Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 20

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed)

Representation through political parties

When a political party manages to form a government its total share of votes may at best be less than 35% of adult population, often much less (Article 2). This falls much short of the target to make them representative of total adult population. For example, even after spectacular success in 2014 elections, BJP has support of only 31% of electorate!! What makes such representation worse and questionable is that these 31% voters included those who (a) voted in droves and forsook their individual responsibility, (b) sold their vote, (c) allowed themselves to be intimidated, (d) preferred persons of their own caste against more efficient persons who have capacity to serve people, (e) voted for a party candidate and (f) voted responsibly. If political parties can have support of only a minority of the electorate, of which responsible voters form only a small proportion, how can we justify a party system for governance?

                                                          

Further, even these elected persons are not free to express their opinions frankly to support needs and aspirations of people because of being subservient to their party and use of whip while voting. Hardly any political party has effective internal democracy.  How can parties which do not have respect for internal democracy  safeguard democracy in the country? If there is no party system, elected persons can act with freedom to ensure peoples’ welfare.

There are talented persons in political parties. If only they were encouraged (or at least allowed) to think and act giving more priority to national interest than to party interest, manifold shameful situations pointed out in Article 15 could have been avoided. A pertinent example is that Dr. Manmohan Singh saved the country from financial collapse when he was allowed to act. But, later on he lost freedom to act and earned the unsavory reputation of being a man without his own ideas!! Elected leaders (even if talented) can be either puppets in the hands of a coterie within parties or victims of coalition politics. If there is no party system, talented representatives will be allowed to act keeping benefit for the country in mind.

Another serious drawback of party system is that large gold mines of talents outside the party in power have seldom been made use of!! These can be used for benefit of the country if there is no party system.

Important legislations are manipulated by party in power with an eye on votes. In this dismal situation which shows lack of ethics of care for people, how can political parties justify their existence as makers of law for people? If there is no party system, legislations with an eye on votes will not occur.

Party interests get much higher priority than peoples’ interests. This diversion of interest led to many shameful situations (Article 15). But political parties did not bother to take any action – did not even  question about these. If there is no party system, such callous neglect of peoples’ interest will not arise.

Most parties have large army of grass root level workers. The main (or only) interest of these workers is safeguarding party interests. They often start inter party disputes and quarrels. Resort to violence is quite common and even murders have occurred.  Now the country has the burden of tackling problems created by these workers with conflicting ideologies and without any vision about national interests.  It is possible that political parties may have created Frankensteins over which they will have no control in future. All these can be prevented if there is no party system.

Another problem is that their hero worship has led to many unfortunate situations such as blindly supporting undesirable or criminal activities of their heroes and side tracking of honest persons who could have helped the country. These can be prevented if there is no party system.

A similar situation prevails among college students who are carried away by party interests and create campus problems. Attention of these young minds is diverted from their studies and a positive attitude to peoples’ problems to a negative one of raving and fighting for party interests. If there is no party system, diversion of interest from studies and fights among college students can be avoided.

These young minds are also misguided by disqualifying behaviour and attitudes of some present day politicians (Article 19). When these fertile minds grow up in this background they will imbibe undesirable traits. They will become faction leaders, manipulators and traders of hatred. This explosive situation can lead to many undesirable outcomes in future. These undesirable developments can be avoided if there is no party system.

Political parties use their large army of grass root level workers to cleverly manipulate creation of caste, linguistic, religious and other group conflicts as well as cliques, crimes and other situations to safeguard their selfish interests. They are also used for spreading rumours. Top leaders of parties do not curb criminal behaviour of members. Thus, political parties are responsible for crimes and creation of hatred and violence in many parts of the country. Crime, hatred and violence will be reduced to a large extent and peace will prevail if party system is abolished.

While people are suffering from hunger and poverty, most political parties spend huge amounts to celebrate party events. If in power, they manipulate to use tax payers’ money for these celebrations. For example, UPA-2 spent about Rs. 30 lakhs for hosting a dinner for their third anniversary bash. Atrociously, this single meal cost Rs.7,700 per head as compared Rs.22.42 and Rs.28.6 considered sufficient by Planning Commission for total daily expenses of the poor in rural and urban areas respectively!! More shocking is that bulk of Rs. 30 lakhs came from Ministry of External Affairs. “Taxpayers’ money was treated as if it was the party’s to burn” (Deccan Chronicle dated 1-10-12). If there is no party system, all these (and some more hidden misuses of money)  can be avoided.

