Monday, February 16, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Democracy: my thoughts
Ostentatious. That may be your reaction when you go through the next lines of my post, (I hope you care to) but the first thing that appears to be the most deserving is a discussion on one of the most old and novel ideas that has revolutionized human society and civilization. Democracy. India today boasts on its most significant achievement of maintaining itself as a democracy till now, when all its neighbors has been cursed with the intimidation of autocracy, at least for some period. One of the reasons, and perhaps the most significant one, why India still lags behind China, is certainly the difference in our political lookouts. But I personally would not prefer to sacrifice my political freedom for a meager increment in GDP and I believe, no other Indian would.
Historically, Indian civilization was truly the pioneer spreading the idea of democracy. Even before Alexander's visit to India, which ushered a new age in Indian history with Chandragupta Maurya taking over the crown of Maghdha, there used to be sixteen 'Maha Janapada's, a few of which used to be ruled over by elected people. But undoubtedly, true journey of Indian democracy started on the auspicious mid night of August the 14th, when India woke up to a new dawn, new life and freedom, to rediscover herself. “A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance.....” I could not resist quoting Nehru. On the 26th of January, 1950, on the very day on which 20 years ago Nehru led Congress sworn to “Purna Swaraj” in a shivering cold morning, India declared herself a democracy bestowed with one of the greatest constitutions ever written.
Democracy has always been our pride and it will continue to be. At it's own quality, it's a great leveler. It makes everyone queue on the same ground- from the Brahmans to Dalits, from Mittals to Mistris and from Rahman to Raman to cast their democratic right. No other idea has ever succeeded to wipe out the boundaries in this magnitude. Think of Jadavs of Bihar. Even in this enlightened modern era, they had to bow to Brahmins, do their chores for free and they were subjected to such humiliations that can not even be imagined in this civilized world. Now the things have changed, and they surely have changed for better. A nation long suppressed, as Nehru would say, has found its utterance and that also in a complete non violent way. The credit, of course, goes to our democracy.
Even great ideas do have some loopholes, and for this one, the loopholes seem to be proportional to the magnitude of the greatness and novelty of the idea itself. On it's 60th year, as Indian democracy approaches its geezerhood, it's problems have started to flourish unbelievably fast. Some problems were inherent with the idea itself. Let us have a look at them first.
Democracy, as we have always believed, speaks for people. “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people”, surely you have read it a thousand times. But does it really speak for the people? Well, the problem is with the definition of “people”. Democracy never speaks for people, it speaks for the majority. That's the glitch. That means, a democratic decision, which finds even overwhelming support, can be a well neat ploy to categorically demoralize a specific portion of the society, which necessarily, is the minority part. History bears its evidence. Hitler, who vandalized the Jewish community during war, started his operation from his native land, which democratically elected him with a brute majority. (His party won a “landslide victory” securing 98% of votes before the war) More disturbingly, his pre-election manifestos severely castigated Jews, which means German people who gave him the mandate were not completely unaware of his intentions. Still, they voted for him and their outrage against the prosperous Jews scripted the most scandalous saga of modern history, quite democratically. Will you say again, all the decisions we take democratically, are righteous? No, and as it appears, success of democracy depends on the good will of majority of people and that of autocracy depends on the same of a single person, I don't know whether to go for a fuzzy analysis or a probabilistic one. (Surely some of you remember the poisoned bottle problem from SGh class)
Even that’s not the end of the story. Unbelievable, as it may appear, even majority does not always decide the fate of a decision in a democracy. How many of us eagerly waited for the much hyped Nano project in Singur? Definitely, the people supporting the move outnumbered the people opposing it. Still, it had to find another place. The magic wand seems to be with a simple word - ‘organized’. That’s another hoax of democracy. An organized minority can topple even a huge majority. I can’t be very much candid discussing all points here because that would be a severe test of your patience. But it won’t be offensive, at least not untrue; if I say the great ascend of Lalu Prasad or Mayavati and more recently Mr. Obama can be accredited to this democratic behavior.
Another problem seems to be quite practical. Assembly election is not far away and I am totally confused what should form the basis of my vote. The elected candidate in my constituency has not done his job, quite traditionally. So it’s time we go for a change and I myself being an ardent fan of Obama, am completely fascinated with any idea of change, right from clothes to MPs. But the problem is I don’t support the ideologies of other parties too. So, the million dollar question is, what should be your preference, when you proudly cast your democratic right. The performance of your representative, or the political and economic orientation that runs the country? I am baffled, discombobulated as some of my friends would say, and I request you to ask yourself also.
Now, the last and most seditious question. Putting it in most blatant way, should everyone in this country given a chance to vote? There are people, who undoubtedly lack the basic political awareness needed to participate in this process. They are the people who are exploited by the political goons who in turn corrupt the whole system making it vulnerable to depravity penetration. What good is a democratic right to the people whom we can not even provide basic amenities like food and security, forget about education and modernization. They elect people, who use these unfortunate, illiterate, poor beings for their own benefit, doing absolutely nothing for them. It’s high time we decide who are using the loopholes of the system to weaken it and take some protective measures.
