Despite the mixed record of democratic experience, why do the people in South Asian countries, even today, sha

Question

Q. Despite the mixed record of democratic experience, why do the people in South Asian countries, even today, share the aspiration in favour of democracy ? Explain with the help of examples.

CBSECBSE Class XII Board 2019Subjective· 4mImportance★★★★★

🔒 Locked · start free trial →

You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Concept understanding — Democratic Consolidation Comparison

Let’s start with something you already know. Imagine two friends who both say they are “fit.” One runs every morning, eats well, and has been doing so for years. The other just bought a gym membership yesterday. Both can claim to be fit, but only one has actually become fit — the habit is deep, the change is real, and it’s unlikely to vanish overnight.

Democratic consolidation is that same idea, applied to a country’s political system. A democracy is not just a one-time event — not just an election, not just a constitution being signed. It is a process that needs to sink in, become stable, and be accepted by everyone as “the only game in town.” When we compare how different countries achieve this stability, we are doing democratic consolidation comparison.

What the NCERT textbook says

The NCERT Class 12 Political Science textbook (Chapter: Challenges of Nation-Building and later chapters on Democracy) does not use the phrase “democratic consolidation comparison” as a formal term, but it teaches the idea clearly. It contrasts India’s experience with that of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many other newly independent countries. The core point is: holding elections is not enough. A democracy must survive crises, transfer power peacefully, and have its institutions respected by all major political forces.

Important

Democratic consolidation means democracy has become routinised and internalised — no major group tries to overthrow it, and even conflicts are resolved within democratic rules.

The precise meaning

Democratic consolidation comparison is the study of why some democracies last and become stable, while others break down or remain fragile. It compares countries on several dimensions:

Institutional strength: Do courts, election commissions, and legislatures function independently and effectively?
Elite and mass acceptance: Do political leaders, parties, and ordinary citizens believe democracy is the best system — or do they support anti-democratic alternatives?
Civil-military relations: Is the military under civilian control, or does it intervene in politics?
Rule of law: Are laws applied equally, or do rulers bend them for personal or party gain?
Economic and social conditions: Is there enough development and equality to prevent democracy from being seen as a failure?

When you compare India with, say, Pakistan or Myanmar, you are doing exactly this kind of analysis. India has held regular elections, seen multiple peaceful transfers of power between rival parties, and kept the military out of politics. Pakistan, by contrast, has experienced repeated military coups and periods of authoritarian rule. The comparison helps explain why — not just describe what.

Why it matters for a commerce/humanities student

You might think this is only for political science students. But consider:

If you go into business or law, you need to assess political risk in different countries. A consolidated democracy is more predictable, has stronger property rights, and is less likely to suddenly change the rules. …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Despite setbacks, South Asians consistently favour democracy because it offers dignity, accountability, and a peaceful way to correct injustices — aspirations that endure even when governments fail.

The question touches on a striking paradox in South Asian politics. On one hand, the region’s democratic record is uneven: Pakistan has oscillated between civilian and military rule, Bangladesh has seen periods of authoritarianism, Sri Lanka endured a long civil war and a constitutional crisis, Nepal’s monarchy was abolished only in 2008, and even India — the region’s most stable democracy — has faced emergency rule (1975–77) and periodic threats to institutional independence. Yet, despite these failures, opinion polls and electoral behaviour consistently show that ordinary people across South Asia prefer democracy over any alternative. Why?

The answer lies in what democracy offers that no other system can: a sense of ownership and a mechanism for peaceful change. Even when governments are corrupt or inefficient, the democratic framework gives citizens the right to criticise, protest, and vote them out. This is not a theoretical luxury — it is a lived experience. In India, for instance, the 1977 election that swept Indira Gandhi’s government out of power after the Emergency demonstrated that the ballot box could punish authoritarian overreach. Similarly, in Bangladesh, the 1990 mass uprising ended the military rule of Hossain Mohammad Ershad, and in Pakistan, the 2008 elections followed the death of General Pervez Musharraf, restoring a civilian government. These moments, however imperfect, reinforce the belief that democracy — unlike monarchy or military rule — allows people to hold rulers accountable.

Note

The term "aspiration" is key here. People may be dissatisfied with particular democratic governments, but they rarely reject the idea of democracy itself. This is different from supporting a specific regime.

Another powerful reason is the association of democracy with dignity and rights. In societies marked by deep caste, class, and ethnic hierarchies, democracy offers a language of equality. The right to vote, to speak freely, and to form associations gives marginalised groups a stake in the system. In India, the rise of Dalit and OBC political parties, or the women’s reservation debate, are examples of how democracy channels aspirations for recognition. In Nepal, the 2015 constitution — despite its flaws — was drafted through a constituent assembly, giving ethnic and regional groups a platform they never had under the monarchy. Even in Pakistan, the 18th Amendment (2010) devolved powers to provinces, responding to long-standing demands for autonomy. These are not perfect outcomes, but they are democratic outcomes — and people see the difference. …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Same / Similar Concept — real previous-year questions on the same or a closely similar concept, not this exact question.