As stated by Chief Information Commission, six major political parties are “substantially financed” by central government (DNA dated 04-06-13, front page). Large amounts are also spent on providing security to top political leaders, besides deputing many police officials. If there is no party system, public funds to support political parties can be used for benefit of people and diversion of police from their normal duties can be avoided.

“Illegal money circulates at every level in every party.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 25-01-12) Political parties, being beneficiaries of black money, are a root cause for its creation and sustenance. Abolition of party system will lead to substantial reduction in black money.

Another serious problem is creation of duel power centres (multiple in case of coalition governments) which lead to obstacles and delays in decision making. These can be avoided if there is no party system.

An editorial in Deccan Chronicle dated 4th December 2012 also highlights harm done by party system: “The trouble with us is we have become too politicized a society and cannot look beyond our nose. The culprits are political parties, not the people.” If there is no party system, distracting politicalization of society will not happen.

In a TV discussion, a former police commissioner stated that police have now become an “armed militia of the politicians in power.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 06-02-13, page 8). “Today, our political leaders not only want the police to do their dirty work but also to collect money for them.”  Abolition of party system will free police from malignant and suffocating political control and improve law and order situation in the country by leaps and bounds.

Political parties have to amass huge amounts of money to fight elections. For this, illegal activities and generation of black money which harm the country are resorted to. Use of money also leads to dishonest voting in elections. This dismal situation can be avoided if party system is abolished.

These important aspects constitute the thirtieth (may be the most serious) obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this most serious obstacle, we have to seriously and objectively ask ourselves whether having party system helps or hinders democracy.

It may be argued that having political parties help in two ways: (a) they can serve as peoples’ voice as their representatives and (b) provide a check on misgovernance by party in power. Both can be done effectively (unlike at present) by efficient elected representatives with out forming political parties.

With regard to (a), representativeness has been denied because a party can at best get only less than 35% of votes.  With regard to having a check on misgovernance by party in power, these Articles show that they have in stead become a root cause of misgovernance!! Various instances of unquestioned shameful situations and callousness for peoples’ welfare show that political parties have not only failed miserably in exercising this check (Article 15) but by their connivance encouraged and is encouraging continuation of some shameful situations (e.g., helping the rich and not the poor).

Even if party system can improve and succeed in providing proper checks on governance, another basic question is: how can political parties justify their position under a democracy when (a) they get only less than 35% of votes cast, despite getting a good proportion of votes by using caste manipulations, money or threats, and (b) they do not have internal democracy?

Evidently, there is no real advantage in having party system. On the other hand, abolishing it has the 17 advantages listed below:

If political parties are abolished:

1. Elected persons can act with freedom to ensure peoples’ welfare.

2. Talented elected representatives will be allowed to act keeping benefit for the country in mind.

3. Large gold mines of talents outside political parties can be used for benefit of the country.

4. Legislations with an eye on votes will not occur.

5. Callousness in preventing shameful situations for the country due to diversion of interest will not arise.

6. Creation of large army of grass root level workers by political parties has led to massive diversion from peoples’ interest to party interests and has resulted in conflicts and crime. It is possible that political parties may have created Frankensteins over which they will have no control in future? These can be prevented.

7. Blind hero worship of leaders (even those with criminal background) and side tracking of honest and efficient leaders can be avoided.

8. Diversion of interest from studies and peoples’ interests among college students can be avoided.

9. When young people with party interests grow up they are likely to imbibe some undesirable traits and become faction leaders, manipulators and traders of hatred. These undesirable developments can be avoided.

10. Because political parties manipulate creation of caste, linguistic, religious and other group conflicts as well as cliques, they are often responsible for crimes, hatred and violence in many parts of the country. These can be avoided.

11. Wasting huge amounts of money on party celebrations can be avoided.

12. Public funds need not be wasted for funding political parties. Spending large amounts and diverting police for security of politicians can be avoided. The savings can be used for benefit of people.

13. Will lead to substantial reduction in black money because political parties are beneficiaries of black money and a root cause for its creation and sustenance.

14. Creation of duel power centres (multiple in case of coalition governments) which lead to problems, obstacles and delays in decision making can be avoided.

15. Because of political parties, society has become too politicized and cannot look beyond their nose. Such distracting politicalization of society can be avoided.

16. Will free police from malignant and suffocating political control and improve law and order situation in the country by leaps and bounds.

