Chomsky reffering to Mayawati
In recent article by Noam Chomsky, he reffers to Mayawati of Uttar Pradesh in following way:
Reactions to the election from across the spectrum commonly adopted the “soaring rhetoric” that was the hallmark of the Obama campaign. Veteran correspondent John Hughes wrote that “America has just shown the world an extraordinary example of democracy at work,” while to British historian-journalist Tristram Hunt, the election showed that America is a land “where miracles happen,” such as “the glorious epic of Barack Obama” (leftist French journalist Jean Daniel). “In no other country in the world is such an election possible,” said Catherine Durandin of the Institute for International and Strategic Relations in Paris. Many others were no less rapturous.
The rhetoric has some justification if we keep to the West, but elsewhere matters are different. Consider the world’s largest democracy, India. The chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, which is larger than all but a few countries of the world and is notorious for horrifying treatment of women, is not only a woman, but a Dalit (“untouchable”), at the lowest rung of India’s disgraceful caste system.
It is up to Indians if they want to feel proud or feel sorry. 
Mayawait is notorious for horrifying treatment of women ? HOW exactly? Corruption allegation, undemocratic party affairs, birthday bash etc. I have read, but this. It is misleading.
Sorry I misunderstood. He meant the state was notorious for horrifying treatment of women.
Hello Prabin,
Noam chomsky is very shewd and to the point writer. He says things very conditional. He is not praising Mayawati but the democratic system which can allow such women to get elected.
My comment was that Mayawati is the best example he can find who is so corrupt. It is kind of irony