Yeah, that’s why the U.P. Brahmins voted as a bloc for Mayawati.

actually that vote is caste based – here’s one take on mayawati’s caste politics. if you don’t like this one, take your pick of articles.

In India, it should be noted that much of that high turnout is due to pure ethnic and caste based voting (only in India do you not cast your vote, you vote your caste)…village headman/local don.

Yeah, that’s why the U.P. Brahmins voted as a bloc for Mayawati. It’s also funny how you use the term “village headman”. I have to ask have you even been to an Indian village? At least the ones I’m familiar with don’t have a headman of any sort. Influential people? Yes. And please, give some credit to Indians. Not all of them are swayed by “local dons”. True, India needs great improvement but don’t get it twisted.

I don’t think Americans are that much more sophisticated than Indians.

yep. only in america would whining that the winner of a popularity contest is boohoo.. too popular.. work. and heck, they voted for dubya in 2004!

Camille: No academic is going to do research that might support a non-PC hypothesis so unfortunately I am not going to be able to find data that’s going to satisfy you. You can’t critique China or its diaspora the way you can India. Most South Asianists throw the word fascist around to describe India & Indians. But how has China, a state that aggressively pushes the interests of the Han ethnic group, escaped that categorization?

You’re attributing the (potential) political leanings and understandings of recent Chinese and Korean immigrants with large historic third+ generation Chinese-Americans. It also ignores migrants who come under political asylum, through third country pathways, or for other reasons. My contention is that you’re making a sweeping demographic generalization with little evidence or justification.

Hello Ravi, as someone a little older, I disagree with this statement very strongly based on how disillusioned I’ve become with the process (but not with politics and with people). I want to say that it’s more important to look at ideas and ideology and experiences that people have than about your ethnic representation when it comes to politics. “South Asian” can happen to be a good way to motivate any kind of politics (from Democratic or Republican party politics to Marxism), but you have to be clear about your politics and why you’re pursuing them. With my politics, why would I want to get a South Asian investment banker involved in politics rather than a guestworker in Katrina rebuilding?

Secondly, voting can often be a fairly ineffective way for any bloc in society (whehther ideological or social or some combination of the two) to secure their interests unless its complemented (or even replaced) by all kinds of other activities, from external pressure to possibly outright rebellion (esp. if they have no right to vote, as many South Asians don’t). Would recommend Poor People’s Movements by Piven and Cloward. I used to do electoral work in high school and all the way through college and am still involved in different ways (like commenting on OpenLeft.com), and it’s good to open your mind to those as well.

In India, it should be noted that much of that high turnout is due to pure ethnic and caste based voting (only in India do you not cast your vote, you vote your caste) As support, I cite “In Spite of the Gods” by Edward Luce. He observes that many Indian voters do not even know one position of the candidate they are voting for- all they know is that they were told his or her name by their village headman/local don.

Vamsi, I think you make a good point here. The points made by others about India having a vibrant democracy are without a doubt very true, and it is most certainly something to be proud of, but at the same time it is most definitely a work in progress. I encourage everyone who is interested in the statistical gathering to take a look at the PDF (I’d also be glad to email it), which specifies the exact methods in which data is gathered. Again – if you have more specific stats then I will certainly update/write a more specifically based post!

For more reference on transparency and corruption in Indian Politics I encourage everyone to look at this link: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html. India has a transparency index score on par with China and Mexico at 3.5, good for a world ranking of 72nd, and far below the “borderline” index of 5.0. The index ” defines corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain and measures the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among a country’s public officials and politicians,” thus involving the subject of perception which I discussed earlier.