the minorities are not oppressed. In the states of Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Andhrapradesh, Maharashtra, Kerala, the urban centers and cities are devoid of the concept of "untouchables". I wonder why most when depicting India should concentrate on the negatives than on the positives. Especially, authors who have been given either op-eds or blogs on NYT and HuffPo make it a point to highlight all the negatives. I wonder, as a political participant, HuffPo would give a person like me to blog here. Someone who now lives in India and has traveled a lot.

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

The article is actually very well researched and does not follow the standard nationalist narrative that I fear most in India have. The US does have a two party system, without doubt and one piece does not need to address everything in the "complex fabric" as you say and that certainly includes all the Dalit issues. What is "demography"? And always remember it is important to be critical.

[Logout]

India has a single Party System. The left congress party. Thats it.

The BJP has been in power a single term since India's independence!

[Shrinath]

Here are some links about your claim of two party system. http://www.helium.com/items/706408-commentary-why-a-two-party-system-limits-us-politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-party_system
http://www.votesmart.org/resource_political_resources.php?category=1

Over the years, the dominant parties have been either the Republicans or the Democrats. That in now way diminishes the fact that other parties do not exist or contest.

The Sachar Committee has its set of critics. Having said that, Muslims are indeed the biggest minority neglected. The committee's report is available online for everyone. However, muslims are not the only ones who have been neglected. Farmers, who committed suicide in Andhrapradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa last year due to severe drought and the local government did nothing. Most of the MSM, like NDTV, Headlines Today, CNN-IBN, etc., are apathetic towards the oppressed whether muslim or otherwise.

I am quite sure that you know what "demography" means. If not, google it.

[NoToGOP08]

This would have been a more coherent post if the writer had focused on the issue of Muslims in India and the impact of the election on them.

In the meantime consider this - India a 62 year old country stitched together from feudal society by 250 years of European colonization. It has 22 'official languages' and hundreds of dialects. It has a billion people, 50% of whom are under age 35. 70% of the country lives below the poverty line.

In 62 years it has fought 4 wars with Pakistan, and 1 with China. China is claiming Arunachal Pradesh. Pakistan is claiming Kashmir. Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers have fought India for 3 decades. Two Prime Ministers were assassinated.

Hats off to this great country. Progress may not be as fast as everyone would like it to be. And Rome was not built in a day.

[Shrinath]

LOL. You hit many of the points that was absent. All of what you said are facts. A lot of progress has been made and which is why this is such a vibrant democracy. It is not only the Muslims that have been neglected, many of the majority Hindus have also been neglected. Politicians, by and large are the same all over. It is the degree of commitment they show and do that varies. Largely Congress, has shed its colonial mentality and embraced free market strategy. It sees a much more enhanced bilateral relationship with the US than it did previously aligning itself with the erstwhile USSR

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

This is too general a comment to a feature that makes a very nuanced and necessary argument regarding dynastic politics and the Muslim vote

[NoToGOP08]

necessary argument...yes it is. Nuanced? I don't think so...because it lacks specific examples of policies (or lack thereof) by these dynastic politics, that impact India's Muslims.

[penngal]

If that is the case, then you need to add more data around how Southern Muslims are different with regards to education, women rights etc. from the Northern Muslims. You have painted all the Indian Muslims in one light, which is clearly not the case.

Southern Muslims are more secular, more educated and have much better track record with regards to women's rights. I will consider yours nuanced if you bring out these key issues.

[Akhilesh Rallabandi]

The author should realize that the lot of the Indian Muslim is unlikely to change in a day. The ONLY thing that can make a difference will be sustainable economic growth. Let's get real. A sudden awakening among bigots is just not human.

In that respect, I find it heartening that non-performers were penalized by the democratic process. For instance, Nitish Kumar's more able leadership (than Lalu's) in Bihar was rewarded by the electorate. If these elections have a lesson, it should be that the Indian electorate has begun to reward development more than divisiveness.

Though one cannot but agree with the Author's assertion that Dr. Singh is the Gandhis' puppet, one must also wonder: is that such a bad thing? He has been voted back in power because of his developmental credentials - and the fact that he spread some of the generated wealth around. It is a safe bet that, global conditions permitting, India will keep growing at 9% or more - and will raise more people from extreme poverty. India just cannot shine in the near future - but it will get there. A few decades of 10% growth later, it might be a different story - even for India's oppressed poor.

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

Great facts-thanks. I have no idea though how the 4 wars with Pakistan, LTTE issues etc that you bring up have any connection to what is said in the piece. Please do read again

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

Am not sure if the only alternative in a nation of 1.2 billion people is to have a puppet prime minister.

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

I disagree with "post man" about only the Dalits being systematically oppressed to the exclusion of Muslim minorities. A careful read is necessary! Thanks ; )

[post man]

I am not disputing about the unfair treatment of muslim minorities. All I'm saying is that there are several groups that are treated unfairly. As some people would say India is organized chaos. But if India wants to play with the big boys then there must be no excuses so you're right in that sense.

[post man]

Agreed we shouldn't fantasize India's democracy.There is a lot to be done to empower people,fight poverty, education and health care reforms etc..
But I still think this a poorly written article. There are loose comparisons made between Obama and Rahul Gandhi which was not how Indians saw it, and muslims being compared to African Americans is totally ridiculous. Muslims at one time had conquered India.If anyone group was systematically oppressed it was and is the Dalits or the untouchables.

[Parvez Sharma - Huffpost Blogger]

It is absolutely not ridiculous to compare the prison statistics in India and the US-both nations where the dominant minority either Black or Muslim constitute the largest prison population. Infact it is a very important statistic that is completely overlooked in India and I intend to write more about it

[Logout]

If I were to write on it, it would go like this.

"Do the crime, do the time"

:)

[post man]

Do you think Black people in the US are jailed unfairly or because they do not have many prospects and therefore turn to crime.

[Ben Dixon]

HuffPost's Pick

In the end Democracy is a circus, but its our circus.

[hillpill]

(After long pause) Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl... :)

[penngal]

Oh is that so? Please ask her to return the pilfered wealth to India and to the rest of the world. She will look really pretty and nice then.