Dhruv Rathee’s question is wrong. Instead, ask what kind of non-democracy India is becoming

Posted on:
Key Points

The interesting thing about Dhruv Rathees super-viral video is that it does not contain any exposor any new fact that a regular follower of news headlines may not have known..

It is a lucid recounting of everything that has worried Indians and well-wishers of Indian democracy:electoralbonds, thefraud in Chandigarh mayors elections, misuse of CBI/ED, decline in media freedom, the witch hunt of opposition leaders, toppling of opposition governments, and what have you..

In a series of publications, beginning with a seminal essay,The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianismin theJournal of Democracy (2002), Steven Levitsky and Lucan A Way. have defined, classified,and explained this sub-specie of authoritarianism.They defineitasapolitical system in which power holders do not abolish all formal democratic procedures, but employ informal mechanisms of coercion and control, while maintaining the formal architecture of democracy..

Incumbents violate those rules so often and to such an extent, however, that the regime fails to meet conventional minimum standards for democracy Although elections are regularly held and are generally free of massive fraud, incumbents routinely abuse state resources, deny the opposition adequate media coverage, harass opposition candidates and their supporters, and in some cases manipulate electoral results...

Given our obsession with elections and the centrality of elections to Indian democracy, it is not surprising that this is the only element of competition that survives in the current system, while legislature, judiciary, and media are no longer any meaningful sites of contestation..