PSIR - Strategy, resources & discussion
Hi peeps. Let’s do this!
1. Previous papers from 2009 (both papers are in the same PDF):here2. Topic-wise PYQs: here
3. Look for PDFs of books here: b-ok.cc, http://libgen.rs/, archive.org
4. Model answers from SR:here
5. OnlyIAS notes, if you need extra matter for a few topics:here
6. SR notes, typed:politicsforindia.com
@whatonly How many thinkers for a 10 or 15 marker?
Depends on the answer but I think broadly 1-2 for 10 and 2-3 for 15
No 1,
KropotkinSchmopotkin,@KropotkinSchmopotkin 30 marks!!Ecpt 2nd bulge,Inclusive pri,Youth bulge,Development angle,national vs state elections,but still cop,EVM doubts,freebies,weak intra party d'cy,ineffective NOTA,Bonds not helping much,cant think much!
A lot of these are not strictly Electoral "behaviour" but electoral demography and electoral issues. "Behaviour" has to do with which issues are most salient to voters and how they influence votes, how identity influences votes etc
Has anyone answered "Examine the changing pattern of electoral behaviour in India" (2011, 30 marks)?
I would start by saying how the study of electoral behavior is a result of the growth of the behavioral and post-behavioral approaches in political science and how it's important to understand the political atmosphere of a country.
Then I would mention Milan Vaishnav who pointed out the difficulty of studying EB in India due its size and diversity. Substantiate it with Kenneth Arrow's 'impossibility theorem.'
Then I would mention the trend in EB like how individuals vote more based on the party or the PM or CM candidate as in a presidential system than on the MP and MLA candidate. I would point out how people vote differently at national and state level and how the public differentiates between national issues and local issues (supported by the post-poll survey conducted by Lokniti). Also could mention 'federalization' of electoral politics where national elections are also heavily shaped by state-level factors.
I would also point out how people seem to be voting for criminals or those with criminal cases pending against them leading to criminalization of politics (maybe quote Milan Vaishnav again since it's a 30 mark question).
You could also add that voter turnout seems to be increasing as seen in the 2019 LS elections.
This is all I have in my notes, but we should definitely add the role of caste and religion in voting behavior and how it's changed, if it has changed. If anyone has these points, please post it here.
Muffin,gussafringHas anyone answered "Examine the changing pattern of electoral behaviour in India" (2011, 30 marks)?
I will divide in 4 phases - nehruvian phase of pluralist parliamentary and single party dominance system, neopatrimonialism of Indira Gandhi accompanied by democratic upsurges and mass movements due to decline of of parliament, 90s phase of multiparty and regional aspirations, and the 4 th phase of BJP system.
1st phase was dominated by patron client relationships, where politics was an elitist occupation, while masses just voted as bloc on calls of their community leaders and under influence of Freedom struggle legacy of congress and stalwarts like nehru.
2 nd phase saw rise of bullock cart capitalist or dominant castes due to land reforms, green revolution etc the concerns of these groups were reservation and greater share in education and administration. Thus caste became a major factor in politics. Another feature was decline of parliament due to neopatrimonialism and centralisation and personalisation of politics. This led to elite disillusionment, and urban educated youth took to politics of street and protests against corruption, price rise etc. Further, regionalism and fundamentalism also began to raise their ugly heads in Punjab, Assam etc
3rd phase saw continuation of above trends with addition of hindu revivalism. Yet it wasn't enough to change electoral behaviour that much and caste and regional issues propelled many regional parties to the national scene. This phase also saw development or vikas making its entry on the political stage as benefits of lpg reforms became conspicuous.
4th phase is seeing return of one party dominant system and consolidation of hindu revivalism withhindu identity trumping all other concerns including those of vikas and price rise etc. the system has become so polarised that identity and ideology have become strong determinants of voting behaviour. Another important factor has been foreign policy and security issues grabbing attention of voters like Asat test, surgical strikes, balakot etc this prompted ashutish varshney to call 2019 elections as national security elections. Other visible trend is that of welfare delivery being made efficient and fine tuned in the form of dbt. Schemes like ujjwala, pmay, pmkisan etc have benefitted large number of people and play a role in these narginalised sections voting for the party.
Forgot to add Parliamentary system being transformed into Presidential one atkeast when it comes to vote
Mankibaat , as i am having a bad day today. again. 😆
KropotkinSchmopotkin,Muffin» show previous quotesI will divide in 4 phases - nehruvian phase of pluralist parliamentary and single party dominance system, neopatrimonialism of Indira Gandhi accompanied by democratic upsurges and mass movements due to decline of of parliament, 90s phase of multiparty and regional aspirations, and the 4 th phase of BJP system.
1st phase was dominated by patron client relationships, where politics was an elitist occupation, while masses just voted as bloc on calls of their community leaders and under influence of Freedom struggle legacy of congress and stalwarts like nehru.
2 nd phase saw rise of bullock cart capitalist or dominant castes due to land reforms, green revolution etc the concerns of these groups were reservation and greater share in education and administration. Thus caste became a major factor in politics. Another feature was decline of parliament due to neopatrimonialism and centralisation and personalisation of politics. This led to elite disillusionment, and urban educated youth took to politics of street and protests against corruption, price rise etc. Further, regionalism and fundamentalism also began to raise their ugly heads in Punjab, Assam etc
3rd phase saw continuation of above trends with addition of hindu revivalism. Yet it wasn't enough to change electoral behaviour that much and caste and regional issues propelled many regional parties to the national scene. This phase also saw development or vikas making its entry on the political stage as benefits of lpg reforms became conspicuous.
4th phase is seeing return of one party dominant system and consolidation of hindu revivalism withhindu identity trumping all other concerns including those of vikas and price rise etc. the system has become so polarised that identity and ideology have become strong determinants of voting behaviour. Another important factor has been foreign policy and security issues grabbing attention of voters like Asat test, surgical strikes, balakot etc this prompted ashutish varshney to call 2019 elections as national security elections. Other visible trend is that of welfare delivery being made efficient and fine tuned in the form of dbt. Schemes like ujjwala, pmay, pmkisan etc have benefitted large number of people and play a role in these narginalised sections voting for the party.
Forgot to add Parliamentary system being transformed into Presidential one atkeast when it comes to vote
Mankibaat , as i am having a bad day today. again. 😆
Impact of foreign policy on voting behaviour is a good discussion. Earlier FP used to be only an elite concern, but now with rise of India's stature in the international sphere a larger section is paying attention to and taking pride in India's FP. India's role as "Vishwaguru" has entered political consciousness and India's exploits on the world stage are being used by the ruling party to attract votes.
Man ki Baat isn't always useless apparently!
Dionysus," ..due to the inability of govt. to fulfill its basic responsibilities which leads to voters choosing strongmen or criminals.." Could you elaborate a bit? Are criminals/strongmen better at delivering basic services?
" ..due to the inability of govt. to fulfill its basic responsibilities which leads to voters choosing strongmen or criminals.." Could you elaborate a bit? Are criminals/strongmen better at delivering basic services?
They are not better, but due to lack of options, and seeing failure of other candidates in not delivering there results, voters usually start choosing some strongmen - because they believe by hook or crook they might get things done. There is a whole image building exercise goes during rallies- that's why we see in bengal elections , mithun da calls himself cobra and all- representing themselves a strongman.
They are no better, but worse, but its people's perception. Thats what my reading has been.
Write your comment…
