India is a multi castes society , so each section needs to have a say in the decision making process and the parties help them to do so, moreover it offers a greater as well as better choice to people among the candidates , the multi party system satisfies the goal of democracy of "people being able to influence the decisions that influence the people " . Although the competition for power is huge and aggressive , the parties need to take care of the emotions of people , to get elected and to be elected by satisfying the people
In general a multi-party political system insures that there will never be a single majority making every single decision, thus making it harder for them to get whatever their wishes are easily. This means that wide scale government corruption has a harder time occurring at the top at the cost of it taking longer to do anything.
Since every party wants to come to power so they would try to increase their foothold at each and every decision making event. The opposition will always tend to oppose any decision that the ruling party makes good or bad just to have an edge in the upcoming elections by showcasing that the ruling party hasnt done any good in its tenure.Multipary system can be good for countries where development parameters are already very high.But in India we cannot afford to have this.If development has to happen then infrastructure has to be created and this would require all sorts of decision that wud require certain people to lose such as incase of and acquisitions for making roads. Here is the problem , opposition will allign with these people and hinder development pace....So clearly we cannot afford to hear each and every voice.Clearly China that doesnot have to care about peoples opinion and has an effective single party can and has advanced a long way
Really? Ours doesn't work at all. Why would someone want to institute that nightmare in another country? I have never seen any supporting evidence that a polarized governmental system like ours has ever resulted in any beneficial outcomes. If someone can qualify or quantify the benefit beyond just saying that it ensures different viewpoints I would be happy to reverse my opinion.
Party loyalty created a bandwagon effect where people can just vote based on the party they generally agree with. It happens in America every time. When there aren't parties, there are two ways to vote. Look at the candidates views or pick at random. Those who pick at random will most likely do that anyway or just not vote. Not having parties would be beneficial in India. They need to avoid the trap America fell into.