17. Political parties have to amass huge amounts of money to fight elections. For this illegal activities and generation of black money which harm the country are resorted to. Use of money also leads to dishonesty in voting. These can be avoided.

This objective analysis clearly shows that advantages of not having  party system far outweigh advantages of having it, even if they can provide an effective check on government (which has not happened). Party system becomes even alarming and harmful when members of political parties suffer from many disqualifications and have become enemies of democracy (Article 19).

Evidently, there is absolutely no doubt that political party system should be abolished. A better alternative system with more effective checks on governance is discussed in a later article.

Note:

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome this obstacle are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@outlook.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to modify the outline of the revised system of democracy (Article 24). 

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 19

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Qualifications of Politicians

Politician is defined as a person who is experienced in politics which is defined as the art or science of governance. Often, some persons who have become leaders of some groups of people or joined a political party or formed a political party or organized some protests or did some social service, call themselves political leaders. These do not qualify them in the art or science of governance. Democracy cannot be successfully run by persons who are not qualified in the art or science of governance.

Even worse, in addition to lack of qualification in the art or science of governance, many political leaders have acquired at least some of the serious disqualifications mentioned below:

1.  Sworn affidavits of 4,827 MPs and MLAs elected in 2009 showed that as many as 724 (14%) had serious criminal charges against them (Article 2). Thirty per cent of ministers in present central government had filed affidavits that they had criminal cases against them (Deccan Chronicle dated 08-06-15). If confirmed this is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy. This also casts doubt on their legal status. This raises three important questions. Knowing that Constitution had put a bar on criminals getting registered as voters or becoming MPs / MLAs: (1) why these suspected criminals did not take prior/quick action to clear their innocence? (2) why government, legal experts and hon’ble judges did not fulfill their moral responsibility to quickly clear the doubt and ensure that the illegal situation does not continue? (2) why are we so dumb and callous that we tolerate being governed by suspected criminals, justifying the remark that “A nation of sheep gets a government of wolves”?

2.  Higher their level in the hierarchy the more distant they are from people. Moreover, from leaders they transform themselves into bosses and feel smug and exhilarated. They dictate to other elected leaders, civil society leaders and professional experts in governance in stead of patiently listening to them to ascertain problems and their views, with an open mind. These are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

3.  Some leaders cleverly manipulate creation of caste, linguistic, religious and other group conflicts as well as cliques and other situations to safeguard their selfish interests and to promote dependency on them among people, in stead of sincerely helping them to enjoy peace and freedom and have a reasonably good quality of life. Higher their manipulating efficiency the stronger and dictatorial they become. Some of them become faction leaders to increase their bargaining power, ignoring that in this manner they are acting against unity and national integration. These attitudes of creating conflicts, cliques and factionalism to safeguard their interests, instead of solving problems faced by people and allowing them to live peacefully, are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

4.  Political leaders are openly exhilarated when people go to them with “begging bowl” or at least hang around them (often with garlands or tempting offerings) and worship them. Modesty, humility, simplicity, sincerity of purpose and an ethics of care for aam admi steadily decrease with their ascendancy in power. They do not believe in the dictum “serve and deserve respect”. These are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

5.  There are many instances of hypocrisy in which their speech and actions are contrary to (1) needs and aspirations of people who elected them, (2) ideology of their party and (3) national interests. Sometimes their actions contradict their own publicly expressed views. Such hypocrisy is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

6.  “Deception is a pillar of Indian politics. Election promises are an elaborate exercise in deception.” (Deccan Chronicle dated 19-12-13, page 8) Such deceptions are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

7.  Our President expressed concern and disappointment at the “eroding commitment among the legislators”. This deterioration in commitment is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

8.  Craving for higher emoluments, entitlements and privileges of political power in stead of setting an example of simple life style, is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

9.  According to a TV report on 21-09-12, in the context of allegations against a central minister about immoral activity, an MP said “Where is the question of morality when we have a majority?” What is worse, none of the other political leaders protested. Such devaluation of morality is another serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

10.              Faced with allegations of financial bungling in a trust formed by him, a central minister told his followers that it was time to “replace the pen with blood” (DNA dated 18-10-12). Shockingly, none of the other political leaders protested against making such threats. Both intolerance of criticism leading to threats to injure or kill others and acceptance of such intolerance of colleagues are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

