Or, what about the claims of the Congress that people have voted the party back to power for ‘development’? In a state with dismal infrastructure and abysmal basic amenities in terms of drinking water and electricity, why have people voted the same government to power again? And what about the ‘regional sentiment’ or ‘regionalism’ which the Manipur Peoples’ Party is said to represent? The recent ‘resurgence’ of this party in the pre-election scenario was followed by its dismal electoral performance. How do we make sense of this?

These issues question the certainty or nature of the ‘realities’ we take for granted. For instance, the ‘consensus’ of the ‘Naga people’ and their aspiration, or the ‘people’s voice’ against the Armed Forces Special Powers Act or perhaps even more crucially, the ‘representative-ness’ of democracy.

The success of the Congress could be largely due to the issue of ‘stability’ that the party has projected during the elections. Given the historicity of the power relations between the Centre and the state, the party that rules at New Delhi invariably tends to form the government in Imphal. Besides, the democratic election, at least in South Asia, is not merely a question of electing a ‘representative’ for ‘governance’. It is also a question of ensuring access to the corridors of powers by electing people who convey such an assurance (be it on the basis of one’s caste or kinship or other attributes). This has been the crucial psychology that constitutes ‘voting behaviour’ in the region.

... contd.