The Promise of Power : The Origins of Democracy in India and Autocracy in Pakistan

Under what conditions are some developing countries able to create stable democracies while others have slid into instability and authoritarianism? To address this classic question at the center of policy and academic debates, The Promise of Power investigates a striking puzzle: why, upon the 1947 Partition of British India, was India able to establish a stable democracy while Pakistan created an unstable autocracy? Drawing on interviews, colonial correspondence, and early government records to document the genesis of two of the twentieth century's most celebrated independence movements, Maya Tudor refutes the prevailing notion that a country's democratization prospects can be directly attributed to its levels of economic development or inequality. Instead, she demonstrates that the differential strengths of India's and Pakistan's independence movements directly account for their divergent democratization trajectories. She also establishes that these movements were initially constructed to pursue historically conditioned class interests. By illuminating the source of this enduring contrast, The Promise of Power offers a broad theory of democracy's origins that will interest scholars and students of comparative politics, democratization, state-building, and South Asian political history. Cover......Page 1 The Promise of Power......Page 3 Title......Page 5 Copyright......Page 6 Dedication......Page 7 Contents......Page 9 Maps......Page 11 Acknowledgments......Page 12 1 How India institutionalized democracy and Pakistan promoted autocracy......Page 19 I. The argument......Page 21 Defining democracy......Page 25 Defining social classes......Page 27 Defining strong political parties......Page 30 The social origins of political parties......Page 33 The history in politics......Page 37 Expanding regional narratives of democratization......Page 38 High command or sole spokesman? The real but limited role of leadership......Page 40 The (lack of) economic requisites for democracy......Page 42 A limited role for differing colonial inheritances......Page 44 International influences......Page 49 Ethnic politics......Page 50 Islam and authoritarianism......Page 52 The primacy of political parties?......Page 53 Claiming causality......Page 54 Why India and Pakistan?......Page 57 The organization of the book......Page 58 2 The social origins of pro- and anti-democratic movements (1885–1919)......Page 62 Educated as Englishmen, imagined as Indians......Page 63 The germ of a “native parliament”......Page 66 The thorny question of religious reform......Page 67 The turn away from loyalism......Page 69 Democratic reforms diminish landed aristocrats......Page 74 Democratic reforms diminish United Province Muslims......Page 75 Overlapping threats and the creation of the anti-democratic Muslim league......Page 79 III. Conclusion......Page 83 3 Imagining and institutionalizing new nations (1919–1947)......Page 85 The instrumental embrace of Gandhian tactics......Page 87 Congress campaigns against caste untouchability......Page 91 Khadi: dress demarcates an Indian nation......Page 96 Marching for freedom......Page 100 A paper party in provincial power struggles......Page 104 Communal conflict and the continued lack of programmatic Pakistani nationalism......Page 107 1937: the turn toward religious nationalism......Page 110 III. Conclusion......Page 116 I. Congress organizes a coherent distributive coalition......Page 118 The rural middle class: the pivotal Congress alliance......Page 120 Committed bania support......Page 126 Capitalists, a fair-weather ally......Page 128 Labor, a distant Congress ally......Page 133 The organization of influence......Page 137 II. Muslim League cobbles together coalitions of convenience......Page 141 United Province Muslims and the invocation of Islam......Page 142 The alliance with Punjabi landed aristocrats......Page 147 Mobilizing the Bengali tenantry......Page 155 III. Conclusion......Page 168 5 Freedom at midnight and divergent democracies (1947–1958)......Page 171 I. Freedom and fratricide......Page 172 Indian constitution-making by consensus and accommodation......Page 178 Musical chair politics in Pakistan......Page 191 An elected Prime Minister in India......Page 208 Aggrandizing Governor-Generals in Pakistan......Page 212 IV. Conclusion......Page 221 I. The puzzle ... and the class coalition and political party answer......Page 223 The long shadow of colonial rule......Page 230 The linchpin role of political parties......Page 231 The legacy of coherent distributive coalitions......Page 233 The fleeting window for institutionalization......Page 234 III. Extensions beyond South Asia......Page 236 Secondary sources......Page 242 Published primary sources......Page 249 Central Secretariat Library, New Delhi, India (CSL)......Page 250 National Documentation Centre, Central Secretariat Library, Islamabad (NDC)......Page 251 Nehru Museum and Memorial Library (NMML)......Page 252 Under what conditions are some developing countries able to create stable democracies while others are perpetually prone to instability and authoritarianism? Despite broadly similar historical and political legacies, India's and Pakistan's regimes diverged radically after independence. In The Promise of Power, Maya Tudor seeks to explain why this occurred through a comparative historical analysis. Drawing on interviews, colonial records and early government documents, Tudor challenges the prevailing explanations of democratization, which attribute political outcomes directly to low levels of economic development and high levels of inequality. Instead, she suggests that the emergence of a stable democracy in India and an unstable autocracy in Pakistan is best explained by the historically-specific interests of the dominant social group which led each independence movement as well as by the varying strength of the political parties which were created to pursue those interests. 1. How India institutionalised democracy & Pakistan promoted autocracy 2. The social origins of pro- and anti-democratic movements (1885-1919) 3. Imagining and institutionalizing new nations (1919-1947) 4. Organizing alliances (1919-1947) 5. Freedom at midnight and divergent democracies (1947-1958) 6. The institutionalization of alliances in India, Pakistan, and beyond. Under what conditions are some developing countries able to create stable democracies while others are perpetually prone to instability and authoritarianism? In The Promise of Power, Maya Tudor proposes a new understanding of the regime divergence between India and Pakistan following their twin independences in 1947. An examination of how, despite similar historical contexts, India became a stable democracy post-independence, whilst Pakistan became an unstable autocracy