11.              An MP threatened to unleash “rapists” on members of another party. He also advised his supporters to slit throats of opposition workers and asked village women to use kitchen vegetable cutters to slit their throats (The Hindu dated 02-07-14, page 10). Such gross intolerance of other political parties and lack of control over emotions are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

12.              MPs and MLAs protest mostly when they (or their parties) are criticized – rarely for issues of importance to the country or people. Being motivated by emotions in stead of welfare of the country is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

13.              A politician spends lakhs to get elected. Some of those elected have become much richer quickly. Seemingly, some politicians consider election as a roaring business with chances for making huge “profits”. Inability to suppress greed is common among some politicians. Greed and replacing “social service approach” by “business approach” are serious disqualifications for a leader of democracy.

14.              Abuse of power by politicians for selfish interests is so common that number of pages will be required to discuss these. Abuse of power has also been done to ensure that bills, such as Lok Pal bill and women’s quota bill, which ensure ethical practices, are inordinately delayed or blocked in Parliament. Abuse of power is a serious disqualification for a leader of democracy.

Many instances of intolerance, double standards and wayward behaviour of politicians have been reported from time to time. They have not realized that their uncontrolled attitudes and actions have given repeated death blows to democracy. Editorial of Deccan Chronicle (10-12-12) highlights wayward behaviour and its consequence as follows: “On paper we have the rule of law, but what is visible most to people is the culture of impunity surrounding the political class. Even small fry politicians throw their weight about, routinely break laws, and take pride in doing so. They feel laws and regulations are meant for ordinary mortals, and flouting these as a measure if their own importance. Top leaders of different parties don’t crack down hard on criminal behaviour by their colleagues……..If a way is not found to rein in such politicians, we simply cannot run a democracy.” Ironically, this implies that politicians became enemies of democracy - protectors themselves becoming destroyers!!

Editorial of another newspaper (DNA dated 13-02-14) has supported this view as follows: “Politicians, who routinely mourn the fate of parliamentary democracy, when under attack from judicial activism and civil society protests, should spare us the pretence. The worst attack Parliament is facing is from within. Parliamentary democracy – that sacrosanct idea of the people electing their representatives every five years to frame laws on their behalf – is in danger: Not from any dictator, terrorist, army, ideology, or anarchist, but within the ornate portals of Sansad Bhawan.” This implies for the second time that politicians became enemies of democracy - destroying the pillars of democracy in stead of strengthening these!!

The above aspects, particularly lack of qualifications to be politicians and having serious disqualifications for leader of democracy, depict the twenty-eighth and one of the most serious obstacles which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

Lack of professional approach

It is universally accepted that professional approach is essential to manage a large organization. This is even more apt for efficient governance of a country because of modern day complexities and frequent changes which need skillful attention, besides need to tackle many pulls and pressures, both from within and outside the country. In India also, need for professional approach for efficient governance has been recognized and qualified and specially trained personnel have been functioning for many years in different fields which together ought to have contributed to good governance. But, their efforts have been nullified because of lack of professional approach by politicians with other interests who curb all professionals. Even worse, hardly any thought was given to rectify this illogical and topsy-turvy situation. Such continuous disruption of professional activities by politicians implies for the third time that politicians became enemies of democracy – hindering professional governance in stead of promoting it!!

Non-allotment of duties and responsibilities

Even though Constitution gives right to any person to occupy any position of governance, qualifications, experience, duties and responsibilities have been prescribed for each position. The only exceptions are for elected representatives even though they are in highly responsible positions. This impropriety becomes more glaring because some of them have to exercise control over activities carried out by professionals in different fields with prescribed qualifications, experience, duties and responsibilities. 

It has not been realized that this omission in prescribing duties and responsibilities to MPs and MLAs (particularly ministers) has not done more harm only because persons in all other positions have  prescribed qualifications, duties and responsibilities!! Fortunately for the country, strong sense of discipline and respect for leaders (who had fought and won independence) which these officers had developed still continues. This has prevented them from revolting against illogical supervision by persons (a) without qualifications in the art or science of governance and (b) without fixed duties and responsibilities, even though both are aspects of anarchy.