But I am not pessimistic. I put my belief on good will of mankind. And I believe, democracy is just like science, which can use the same atomic energy to devastate life and rejuvenate it. Obviously, in the end, the user matters. I would like to follow the ideals of democracy just like West Bengal has democratically elected a particular party over the years, with the only reason, there is no better alternative !
Historically, Indian civilization was truly the pioneer spreading the idea of democracy. Even before Alexander's visit to India, which ushered a new age in Indian history with Chandragupta Maurya taking over the crown of Maghdha, there used to be sixteen 'Maha Janapada's, a few of which used to be ruled over by elected people. But undoubtedly, true journey of Indian democracy started on the auspicious mid night of August the 14th, when India woke up to a new dawn, new life and freedom, to rediscover herself. “A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance.....” I could not resist quoting Nehru. On the 26th of January, 1950, on the very day on which 20 years ago Nehru led Congress sworn to “Purna Swaraj” in a shivering cold morning, India declared herself a democracy bestowed with one of the greatest constitutions ever written.
Democracy has always been our pride and it will continue to be. At it's own quality, it's a great leveler. It makes everyone queue on the same ground- from the Brahmans to Dalits, from Mittals to Mistris and from Rahman to Raman to cast their democratic right. No other idea has ever succeeded to wipe out the boundaries in this magnitude. Think of Jadavs of Bihar. Even in this enlightened modern era, they had to bow to Brahmins, do their chores for free and they were subjected to such humiliations that can not even be imagined in this civilized world. Now the things have changed, and they surely have changed for better. A nation long suppressed, as Nehru would say, has found its utterance and that also in a complete non violent way. The credit, of course, goes to our democracy.
Even great ideas do have some loopholes, and for this one, the loopholes seem to be proportional to the magnitude of the greatness and novelty of the idea itself. On it's 60th year, as Indian democracy approaches its geezerhood, it's problems have started to flourish unbelievably fast. Some problems were inherent with the idea itself. Let us have a look at them first.
Democracy, as we have always believed, speaks for people. “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people”, surely you have read it a thousand times. But does it really speak for the people? Well, the problem is with the definition of “people”. Democracy never speaks for people, it speaks for the majority. That's the glitch. That means, a democratic decision, which finds even overwhelming support, can be a well neat ploy to categorically demoralize a specific portion of the society, which necessarily, is the minority part. History bears its evidence. Hitler, who vandalized the Jewish community during war, started his operation from his native land, which democratically elected him with a brute majority. (His party won a “landslide victory” securing 98% of votes before the war) More disturbingly, his pre-election manifestos severely castigated Jews, which means German people who gave him the mandate were not completely unaware of his intentions. Still, they voted for him and their outrage against the prosperous Jews scripted the most scandalous saga of modern history, quite democratically. Will you say again, all the decisions we take democratically, are righteous? No, and as it appears, success of democracy depends on the good will of majority of people and that of autocracy depends on the same of a single person, I don't know whether to go for a fuzzy analysis or a probabilistic one. (Surely some of you remember the poisoned bottle problem from SGh class)
Even that’s not the end of the story. Unbelievable, as it may appear, even majority does not always decide the fate of a decision in a democracy. How many of us eagerly waited for the much hyped Nano project in Singur? Definitely, the people supporting the move outnumbered the people opposing it. Still, it had to find another place. The magic wand seems to be with a simple word - ‘organized’. That’s another hoax of democracy. An organized minority can topple even a huge majority. I can’t be very much candid discussing all points here because that would be a severe test of your patience. But it won’t be offensive, at least not untrue; if I say the great ascend of Lalu Prasad or Mayavati and more recently Mr. Obama can be accredited to this democratic behavior.
Another problem seems to be quite practical. Assembly election is not far away and I am totally confused what should form the basis of my vote. The elected candidate in my constituency has not done his job, quite traditionally. So it’s time we go for a change and I myself being an ardent fan of Obama, am completely fascinated with any idea of change, right from clothes to MPs. But the problem is I don’t support the ideologies of other parties too. So, the million dollar question is, what should be your preference, when you proudly cast your democratic right. The performance of your representative, or the political and economic orientation that runs the country? I am baffled, discombobulated as some of my friends would say, and I request you to ask yourself also.
Now, the last and most seditious question. Putting it in most blatant way, should everyone in this country given a chance to vote? There are people, who undoubtedly lack the basic political awareness needed to participate in this process. They are the people who are exploited by the political goons who in turn corrupt the whole system making it vulnerable to depravity penetration. What good is a democratic right to the people whom we can not even provide basic amenities like food and security, forget about education and modernization. They elect people, who use these unfortunate, illiterate, poor beings for their own benefit, doing absolutely nothing for them. It’s high time we decide who are using the loopholes of the system to weaken it and take some protective measures.
But I am not pessimistic. I put my belief on good will of mankind. And I believe, democracy is just like science, which can use the same atomic energy to devastate life and rejuvenate it. Obviously, in the end, the user matters. I would like to follow the ideals of democracy just like West Bengal has democratically elected a particular party over the years, with the only reason, there is no better alternative !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)