A Long Rant on Democracy

Recent events in the Indian political scenario have made me quite sick and I am sure that it is making other people just as sick too. It is quite a painful process to open the newspaper in the morning and force yourself to read about the latest atrocities committed by our dear governments (be it the Central, the State or the Local governments). Some of these incidents are outrageously comical while others are downright sinister. It seems to me as if the quality of governance in this country has gone from the dogs to parasitic bacteria. And parasites they are, these politicians, playing subtle (and not-so-subtle) mind games to acquire as much power as they can.

Some events, such as the recent Amarnath land transfer issue has been positively scary. Though Kashmir had always been a hotspot for trouble in my lifetime, never have I felt such a strong current of separatism washing out of the state. For the probably the first time in years, I am really frightened of the consequences and repurcussions that may arise from a single incident such as this. But do the politicians care? I doubt it. They seem to be hardly concerned about the fact that Jammu & Kashmir might get embroiled in a dangerous inter-community clash. During normal times, this may be bad enough but coming at a time when there are other worries plaguing the nation - a slowing economy, rising prices, terrorism and political turmoil in neighbouring Pakistan - the Jammu & Kashmir row might just be the spark that will ignite the oil spill of destruction across the country. But though both the government and the opposition seem to be very interested in the development of affairs in Kashmir, they don't seem to display either caution or tact while handling this highly sensitive issue.

Why have we ended up like this? Why have ended up with gerontocrats whose only aim and ambition in life is to gather as much power before dying? Does one really want to know? Not really, because the answer is a rather discomforting thought. It is we who took matters out of our hands and placed both the power and responsibility on some one else. Most Indians seem to be proud of the fact that they are citizens of the world's largest democracy. I am not. I am not proud of that fact because it is not a fact at all. India, I recently concluded, is not a democracy.

Of Democracy

If India is not a democracy then what is it? In order to answer that question, one must review the very definition of democracy. Abraham Lincoln gave a very simple definition "A government of the people, by the people, for the people". Nothing really, can describe a democracy more lucidly. But for the sake of technicality, I quote the Oxford Dictionary meaning "A form of government in which people have a voice in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives"

What do both these definitions have in common? Any fool can see that both definitions lay emphasis on people. Or more precisely, on power being a tool of the people. In other words, a democracy tries to contain the power of decision-making to the citizens of the democracy. But how? Oxford provides the answer: Through elected representatives. So what's new about that? India does have elected respresentatives. Ah, but that's the point - elected representatives are meant to ensure that power to make decisions lies with the citizens. In India, elected representatives don't do that - they keep the power with themselves.

Do the people have a voice?

Does the common citizen have any say in how the matters of the country are run? Yes, they can vote for or against a party once in five years. Let me repeat that - the only time the common citizen gets a chance to demonstrate political power is once in five years. Five years. In five years, a lot of things can happen - both good and bad. The government in power claims credit for the good times and lays blame on others for the bad. So, in almost ninety nine out of a hundred times, a government at the end of five years usually has a mixed report. This confuses the ordinary voter and ultimately, he or she either votes for a party because of some illogical loyalty or he or she will simply give up and not vote at all.

Let me come back to why India is not a proper democracy again. Examine the Lincoln definition of a democracy once more. A government of the people. The Indian political scene is not of the people at all. At least, not of common people like you and me. They consist of seasoned politicians who have either trained themselves or have been trained by someone else to retain as much political power as possible with themselves. Common people really have no voice in the Indian political system.

Take some government project as simple as say, tarring the roads in your neighbourhood. Firstly, the local government rarely listens to your complaints. Secondly, neither you nor your neighbours can decide which contracter is going to be responsible for the tarring of the roads. Thirdly, the duration and deadline of the project is decided by the government, not by you. And finally, the government has no obligation to complete the project and can abandon it whenever it feels like doing so. Strangely, all this is being done, for you.

The Reason for the Madness

Why is the situation so bad, even at a local level? The answer is simple. The situation is horrifying because, we as citizens take no interest in decision-making. We hardly ever bother about taking an active participation in the democratic process. A democracy doesn't function like that. If a government of the people, has no people in the first place then how can it be for the people? We citizens are happy to come to election booths once in five years, vote for someone and then sit back, expecting our representatives to work miracles.

Democracy is not the same as elections. As Ramesh Ramanathan, the founder of the NPO Janaagraha (where I volunteered this summer) put it "Don't move from E to F (Elect to Forget). Start with E and stay on E (Elect and Empower).". Citizens cannot just sit back and complain about the political system. They have to take an active part in it. That is what a democracy is all about. The process doesn't end with voting, it begins with it. After having voted for a candidate, it is the job of the citizens to make sure that their elected representative is doing a good job. Doesn't one do the same thing while hiring a new recruit for a company?

The Whys and Hows

But why should the citizens go through so much bother? Well, if you don't, you end with a scenario like today. When we vote for someone, we give them both power and responsibility. If there is no careful scrutiny to make sure that the powers are being used responsibly, the incentive to shirk responsibility is too high. There are few idealistic people in the world today, with even fewer being in politics.

All right, let's say one wants to be actively involved. How does one go about it? Unfortunately, there is no real concrete platform from where people can voice their concerns, especially on national issues. Urban areas, surprisingly, are much more at a disadvantage, legally, than rural areas because unlike rural areas, there is no equivalent of a panchayati system in cities.

So what does one do? For starters, one should get down from one's ivory tower. Secondly, one should start organizing oneself with others to form collective bodies to represent common concerns. Bureaucracy tends to listen more to organization than to individual. Thirdly, one should take a greater interest in what is happening around one's immediate locality and try to correct any faults within that locality. Only after this, can one try and work their way up to try and influence higher-level decisions.

Efforts are already underway in this direction. Organizations like Janaagraha and Lok Satta are pioneering a concept known as the 'Area Sabha' which may turn out to be the platform that urban citizens desperately need to address their concerns. Local welfare groups have been formed in many cities and many areas to interact with the government over matters regarding their interest. Efforts are on to mobilize rural areas as well. What is required right now is greater awareness followed by greater participation.

Through out this post, I have referred to the government as if it was an entity separate and distinct from the rest of society. The truth is far from it. The government at the end of the day, is an extension of our own selves. Ignoring it is not going to make it go away because contrary to whatever anarchism might say, the government is still the most viable form of self-rule. Remember that term. Self-rule.

Note: I wrote this piece in one long sitting around 1 AM in the morning. Therefore this piece may not have been all that great a read - both grammatically and argumentatively. My sincere apologies for that. Still, it's nice to rant and rave for a while!