Democracy calls for a routine change in leadership. Perpetual leadership starts exerting its dominance in a way, which sheds off its democratic nature and ultimately turns towards a tyrannical lane. Voters, in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections raised a warning bell to the make the leaders realise the “throwing the bums out” sentiment. Even though, the BJP-led NDA once again emerged victorious, but the failure of “abki baar, 400 paar” conveyed a message in itself, that majority people are dissatisfied with the BJP rule but not dissatisfied enough to completely vote it out of power.
However, the tough tussle between the government and the opposition this time, showcased that the Modi magic might be losing its charm. The anti-incumbency factors emerged in Indian politics, as it seemed to undergo, what we call in USA, as “wave elections”, where a single political party makes major gains. If laid out on a map, we can see how the BJP wave has been tamed this time, whereas compared to the previous general elections in 2019, the Congress wave had a valiant uproar this time as it won 58 seats which it had lost back then.
India has the highest rate of anti-incumbency in the world, so BJP’s ability to remain in power for a third term is quite commendable irrespective of the fact that it could not bag 300 seats this time, let alone winning 400 seats as it claimed it would. A change of governments over time is necessary to avoid a hegemonic rule and to uphold the true spirit of democracy. For a developing country like India which seeks to serve a diverse diaspora, we demand leaders who would reflect that diversity in their policies and programes.
Historically, we have seen instances of one-party rule, which ultimately had to be abolished due to its autocratic nature. In the colonial era, India was governed solely by the British, who ruthlessly exploited the country’s resources to serve their vested interests. Post-independence brought the enduring period of the dominance of the Congress party which saw its most vicious form under Indira Gandhi’s tenure as the Prime Minister. Fortunately, democracy ceases such perverted nature of governance and uplifts the one which proves to be “for the people, of the people, and by the people.”
Over the years, India’s democracy has faced several jabs, particularly under the BJP regime. From organizations such as the Freedom House, swapping the country’s status of “free democracy” with “partially-free democracy”, to the Sweden based V-Dem Institute, labelling India as an “electoral autocracy”, a grave concern is raised for what the world knows as, “the biggest democratic country.” India’s downgrading democratic status is attributed to different causes. The laws passed by the BJP government have been the focal point of this criticism.
When your party sits with a clear majority in the legislature, it holds a power with practically negligible restrictions, when it comes to passing bills. This power grows when your party has been elected more than once to govern the nation and the power grows even more when your party gears up to continue ruling the nation for a third term but “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” However, with the rise of a coalition government at the centre this time, arbitrary passing of bills would come to a halt.
Moreover, not all laws passed by the BJP government so far, have proved to be controversial. Nonetheless, the bigger picture here remains that if a single party continues to rule for one term after another, it will keep pushing the same set of beliefs and ideologies it carries, which can very well be biased towards a particular group of people in the society. As we proceed more and more towards modernization, our societal values are also evolving and so the responsibility of transitioning from traditional to modern also lies on the government.
The same set of leaders, belonging to the same party which has been in power for a considerable period of time leans more towards a traditional or an orthodox approach in governance than a modern or a liberal one. The lack of new faces in a government takes out the possibility of new and fresh viewpoints and promotes a monotonous image of the government. Therefore, we require a change of governments after a certain period of time to avoid a dictatorial rule and bring forth leaders who can cater to the ever-evolving societal values.
States like Rajasthan, where an anti-incumbency tradition lives long, stand as a true testament to democracy’s need of changing governments. However, the rise of anti-incumbency sentiments among voters stands as an indirect cause for the way elections turn out. They are actually driven by multiple factors which, henceforth, inculcate the idea of replacing governments in the voters’ minds. The BJP government dodged a bullet this time and that too quiet closely and even though the saffron party won for a third time, but the opposition had a moral victory. Now, if the BJP is able to gain its lost popularity back, in this term, maybe it gets to remain in power for a 4th term as well, or, like other governments in the past, it too might succumb to the anti-incumbency sentiments.
Nalin Sharma is an undergraduate student of Journalism and Mass Communication at Manipal University, Jaipur