India is a participatory democracy where people have a say in who is ruling over them. Democracy is India's biggest boon, and in my opinion, the prime reason why we haven't broken up into separate states like Europe, since independence.
The best (and only) suggestion that critics of the current anti-corruption protests provide is for people to use elections to tackle corruption. However, the protesters seem to be exasperated at this democratic system's failure. Why are they on the streets? What makes the democratic process fail?
Let us start off with a young voter of this country who wishes to do it good. He isn't a walking, talking archive of The Hindu but he is far better informed than the huge masses who are transported in truckloads to voting booths. He can vote at the assembly level and the Lok Sabha level. But let us look at whom he can vote for. He has a choice between the two central parties, both of whom are steeped in the same corruption and malpractices. On voting for an independent candidate, he realises that his candidate will either not even cross the minimum number of votes required to collect his election deposit, or will side with one of the two 'national' parties. On voting for a state level party, he'll realise that he is playing into the hands of regionalists who are increasingly resorting to dirty, caste based politics. These regional parties also hold the trump cards in today's coalition governments and demand that they get ministerial berths out of which they can make the most money out of. ( viz. A Raja's telecom ministry)
The system is neck deep in filth. He compares it to vibrant democracies in the west where any spot of dirt on the candidates makes them liable for impeachment and unspeakable humiliation. He is now rendered speechless with humiliation at his country's netas. The parliament's first Lokpal draft dates back to 1968. His politicians haven't agreed on passing that bill for 43 years and counting. How could even the brightest optimist still harbour any hopes in the parliament?
Why not contest elections? If he wished to join either of the big parties, his purpose is defeated. Besides, there is the huge contribution he'll have to make to the party coffers for his entry. If he contests as an independent candidate... Oh wait! He already knows the fate of those naive independents.
The civil service! That is surely the panacea to his angst and eagerness to do good for the country. So he goes about exploring that option. Well, there is the rest of the young people in the country to compete with. As the civil services are highly coveted, the entire mass of India's huge and burgeoning population adds to the weight of this competition and he is faced with lakhs of competitors, vying for a few hundred posts. This also demands intricate knowledge of the country among a whole lot of other things. Only graduates can apply. After rigorous selection processes that run into the best part of a year, these hallowed people are selected to serve the masses. But wait. They are selected to serve the masses under the thumb of their neta who might not have even passed second standard! The neta is sure to transfer them if they try to do anything good against his vested interests. There is also this tradition among IAS officers to spend a huge amount of money on coaching classes and attempt at making solid returns on investment once they are in power.
The legislature and the bureaucracy are pretty much closed doors to this citizen. The judiciary is so swamped with cases to be heard that he has very bleak hope there. The legislature, with its passing of 17 bills in 12 mins, including amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act, has also substantially weakened the judiciary's hold on it. Now that the supreme court is interfering with their dirty affairs time and again, they are going to threaten it with a judicial accountability bill. I rest my case.
The gentleman whose example has been taken in this post is mostly from the middle class. The poor are too busy making their 30 rupees per day to worry about these things. The rich aren't bothered to find out how their agent obtains their driving license. As long as he delivers it to them, they are happy. So how then does this young, middle class voter, bubbling with enthusiasm to be a part of the change and redress his grievances against systemic corruption that he encounters everywhere, from getting his birth certificate made to getting a cremation done and a death certificate obtained?
He waits for an Anna Hazare to come along. He doesn't even bother to find out the merits and demerits of the proposed bill, but plunges headlong at anything that helps him channel his anger against the corrupt politicians he so loathes. The majority of people at the rallies today don't even know what the Jan Lokpal bill does or how it proposes to root out corruption. They have lost faith in the politicians to such a grave extent that they go by the saying "An enemy of my enemy is my friend."
The best (and only) suggestion that critics of the current anti-corruption protests provide is for people to use elections to tackle corruption. However, the protesters seem to be exasperated at this democratic system's failure. Why are they on the streets? What makes the democratic process fail?