CBSE 2023Set 59/4/11 markMCQ
$Q. Which one of the following developing countries is the first to successfully control the rate of growth of population ?$
(a) Bhutan
(b) Pakistan
(c) Nepal
(d) Sri Lanka
›Reveal solutionSolution

Sri Lanka was the first developing country to successfully control its population growth rate through early investments in education, healthcare, and family welfare.

Population control in the developing world has been a story of varied approaches and outcomes, shaped by political will, social reform, and access to healthcare. Among the countries listed, Sri Lanka stands apart as a pioneer. While most developing nations in South Asia struggled with high fertility rates and rapid population growth well into the late twentieth century, Sri Lanka achieved a demographic transition much earlier—one that mirrored patterns seen in developed countries rather than its regional neighbors.

The foundation of Sri Lanka's success was laid in the years following independence in 1948. The government prioritized universal education and made primary schooling free and compulsory. Female literacy rose sharply, and educated women began marrying later and choosing smaller families. At the same time, Sri Lanka invested heavily in public health infrastructure. A network of rural health centers brought maternal and child healthcare within reach of even remote villages. Infant mortality fell dramatically, and as parents grew confident that their children would survive, the incentive to have many children diminished.

Family planning programs were introduced early and integrated into the broader health system. Contraceptives became widely available, and the government promoted family welfare without coercion. Crucially, these efforts were supported by a relatively egalitarian social structure and progressive policies on women's rights. By the 1960s and 1970s, Sri Lanka's fertility rate had begun to decline steadily, a trend that continued in the decades that followed. …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2020Set 59/1/11 mark
$Q. How long did East Pakistan and West Pakistan remain together as one country ?$
(OR)
$Which community dominates the politics of Sri Lanka ?$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Part (a): East and West Pakistan remained one country for 24 years, from 1947 to 1971.

Part (b): The Sinhala community dominates the politics of Sri Lanka.

Part (a)

The creation of Pakistan in 1947 was a unique experiment in nation-building, for the country was born as two wings — East Pakistan and West Pakistan — separated by more than a thousand miles of Indian territory and bound together mainly by a shared religion. East Pakistan, with its Bengali-speaking majority, was more populous, yet power and wealth were concentrated in the West. The imposition of Urdu, economic exploitation and political marginalisation bred deep resentment. The breaking point came when the Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, won the 1970 elections but was denied power, leading to a military crackdown and a war of independence. With Indian intervention, East Pakistan surrendered on 16 December 1971 and became Bangladesh — ending a union that had lasted 24 years since 1947. …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2020Set 59/1/11 mark
$Q. Identify any one reason for the aspiration of democracy in South Asia.$
›Reveal solutionSolution

A primary reason for the aspiration of democracy in South Asia is the historical experience of non-democratic rule, which fostered a deep desire for self-determination, individual rights, and representative governance.

The aspiration for democracy in South Asia is deeply rooted in the region's historical experiences, particularly the long periods of colonial rule and subsequent struggles against various forms of authoritarianism. This collective memory of being governed without consent, coupled with the denial of fundamental freedoms, cultivated a profound longing for a political system that promised self-determination and citizen participation.

During colonial times, the people of South Asia were subjects, not citizens. They had limited or no say in their own governance, and their political, economic, and social lives were largely dictated by an external power. This experience of subjugation, marked by a lack of representation and the suppression of local voices, ignited powerful nationalist movements. These movements, while diverse in their methods and immediate goals, often shared a common vision of an independent future where the people themselves would choose their leaders and shape their destiny. Democracy, with its emphasis on popular sovereignty and individual liberties, became the natural ideal for this post-colonial future.

Note

The concept of 'self-determination' was a powerful rallying cry during anti-colonial struggles, directly linking the idea of national independence with the right of people to choose their own form of government, which often meant democracy. …

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2020Set 59/3/11 mark
$Q. Which event does 9/11 refer to in the context of contemporary world politics ?$
(OR)
$Who took over the administration of Pakistan after its first Constitution was framed ?$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Part (a): 9/11 is the al-Qaeda terrorist attack on the USA on 11 September 2001.

Part (b): Iskander Mirza took over Pakistan's administration after the 1956 Constitution.

Part (a)

In contemporary world politics, '9/11' is shorthand for 11 September 2001, when the militant group al-Qaeda hijacked four commercial aircraft in the United States. Two were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York, one struck the Pentagon, and a fourth crashed in Pennsylvania. Nearly 3,000 people were killed. The attack triggered the US-led 'War on Terror' and reshaped global security. …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →

Q.Despite the mixed record of democratic experience, why do the people in South Asian countries, even today, share the aspiration in favour of democracy ? Explain with the help of examples.

🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days

Unlock everything free for 14 days