Not for commercial use Political Processes under the Microscope: Comparative Ethnography as an Approach to Understanding Democracy and Elections in India Manisha Priyam 1 The study of democracy in its similarities and differences has been among the most important agenda for comparative social theory in contemporary times. The endeavour of comparison has advanced a purely normative understanding of democracy, rooted in the idea of its being a form of rule legitimated by the people, to a greater understanding of its structures and processes—the variety of empirical conditions under which its facets play out. Since the arena of democracy has now expanded to include a majority of the countries of the world 2 —its ferment as Diamond (1990) notes, having spread to ‘…the world’s most isolated, unlikely, and forgotten places’, and also the challenge of understanding the plurality and differ- ences of contexts under which electoral institutions operate, consent and consensus obtained, and citizen rights secured. This piece advances a methodological proposition in favour of the use of an ethnographic approach for the comparative study of democracy and elections in India. The appeal of this approach is two-fold, it is argued: First, it helps us overcome the narrow rationality and exclusionary understanding of democracy as modernization—a guiding paradigm within comparative politics. Second, it advances our understanding of the substantive meanings associated with democracy as it flourishes in unexpected conditions of social traditionalism and economic poverty. In this case, democracy as it guides the thoughts and political actions of India’s poor and marginalized, as part of a holistic culture within which individual rationality or group action can be meaningfully interpreted. This approach and the substantive considerations on democracy that follow are a contrast to the widely prevalent use of large-scale surveys in comparative politics. While the comparative ethnographies enhance our understanding of citizens acting within cultures of politics, the large-scale surveys have a thin yet aggregate understanding of individual action and cultural values. It also brings the unanticipated to the fore—ordinary people appear on the stage of politics with their agency, not simply as averages of numbers, playing out a force of history. Note: This section is coordinated by Divya Vaid (divya.vaid.09@gmail.com). 1 Associate Professor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, India. 2 Diamond (2008, p. 6) notes that by the 1990s, democracy became “the spirit of the time” with three in every five countries of the world having embraced the democratic form of rule. Notes on Methods Studies in Indian Politics 5(1) 73–81 © 2017 Lokniti, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies SAGE Publications sagepub.in/home.nav DOI: 10.1177/2321023017698268 http://inp.sagepub.com Corresponding author: Manisha Priyam, Associate Professor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, India. E-mail: priyam.manisha@gmail.com