Abstract
In most political science literature, democracy is usually equated with majority rule. It is often regarded as the best practice for protecting and promoting human rights in a society. This paper evaluates this approach critically with specific reference to majority rule in plural societies to contend that majority rule can prove to be undemocratic and destabilizing. Majoritarian democracy in such societies provides an institutional context for conflict between ethnic groups through processes of exclusion and discrimination, which ultimately lead to exacerbated claims and reclaims of nationalism and nationalist tendencies. The practice of privileging one ethnic identity and regarding others as subservient leads to ethnic majoritarianism, which, specifically in case of plural societies, results in dissimilatory and exclusionary state policies that create dissent and dissatisfaction among the minority ethnic groups. The paper examines three case studies, the case of Tamils in Sri Lanka, Sindhis in Pakistan and Tamils in India to substantiate these claims and question the practice of ethnic majoritarianism in these states. The role of the state in creating and maintaining strong ethnic identities is examined and it is concluded that although ethnic majoritarianism has hindered the progress of democracy in plural societies, the possibility does exist and is achievable by means of more inclusionary and assimilationist policies.
Ayesha Hashmat Kamal. (2020) Majority’s Authority? Ethnicity and Democracy in South Asia, Journal of Politics & International Studies , Volume 6, Issue 1.
-
Views
605 -
Downloads
52
Previous Article
Article Details
Volume
Issue
Type
Language
