Please revise the attached document of an AI generated annotated bibliography for a future assignment of mine so that Turnitin doesn’t flag it for ChatGPT & alert my professor.
Understanding Political Developments in India
Course Description:
When India gained independence from British Rule in 1947, observers noted that the likelihood of the new country remaining democratic was limited. There was no democratic country that was poor and divided along caste, religious, linguistic, and regional differences. Yet, India proved such observers wrong and has remained one of the world’s most thriving democracies for over seven decades. Contemporary Indian politics, like electoral politics in many parts of the world, has taken a rightward turn. For a long time, a centrist party (or a coalition) led by the Congress Party governed India. The elections of 2014 and 2019 changed all that. A Hindu right party – the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is in power at the center and many states of India. For some, the rise of the right signals the end of the politics of accommodation in India. The rise of the right poses a puzzle for many political scientists who ask how a country with multiple social, economic, ethnic, linguistic, and religious cleavages elect a Hindu right party to power. Why did the centrist politics of Congress fail? Is it the Congress Party that has declined, or accommodative politics no longer has a place in India? To answer these questions, we will understand India’s social complexity and the political institutions designed to accommodate the many social divisions.
Final Paper Overview:
All students will write a final paper on one of three questions that will be released on the first day of classes. The paper should be 2500 words.
Instructions:
An annotated bibliography references relevant scholarly work (Research Articles, Books, Working Papers, etc.) on the chosen topic and briefly discusses each entry.
Here are some guidelines for the annotated bibliography assignment
Your submissions must have three references and their discussion.
You should only use academic research—journal articles, working papers, and books—for the annotated bibliography. Newspaper articles or opinion pieces will not be accepted.
Each discussion must be 200-250 words. You will be penalized for being more than 50 words over the word limit.
You cannot use course readings as one of the three references. Including a course reading as one of the references would lead to an automatic deduction of three points.
You will be graded based on the relevance of the reading and the quality of the discussion written.
The discussion should 1) concisely summarize the overall argument from the reading relevant to the question. It can also mention details about the context/evidence studied and results. 2) Discuss how you will use the readings for your final paper. Does it support the argument you would be making? Will it be used as counter-evidence in your final paper?
Format:
Question:
Reference 1:
Discussion of Reference 1:
Reference 2:
Discussion of Reference 2:
Reference 3:
Discussion of Reference 3:
Question:
Can politicians’ desire to win elections explain the challenges to political order, such as separatism and ethnic violence, and the functioning of democracy in India?
Example of summary:
Ashutosh Varshney and Joshua Gubler. 2012. ‘The State and Civil Society in Communal Violence’ in Atul Kohli and Prerna Singh, ed. Routledge Handbook of Indian Politics.
In this article, Ashutosh Varshney and Joshua Gubler work to create a “good theory” regarding the state’s role in mitigating ethno-communal violence. The authors used a vast array of data for their article, pulling from sources like an analysis of all recorded Hindu-Muslim riots across India between 1950 and 1995 and a study that Varshney conducted of six Indian towns in which cities with endemic communal violence and rare violence were paired and observed alongside their Hindu-Muslim percentages. This research focuses on the intersection of ethno-religious identities in India and outbreaks of violence. The article is helpful for my chosen prompt because Varshney and Gubler examine the influence of deep-seated ethnic divisions while also exploring the state and local initiatives that can impact whether violence does or does not break out. They use contrasting examples to show how strong communal ties prevented violence between Hindus and Muslims in Bhiwandi. When similar ties degraded in the face of opportunities for power in the towns of Ahmedabad, Baroda, and Godhra, the degradation led to violence worsened by a lack of state interference. The authors conclude that while ethno-communal divisions can serve as the base for conflict, with local structures in place creating connections and not separating different groups, strong social ties can prevent violence. However, the authors also note that the actions of the state can serve as a spark to prompt violence. I can use this to support the thesis that ethnic divisions alone do not lead to ethnic violence.
