How stupid are we?

Image Courtesy: Google

Five years ago, Modi campaigned on the promise of “acche din” for Indians and its economy. Creation of millions of jobs, stimulating rapid growth and revitalizing India’s sluggish investment cycle was the manifesto of the BJP. While Modi did enact several economic reforms- such as a nationwide sales tax and a new bankruptcy code to wind up failing businesses – large parts of his promised economic narrative never materialized.

Yet, ahead of the 2019 election, findings from CSDS-Lokniti-Tiranga TV-The Hindu-Dainik Bhaskar Pre Poll Survey, 43 percent of Indians wanted to see Modi return as Prime Minister. There is further evidence to suggest that voters would not have voted for the BJP alliance if Modi were not the prime ministerial candidate. Hence, placing leadership above all other considerations clinched victory for the Modi led BJP.

What’s going on here? Logically, you’d not support a man who doesn’t keep promises or worse, does something unpopular. But, people seem drawn to demonstrations of “chunavi jumlas” or an empty statement.

My quest took me to an article by Dean Burnett, titled Democracy v Psychology: why people keep electing idiots. The context was the 2015 UK general elections. According to Burnett, “It’s clear that doing or saying unintelligent things is no barrier to political success. Unfortunately, there are several psychological mechanisms that lead to apparent idiots being elected into powerful positions.”

I have taken the liberty of applying the same mechanisms to Indian politicians and voters to drive home Burnett’s idea that, “There are a wide variety of ideological, social, cultural and other factors involved, but there are also some known psychological processes that we need to consider”.

“Confidence inspires confidence”

Many studies have demonstrated that confident people are more persuasive. Take for example a courtroom setting; a strong witness is more convincing than a nervous, hesitant one. Retail industry is another setting where you are more likely to be swayed by a self-assured salesman to buy a product that you never intended to. Successful politicians do the same. They come across as assured and confident.

Take for example the fact that India's Prime Minister prefers to speak in his rashtra bhasha - Hindi, ensuring that our ancient language earns its rightful place as a recognized world language. By speaking in Hindi at the United Nations, with global leaders, Modi is showing a confident India. Another sample is the recent terrorist attack on Indian forces in the state of Jammu and Kashmir and the government’s subsequent airstrikes on terrorist camps in Pakistan. It strengthened Modi’s stature, reinforcing the confidence he often touts.

“Politics is complicated”

Effectively running a country of a billion people and a billion different perspectives is an incredibly complicated job. People are often put off by intellectual and complex subjects or may have no experience with an issue. A successful candidate can make you feel that your voice matters and the candidate is a representative of your beliefs. (Its another matter if the elected leader really reflects what the people want or is it mostly what the leader wants, often for his own reasons?)

Majority of the Indian people still live in rural India, in poverty and poor living conditions, and with little education or awareness of matters outside their areas of residence. Yet, a significant percentage of the people who fall in this category are responsible for choosing a government, which will legislate over the future of the country. So if a confident person says there is a simple solution or promises to make the big complicated thing go away, they are going to seem far more appealing.

This is also demonstrated by Parkinson’s Law of triviality, where people will spend far more time and effort focusing on something trivial that they do understand than something complicated that they don’t. Hence, candidates condensing down the big issues into brief often-inaccurate snippets are a potential vote-winner. Who else would have thought of drawing parallel between “Harvard” and “Hard Work” or the even more bizarre reference to Alexander The Great, who Modi claimed had reached Patliputra? When Modi began speaking in Rajasthan, within hours of the airstrikes in Balakot, his statements reduced a serious confrontation to the level of a street brawl with “Pakistan ke ghar mein ghus kar mara”. Terrorism will not end by “entering Pakistan” or oversimplifying India’s security challenge. Another example of over simplification is the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. Without improving the lot of sanitation workers one cannot expect to become clean through celebrity endorsements.

Finally,

“People like to relate”

Modi’s selfie-game puts the Kardashians to shame. From Priyanka Chopra to Anushka & Virat’s wedding reception, he doesn’t miss an opportunity to be clicked with the cool kids. He endorses physical fitness, is not shy about public displays of affection or emotion. Constant efforts are made by politicians to “fit in”. That’s because humans prefer their own “groups”. Like-minded people who have similar beliefs, biases or prejudices where they are not told things they don’t want to hear. As a result, someone seen as challenging those beliefs or prejudices appears less appealing.

As a corollary, India is witnessing increasing levels of intolerance. Political parties are guilty of quashing dissent in any form and more seriously resorting to violence. Arun Shourie has condemned Modi’s failure to speak out on some fundamental issues, especially the perception of growing religious intolerance. He told Karan Thapar, “The PM is not a section officer in the department of homeopathy. He’s not the head of a department of government. He is the Prime Minister. He has to show the country the moral path.” When Lance Price, author of “The Modi Effect”, about this, questioned Modi he said, “My silence is my strength.” But silence can be as much a sign of approval or weakness to be perceived as singing the same tune as the group one wants to belong to.

It is unfortunate but people find candidates more appealing when they say simple things, appear confident but less intelligent and support inherent prejudices or deny uncomfortable facts.

I am sure there is much more going on than these three aspects expressed by Dean Burnett. But for now including those, and I quote, “would make the whole thing more complicated, and that’s no way to get people to like something, as should be obvious by now.”

And candidates contesting, "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups"

- George Carlin