Indian Party System Research Articles

BLENDING DOMINANCE, REGIONALISM AND COALITIONS: A NEW READING OF INDIA’S FOURTH PARTY SYSTEM

Since 2014, India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has won more elections at the national and state levels than it has lost, returning with an even larger majority in the 2019 General Election. However, the question of whether there has been any break from the past in the nature of the Indian party system remains open. What is the nature of the BJP’s dominance in this period? What is the status of the opposition and the vitality of regional players in this new era? Have coalitions really been relegated to the past? This article investigates the current trends of the party system and compares them with tendencies exhibited historically. It applies mixed methods, largely quantitative analysis of secondary data based on ECI and Lokniti – CSDS election surveys. It argues that what has been called India’s “Fourth Party System” is not completely separate from the trends of the three preceding epochs but rather blends them in unique ways. A re-examination of the election results would reveal how dominance, regionalism and coalitions coexist in an enigmatic symbiosis offering a new reading of the structure of India’s current party system. The 2024 General Elections which witnessed a humbling but historic third consecutive BJP victory albeit reliant on coalition partners only reinforce how the three dimensions of dominance, regionalism and coalitions constantly play out in shaping the character of India’s Party System where changes seem more of a degree rather than of kind.

Understanding layered dominance of political dynasties in India: A de-hyphenated reading of dynastic representation and dynasty-led parties

India has witnessed the dominance of a plethora of political dynasties, both at the national as well as the state level, since independence. The post-colonial Indian state adopted a liberal constitutional democracy premised upon modern representative institutions. However, the primordial principle of hereditary succession of power resiliently co-existed in the form of powerful political families that have continued to impact the nature of Indian democratic political discourse till today. The political parties are an instrumental driver of political life in all modern representative democracies including India. Hence, it is crucial to study how the Indian party system has consolidated the prominence of political dynasties especially from the 1970s onwards, in the realm of both party organisation and the representative institutions. In this context, the article attempts to problematise the nature of dynastic politics in India and offers a framework to analyse the causes of its dominance to understand how it impacts the right to equal political opportunity and electoral competitiveness. The article makes three arguments. First, to better understand the amorphous nature of dynastic politics, two elements – dynastic representation in elected institutions and dynasty-led parties – need to be studied distinctively, despite some commonalities. Second, dynastic representation is largely ubiquitous in most political parties (in both dynasty-led and non-dynasty-led parties) due to the party's preference for legacy candidates and their higher chances of electoral winnability. Third, the article offers two typologies of dynasty-led parties, explaining why the dynasties’ grip over their parties, particularly in recent times, appears to be mostly performance-immune and in what circumstances some dynasty-led parties not only perform better in electoral contests than others but also face tough competition for retaining their dynastic control over the party. Lastly, the article concludes with some reflections on how dynastic representation and dynasty-led parties impact the form and substance of the Indian party system and democratic politics.

The Changing Nature of the Indian Party System: ‘Congress System’ to ‘BJP Dominance’

In the last 75 years, the Indian political system has gone through various changes and transition phases, the clear impact of which can be seen in the Indian party system. The existence of the Congress as an important national party after independence, both at the national and state levels, in what Rajni Kothari termed the 'Congress System' (1952-1967). Morris-Jones described the 1950–1967 phase in similar terms as "coexistence with competition but without a trace of alternative". 1977 marked the beginning of the end of the 'Congress system' by Rajni Kothari, which had been facing challenges since 1967, when Congress lost power in eight states for the first time. The main reasons behind this were the rise of opposition and regional parties, allegations of corruption and scams, preference for seniority and dynasty over talent, the dominance of the Nehru-Gandhi family, failure to attract youth and the Modi wave etc. Along with this, various parties and regional parties started emerging in the opposition, which changed the Indian party system towards a multi-party system. In this form, BJP emerged as an important national party, which completely changed the party system after winning the national elections in 2014 and 2019. Some thinkers argue that 2014 marks the beginning of India's fourth party system—the first three-party system in the Congress system (1950–77), the second transitional phase (1977–89) when the dominance of the Congress was challenged, Third, the emergence and new phase of a bipolar party system in the 1990s. Can we compare BJP dominance with the 'Congress System'? What are the similarities and dissimilarities in this? What are the reasons behind the decline of 'Congress System'? All these questions will be discussed in detail.

