Friday, August 26, 2005

Democracy II

One of the dictionary meanings of democracy is government by the people; exercised either directly or through elected representatives. If we take the literal meaning of the definition then we end up with only visible portion of democracy. That is, voters electing their representative and by exercising their vote of consent they take direct part in the governance. But governance of law, international relations, trade, defense, social structure etc. actually encompasses the true meaning of democracy. Unfortunately, the representation of common man in all these sectors is virtually non-existent. Once we elect a representative, the nation goes in their hand and for next few years at least, general populace is left in lurch.

The feeling of lack of say in the crucial matter, perhaps, actual lack of representation mocks the very system by dissociating the populace from the democracy. They feel alienated enough and whenever the political leadership makes a mistake, general populace refuse to owe the responsibility. German society refuses to accept that, directly or indirectly, they were responsible for genocide. American society fails to understand that they are the one who elected Nixon in spite of his ambiguous stand on Vietnam War. Do I need to mention re-election of George W. Bush here?

Western countries on their quest of plundering the world forcefully sowed an alien form of democracy in rest of the world. The promised anodyne effect of democracy is nowhere in sight and the result had been nothing short of a disaster. Cursory glance on once conquered world and the banality of the democracy stands naked. Except few functioning democracies like India, Japan, South Korea, and South Africa, the race to keep pace with western nation had resulted at best a failed state and at worst catastrophe. Borrowed concept, borrowed institution, borrowed attitude, borrowed mentality never works, and if it had worked some where then exception proves the rule.

I am not lamenting democracy for sake of lamenting. But, what happened to most of the world in 1940’s is happening again, in Iraq. Without considering the sentiment and mentality of the society, western nations are thrusting their form of democracy on Iraq. The result of it will be seen after 10-20 years or more. I am sure it won’t be great.

Reiterating my stand; I am not against democracy and I see democracy as the only legitimate way of governing society. At the same time, if the democracy does not reflect the mentality of the society then it is more often than not, bound to fail. And, rather than changing the whole society, we need to overhaul the system. I don’t mean any revolution because revolutions are futile efforts leading nowhere. Rather concrete steps tailor made for the society and by the society.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

According to me,"revolutions are futile efforts leading nowhere" is an unacceptable sentence.When you say "concrete steps tailor made for the society and by the society" it does mean change in society, and revolution is generally a change for good, you can say it as an abrubt change,but then it is reasonable and most of the time successful.
Rest of the column is interesting.

Amit Rahalkar said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Amit Rahalkar said...

In one of the responses to your earlier blog of Democracy you wrote..."if we make an individual stronger from inside ....then there is higher probability that majority of the people will live happily in the society..."

I think you should carry that thread forward...that is a very hopeful 'door' you were opening.

Let's take a holistic view, a view from 10,000 feet above...a man is by nature a social animal ...in some men the 'social' aspects play dominant role...whilst in others the 'animal' part...Although there is no doubt that the man does indeed want to give a 'structure' to that conglomeration of likes of himself ...a society.
Since this very structure is a pure invention of man , a various periods of times, depending on which of the qualities are dominant in that period, he devises a system accordingly...
A few thousand years ago , at least in India , a 'horizontal' 4 dimensional structure, with a distinct function attributed to each, was invented...over time it’s boundaries rigidified to form a ‘jati’ system. This structure gave birth to the kings-subjects type of systems...

The western world came up with it's own 'caste' ( in Spanish literally means a class) , a ‘vertical’ structure of it's own. The tussle between these classes also gave rise to a bourgeoisie and proletariat system which in turn gave birth to the communist system ....

Now we have this system called democracy...which I think is the best system of all , since the majority of the men decide their fate together...the downside is, often, the best foot that the society puts forward is determined by the lowest common denominator...hence what we should aim for is towards increasing the quality of the 'this lowest denominator' ...which you pointed out very correctly...”by making an indivisual stronger..”

I will leave it to you to extend this thread further...looking forward to see how it develops...

Rgd,
- Amit

Anonymous said...

I am happy to learn that you are making an effort to have/start a discussion on crucial topics like Democracy.
I agree with amit's comment.

As far as my views are concerned, today the world works on the Principle of Realization. Not that I have read or heard it from anywhere, but strongly feel its effect. Indeed, it applies everywhere,

Any mistake an individual does can be best explained by making the person realize. To realize a situation/action an individual could either opt to learn from the past or react spontaneously (without any thinking). I would say that an important part which most of us forget in our busy life is introspection. And to add more I would also say Retro-introspection. If Democracy is to be seen the way we want, mass realization between individuals is important to make them stronger from inside. Realization, which I believe should be of all types. To point some, they could be realization of the actions made in anger, in pain, distress, confusion, jealousy, hatred, enmity, etc.

Nikhil

One in the crowd said...

Democracy can work provided people have the will to make it work...as Amit very correctly pointed out, it's generally the stance of the lowest common denominator that triumphs...and we as a society need to rise higher and blur the mark between the two fragments...and in my view, it is easier to achieve that in a democracy rather than in an autocracy...