Targets, Quantification and Moral Deliberation

And another new post from Christina Boswell…

Politics, Knowledge & Migration

Much has been written about the ways in which quantified targets and performance indicators distort and compress the social dynamics they seek to represent. And scholars of science and technology studies have convincingly shown how such representations are not just descriptive but also performative, shaping our beliefs and norms about policy problems and appropriate responses.

But less has been said about how such compressions affect deliberation on questions of moral duties. How do the sorts of compression and simplification implied by quantification affect how we reason and debate questions of distributive justice, rights, or duties? This is not simply an academic question. The use of quantified indicators and targets is becoming mainstream in a number of policy areas which touch on issues of distributive justice. Such instruments are widely used to compare and assess trends on global poverty, human rights, development, and democratisation. In the area of immigration, national policies…

View original post 448 more words

Is Modi’s Honeymoon Over? The 2015 Delhi Legislative Assembly elections and the Possibility of Change

This blogpost by Dr Wilfried Swenden originally appeared on the #IndiaVotes Ballots and Bullet Blog at the University of Nottingham on the 11th of February 2015          

Aam Admi Sympathisers

Aam Admi Sympathisers © Wilfried Swenden

Since wresting power from the Congress led United Progressive Alliance in the Lok Sabha elections (April-May 2014), Narendra Modi’s Bharitiya Janata Party (BJP) has secured a trail of successive electoral victories. The party swept the state legislative assembly elections of Haryana and Jharkhand, became the lead coalition party in the government of Maharashtra and, following the November 2014 state assembly elections, may well become the junior partner in the government of Kashmir after it successfully captured two third of the seats in Jammu, the Hindu-dominated part of that state. Yet, with a massive electoral defeat in the February 2015 Delhi legislative assembly elections to the Aam Aadmi (common man) Party, the BJP electoral bandwagon finally appears to have run into trouble. Despite winning all 7 Lok Sabha seats from Delhi in 2014, the BJP is set to capture only 3 of the 70 seats in the Delhi Assembly against 67 for the Aam Admi Party and none at all for Congress, India’s –not so Grand- Old Party- which governed Delhi uninterruptedly for fifteen years (1998-2013).

How can we explain this victory for AAP and what is its significance for politics in India more generally? First of all, we should note that the astounding performance of AAP in seat shares is a reflection of India’s first-past-the post system. Although AAP appears to have amassed about 54% of the vote, the BJP still comes a distant second (32.5%), with Congress a marginalized third (with now less than 10% of the vote). Compared with the Lok Sabha performance in Delhi (May 2014), the BJP’s vote share dropped by about 13% and that of Congress by about 5%. However, in comparison with the most recent Delhi Legislative Assembly elections (December 2013), the BJP lost only 2 percent against about 15 percent for Congress. Although electoral surveys have yet to confirm this, these data appear to suggest that many former Congress voters (including Congress’ traditional Muslim vote bank in Delhi, good for about 14% of the Delhi electorate) switched their support to AAP in an attempt to keep the Hindu nationalists out of power.

BJP Activists

BJP Activists © Wilfried Swenden

Yet, for Narendra Modi, India’s combative Hindu nationalist Prime Minister, this result undoubtedly comes as a personal disappointment and reality check. By making four interventions during the Delhi legislative elections and calling upon his party MPs and state (Chief) Ministers to join the campaign trail, he turned the Delhi election into a popularity test for his own government. In parallel with this nationalizing election strategy, his party also pushed through centralized decisions against the wishes of the party rank-and file. In this, as in previous state assembly elections, a select group around Modi, party president and strategist Amit Shah (who just a few days before the election confidently claimed in The Hindu to have masterminded 42 successive BJP electoral wins) and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley single-handedly decided on candidate nominations; including that of Chief Ministerial candidate Kiran Bedi who was brought in halfway through the election campaign. Neither the BJP legislative group in the Delhi legislative assembly, nor the party’s Parliamentary or Election Boards appear to have had much of a say in the matter. Expressing their discontent, many party volunteers refused to canvass, especially when it appeared that Bedi was no match for the formidable Arvind Kejriwal, the former tax inspector and anti-corruption activist turned AAP leader. Such a centralized strategy may have worked in previous state assembly elections in which the BJP managed to unseat state governments comprising the highly unpopular Congress Party. Yet, it may not work as well in those states where the party faces a powerful regional adversary. Indeed, the 2014 Lok Sabha elections indicated as much, as K.K. Kailash highlighted in Economic and Political Weekly: the BJP did well where it fought against Congress or some of the caste based parties, especially in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. However, it did not do as well in those states where its adversaries expressed a strong regional sentiment (as in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal or for that matter in the Kashmir Valley during the most recent state assembly elections there).