Let us start off with a young voter of this country who wishes to do it good. He isn't a walking, talking archive of The Hindu but he is far better informed than the huge masses who are transported in truckloads to voting booths. He can vote at the assembly level and the Lok Sabha level. But let us look at whom he can vote for. He has a choice between the two central parties, both of whom are steeped in the same corruption and malpractices. On voting for an independent candidate, he realises that his candidate will either not even cross the minimum number of votes required to collect his election deposit, or will side with one of the two 'national' parties. On voting for a state level party, he'll realise that he is playing into the hands of regionalists who are increasingly resorting to dirty, caste based politics. These regional parties also hold the trump cards in today's coalition governments and demand that they get ministerial berths out of which they can make the most money out of. ( viz. A Raja's telecom ministry)
The system is neck deep in filth. He compares it to vibrant democracies in the west where any spot of dirt on the candidates makes them liable for impeachment and unspeakable humiliation. He is now rendered speechless with humiliation at his country's netas. The parliament's first Lokpal draft dates back to 1968. His politicians haven't agreed on passing that bill for 43 years and counting. How could even the brightest optimist still harbour any hopes in the parliament?
Why not contest elections? If he wished to join either of the big parties, his purpose is defeated. Besides, there is the huge contribution he'll have to make to the party coffers for his entry. If he contests as an independent candidate... Oh wait! He already knows the fate of those naive independents.
The civil service! That is surely the panacea to his angst and eagerness to do good for the country. So he goes about exploring that option. Well, there is the rest of the young people in the country to compete with. As the civil services are highly coveted, the entire mass of India's huge and burgeoning population adds to the weight of this competition and he is faced with lakhs of competitors, vying for a few hundred posts. This also demands intricate knowledge of the country among a whole lot of other things. Only graduates can apply. After rigorous selection processes that run into the best part of a year, these hallowed people are selected to serve the masses. But wait. They are selected to serve the masses under the thumb of their neta who might not have even passed second standard! The neta is sure to transfer them if they try to do anything good against his vested interests. There is also this tradition among IAS officers to spend a huge amount of money on coaching classes and attempt at making solid returns on investment once they are in power.
The legislature and the bureaucracy are pretty much closed doors to this citizen. The judiciary is so swamped with cases to be heard that he has very bleak hope there. The legislature, with its passing of 17 bills in 12 mins, including amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act, has also substantially weakened the judiciary's hold on it. Now that the supreme court is interfering with their dirty affairs time and again, they are going to threaten it with a judicial accountability bill. I rest my case.
The gentleman whose example has been taken in this post is mostly from the middle class. The poor are too busy making their 30 rupees per day to worry about these things. The rich aren't bothered to find out how their agent obtains their driving license. As long as he delivers it to them, they are happy. So how then does this young, middle class voter, bubbling with enthusiasm to be a part of the change and redress his grievances against systemic corruption that he encounters everywhere, from getting his birth certificate made to getting a cremation done and a death certificate obtained?
He waits for an Anna Hazare to come along. He doesn't even bother to find out the merits and demerits of the proposed bill, but plunges headlong at anything that helps him channel his anger against the corrupt politicians he so loathes. The majority of people at the rallies today don't even know what the Jan Lokpal bill does or how it proposes to root out corruption. They have lost faith in the politicians to such a grave extent that they go by the saying "An enemy of my enemy is my friend."
6 comments:
exactly!
Good post. I think it's virtually impossible to play a hand in the governance of this country without doing something radical or rash.
It's certain that no sort of radical restructuring is going to happen from the administrative end, at least for the foreseeable future. And as for the masses, they are controlled by the vote-bank politics, so a bottom-up change is hard to effect as well. As long as we lack a basic sense of pride and righteousness, ministers and netas will have they say despite a few good men. How we change that is beyond me.
My view from a few years ago that India should never have adopted a democratic form of government has weakened, but I still think we jumped into it not realising ( or perhaps, knowing fully well) the consequences of the particular way the Indian administrative system has been structured. It's been 65 years now, and that's enough time for people to adapt to and take advantage of its deficiencies.
@ bhargav: I think the basic problem seems to be the gap in the level of awareness in our people. During Independence, our masses were desperately illiterate. All well educated people most invariably joined the congress. Since independence, the difference in levels of education has been translated into the difference in levels of wealthiness.
I think when other countries adopted a democratic system, their population was uniformly educated. (or uneducated as the case maybe)
However, with this gap in education becoming smaller, we're getting there.
It's quite a misconception that politics in the west isn't dirty and is free from corruption. It's far from it. I've been following American politics for the last two months and what's clear is that politicians are almost entirely controlled by big industry.
Is our country full of ignorant voters? You'd be amazed how many people openly vote for their own disadvantage over here.
Anyways, I think the Civil Service is a good place to be in order to make change. They control the flow of information and also typically what the politicians hear. Of all the places where making a change is possible, that's where you can be most effective IMO.
I second Layfield. Its pretty insane out here.
When I mentioned vibrant western democracies, I certainly didn't mean the US, where republicans win often.
Post a Comment