A historical approach shows how a change in mind set has occurred among politicians and bureaucrats. Soon after independence our leaders, without any facilities or time for acquiring necessary qualifications, had filled the vacuum in top levels of governance by working hard with an open mind, good intentions and determination to build the nation. For this, they wisely made proper use of the qualified and experienced ICS cadre (which the British had built up). To augment such capacities, they created a similarly qualified IAS cadre and involved them as their partners in governance. To meet need for professional management, other cadres were also built up. They created a chain of scientific institutions to give scientific support to development.  In this wise manner, they did not allow their lack of qualifications and experience in governance to ruin the country.

Unfortunately, after majority of the wise and committed politicians left the scene, a change in mind set occurred among political leaders.  Most of the remaining old leaders were forced to support the new leaders who were interested in amassing wealth and were determined to use even foul means to hold on to power and wealth. At present, most leaders also suffer from at least some serious disqualifications mentioned earlier in this article.

Even worse, instances of ignoring advice of professionally qualified and experienced government officers became quite common. To gain their compliance, politicians adopted two strategies. They enticed some of them to form a politician-cum-bureaucrat nexus to gain benefits for this nexus and their political party. Those who did not fall in line were shunted to less important positions and harassed regularly. By adopting these two strategies, these politicians destroyed the innate character and strength of our system of governance, without realizing the serious harm they have done to the backbone of our governance system. This serious destruction implies for the fourth time that politicians became enemies of democracy - system builders themselves becoming destroyers of backbone of the system!!

Mahatma Gandhi, who led fight for independence, was keen to have swaraj (self governance) for people. Regrettably, over time, politicians gave less and less attention to his views on swaraj. They preferred to become masters of people, by cleverly using the pretext of democracy. This implies for the fifth time that politicians became enemies of democracy – becoming masters of people instead of servants of people!!

Lack of professional approach, non-allotment of duties and responsibilities and destruction of backbone of our governance system constitute the twenty-ninth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome these serious obstacles, qualifications, experience, duties and responsibilities should be prescribed for all posts held by politicians. Aspiring politicians should qualify themselves as graduates or post graduates in governance and adopt a professional approach for which recognized institutions should start suitable courses. A time frame has to be given for acquiring these qualifications. Meanwhile, special courses should be arranged for present day politicians to acquire required qualifications and expertise as well as professional approach, humility, simplicity, sincerity of purpose, ethics of care for aam admi and transparency.

It is a matter for serious concern that there are at least five solid reasons for concluding that politicians, by their uncontrolled attitudes and actions, gave repeated death blows to democracy and became enemies of democracy. Consequently, Parliament, with members who became enemies of democracy, has qualified itself for self destruction. It is pertinent that Article 15 also had emphasized the need to abolish Parliament because (a) it lacked dignity, guts to punish government for braking promises thousands of times, accountability and an ethics of care for aam admi and (b) has a distorted and unhealthy representation of people with vast majority of its members being crorepatis. Other great advantages of this abolition are (1) lakhs of crores will be saved which can be used for welfare of people and (2) large areas of prime land and buildings will be available for public use.

Following jokes about politicians are thought provoking:

I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.                               Charles de Gaulle 

                                                                            

What do politicians do when faced with a calamity?

Make speeches, do aerial surveys and steal credit from those who took risks and worked hard to solve problems.       Anonymous

Politicians are like mosquitoes – they not only suck our blood but also help other organisms (mafia) to ruin our health (life)    Anonymous

What happens if a politician drowns in a river? That is pollution. 
What happens if all of them drown? That is solution!!! - Anonymous

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. 
                                                                                                                               Aesop Politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country.
                                                                                    Texas Guinan

Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river.    Nikita Khrushchev
 
Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other.
                                                                                            Oscar Ameringer

Note:

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome this obstacle are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@outlook.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to modify the outline of the revised system of democracy (Article 24).

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 18

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Role of people

Responsibilities:

Democracy has been defined as government of the people by the people for the people. To have a government by the people, we (the people), have to play important roles to ensure that governance is carried out according to the true spirit of democracy. For this, we have the responsibility to elect representatives who have character, clean image and the qualifications and experience needed for governance. We have not only failed to do so in many ways but also have not realized the seriousness of our mistakes and therefore remain callous about these.

All those who did not vote have unfeelingly failed in their responsibility. Voting figures show that they form more than 30% of the electorate. Among those who voted, many did not fulfill their responsibility of choosing capable and efficient representatives with character and clean image: large numbers voted in droves and failed in their individual responsibility; some others made the serious mistake of selling their vote; some others have allowed themselves to be intimidated even though their vote was secret; some others had preferred persons of their own caste. For example, in a sample survey in 2013 across Karnataka, 41% had stated that caste was very important in deciding who to vote for (Times of India dated 01-11-14, page 6).