Вплив Індійського Національного Конгресу на інституціоналізацію партійної системи Індії 1947–1989 рр.

Indian National Congress (INC) became the country’s leading political force after it gained independence in 1947. Its participation in the formation of the party system of India is also decisive. The INC has been virtually a separate party system since the first parliamentary elections (during the British colonial rule) and even in the first decades after independence. That is why the first two decades after the independence are called Congress System in the Indian political science literature. However, both on the eve of independence and after it some political parties began to separate from the INC. They formed the first opposition. Some of these parties were founded much earlier, but they agreed to join forces under the wing of Congress during the liberation struggle. Such separation of various domestic political groups and parties characterizes the process of transforming the INC from a national liberation movement into a political party. In addition, during this period, the organization’s internal structure is reformed, various types of membership are tested to encourage as many citizens as possible to become active members. The article aims to characterize the process of fragmentation of the Indian party system in the first four decades after India gained independence (1947–1989). The study considers the formation of the INC as a mass movement and later a party, examines the problem of membership in the organization, in particular the problem of fake membership, which disturbed the party leadership throughout the entire period of the study. A significant emphasis of the article is placed on those political players who separated from the parent party, the INC, although the experience of parties that did not have a direct connection with the INC is not overlooked. The article also argues that due to the openness of India’s first party system, formed around the INC, the country managed to build a democratic culture of change of power, and this influenced the institutionalization of India’s party system.

The Association of Electoral Volatility and Religious Riots in India

AbstractWhy are religious riots between Hindus and Muslims endemic in some states of India and not in others? Scholarship on the topic is divided between those arguing that electoral competition increases the occurrence of such riots and those arguing that electoral competition decreases the occurrence of such riots. Both types of explanations assume a relationship between political parties and religious violence, but they ignore voting behavior. This paper accounts for party system instability or change, measured in terms of electoral volatility, to argue that electoral volatility in the Indian party system is a key overlooked determinant of religious violence. Specifically, higher levels of electoral volatility, implying high switching of party allegiances by voters, may indicate the process of ethnic outbidding that causes violence.

An Analysis of the 2019 Indian General Election : Transition in Political Landscape and Its Implications

The outcome of the 2019 Indian general election was unprecedented in many ways. For the first time in history, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government was re-elected. On the other hand, India’s main opposition Congress party suffered a second consecutive humiliating defeat. How did this happen? Specifically, what are the major factors behind the success of the BJP? Drawing on survey data, this paper identifies a combination of factors that paved the way for the landslide victory of the ruling party, which are leadership, forging effective alliances, winning the caste equation, and attracting new groups of voters. Now, what is the major implication of this verdict on the Indian party system? Contrary to existing studies which point out that despite the unprecedented rise of the BJP, a new party system is not yet arrived, this paper argues that the electoral outcome of 2019 has contributed to the establishment of the one-party dominant system in India. This system can be characterized as the hegemony of the BJP and the lack of an opposition.

India after the 2014 general elections: BJP dominance and the crisis of the third party system

ABSTRACTThis article critically assesses claims that India has entered a new party system after the 2014 general elections, marked by renationalisation with the BJP as the new ‘dominant’ party.’ To assess these claims, we examine the electoral rise of the BJP in the build-up to and since the 2014 general elections until the state assembly elections in December 2018. Overall, we argue that despite the emerging dominance of the BJP, a core feature of the third party system -a system of binodal interactions- has remained largely intact albeit in a somewhat weaker form. Furthermore, by comparing the post 2014 Indian party system with key electoral features of the first three party systems, we conclude that the rise of the BJP has thrown the third-party system into crisis, but does not yet define the consolidation of a new party system.

Book review: Adam Ziegfeld, Why Regional Parties? Clientelism, Elites, and the Indian Party System

Adam Ziegfeld, Why Regional Parties? Clientelism, Elites, and the Indian Party System. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2016, xix + 288 pp., ₹1,780 (hardback). ISBN: 978-1-107-11868-3.

