Meritocrasy in Democracy?

All of us have been led into believing that the US stands, by and large, for meritocracy.

There used to be a joke about Giani Zail Singh. Before he became the President of India , he visited the US to meet Raegan, and they could not converse, since Zail Singh knew only Punjabi and Raegan, only English. The story goes that Raegan vowed to teach English to the genial Sardar, but ended up learning Punjabi!


The recent events in the US Presidential nominations and the street fights that preceeded it, made me wonder if the US is learning too fast from India. Look at the facts below and make your own conclusions:

1. There was initially so much hoopla in the media on whether to get a Blakc or a Woman as the Democratic party candidate... merit took the back seat, and all the public spats reminded me of Jayalalitha vs Karunandhi spats in the TamilNadu politics ( woman vs untouchable)...
2. Finally Obama elbowed his way, and the national press went ga-ga over a "hisotric" nomination of a Black Presidential candidate ( first in some 250 years after the Americas were founded) , again , talk was much less about his capability ( or lack of it) than the colour of his epiderm and mesoderm.
3. Obama was more criticized for his rather yougnage, and lack of Congressional experience... again no talk of merit or what his capabilties were. And how did he respond? By picking a 72 year Oldie (Biden), whom people hardly knew... for his age, his "experience" and for his oratorial skills... dont even bother asking about his credentials or capability... for a minute I thought Theepori Arumugam or Kaaduvetti Guru would have perfectly fitted the bill ( great orators, lot of experience and aged....)... Merit? What merit?
4. Just when the Democrats thought they got the trump card, McCain perhaps glanced through recent Indian politics, saw the Pratibha Patil episode, and decided to bowl a Googly ( or Doosra, should I say?). Not to be left far behind, he wanted to erase the accusation of old age being against him, he stuck two mangoes with one stone, by announcing Palin ass his running mate. One she is 44 years young only, and two, she is a woman? And how did she start off her Acceptance speech? By roaring that "women in the US are not finished yet!!" Clearly she was targetting the women voters ( 50% plus)... whether this gimmic will help erase the legacy(???) Georgie and help the Republicans back into the White house remains to be seen, but again, merit has clearly been buried under 10 feet of snow in Alaska!!
5. An even funnier observation - the media misses no chance to mention " Obama is a devout Christian... goes to xyz church regularly" "McCain is a devout Baptist" "Hiilary is a devout Methodist" ... all thesse are clear gimmics to corner the votes of the beleiver voters. Compare this what is happening in India - the BJP tries to woo Hindus, all the non -BJP parties go head over heels to establish their "secualar" credentials , a move amied clearly at cornering the Muslim and other minority votes... or Ramadoss and Co. clear take the names of Vanniyars. etc etc... clear market segmentation in the name of religion and caste in India, is matched one to one in the US by both the politicians and the media... and all along we thought the US democracy was a lot mature, and believed in meritocracy!!!!

All this goes to prove a few things:

1. Politicians are the same everywhere.
2. Formal Western Education ( or lack of it) is no guarantee for rational thinking and voting... people will still vote becuasde " she is a woman" or "he is a devout Christian" or " he is a white" or " or "he is from the Afro American community" or " he is from the xyz caste" or " she is from the abc town" etc etc... merit is only secondary or even tertiary.
3. Getting votes on factors other than merit has been the norm throughout the world, not just an expception in India. The next time you read a western magazine referring to the "abominable casteist politics" in India, dont shy to ask " what about the other countries?"