Admitting that I do not know much about Indian politics and democracy (beyond some contemporary Indian history) I miss some justifications for your conclusions, Darasingh. The major point here is that voters (among them the thoughtful ones, which you call 'educated') in non-compulsory voting democracies have the right to refuse voting. So, they just follow their democratic rights.

Rural and urban differences in voting participation might be more a result of excitement, noise and neighbourhood partying than actual interest in politics (or even vote buying among the poor as is alleged frequently here in Thailand?). Maybe thoughtful people just don't find someone to vote for. Anyway, I haven't checked the demographics of India but I think the rural population is still in advance of the urban.

If you made voting compulsory you would get a similar pattern of politics as in Australia, where the parties fight over indistinguishable details and small groups sometimes decide the election.

Voters vote when convinced of the efficacy of their vote in affecting public policy. When not so convinced, they abstain from voting often as a protest against an inefficacious democracy and often as mere indifference to the democratic process. Do we take democracy for granted? We become aware of it when it malfunctions as in cases of corruption. Democracy is like the air we breathe: when fresh we often take little notice of it; when polluted, we protest.

Like Michael, I confess, to be no specialist for Indian politics. But one of the democratic rights is the refusing to vote. Could it be that the urban population has nothing to vote for?

@Darasingh, regarding the data You have given, one could conclude that educated people taking democracy for granted! But, as I am not aware of political system of India, does it suppose that more educated people live in cities than in rural area? It seems obvious, yes. Being educated does not suppose someone to be smarter! It is similar situation in my small country Serbia regarding the response to voting! Changeability of government is essential to your greatest democracy in the world!

http://www.indisaonline.com/india-general-elections-2014/

Admitting that do not know about India and its politics however its obvious that voting and democracy does not guarantee the best all the time due to presence of many factors affecting the process

Dear Cecilia,

why not in India? Do the urban Indians refuse to vote because they have noticed and experienced all possibilities for manipulation?

The tell tale low 'casting of vote' gives an indication how dysfunctional the democracy is. Although democracy helps to get rid of bad apples in the system; among others, false promises by the politicians (to vulnerable - poor and illiterate), voting frauds, counting frauds, caste-based voting, and party-based voting (no matter if the candidate is good or bad) all play pivotal role in deciding who will win. That said, it is not always the best will win.

But the situation in these days, we don't look for best and competent; but look for 'best of the two evils'. Which person or party is less corrupted, which politician will take bribe, yet at least do (a 10%?) what he promises, etc. This is due to lack of trust in the politicians and the political system as a whole.

Generally, the people mentality is that whichever party comes in power, they are not going to make their life any better (if not make it worse), but they are going to fill their pots, and not improve the quality of life of common people. These reasons overshadow the fact that they really want to vote. When come for next elections, the same politicians will meet the same constituency people and give an explanation why he didn't do what he promised them (usually, this means, they will blame on the other party). But the 2nd term, he has plan to fix it, etc. This cycle (lies) goes on and on. Perhaps, people getting tired of it?

If I am not wrong, there is nothing like - if there is a case against a politician that they cannot stand for elections. They can still compete for the election, and win. Too much money is spend on elections, 'gifts' are given to the vulnerable population and make sure they win the election. With such election expenses, what might be the first objective if they actually happen to win the election? Do the maths. Once they win all cases will be delayed for another 5-10 years or thrown away!

When I was young, I enthusiastically to went to cast my vote. Various party members were coming and making sweet talks to our family and in the neighborhood. On the election day, each party were shuttling cars and vans in the neighborhood. They were picking-up voters to the polling station. The usual dram is that, on the way to the polling station, they will tell how good their party is, how good their candidate is, and why they all have to vote for their party.

I refused to take a car or a van. I went by my bike to vote. I went to the polling station. When I went inside, I went to collect my ballot paper, and the officer told me that you cannot vote second time. I told him that I was just coming now to vote for the first time. Apparently what happened, already someone has casted the vote for me. Democracy at the best! I am sure such manipulations are not uncommon even today! Since that incident, I never took election that seriously or wanting to vote. Anyways, it was an old incident and now I am an NRI.

When an important politician takes the road, the traffic is halted and the common people suffer. It's not at the time when their convoy crossing a major intersection, as soon as the politician wakes up at home (may be bit exaggeration here, but almost true!) the roads will be blocked or detour will start to happen.

Even this was made it as a joke in an Indian movie. In this particular movie, in one scene, the comedian waiting at the intersection where the police stopped everyone for a political convoy to pass that area. After a long wait, there was a Heli passing that area and the police men salute looking up and the traffic is cleared after the Heli crossed the area. It was very funny to watch it.

