Manipur, Democracy & the Fractionalisation
- The emerging convergence -

Amar Yumnam *

“A nation is a society united by delusions about its ancestry and by a common hatred of its neighbors” so said William Ralph Inge (1860 - 1954). I am reminded of this quote by the outcome of the recent elections to the Indian Lower House as it relates to Manipur.

The beauty of democracy lies in its accommodation of the potential for people to express collective wisdom through absolutely individualized means. This throws up many unexpected outcomes and dispels many fears as well. The elections to the State Assembly and the recent one for the parliament are significant social episodes which have thrown up many interesting lessons for observers of the people and land of Manipur.

The Background: A brief mention of the social background in which the elections have been held in Manipur recently would be in place for contextual appreciation of the results. I would take up only two features. First, there is the widespread debate about the means with which the state has been trying to counter insurgency in the State.

There are sustained moves for review of the entire method of state machinery as it tries to face the various movements for creation of a new state. Secondly, there is the visible fractionalization between the valley and the mountains in the State.

While this division could be rooted in the geographic differences between the two, and the differing social institutions necessitated and evolved at the time when land was the only factor of production other than labour, the recent period has seen political intensification of this fractionalization.

The Divergence: The second feature relating to fractionalization has made it practically unrealized as of today the emergence of a State-wide issue; even the articulation of developmental issues is fractionalized. What is even more interesting is the non-emergence of a common valley-wide issue.

On the face of it, one may gather the impression that the valley seems to have settled down to certain commonality of issues. But the election results tell an altogether different story. These results establish beyond doubt the pre-eminence of local and ultimately personal interests rather than whatever manifestly valley-wide issue.

This is the reason why money plays a critical role in the outcome of elections, and the importance arises of the ruling party in the State when it comes to parliamentary elections. When it comes to matters of the state, my relative, my friend, my acquaintance or someone close, even if it is in terms of purely transitory monetary transactions, should hold the helms, and the collective interests can wait. One truth is that the public can be trusted to respect the highest bidder when it comes to casting the votes.

The lived experiences of the state-led developmental trajectory could have a lot to do with the prevalence of such a situation, but it is not I want to dwell on today.

The Convergence: I would rather like to speak of the emerging convergence in the behavioural manifestations of the people in both the valley and the mountains of the State. The people so fractionalised by geography, institutions and political articulations are in one in saying No whenever diktats cross a limit and start causing threats whatever harmony there in the society.

The run-up to the Assembly elections in 2007 was marked by marked by tumultuous social happenings for a few years at least in the valley. On the other hand, we observed hectic efforts in the mountains to capitalise on the fractionalization and the tumultuous situation in the valley.

All these led to emergence of a force to diktat the elections to the Assembly in 2007 towards a particular direction in the valley. But the valley people said a resounding to such pressures beyond the limits despite the prevalence of a presumably State-wide articulation of common agenda.

When it comes to the mountains, the people there have witnessed a certain kind excess preoccupation with a single agenda which slowly started eating into the age-old social ties across the fractions.

While the earlier fractionalisation was mainly to establish a kind of competitive edge over the other, this time round it started talking the shape of a move towards mutual annihilation. The mountain people found this illogical and have voted clearly against the diktats meaning to take the existing fractionalisation towards annihilation.

The Identity: As Amartya Sen says identity can have multiple forms. The common characteristic of both the valley and the mountain people to repulse any unwarranted force exerted on them speaks of a commonality of an identity. It is now for us build on this commonality and evolve a shared future.