These four groups who wrongly voted and those who did not vote have made a mockery of our democracy by failing in their responsibility to elect capable and efficient representatives with character and clean image. Those who did not vote and those who voted on caste basis together form more than 70% of the electorate. No estimate is available for the first three groups of wrong voters. With their addition, percentage of voters who did not consciously fulfill their responsibility is likely to exceed 90%. Unfortunately, these five groups, who together constitute the vast majority of voters in most constituencies, did not realize the seriousness of their mistakes. Because of this grave failure by people, most of our elected representatives suffer from the incongruity that they were supported only by a negligible minority of voters who had consciously exercised their responsibility!!

We have not realized that capacity required for good governance is different from that needed to win an election. Moreover, while winning election needs capacity for one time hectic effort only, good governance needs capacity for sustained efforts for many years. Another aspect is that politicians who win elections by making false promises are deceptive. All the above lacunae explain why experts in winning elections have often failed to ensure peoples’ welfare. As efficient voters we should watch out to prevent being duped by experts in winning elections. We should demand for proof about their capacity and commitment to ensure peoples’ welfare and verify their character and image. It is better not to take the risk of supporting candidates with even doubtful image. We should also ask why they or their party did not fulfill the promises made earlier. Merely blaming others without giving positive solutions and resorting to hate speeches should be considered as disqualifications.

All of us interested in saving our sinking democracy should use the NOTA option during elections if we do not “find a right candidate with character and clean image” as exhorted by the anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare (The Hindu dated 18-03-14). If large numbers of voters have used NOTA option we should insist on fresh elections after excluding all the candidates who have been rejected by this option. To save our sinking democracy we should not only consciously use NOTA option but also educate and motivate others to do so.

As responsible voters, we should reject even right candidates if they belong to a party which is observed to be “buying votes” or has sponsored candidates with criminal background. This is very important because, after election, even these “right persons” will be forced to support party interests at the cost of peoples’ interests; for example supporting the party in not punishing those who are corrupt or have misused their power to help vested interests.

Failing in our responsibilities to vote properly is the twenty-sixth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

Wrong conceptions:

Another major failure is that after voting once in five years, we close our eyes and allow our representatives and the government they form to govern as they like. We are not alert enough to question when they do not act to ensure our needs and aspirations and repeatedly ignore the principles of democracy and the promises made at election time.

A third major failure is the misconception that government alone can provide good governance. This has led to a totally negative and callous attitude about cooperating with government efforts and supplementing these. Even worse, we often create problems because of lethargy, narrow selfish interests and intolerance of others.

When faced with problems, we expect government to do everything for us but we do not make any efforts to cooperate with government to solve problems or try to reduce them. For example, when there is shortage of electricity, we do not try to eliminate avoidable consumption or at least reduce it. If everyone switches off lights and fans when leaving a room there will be substantial reduction in shortage. Unnecessary use of large number of bright lights to show off affluence enhances the problem. If we, particularly owners of large office buildings and multistoried flats, install solar power spending affordable funds, shortage will come down drastically. We have also not cared to make full use of wind energy.

Similarly, preventing wastage of water will immensely help to reduce shortage of precious water. Currently, it is estimated that as much as 40 t0 50% of water is “lost” in the distribution system (Article 15) but we do not protest. Leaking taps, leaving taps open for longer time than required, misuse (such as frequent car wash in stead of dusting, washing passages in stead of sweeping etc.) and wasting 90% of full tank for flushing of toilets after urination add a lot to wastage.

We have no right to complain about any shortage until we prevent wastage.

Where garbage is a serious problem, we expect the authorities to clean up but have no hesitation to throw it anywhere we like. Segregating waste and producing power from it to reduce shortage or making organic manure which reduces the need for harmful chemical fertilizers not only help to reduce the problem but also solves other problems.

National integration, which helps to sustain democracy (Article 12), has failed mainly because we have not taken any interest in building up the concept of being an Indian. Regrettably, we have nurtured dissipating tendencies in stead of building up togetherness with humanitarian approaches.

