State of Indian Democracy
Monday, June 8, 2009
J. William Fullbright once said
India is the largest democracy in the world. Is it something to be proud off? No. Why? Its because we will be largest anything? Our population dictates that.
Should we be proud of out democracy? Yes. When no one gave us a chance, we succeeded. When every nation in our vicinity has managed to get itself into chaos we have survived. We have gone form strength to strength.
Is our democracy perfect? No. Why? There is a myriad of reasons but one I feel which is more responsible for our failings in democracy and that reason is that we have no democracy in our democratic political parties.
We crib about the fact that India has become a 'Dynastic Democracy'. TV Channels and Arm Chair Intellectuals often lament the fact that why do Indians choose members of a particular family. The political parties retort that if public elects member of a particular family then why should they field them. To make matters worse almost all regional parties and indeed a national party has become personal fiefdom of the 'great leaders'.
Why is it? A probable reason is that Indians are necessarily feudal in their nature. If that were the case than no Maharajah would ever loose. But maharajahs loose. Even Indira Gandhi lost. Then why do we keep electing people of one political family. It is because in India we cannot choose who will contest the elections. This results in the fact that we don't know our candidates. A person with a dynasty is known. His families views are known and more often than not his views would be in line with those. Primaries in US let the public know where their candidate stand.
Secondly no alternate leadership is allowed to flourish. In states the great leaders word is the final word. Even at the center dissent is not allowed. What happened to the concept of dissent in democracy. With no alternate leaders being allowed to air their view we end up with only the son/wife/daughter/brother of the great leader as a viable alternative.
Final nail in the coffin was the anti defection law which institutionalized the fact that people cannot disagree with their leadership. Agreed the intent of the law was correct but sometimes even well intentioned steps lead to disaster. This time it took away the right of dissent. We should find a way through which MP/MLAs can voice their dissent without being susceptible to horse trading.
In a democracy dissent is an act of faith. Like medicine, the test of its value is not in its taste, but in its effects.Democracy is often said to be a better form of governance than autocracy. It s because in Democracy people can voice there concern about any step a government takes. It means that even government actions which causes minor inconvenience to people are opposed. It also means that a democratic government can seldom cause grave damages to public. No Giant Leap Of Mao is possible in a democratic setup and this is one reason why democracy is a preferred form of government. This is why our forefathers chose democracy over autocracy.
India is the largest democracy in the world. Is it something to be proud off? No. Why? Its because we will be largest anything? Our population dictates that.
Should we be proud of out democracy? Yes. When no one gave us a chance, we succeeded. When every nation in our vicinity has managed to get itself into chaos we have survived. We have gone form strength to strength.
Is our democracy perfect? No. Why? There is a myriad of reasons but one I feel which is more responsible for our failings in democracy and that reason is that we have no democracy in our democratic political parties.
We crib about the fact that India has become a 'Dynastic Democracy'. TV Channels and Arm Chair Intellectuals often lament the fact that why do Indians choose members of a particular family. The political parties retort that if public elects member of a particular family then why should they field them. To make matters worse almost all regional parties and indeed a national party has become personal fiefdom of the 'great leaders'.
Why is it? A probable reason is that Indians are necessarily feudal in their nature. If that were the case than no Maharajah would ever loose. But maharajahs loose. Even Indira Gandhi lost. Then why do we keep electing people of one political family. It is because in India we cannot choose who will contest the elections. This results in the fact that we don't know our candidates. A person with a dynasty is known. His families views are known and more often than not his views would be in line with those. Primaries in US let the public know where their candidate stand.
Secondly no alternate leadership is allowed to flourish. In states the great leaders word is the final word. Even at the center dissent is not allowed. What happened to the concept of dissent in democracy. With no alternate leaders being allowed to air their view we end up with only the son/wife/daughter/brother of the great leader as a viable alternative.
Final nail in the coffin was the anti defection law which institutionalized the fact that people cannot disagree with their leadership. Agreed the intent of the law was correct but sometimes even well intentioned steps lead to disaster. This time it took away the right of dissent. We should find a way through which MP/MLAs can voice their dissent without being susceptible to horse trading.
