Nice analysis but I think the use of Hanlon's razor is too quick. One needn't attribute active malice here. But the incompetence, if that is what it is, is in the direction of making it easier to exclude genuine voters, rather than making it easier to include fake voters. This is not a neutral mistake. Such a mistake would not have happened, imo, had it been clear to the EC that the ruling party would oppose it. And *this* ruling party has made its priorities clear in that regard.
I also think that it has been clear for a while that the EC doesn't relate symmetrically to political parties. Critics of the EC have been very clear on their specific complaints, and what it would take the EC to address them; time-and-again the EC has rejected it.
I think the presumption here that parties casting aspersion or the current petition has some element of good faith in it. I don’t think that’s the case at all. They are clearly politically motivated to do this, and any all-party meeting or confidence building exercises etc may have given EC more “credibility” in certain narrative points but wouldn’t have abated the attacks it is facing now. The political reality is that any revision process or action will be challenged because the largest opposition party has basically made a conspiracy theory part of its core theorem on what’s wrong in India today. What else explains the inability of that party wrt Maharashtra?
The EC failed in its duty, acted in a ham-fisted manner creating anxiety on the ground for crores of poor people. The Opposition is duty-bound to push back; whether its rhetoric is advisable is a separate matter. Criticism of the response while glossing over the unilateral action itself has an element of bad faith.
Any form of revision or action - even those relating to MCC can be considered as unilateral action then? I disagree with that. I think there’s limited validity to the argument that there should have been more consultation at best. I didn’t specify that cause you’ve anyway focused on it.
Nice analysis but I think the use of Hanlon's razor is too quick. One needn't attribute active malice here. But the incompetence, if that is what it is, is in the direction of making it easier to exclude genuine voters, rather than making it easier to include fake voters. This is not a neutral mistake. Such a mistake would not have happened, imo, had it been clear to the EC that the ruling party would oppose it. And *this* ruling party has made its priorities clear in that regard.
I also think that it has been clear for a while that the EC doesn't relate symmetrically to political parties. Critics of the EC have been very clear on their specific complaints, and what it would take the EC to address them; time-and-again the EC has rejected it.
I think the presumption here that parties casting aspersion or the current petition has some element of good faith in it. I don’t think that’s the case at all. They are clearly politically motivated to do this, and any all-party meeting or confidence building exercises etc may have given EC more “credibility” in certain narrative points but wouldn’t have abated the attacks it is facing now. The political reality is that any revision process or action will be challenged because the largest opposition party has basically made a conspiracy theory part of its core theorem on what’s wrong in India today. What else explains the inability of that party wrt Maharashtra?
The EC failed in its duty, acted in a ham-fisted manner creating anxiety on the ground for crores of poor people. The Opposition is duty-bound to push back; whether its rhetoric is advisable is a separate matter. Criticism of the response while glossing over the unilateral action itself has an element of bad faith.
Any form of revision or action - even those relating to MCC can be considered as unilateral action then? I disagree with that. I think there’s limited validity to the argument that there should have been more consultation at best. I didn’t specify that cause you’ve anyway focused on it.