Change and continuity in Indian politics and the Indian party system

The 2014 Indian general election was notable due to a single party – the Bharatiya Janata Party – winning a majority of seats in Lok Sabha for the first time since 1984. The Congress, the other main national party, suffered its worst ever defeat. This election was viewed by some as signalling the advent of a phase of a BIP-dominated party system in India. In this article, I revisit the results of this election, and of the subsequent state assembly elections, to analyse if they signal a substantial change in the political landscape and party system in India. I argue that although the Congress decline has continued, and the BJP has won many recent state assembly elections, it is premature to conclude that the Indian party system has shifted to a BJP-dominated one. Further, given India’s first-past-the-post electoral system and a diffused political environment, where state and regional parties continue to be strong in many parts of the country, achieving a legislative majority remains a difficult proposition for a single party.

Indian elections 2014: explaining the landslide

This special issue examines the patterns, causes and consequences of India's 16th parliamentary elections. The 2014 elections broke records in terms of levels of voter participation, election expenditure and the number of political parties fielding candidates. The outcome marked a break from the past 30 years of India's electoral history with a single party – the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party led by Narendra Modi – achieving a parliamentary majority on its own, without depending on coalition partners. Yet not all was new: there were strong continuities amid the change. In this collection, scholars present explanations for the BJP's success, analyse the extent to which urbanisation has acted as a disruptive force for electoral politics, look at the significance of a focus on leaders over political parties in the election campaign, assess the implications of the election result for the Indian party system and examine state-level contests in which regional parties held out against the BJP wave.

Fragmentation and performance: the Indian case

While the transformation of the Indian party system from a predominant party system to a highly fragmented multi-party system has been investigated, less attention has been paid to the political consequences of this change. By analysing an original data set, this paper investigates how the fragmentation of the Indian party system has affected the stability of Indian legislatures, their ability to legislate, and the quality of the law-making process. The analysis reveals that as fragmentation increased, legislatures became more unstable, produced less legislation, and the quality of the law-making process declined. The paper further suggests that these changes may be the reason that Indian voters may have less confidence in parliament.

Duverger's Law and the Size of the Indian Party System

Duverger's law postulates that single-member plurality electoral systems lead to two-party systems. Existing scholarship regards India as an exception to this law at national level, but not at district level. This study tests the latter hypothesis through analysis of a comprehensive dataset covering Indian parliamentary elections in the period 1952—2004. The results show that a large number of Indian districts do not conform to the Duvergerian norm of two-party competition, and that there is no consistent movement towards the Duvergerian equilibrium. Furthermore, inter-region and inter-state variations in the size of district-level party systems make it difficult to generalize about the application of Duverger's law to the Indian case. The study concludes that a narrow focus on electoral rules is inadequate, and that a more comprehensive set of explanatory variables is needed to explain the size of the Indian party system even at the district level.

Indian Party System Towards Coalition Governance: Need for Introspection

Indian Party System Towards Coalition Governance: Need for Introspection

Accountability and Capacity in Developing Country Federalism: Empowered states, Competitive Federalism

State extraction depends in part on the degree and type of accountability to citizens. Accountability relationships are especially complex in federal systems, where multiple and overlapping jurisdictions must compete to respond to, and extract from, common citizen bases. The current project examines the operation of accountability and taxation in India. India has always been a centralised federation in which a powerful central government, made even more powerful by single-party dominance, overwhelmed most state interests. The result was a fiscal system in which the central government controlled most resources. Over the last few decades, the Indian party system has increasingly fragmented and oriented towards interests in the states, and the fiscal system has shifted in turn. What was originally a highly centralised federation has now evolved into a more decentralised regime in which resources and powers are held significantly by state governments, which compete with each other and with the federal government. Interestingly, as competition increased, the overall amount of tax decreased and, in turn, more coercive mechanisms of extraction were adopted.

Predicting the 1998 Indian parliamentary election

An account is given of the methods used to predict the results of the 1998 Indian parliamentary election by a team from the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi. The special features of the Indian party and electoral system and the election-night context as they relate to the problem of election forecasting are discussed. The methods developed for the polling of the Indian electorate and for forecasting the composition of the parliament from the sequence of results declared are presented.

