[eldaisfish]

India is an electoral autocracy. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56393944

The most robust part of India's "democracy" is its voting system which is among the most accessible in the world and is likely one of the best in the world.

By all other metrics and measures, India is a feudal state where laws are great on paper but terrible otherwise. People should - rightfully so - be wary of labelling India a democracy.

[valarauko]

That's the assessment of an NGO, which may have some merit to it, and maybe not.

To quote the same article,

> Prof Mukherjee says most non-academics would be incredulous that a handful of research assistants and country experts get to decide that a country is an "electoral autocracy" while hundreds of millions of that country's citizens would disagree.

> "So really this is an instance of academic discourse and concepts operating at a considerable distance from lived experience. The operational concepts across the two domains are very different."

[malshe]

> India is an electoral autocracy.

You forgot to write that it is according to "Sweden-based V-Dem Institute."

[csomar]

This is not specific to India. India is a poor democracy and that does not solve the compliance issue (either from companies or civil servants).

But it's still a democracy, although an awkward one.

[bergenty]

It’s probably the most robust democracy on earth. Voter participation is extremely high and voter fraud is shockingly low.

[shubhamkrm]

Lol. This coming from an NGO based in a country with a hereditary head of state. Pot, meet kettle

[laxmin]

The problem is in defining Democracy.