To Consociate or Not to Consociate: Understanding the Paradox of Elite Dominance and Constitutionalism

Daisy Verghese and Parvathy K. Arun present a critical analysis of consociationalism, a political theory for managing deeply divided societies. The authors challenge Arend Lijphart’s classification of India as a successful consociational state, arguing that the theory’s power-sharing mechanisms, intended to mitigate ethnic conflict, have instead contributed paradoxically, to elite dominance and the oppression of minorities. By examining India’s political evolution, the paper demonstrates how the informal adoption of consociational principles, such as proportionality in government appointments an cultural autonomy, has institutionalized ethnic divisions. This framework, they argue, exacerbated tensions and ultimately contributed to significant violence, including the Partition. The article concludes that India’s experience serves as a cautionary tale, revealing that consociational policies can deepen divisions rather than alleviate them, and highlights the need for alternative policy structures that promote genuine social harmony without institutionalizing ethnic identities.

CALJ Vol 9 Issue 2 Verghese.pdf

Download PDF • 844KB