A specific ‘regional sentiment’ is also present in Delhi, and in fact in many state elections which do not always follow a ‘national’ electoral logic. As India’s largest ‘city-state’ (strictly Union Territory), Delhi’s politics are not easily replicated across other states. As P.K. Datta has argued recently in The Hindu, economic deprivation, experienced by about 60 percent of the urban population enabled the AAP to project a ‘universalization of class politics’, transcending divisions on the basis of caste, religion and region. The pro-poor politics in rhetoric (and to some extent in substance through the local development initiatives of AAP councillors) has been accompanied by a skilful process of candidate selection with the fielding of Jat, Bania, Punjabi Khatri, Yadav or Muslim candidates where they could sway the election in AAP’s favour.

For the Aam Aadmi Party, this election result offers new opportunities after its – at times chaotic – brief stint in government following the 2013 Delhi legislative elections. This time with an absolute majority, the party can seek to offer a more meaningful counterpoint to the BJP’s rhetoric of economic growth by emphasizing policies of social inclusion, anti-corruption, and communal harmony. As Chief Minister of India’s second largest city, Kejriwal can project the message of his party well-beyond its state boundaries and it certainly helps that he can do so in Hindi. As such, Aam Aadmi could offer a voice to the chorus of state party leaders which, in the short run, appear to provide a more effective opposition to the BJP than Congress. Yet the challenges are high: keeping its highly heterogeneous electorate together (from slum dwellers to sections of the middle class), building out a party organization that is not overly reliant on its leader but retains a considerable degree of intra-party democracy and participation and delivering on some of its policy promises in the face of a young and increasingly impatient electorate. Its short term prospects are also limited in the less urbanized and ‘patrimonial states’ of North India where the politics of caste and religion may continue to play a more seminal role: the forthcoming assembly elections in Bihar, India’s third most populous and one of its most backward states will be an important test case in this regard.

For Modi and the BJP this election holds three lessons. First, even with a relatively popular central leader, a highly centralized electoral and campaign strategy may not pay dividends, especially where it alienates large sections of the party rank and file. Within his own party, Modi certainly does not practice the ‘co-operative-competitive’ federalism which he projects as the ideal pattern of centre-state interactions within the country as a whole. Second, the party will do well to reconsider some of its policies that alienate the downtrodden, in particular the Scheduled Castes and Tribes and Other Backward Castes, large sections of whom lent their support to the BJP in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Its recent handling of the Land Acquisition Bill is a case in point. Finally, at least the Delhi vote appears to have signalled a concern with a party that implicitly consents to the Hindutva aspirations of the Sangh Parivar and especially of the RSS and VHP. The failure of the party or its leader to openly condemn the burning of churches in Delhi or the forced mass conversions of Muslims into Hinduism appears to have unsettled sections of the BJP vote base.

Finally for Congress, the Delhi election can provide yet another impetus for much needed internal party change, away from its dynastic and highly centralized leadership. In all these senses, the Delhi vote holds the possibility, but no guarantee for a different and more consensual style of politics in India.

Nigeria’s 2015 Elections: Threats and Opportunities’?

