India is placed behind countries with questionable and rocky histories of democracy, including Nepal and Kosovo.
Another year, another report, yet the same story! The V-Dem Institute, based in Sweden, has released its 2024 Democracy Report, once again bringing to the forefront its biases towards India and the Global South. The report appears to be nothing more than a political hatchet job while serving as a mouthpiece for vested interests. With the increasing accessibility of the internet and the public’s reliance on digital platforms for news, institutes like V-Dem have found a platform to showcase their supposed virtues without any cost or consequence. Through flashy infographics and diagrams, yet minimal substance, these reports masquerade as fair and virtuous, akin to high priests from medieval times passing judgment without any legitimate basis or fairness.There is no transparency on whose opinion was taken and who these 21 intellectuals are and what the methodology is of this purposive biased so-called sample or sham opinion of a few.
NON-ACADEMIC TO THE CORE
The V-Dem report claims to have “developed innovative methods for aggregating expert judgments” to produce “valid and reliable estimates,” acknowledging that these estimates are “difficult-to-observe concepts”. Anyone training in research methodology in the social sciences knows that biases and limitations are inherent in concept and practice. Yet, V-Dem seems blind to any biases within its own operations. Only once does it briefly mention “potential biases” regarding its report, but swiftly deflects it by attributing such biases to “experts”. Then, V-Dem, trying to be the “good guy”, claims to address such biases through a “measurement model”. Thus, lots of hyperbole and self-aggrandisement seem enough to overlook academic rigour.
The question of who evaluates V-Dem is also intriguing. According to the methodology outlined on their website, they rely on five “Country Experts” in each of five categories, totalling 25 (or so) experts per country, most of whom remain anonymous. These 25 “experts” or so supposedly serve as better judges of a country’s democracy and credentials. Fortunately, India and its Constitution makers wisely opted not to entrust the fate of millions of Indians to a selected few. Instead, they devised a system where people could have a say in the direction of their country through free and fair elections.
Another fundamental aspect of conducting research V-Dem disregards is revisiting methodologies and reconsidering assumptions. While V-Dem claims to “continually review” its methodology, it admits that it “occasionally” adjusts it. The supposedly brilliant methodology employed by organisations like V-Dem regularly faces significant criticism from countries in the Global South, irrespective of their political systems, for their inherent prejudices and ideological narratives that align with the interests of a few like George Soros. Yet, despite years of criticism about its flawed methodology, V-Dem has made no notable endeavour to change its methods. Therefore, the issue at hand transcends concerns about the transparency of the methodology. Instead, it raises significant concerns regarding incompetence and ill-intentions of the so-called report.
Similar to the portrayal often found in Western fiction and oversimplified non-fictional narratives about other parts of the world, the West—mainly comprising the US, Canada, Europe, and Australia—is predictably depicted as a better performer than the rest. However, if Rishi Sunak stops the genocidal calls against Israel and Jews in London streets, the UK would become “autocrazing”. As such, to avoid losing favour with organisations like V-Dem and fear of being labelled as “autocrazing,” world leaders are getting cosy with woke ideologies.
INDIA IN THE 2024 REPORT
India is placed behind countries with questionable and rocky histories of democracy, including Nepal and Kosovo. Labelling a country with 18% of the world’s population, which consistently conducts the world’s largest elections, as “one of the worst autocratizers lately” seems quite disproportionate and misguided. Such a characterisation overlooks the complexity and diversity of democratic processes within the country and fails to acknowledge the significant strides made in ensuring democratic participation and representation.
What’s interesting about the report is that it identifies the process of “autocratization” in India beginning in 2008, the same year India had the 26/11 attacks. Up until then, India had endured two decades of violent, blood-soaked history of terrorism, wherein people died even doing small things such as shopping in the national capital for Diwali. Consequently, when India decided to tackle terrorism and clamp down, particularly over the last decade, it became problematic. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill 2019 is blamed in the report as one of the reasons for India’s poor scores.
Even though terrorism and insurgency-related deaths of civilians and soldiers are at an all-time low in the country, this is deemed irrelevant by V-Dem. It seems that only when India capitulates to Islamic terrorists and insurgents will there be hope for improvement in its rankings. However, this is not an option for India because such rankings do not define India or its people. The democratic process in India is among the most robust in the world, with a history of democratic ideas that are older than many modern-day civilisations.
Politically, some parties may see an opportunity to peddle this dangerous narrative, portraying themselves as doing nothing more than aiding outsiders in spreading misinformation. However, the rankings hold little weight when measured against fundamental academic scrutiny. That being said, disseminating misinformation by the likes of V-Dem is critical for countries like India because the impression they create, unfortunately, has a lasting impact. For example, 75% of downloads of V-Dem datasets took place from Europe and North America, which would explain if the behaviour of the European/American investors changed at some point about their investment in India after reading reports that portray the country as intolerant or undemocratic. Such perceptions are misleading and harmful to India’s economic prospects. For such reasons, there is an absolute need for action by everyone in India, from students to leaders, to counter such reports. Like many of its counterparts, the V-Dem report must be criticised, condemned, and dismantled, using valid facts and evidence, not only to demonstrate Indian calibre in research but also to dispel the illusion that anything emanating from the West has to be gospel.
Let me reiterate that India is the most durable democracy than many in the West and rest. No elected leader in a democracy today can match the popularity of the Indian Prime Minister. Narendra Modi’s covenant with the world’s largest free voters remains unbroken. If authencity is what leaders lack, even as they seek an eternal mandate, Modi has it in abundance. That’s what adds to the aura of democracy’s tallest spokesperson of the oldest and largest democracy. The West must stop preaching and creating false conjectures, prejudices and a colonial hegemonic mindset.
Prof Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit is the Vice Chancellor of JNU.