System of Political Parties in India

The Indian party system is a most unusual phenomenon, for at least two reasons. First, its form differs totally from the so-called Duverger laws under which a country which in elections to the lower chamber of its parliament, uses the one-round relative plurality system, should have a bipartisan regime. But the form of the party system in India is multi-partisanism. The second reason why the author turns his attention to the Indian party system is the fact that the party regime in question has changed from a system of one predominant party (the Indian National Congress) to a classic multi-party system; this occurred essentially in the early 1980s when a new relevant political subject – the Indian People's Party (BJP) – came to the fore and took its place next to the traditional centre-left Indian National Congress. First of all, one has to understand the complex nature of the Indian party spectrum where, on the basis of clear criteria, only 42 of the total number of 654 parties are officially recognized and registered; of these, seven are regarded as national parties (that is all-Indian, federal), and thirty-five as state parties (i.e. regional).The author asks himself two fundamental questions in the article: What is the reason for the multi-party system in India? What polarity does this Indian multi-party regime reveal? India is a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural formation, and consequently the variety of parties is nothing unusual. Each of the twenty-five states making up the Indian Union has in most cases a population of different nationalities and ethnic origin, the interests of this population are presented by their own regional (in the Indian context, state) parties. But precisely because of the electoral system to the lower chamber of the federal parliament (the People's parliament), these small political subjects have become immensely significant elements. If they are successful in the elections, the INC and the BJP are directly dependent on these small regional parties which can either support INC or BJP minority governments, or become part of government coalitions where the INC or the BJP are the nucleus. As regards the second question, the author tends to the opinion that the current Indian extreme and fragmented multi-partisanship must be regarded as bipolar (the INC and the BJP are two poles), since the potential third pole – the United Front (UF) – (an expedient block of a number of very different parties) appears to be most unstable. The UF turns into the relevant third force only during an election campaign or when it succeeds in becoming the ruling party (there was a UF minority government in 1996-1997, supported by the Congress Party). When the UF is an opposition group (as after the 1998 elections) it is a subject that becomes entirely inconsistent. That is why we cannot regard it as a firm third pole in the Indian multi-party system.

Divide and Rule in Indian Party Politics: The Rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party

From the highly fragmented Parliament produced by India's 12th general elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led a heterogeneous coalition of smaller political parties to form a minority government. Gradually but persistently moving out from the wings of Indian politics, the BJP has proven itself capable of sustained competition with the once-dominant Congress Party (INC). The outcome of the 1998 general elections-in which the BJP became the only party to claim more seats than the INC twice in succession-confirms its existence as a major political party in the Indian system. 1 Its rise is significant not only because it definitively signals the end of the Congress system but also because of the Hindu nationalist character of the party itself. While secularism is an ideological hallmark of the Indian state, Hindu nationalism is not a new force in Indian politics: the political assertion of the belief that India is a fundamentally Hindu nation, the central tenet of Hindu nationalism, has its origins in the 19th century. But never before has a party espousing such an ideology matched the BJP's current level of popular support. How and why has the BJP moved from the political fringe into the center? And why are its politics of Hindu nationalism-overtly or insidiously expressed-so salient now? Beyond an exploration of the BJP as a party, the present analysis will examine the impact of the BJP's growth on the Indian party system and Indian

The Indian Party System under Transformation: Lok Sabha Elections 1998

The Indian Party System under Transformation: Lok Sabha Elections 1998

The Indian Party System under Transformation: Lok Sabha Elections 1998

The Indian Party System under Transformation: Lok Sabha Elections 1998

The New Indian Party System

The national party system of India has undergone a major transformation since the 1989 elections. The predominant party system that had been in place since 1952 gave way to a pattern of genuine multi-party competition. While the party system has become extremely fragmented, the stable presence of three competing poles lends it an aura of orderliness. This paper analyzes the nature of the new Indian party system with reference to Sartori's theoretical framework. It seems that the Indian party system hinges somewhere on the borderline between polarized and moderate pluralism.