Compare clientelism, patronage, and giveaways

• Scholars are advocating for a shift away from the politics of ‘freebies’ and populist schemes.

• These redistributive practices are seen as negatively affecting a polity’s political culture and making voters dependent on the distribution of such largesse.

• There is a tendency to confuse many different phenomena due to overlaps between these practices.

Definition and Characteristics of Clientelism

• Clientelism is a reciprocal exchange where politicians offer tangible benefits to voters based on their electoral support.

• The delivery of resources in clientelism is contingent on the continuance or expectation of electoral support.

• Politicians monitor the voting action of their supporters and ensure that the supporter who receives the benefit is also voting in support of the politician.

• The threat of retribution on non-compliance of reciprocity is a significant distinction between clientelism and any other type of distributive politics.

Clientelistic Relationships and Resource Asymmetry

• Clientelism relationships are typically asymmetrical, linked through bonds of hierarchy, caste-identity, or resources.

• The asymmetry of resources has increased due to the levelling of caste hierarchies and democratic upsurges in India.

• The secret ballot system and lack of dense networks of party activists affect the ability of politicians to monitor the compliance of their supporters.

• In India, a high voting population and large constituency size restrict a politician’s ability to implement effective monitoring strategies.

Patronage Networks and Freebies in India’s Electoral System

Patronage Networks and Freebies

• Patronage networks allow politicians to disburse permanent resources like jobs, loans, or subsidies to cultivate electoral loyalty.

• These networks are long-standing relationships, with the interaction between the distributing politician and the receiving voter being more recurring and reiterative.

Freebies and Universal Distribution

• Freebies are universally distributed goods, not selectively distributed based on individual targeting.

• They are typically distributed to entire population groups or a class of voters, with the aim of expanding the scope of distribution on a large scale.

• The distribution of freebies does not necessarily need to be monitored by political agents to check reciprocal compliance by recipients.

• The introduction of Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) and increased usage of banking channels for such distribution is waning the role of party brokers and karyakartas in mediating such welfare schemes.

Critiques of Freebies

• Criticisms of freebies as undemocratic or violating the voters’ right to vote freely are not fair.

• The distribution of freebies is largely informal and undocumented, making it open for audits and restructuring.

• Focusing criticism on universal distributive schemes that are more inclusive and have shown positive effects in the long-term is akin to missing the woods for the trees.