lijphart notes
Lijphart
THE PUZZLE OF INDIAN DEMOCRACY; A CONSOCIATIONAL INTERPRETATION
-india is a DDS with arguably majoritarian democracy, but has all elements of consoc
-argues most consoc 50s-60s, less so after, conincides with increased EV-related
-John Stuart Mill; dem impossible in multiethnic, particularly multilingual countries
-power sharing theory; dem possibly in DDS only if consoc (inc all 4 elements)
-majoritarian (maj) winner takes all dem concentrates power in gov/party, disproport
-consoc is one of the most influential theories in comparative politics
-it is paradigm for looking at possible power-sharing countries/political systems
-has been used to shape many DDS’s models of gov
-claims other than ‘exception’ of india consoc remains empirically valid
-india survived despite largely majoritarian Westminster style poli system
-since india is so huge and divided it is difficult to just ignore
-highly centralized gov and single party strength, BUT with linguistic autonomous groups and largely coalition based, making it semiconsoc Four Elements of Power Sharing in India Grand Coalition
-model form is inclusive cabinet coalition of minorities, can be councils, will have set proportional ratio of ethnic/linguistic groups who must be represented
-congress system was very inclusive, had small pressure parties influencing both sides
-so no alternating 2 parties, single party more like consoc grand coalition
-India has a consensus based system via the congress party, intra party competition
-congress is inclusive and dominant, ministers of all religion, language and region Cultural Autonomy
-Use; 1) coinciding language-state bounds, 2) reli/ling minorities own public schools, 3) separate personal/family laws for religious minorities- all present in india
-originally not ling divided, but pressures in 50s force it, reorg states implemented 56
-uneven power tilted to the center esp since 60s autonomous status of muslim kashmir
-this
THE PUZZLE OF INDIAN DEMOCRACY; A CONSOCIATIONAL INTERPRETATION
-india is a DDS with arguably majoritarian democracy, but has all elements of consoc
-argues most consoc 50s-60s, less so after, conincides with increased EV-related
-John Stuart Mill; dem impossible in multiethnic, particularly multilingual countries
-power sharing theory; dem possibly in DDS only if consoc (inc all 4 elements)
-majoritarian (maj) winner takes all dem concentrates power in gov/party, disproport
-consoc is one of the most influential theories in comparative politics
-it is paradigm for looking at possible power-sharing countries/political systems
-has been used to shape many DDS’s models of gov
-claims other than ‘exception’ of india consoc remains empirically valid
-india survived despite largely majoritarian Westminster style poli system
-since india is so huge and divided it is difficult to just ignore
-highly centralized gov and single party strength, BUT with linguistic autonomous groups and largely coalition based, making it semiconsoc Four Elements of Power Sharing in India Grand Coalition
-model form is inclusive cabinet coalition of minorities, can be councils, will have set proportional ratio of ethnic/linguistic groups who must be represented
-congress system was very inclusive, had small pressure parties influencing both sides
-so no alternating 2 parties, single party more like consoc grand coalition
-India has a consensus based system via the congress party, intra party competition
-congress is inclusive and dominant, ministers of all religion, language and region Cultural Autonomy
-Use; 1) coinciding language-state bounds, 2) reli/ling minorities own public schools, 3) separate personal/family laws for religious minorities- all present in india
-originally not ling divided, but pressures in 50s force it, reorg states implemented 56
-uneven power tilted to the center esp since 60s autonomous status of muslim kashmir
-this