Electoral Bias and Authoritarianism: Jim Crow South, Indira Gandhi’s Emergency, and Viktor Orbán’s Hungary

• In Event: Global Insights on Political Parties

Abstract

Electoral bias is common within electoral systems with single-member districts, and is usually understood to be the electoral advantage of one major party vis-à-vis another major party, for example, the Conservatives versus the Labour Party in the UK. In this paper, I argue that electoral bias is a much broader concept with far greater implications on the study of electoral systems. (1) Electoral bias can occur in various directions, including between large versus small parties or between national versus regional parties. (2) Electoral bias can also impact the dynamics across parties, including converting a party’s minority voter support into majority or even supermajority representation in legislative bodies. This overrepresentation can shift power towards a single party in a way that increases the likelihood that the country (or region of the country) will slip into authoritarianism. Applying a relatively new measure of electoral bias called the Directional Proportionality Index (DPIx), I measure electoral bias in the post-Civil War American South, the Lok Sabha in India since the country’s independence from the UK, and Hungary since the fall of the Berlin Wall. I demonstrate how electoral bias had contributed to the rise of one-party authoritarianism in the Jim Crow South, during India’s “Emergency”, and more recently in Hungary. I further apply this analysis to the BJP’s consolidation of power in India and the current threats to US democracy.

Author

• Bernard Tamas, Valdosta State University