We are often carried away by hatred or belief in unverified rumours by trouble makers. We have also developed the harmful habit of hero worship which has often resulted in our blindly glorifying some politicians who mesmerize us by their oratory or hoodwink us by clever tactics, even when they did not ensure peoples’ welfare with equanimity – sometimes even ignoring their criminal past. Moreover, we often start fights for trivial or irrelevant matters due to emotional imbalances or selfish interests. These show our inability to discern what is good for welfare of majority of people which is a key principle of democracy.

A fundamental mistake is to consider that democracy is needed only for good governance. We have not realized that many more aspects e.g., those relating to religion, culture, entertainment, recreation, sports etc., require organized attention to avoid conflicts and to enjoy a peaceful life and be happy. These cannot and should not be taken up by government. We have to build other organizations to fulfill our responsibility to ensure happy and peaceful surroundings which are not subjected to hatred and fear.

Because ensuring the noble idea of equality is illogical and impractical, we can and should set limits for inequalities in income, expenditure, ownership of land etc. This is another fundamental omission.

Sad to say, we (the people) have not visualized such important aspects which ought to form the back bone of a democracy which aims at happiness, peace and a good quality of life for people. For this a new type of leadership has to come up. These important aspects are discussed further in later articles.

All these show that we, the people, have some wrong conceptions which hindered development and maintenance of a true and vibrant democracy.

This is the twenty-seventh and most serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome these obstacles we have to introspect and change our mindset. We have to realize and create awareness that all of us have the responsibility to ensure that capable and efficient representatives with character and clean image are elected and governance actually reflects the will of the people and effectively functions for the people.  We have to be alert to sustain our democracy.  We should be watchful to detect signs of deterioration of democracy in any locality or in any manner.

We should insist that once in six months the MLA of our area together with our MP should report to us their achievements as well as problems faced and future plans to overcome these in a meeting of all “groups” of people (without any exceptions). During these meetings, they should also advice us about how we can cooperate with them to achieve better results and also help to maintain peace and social harmony in the area, besides striving for national integration.

During these meetings we should also give our assessment of the extent to which government has succeeded in meeting our needs and aspirations. We should insist that video recording of these meetings should be immediately sent by the concerned MLA to the State Election Commission so that it can keep a regular watch on the efficiency of these representatives and local leaders who had participated in the meeting. This method of assessing efficiency of MPs, MLAs and government is a much better way for people to exercise their voice than by voting once in five years to elect  representatives without (a) knowledge and expertise required to elect efficient managers of democracy and (b) being misguided by other considerations like, caste, party affiliation, monitory incentives  etc..

Often, particularly during election, leaders speak at public meetings. We should be alert enough to avoid being hoodwinked or mesmerized by their crafty speeches especially when the speaker is cleverly using gift of the gab and dramatic gestures to mislead us. When leaders speak at length criticizing others, they should be politely told that we are not interested in fault finding but in what plans they have to improve welfare of people and how they are going to implement these plans. We should realize that those who criticize others without giving any positive plans are more likely to be incapable of positive actions. Those who make hate speeches should be told that we consider them as enemies of peace. Those who give flashy promises without elaborating their plan to achieve these are also not worthy to be elected. Some national and regional leaders speak in support of candidates from their party. We should not trust that what these leaders say fully reflects the views and principles of the local candidates and is binding on them.

Some leaders cleverly manipulate creation of caste, linguistic, religious and other group conflicts as well as cliques and other favourable conditions to safeguard their interests and to achieve their ignoble ambitions. We should not allow ourselves to become their tools for such anti-social activities which disturb peace in our areas. We should avoid electing persons who are thrust on us by leaders from other areas who cleverly mesmerize us by their oration but choose those who directly convince us that they can act with vision and compassion, with empathy and empowerment and with qualities of head and heart. Some disqualifications for a leader of democracy will be explained in Article 20. We should closely watch whether our leaders have any of these disqualifications and should not choose them as our leaders.

We have also to be alert to ensure that mischief mongers and selfish groups do not create problems. Constant efforts should be made to identify rumour mongers and to isolate them in the community. Though unintentionally, most newspapers divert our attention from real problems by providing gossip about celebrities, political parties and politicians. We should not be distracted by such gossip.

The six-monthly review meetings mentioned earlier should be made use of to short list efficient leaders, out of the elected and local leaders who participate in these meetings.

We have to give full support to social activists who are eager to be upholders of democracy (Article 17) so that they can provide leadership for saving our sinking democracy. We should request them to be our watchful leaders to attend the 6-monthly meetings suggested earlier and to bring problems to the notice of the authorities and fight peacefully for solutions.

