Political Processes under the Microscope: Comparative Ethnography as an Approach to Understanding Democracy and Elections in India
| DOI | 10.1177/2321023017698268 |
| Author | Manisha Priyam |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Notes on Methods |
Political Processes under
the Microscope: Comparative
Ethnography as an Approach to
Understanding Democracy and
Elections in India
Manisha Priyam1
The study of democracy in its similarities and differences has been among the most important agenda for
comparative social theory in contemporary times. The endeavour of comparison has advanced a purely
normative understanding of democracy, rooted in the idea of its being a form of rule legitimated by the
people, to a greater understanding of its structures and processes—the variety of empirical conditions
under which its facets play out. Since the arena of democracy has now expanded to include a majority of
the countries of the world2—its ferment as Diamond (1990) notes, having spread to ‘…the world’s most
isolated, unlikely, and forgotten places’, and also the challenge of understanding the plurality and differ-
ences of contexts under which electoral institutions operate, consent and consensus obtained, and citizen
rights secured. This piece advances a methodological proposition in favour of the use of an ethnographic
approach for the comparative study of democracy and elections in India. The appeal of this approach is
two-fold, it is argued: First, it helps us overcome the narrow rationality and exclusionary understanding
of democracy as modernization—a guiding paradigm within comparative politics. Second, it advances
our understanding of the substantive meanings associated with democracy as it flourishes in unexpected
conditions of social traditionalism and economic poverty. In this case, democracy as it guides the
thoughts and political actions of India’s poor and marginalized, as part of a holistic culture within which
individual rationality or group action can be meaningfully interpreted. This approach and the substantive
considerations on democracy that follow are a contrast to the widely prevalent use of large-scale surveys
in comparative politics. While the comparative ethnographies enhance our understanding of citizens
acting within cultures of politics, the large-scale surveys have a thin yet aggregate understanding
of individual action and cultural values. It also brings the unanticipated to the fore—ordinary people
appear on the stage of politics with their agency, not simply as averages of numbers, playing out a force
of history.
Note: This section is coordinated by Divya Vaid (divya.vaid.09@gmail.com).
1 Associate Professor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, India.
2 Diamond (2008, p. 6) notes that by the 1990s, democracy became “the spirit of the time” with three in every five countries of
the world having embraced the democratic form of rule.
Notes on Methods
Studies in Indian Politics
5(1) 73–81
© 2017 Lokniti, Centre for the
Study of Developing Societies
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2321023017698268
http://inp.sagepub.com
Corresponding author:
Manisha Priyam, Associate Professor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi,
India.
E-mail: priyam.manisha@gmail.com
To continue reading
Request your trial