Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

In just one month since this year, a number of Asian countries that are deemed democracies by the West have witnessed social chaos due to elections.

In Bangladesh, large-scale disturbances occurred during the parliamentary elections at the beginning of this year, resulting in several deaths and more than 120 polling stations being torched.

Then, the whole society in Thailand has been gridlocked in sharp conflicts since protests disrupted voting in the country's general election.

The situation in the mountainous country Nepal has been relatively mild, as the election deadlock that had been dragged for months ended. But the new prime minister has only brought dim hope of stability to the public.

Usually, people attribute the social unrest in these developing countries to the widening gap between rich and poor. But the chaos in 2013 shows that the deeper reason is likely embedded in political systems.

The real problem might be that the current imperfect democratic systems have offered room for populism, and caused confrontations among different religious groups, among various social classes and among different political parties.

For the countries whose social and economic conditions are far from ideal, an imperfect representative democracy has gradually created a fundamental issue that makes society split because of votes.

The prevalence of populism is attributed to the power of votes.

Social welfare becomes a commodity that can be exchanged for votes. The interests of some people are met, while those of others get hurt.

When democracy turns into confrontation, elections become the battlefield. The head-on clash between two parties only brings about disorder.

As a result, democracy becomes an excuse for people taking on the streets and seeking to oppose the ruler through non-democratic means. The disorder in Bangladesh and Thailand are typical examples in point.

Votes determine politics, the outcome of which is governors have to put in more resources to the biggest source of votes - people living at the bottom of society.

Satisfying the needs of these people without limits becomes the sole condition of whether the rulers can remain in power.

In India, the parliament is clearly aware of the elections taking place in 2014, so it passed a bill to provide subsidized food to two-thirds of the population last year.

Setting aside the fact that this large sum of money will burden the already huge budget deficit, the money should be utilized in building ports and roads or promoting the productivity of the country's manufacturing industry.

Like other developing countries, what India needs now is not subsidy but real actions.

However, a government constrained by votes can only bet on social welfare and exchange it for votes.

This phenomenon also reveals why some Asian countries always linger in the middle income trap.

Although the countries that have experienced social chaos have made remarkable achievements in recent years, especially in overcoming poverty, one common scene is that there is an obvious imbalance between social productivity development and individuals' income and their social welfare.

The key to escaping the middle income trap lies in not only helping more people out of poverty but also raising their productivity.

When the economy is favorable, the former may be achieved, satisfying the needs of both the middle class and the bottom class.

But when the economy is not in a good condition, the interests of the middle class will be divided to make up for those of the bottom class, which will lead to resentment of the middle class and the split between the two classes.

Unfortunately, Asia is heading to an era when the economic engine slows down. When it is difficult to generate new interests, original interests need to be redistributed. That's how chaos emerges.

The author is a senior editor with People's Daily. He is now stationed in Brazil. dinggang@globaltimes.com.cn. Follow him on Twitter at @dinggangchina