By Ibrahim Sani, a Phd Candidate in Politics at Edinburgh  @ibraheemsanii

Come February 14th millions of eligible voters in Nigeria are expected to come out across the country’s 111,119 polling units to determine who will govern their affairs for the next four years. As the fifth round of elections since 1999, the elections appear problematic with several challenges and prospects. The Independent National Election Commission (INEC) has assured Nigerians and the world of its commitment toward successful polls. Despite these guarantees many Nigerians, the opposition, and the country’s friends in the comity of nations appear doubtful. Worryingly, the national security adviser to Nigerian president, Sambo Dasuki, responding to questions at Chatham House, London, seems at ease with the postponement of the elections. Just as the Plateau State Governor, David Jonah Jang indicated his confidence in the use of temporary rather than permanent voter cards.

weekly trust

Source: Weekly Trust Interview

With such cynicism, a look at the threats and opportunities of the February 2015 elections makes an interesting endeavour. Firstly, this is the first time in its 16 years of dominance that the ruling People Democratic Party (PDP) is facing a seemingly formidable opposition of four major political parties who have overcome their differences to form a grand alliance under the name All Progressive Congress (APC). The APC cuts across almost all existing divides in the country and the party elected/nominated its presidential candidate in what many believe to be the most transparent party primaries conducted recently. In fact, aspiring candidates accepted the declared result and congratulated the winner.


Image from Atiku Abubakar’s tweet. Click for link to full tweet.

For instance, Atiku Abubakar, a former PDP vice president and party’s aspirant instantly tweeted ‘Congratulations General Buhari. The delegates have spoken, you fully deserve the victory’ -AA. Also, the second runner expressed a similar view when he said: Let me also, at this point, congratulate our leader, General Muhammadu Buhari (rtd.) for such a wonderful performance’.

Secondly, the elections bring into sharp focus the turbulence about Boko Haram in the north-eastern part of Nigeria. After abducting 219 or more school girls, the radical group succeeded in killing thousands of people, forcing hundreds of thousands to take refuge in the neighbouring Cameron, Chad, and Niger and displacing others within Nigeria. This unholy act and the inability of the Nigeria government to handle the situation creates a real great tension in the country. The Nigeria electoral commission now faces the challenge of abiding by the principle that all resident adult Nigerians of 18 years of age should not be denied the right to vote merely because of displacement. Although the commission seems to be employing its rule making powers to ensure that each exercises his or her right, the fact remains that it is difficult if not impossible to ensure this for all.

Lastly, although the 2011 elections in Nigeria received a unanimous endorsement of all election observers and Nigerians, the country’s electoral process had some unresolved issues of malpractice. In some parts of the country there were reports of proxy, underage, and multiple voting. Likewise, there were cases of vote buying to the extent that some states recorded 99% voter turnout, thus generating suspicion. However, according to INEC these practices are no longer possible. The commission says it has introduced inecstringent measures toward stopping electoral rigging which include a cross-matched and authenticated national voter roll of 68.8million registered voters and the provision of smart cards for each of the registered voters.

The introduction of a smart card reader machine which detects fake and cloned cards, ensures that no voter uses his or any other voter card in any place to vote more than once, and which is expected to reduce the possibility of buying and usage of bought voter cards.

In addition, the chairman of the commission indicates that the polls will be conducted using colour coded ballot papers such that ballot papers made for Lagos state, for example, could not be used in any other state of the federation.these measures are enough for successful and all inclusive, free, and fair elections depends on several other factors and only time will tell.

channel tv

Source: Channel TV Nigeria

Indeed, the country’s political atmosphere is stressed with key politicians discrediting the ruling party’s intolerance to opposition, indifference to serious cases of corruption, and security issues. On security in particular, some point to the President’s failure to respond accordingly to the violent threat posed to the Nigerian state and claim that Nigeria is going to war should Jonathan lose the elections: ‘For every Goliath, God created a David. For every Pharoah, there is a Moses. We are going to war. Every one of you should go and fortify yourself’ they argue. Perhaps this explains the opposition’s fear that the PDP-led government is committed to retaining political power at all cost.

Conclusively, however, what Nigerian democracy requires is a politics that focus on policy issues not political naivety. The country and its citizens have travelled this road and it led to nowhere. Nigeria seems to spend its 55 years of independence marking time. It is high time, that Nigerian politicians start to ‘talk about how to fix Nigeria’s problems’.