It leads to corruption.
Explanation
Electoral competition is the essence of democracy, ensuring that political parties and leaders are accountable to the people. However, the intense rivalry to secure power often generates negative externalities that affect the quality of governance and social harmony.
Analysis of Options:
- It leads to hyper-nationalism. It leads to hyper-nationalism: Incorrect. While nationalism can be a tool used during campaigns, it is not an inherent structural drawback of electoral competition itself. Competition can focus on local issues, caste equations, or economic policies just as easily as nationalism.
- It leads to corruption. It leads to corruption: Correct. The pressure to win elections at any cost often encourages political parties and candidates to use "dirty tricks," excessive money power, and muscle power. This creates a breeding ground for electoral malpractice and systemic corruption, as candidates may seek to recover election expenses through illicit means once in power.
- It leads to the suppression of the press. It leads to the suppression of the press: Incorrect. A vibrant electoral democracy typically requires a free press to function as a watchdog. Suppression of the press is a characteristic of authoritarianism, not a direct consequence of competitive elections.
- It leads to the abolition of the judiciary. It leads to the abolition of the judiciary: Incorrect. The judiciary acts as an umpire in electoral competition (e.g., resolving disputes). Electoral competition operates within the constitutional framework and does not lead to the abolition of the institutions that regulate it.
Key Takeaway:
The primary drawbacks of electoral competition include the creation of disunity (factionalism), the use of unfair means to win (corruption), and the discouragement of good individuals from entering politics due to the unhealthy nature of the rivalry.