What I am trying to tell is that, both people and politicians aware of the real situation. The system is deep-rooted. Hard to change. No one can blame if someone choose not to vote!.

What we need is a paradigm shift. I am not sure if India is ready for it! Otherwise, you will not hear the same political news (strategy) again and again.

Educated people are wary of the whole process that involves elections. Casting of votes is unpredictable as rightly pointed out. People vote if they are convinced that their vote will make a difference. Maybe we really are taking democracy for granted !

Glenn Wayne Jones sir through message:

Yes we are. If we want democracy to flourish and us to do the same then we must invest in it. Unfortunately, few see the urgency and imperative of supporting their own freedoms by putting in a bit of effort to maintain and increase them, so we are at risk of calamity. Democracy and freedom as in Canada are exemplary; more could be done everywhere including in Canada. However, there are too few who see the issue as important, and don't see the risks of deteriorating democracy or another system. Also, democracy, as in the USA, is at risk of "manufacturing consent", power-based rejection of accountability, and "atherosclerosis" in processes and bureaucracy...so without active citizenry and so forth we are at serious risk of democracy being undermined and subverted, and being replaced with worse regimes (pseudo-democracy or worse)... I wish everyone involved were better and more vigilant...but it really is the case that human life is so complex and short (relatively) and democracy maintenance and enhancement is not a priority for many--they may even think other systems are better, perhaps--and so it makes you feel either (1) why bother about it, what can I do anyway, etc, or (2) despair. Humans are so finite and limited in their ability to hold to ideals and values, and make them happen. We are always muddling through, often with wars and collapse. Democracy isn't always the best, but it is better than the rest, because it promotes freedoms and rights, etc. Those who have never tried it, should try it, and they'll probably agree.

@Michael Brückner sir,

@Nelson Orringer sir,

@Hanno Krieger sir,

@Jaya Kurhekar ma'm

The Election Commission of India is very thoughtful about the lower participation of urban citizens. It has already answered all the doubts raised here.

1. If one is not satisfied with the election procedure, he/she should come to the polling booth and may literally refuse to vote and can submit the reason for refusal. ATLEAST LET YOUR REFUSAL COUNT.

2. if one found none of the candidates suitable enough to vote for, then there is a NOTA (None Of The Above), by this one can reject all candidates anonymously.

3. Government declared paid leave for all public and private workers. So, job cannot be the reason for no voting. But, SMART urban citizens UTILIZE this paid leave as a holiday for family outing.

Now, a supplementary question,

Should a citizen claim for his democratic rights when he don't participate in this democratic duty?

Dear Darasingh

Majority of the educated and urban population are not really serious about participation in elections because of a number of reasons:

1. They think their vote will not change the result.

2. Polling booth too far away.

3. Long queues (time spent near the polling booth) for voting.

4. Paid leave for voting is considered as a holiday

Is it the correct approach? No. But then they think normally they are normally smarter than others and are not really amenable for any suggestion otherwise. That is why we see large turnouts in villages because it is easy to mobilize them because they are willing to accept the advice from elders.

@Darasingh,

the statement, who doesn´t claim has not or should not have democratic rights is very strange. Please read Nageswara listing and arguements.

One of the main reasons here in Europe not to vote, is the wish not to elect the special offered politicians because you don´t share their opinions or your voting won´t change anything.

@Darasingh,

No. Voting is purely a democratic right as Hanno puts it. Whether they exercise or not is their choice. Later on they should not complain about the elected member since they did not exercise their right. SO we need more education to these so called urbanites about the value of voting and electing the right candidate.

Dear Nageswara,

you really point it out. I´m afraid of the tendency to deny democratic rights by an unwanted behaviour of the voters.

I agree with Nageswara for the listing and nice arguements. Thank you.

If you study voting patterns you will find that this applies to many countries. The percentage in major cities is always lower than smaller ones. Voting is a right that we may or may not choose to exercise as we wish.

I believe that the problem facing democracy is cultural. Some principles of democracy goes against some cultural norms. This is why custodians of cultures are the best people to interpret it to the rural people and when that happens it is often easier to mobilize them to vote, but the danger in this circumstance is that they vote for whoever the cultural leader wants, since they have no other way of knowing the candidates. Again in rural areas people vote for candidates who are related to them closely or remotely, it doesn't matter how incompetent and wrong the candidate may be. I think that culture is a determining factor on democratization process. In developed cities nonchalance is often caused by the history of insincerity in the whole electoral process.