All the steps mentioned above are essential to overcome our lack of qualifications and expertise to elect efficient managers of democracy and thereby ensure true democracy.

We should develop a sense of discipline to solve problems which come up and to avoid creating other problems. It is important to have a committed approach to solve all social and economic problems with or without government help. We should be eager to use every opportunity to support helpful government efforts and extend our full cooperation. Where government cannot help we have to organize ourselves. In fact, we have to play the dual roles of partners in democracy and watch dogs to detect deficiencies in our democracy.

Note:

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome this very serious obstacle are welcome.  Please send these to

StartRemovingBlocks@outlook.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 17

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

 (Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Upholders of democracy

Before independence, the country had leaders who sacrificed a lot to fight for independence. They were supported by freedom fighters who also joined the fight with a spirit of sacrifice. These freedom fighters                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             were from every walk of life such as lawyers, authors, poets, doctors, cartoonists, actors, farmers, workers, sportsmen  etc. After independence, some of these leaders became politicians and adopted a different role viz., governing the country with a commitment to national interests and welfare of people.  Unfortunately, over time, there has been steady deterioration in the spirit of sacrifice and commitment to national interests and welfare of people among political leaders.  Our President expressed concern and disappointment at the “eroding commitment among the legislators who are expected to be custodians of public interests and rights”.

On the other hand, most of the freedom fighters did not take up any new role. They became complacent because they felt that the country was safe in the hands of the leaders who fought for freedom. Otherwise they would have sought and found a new role as upholders of democracy. Most of them have realized, as years passed by, that the self-sacrificing political leaders were increasingly replaced by self-serving politicians who were more interested in holding on to power and amassing wealth.  They also now realize that such leaders not only do not feel the need for support from spirited groups like “freedom fighters” but also feared that such people can be a hindrance for their selfish endeavours and avoided or even suppressed them. At present, most of the survivors among the freedom fighters have become cynical and disgruntled and suffer from a defeatist mentality. Younger generations of potential upholders of democracy are either confused without proper leadership or have been cleverly side tracked by misinformation.

The above aspects depict the twenty-fifth obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, upholders of democracy (old and potential) should wake up as quickly as possible and organize themselves to save democracy.  Their current cynicism, negative attitude, and defeatist mentality should be replaced with a positive and spirited outlook for fighting for true democracy. They should develop full confidence by following the advice of Margaret Mead: “Never forget that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world; it is the only way that ever does.” They should also persevere by following an anonymous thinker’s advice that “There can be efforts that fail but there should not be a failure of efforts” and systematically organize a meaningful and peaceful fight for real democracy. An essential first step is to create wide spread awareness among people about the various obstacles which led to the sinking of our democracy. This series of articles can be used to initiate discussions. These discussions and other ideas which arise during the process of creating awareness should be used for wider debates.

Without entering politics, upholders of democracy (old and potential)  should peacefully fight for reforming the democratic system by utilizing their talents and influence as lawyers, authors, poets, doctors, cartoonists, actors, farmers, workers, sportsmen etc. as their predecessors had done in the fight for independence. For a start, they should create awareness among the people, mobilize their support and provide them leadership to fight for a truly vibrant democracy.  

Most educated people are members of some associations or clubs. They should frequently discuss in their meetings the problems faced by our sinking democracy - firstly to create awareness of these problems and then debate on possible solutions for these problems. These discussions ought to lead to development of many leaders all over the country for a peaceful fight for true democracy. These new leaders should organize public debates to reach a consensus about the reformed system of true democracy. They should select regional and national leaders to strengthen the peaceful movement for true democracy.

The upholders of democracy should also approach and request celebrities in different fields such as film stars, musicians, authors, doctors, lawyers, poets, cricketers, cultural and religious groups etc., who have lot of influence on people, to help to create awareness about the failures in our democracy and thereby help to form a true democracy on sound lines. Some celebrities can also be persuaded to take up non-political leadership of the peaceful movement for true democracy.

To make meaningful efforts, old and potential upholders of democracy and their new leaders should dare to think and act for securing welfare of the people. They have to awaken and motivate people particularly the youth to act peacefully without fear and with patience to achieve the goal of a truly vibrant democracy. They should be prepared for a long peaceful fight against powerful vested interests who will give threats and play lot of tricks to prevent any meaningful reform of democracy.

Note:

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome this very serious obstacle are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@outlook.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.