Ashok Ogra
Polling percentages in the first two phases of the 2024 general elections, at 66.14% and 66.71% respectively, have been comparatively low. This is especially notable given the overall turnout of 67% in 2019 and 66.4% in 2014, despite an 8% increase in registered voters from the 2019 figure of 96.88 crores. A significant decline was observed in urban and semi-urban areas, including Ghaziabad and NOIDA within the NCR region, which saw a 5-7% drop from the previous two elections. Chennai and Bengaluru exhibited similar trends. In contrast, the Udhampur and Jammu constituencies in Jammu and Kashmir defied this trend, recording a robust voter turnout of approximately 70%.
The complete picture of the polling percentage will emerge after the final phase concludes on June 1. However, given the current trends and the impending heatwave expected in the coming days, it is unlikely that the overall turnout will exceed that of previous elections. Despite massive election rallies, all political parties have failed to significantly motivate the electorate, indicating a pervasive voter apathy.
A particularly concerning aspect is the low engagement among first-time voters, with only 40% registering for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. This highlights a growing detachment among millennials regarding the significance of elections.
Former Vice President M. Venkaiah Naidu recently expressed his dismay over this voter apathy, emphasizing the need for greater participation to strengthen the democratic process. The disfavor towards political parties and widespread distrust of politicians have reached unprecedented levels. Issues such as the increasing nexus between criminals and politics, rampant use of monetary influence, the poor image and credibility of candidates, and political agendas characterized more by rhetoric than substance have been well-documented. Former Chief Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi described the situation succinctly: “Good elections, flawed democracy.”
In this feature, I aim to explore some lesser-discussed factors that I believe dampen the average voter’s interest in the election system and in exercising their vote in particular.
NARCOTIZING DYSFUNCTION
One such factor is the ‘Narcotizing Dysfunction,’ a term coined in 1948 by Lazarsfeld and Merton. They argued that the overwhelming flow of information can lead to apathy rather than action. It serves to narcotize rather than energize the voters. In an ideal scenario, the audience would react to new information by taking action to effect positive change. However, what often happens is that while citizens may understand the issues, they avoid taking any organized social action. Instead, they spend most of their time absorbing information, which ultimately leads to a superficial concern with societal problems rather than a genuine interest in solving them.
SOCIAL MEDIA
While democratizing access to information and serving as a platform for expressing political ideals, especially among the youth, the advent of new media also contributes to this phenomenon. The false sense of activism that social media generates can lead to decreased actual political participation, providing a passive alternative to active engagement. Therefore, in a sense, social media parallels the ‘Narcotizing Dysfunction’ theory and, at a point, stops serving as a means to effect change.
Additionally, social media algorithms reinforce existing biases and create echo chambers where people only encounter views that confirm their existing beliefs.
ASPIRATIONS VS IDEOLOGIES
Another noticeable trend, particularly among the middle classes and youth worldwide, is that aspirations rather than ideologies drive political engagement. According to a study by Dr. Mathangi Krishnamurthy of IIT Madras, politics is not a priority for most 18-21-year-old Indians, who are driven more by personal aspirations than by ideological commitments.
The majority of people do not engage deeply with politics or view themselves as political voices. Many aspire to secure predictable government jobs. They are aware of social issues and familiar with initiatives like Chandrayaan, Swachh Bharat, and Make in India, as well as social and communal clashes and international conflicts, primarily through social media and the internet. However, they do not see themselves as having significant stakes in political movements and show little interest in voting. Can this lack of interest among the youth be attributed to what Frank Furedi, Professor of Sociology at the University of Kent, describes as the “depoliticization of public life,” which has coincided with the rise of market economics and identity politics? Frank suggests that “ideology has not ended-it has merely been depoliticized.” Without a guiding ideology, the role of politicians shifts from persuading to merely selling.
DEMOCRACY ON THE RETREAT
More alarming is the systematic decline in the percentage of people who view living in a democracy as essential, which varies based on the decade of their birth. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, many regarded liberal democracy not only as the best form of government but as the inevitable one. Political scientist Prof. Francis Fukuyama famously termed this “the end of history,” where democracy had triumphed over all other systems. However, by 2024, this view appears naive. Recent research indicates a global decline in enthusiasm for democracy, particularly among younger generations. The decline in voter turnout being witnessed across the globe has occurred in parallel with the emergence of many negative voices about the state of democracy around the world. While the number of countries that hold direct national elections has increased substantially since the beginning of the 1990s, the global average voter turnout has decreased significantly over the same period.
Studies from various regions over the past 25 years show an increasing preference for “a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament or elections.” This trend is troubling and poses a risk that elections may lose their appeal as a fundamental tool of democratic governance, a trend that is observable even in India, albeit not as sharply as in Western democracies.
Voter Education: It is clear that voter apathy severely undermines democracy, especially in a diverse country like India, where political participation should be vigorous and active. Enhancing voter participation requires broad actions from election stakeholders, including governments, political parties, community leaders, and civil society actors. The Election Commission has been proactive in this regard, spearheading the Systematic Voters’ Education and Electoral Participation (SVEEP) program to spread voter awareness and promote informed participation through various modes and media.
Remember, every vote counts. In the 2004 Karnataka assembly elections, a candidate won by just one vote. Similarly, during the 2008 Rajasthan assembly elections, Congress chief CP Joshi lost by a single vote. Since 1962, two MPs have been elected by a margin of just nine votes. Interestingly, elections have even resulted in a tie, as seen in the 1988 Meghalaya assembly elections where two candidates each received 2591 votes, with the winner determined by a draw of lots.
Backstory
Sukumar Sen, the first Chief Election Commissioner of India, appointed in 1950, faced the colossal task of preparing for India’s first general elections from November 1951 to March 1952. With an average literacy rate just over 16%, and even lower among women and SC/ST populations, a significant challenge was the creation of electoral rolls in a population where most could neither read nor write. Women often preferred to be listed under their male relatives’ names-fathers, husbands, or sons. A crucial innovation was the introduction of party symbols, which allowed illiterate voters to easily identify their choices. To prevent impersonation, an indelible ink was used on voters’ fingers.
An interesting historical fact: Shyam Saran Negi of Kannur district in Himachal Pradesh became arguably India’s first voter when he visited the polling booth in October 1951, marking a new era for the Indian republic.
The disengaged voters of our republic need to be reminded that a Government “of the people” cannot be sustained without the people’s active dedication to democratic ideals. Recall the wise words of a French philosopher: “The tyranny of a prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy of a citizen in a democracy.”
(The author works for Apeejay Education, New Delhi.)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
