Logical Reasoning Questions for CLAT | QB Set 38

Duality — understanding Indian voter behaviour

As the election results of the 18th Lok Sabha were announced on June 4, 2024, they sent ripples across the political landscape. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won 240 seats, but fell well below the majority mark in the Lok Sabha. Though the general election lacked the “criticality” of a power shift, it would be a mistake to overlook the Indian voter’s nuanced behaviour and the diversity of factors they consider when making electoral choices.

This article examines such “diversity” through the lens of prudence and paradox inherent in electoral behaviour, drawing on data from the poll surveys conducted by the Lokniti-Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS). The article uses pre- and post-election surveys conducted by Lokniti, predominantly from 2024 but also includes data from 2014. By examining voters’ responses to diverse themes captured in the survey, it aims to reflect the discerning and contradictory nature of voter decision-making, representing two different sides of a vibrant democracy.

Duality in decisions?

Any discussion on voters’ choices must start by examining their independence and substance of those choices. As 56% of respondents make their independent voting choices, it is crucial to examine whether those are informed or substantial. According to the 2024 pre-poll survey data, unemployment is by far rated as the most important issue for voters when they decide on whom to vote for, outnumbering the construction of the Ram Temple, which is ideologically significant. This points to a preference towards pragmatic socio-economic issues over ideological constructs.

Correspondingly, the 2024 post-poll survey data too reveals that discernment trumps ideological biases. While the BJP has relied on a narrative of decisive leadership and ideological clarity that includes milestones from the dilution of Article 370 to the ideological roots of the Ram Temple. Despite the significant emphasis on unemployment by voters, this ideological arc has exerted considerable influence on voters, with 22.4% of respondents highlighting the construction of the Ram Temple as the most appreciated work done by the central government in the last five years. However, when examining how this appreciation translates into electoral support, the shrewdness of the Indian voters becomes apparent. While many acknowledge the significance of the Ram Temple, this did not necessarily translate into votes for the BJP. Over 21% of respondents credited the country’s overall development for granting the ruling party another term. In stark contrast, the dilution of Article 370 and the construction of the Ram Temple were cited by only 1.3% and 5.2% of voters, respectively, as reasons to support the party.

This dichotomy, where voters appreciate the construction of the temple but do not vote for the same, illuminates the Indian voter’s dualistic and predominantly organised and ideological choices. The nuance of voters has served to dampen the otherwise sharp focus on ideological narratives, which have proved insufficient to override socio-economic priorities. It reflects the prudence of the Indian electorate in balancing economic and discerning electorate over ideological focus.

The subject of leadership

If ideology alone had sufficed for the BJP, it was the party’s formidable drive for its success in forging a pan-India vote that proved its stronger suit, more than the creation of a Ram-mandated generation of voters. The need for Narendra Modi’s charisma and leadership was still a deciding factor, as highlighted by over 34% of respondents who voted according to the post-poll survey of 2014. The same trend is reflected in 2024, showing the independence and discernment of Indian voters who have both advocated for a strong leader yet do not have to bother about having a strong leader at the helm. While the post-poll survey of 2004, where over 67% of voters advocated having such leaders. However, 57.5% of voters emphasised the need for checks and balances, with around 70% affirming the right of citizens to interfere and hold leaders accountable. This juxtaposition highlights the prudence in valuing robust leadership but not a leader who cannot be checked.

The need for a strong leader and the impact of the Hindu voter’s ascendency compels us to examine how minority rights are simultaneously perceived by the electorate. Revealing a nuanced stance, and owing to the majority model that is a democracy, the will of the majority should hold. However, over 48% of the electorate refused to support the dilution of minority rights, even if it meant losing the majority. Also, over 75% of Hindus supported the idea that Muslim Indians should not be treated as untouchables/Caste lists. The paradox in the mandated culmination of the Hindu-majority rule is clear in the opposition to anti-minority, cultural-religious expressions and rhetoric, which highlights that anti-minority/Muslim sentiments.

Institutional checks and balances

The post-poll study showcases a blend of stability and contradiction, advocating a shift from India’s democracy’s dynamic nature. This calls for a re-evaluation of “change” and “order” as Indian voter choices which together produce a fine balance. It is this contradiction of prudence and paradox which should shape the contours of Indian democracy as it moves ahead, creating a discerning and progressive democracy.

Question -1) Which of the following best captures the main theme of the article?

A) The impact of economic factors on Indian elections.
B) The ideological influence on Indian voters’ decision-making.
C) The dual nature of Indian voter behavior combining prudence and paradox.
D) The decline of BJP’s popularity in recent elections.

Question -2) What does the term “criticality” of a power shift, as mentioned in the article, refer to in the context of Indian elections?

A) The overwhelming majority obtained by a single party.
B) The economic consequences of an election outcome.
C) The necessity for significant policy changes post-election.
D) The substantial impact of leadership changes on governance.

Question -3) According to the article, which issue had the least influence on voters’ decision-making in the 2024 elections?

A) Unemployment
B) Price rise
C) Construction of the Ram Temple
D) Ideological rhetoric of Hindutva

Question -4) Why does the article suggest that Indian voters are discerning?

A) They rely solely on ideological beliefs when voting.
B) They balance socio-economic issues with ideological considerations.
C) They vote based on the popularity of leaders.
D) They focus only on economic factors.

Question -5) What paradox in voter behavior is highlighted by the Lokniti-CSDS post-poll survey?

A) Support for economic policies despite political instability.
B) Majority support for leaders with a lack of accountability.
C) Majoritarian inclinations coexisting with minority rights protection.
D) Voting for socio-economic issues while disregarding cultural values.

Question -6) What does the article imply about the future of Indian democracy based on the post-poll study findings?

A) A shift towards authoritarian governance.
B) Increasing disregard for minority rights.
C) Strengthening of democratic principles and minority rights.
D) Decline in voter participation in elections.