Skip to main content

The Failure of Democracy

If the Godfather wanted to get elected, he probably would. –Oscar Wilde

Democracy is the most successful form of government, we are told. It’s the same form which powers the governments of the West, and all the powerful nations in the world. Almost all other independent countries have democratically elected governments. Those that have not want to have democracy as a symbol of independence, supremacy of the people and a sign of progress.

But let’s just hang in here for a minute. Is democracy the ultimate symbol of independence and supremacy of the people? Sure. It’s a government of the people, for the people and by the people. People elect representatives amongst themselves to represent their say in government. These representatives draw salaries, from taxes collected from the people, and go around governing those that have elected them to power.

Whoa! Suddenly, democracy does not appear to be all that pro-equality. But moving on… While I would like to make this post as general as possible, I am basing a lot of my arguments based on the Indian democracy, mainly because of my ignorance with regards to democratic systems in other countries. So, in an attempt to make this post as general as possible, I shall begin by tackling the key principles on which democracy is based, and then move to specifics.

Firstly, we have the very process of a democratic election. A democratic election involves people choosing from a list of candidates, their representative to the house. Now, the very word “representative” is a problem. A representative is one who “represents” the voice of the people. However, such a representative would spell doom for any democratic country.

Consider the true representative. He will voice only the concerns of the people he represents. Now, consider a representative who has been elected by the fisher-folk. He will forward their concerns regarding fisheries, push for laws that promote the community he represents. Now, consider another representative who represents the views of another community, say loggers. He will voice a different set of concerns. Such a situation would lead to chaos in the house. Utter chaos! A hundred voices voicing a hundred different thoughts. Yet, not one of the voices will ever voice foreign policy, or security; those little things essential for the very freedom of the people that democracy claims to protect.

So, we have a representative that must, in the interest of the nation, voice the concerns that are not of the people he claims to represent. This direct contradiction to the principle that democratically elected representatives represent the interests of the people is the first failure in the fabric of democracy.

Next, I discuss the premise that the elected representatives will always be “good”, i.e. that they will do what is best for the country and for the people. As we have seen in the earlier argument, the elected representative may, in national interest, have to voice his opinion on matters that don’t concern the people he claims to represent. By a corollary, we must assume that not anyone can become a representative. A person who files his candidature for election must necessarily be one well versed with the political scenario, a person who is willing to dedicate his life to the service of the people. Such folks are hard to find.

Contesting an election itself is a high-risk business. Not only does campaigning take up a lot of resources, the outcome may not be favourable either. This means that only a select few people who have taken up politics as a career will continue in the political world; which in turn gives voters one-out-of-x kind of choice when they cast their votes. Further, the elected representatives politicians will remain in power (in all probability) until the next election; and the ones who elected them to power can do little to change that.

While we are on the topic of funding campaigns; most of the funds for any political campaign come in from corporates. These funds are never given for free; they constitute a tacit agreement that includes lobbying. So, these politicians are elected by us people, and yet, they agree to lobby for corporates. The result? Laws that are anti-people, and which make ordinary people “felons”, to be served as slaughter for corporate lawyers. Laws that encourage monopolies, discourage competition, and spell doom for the free market; the other institution that has failed rather miserably.

Further, elections will be successful only if the people are responsible and well-informed. For the people to be informed, we need an honest and unbiased media, which is again, a fictitious entity. In case you are shaking your head and clicking your tongue; consider this: almost everyone has some prejudices and biases. Why should the media be any different? After all, the media consists only of people like us, but those that have taken journalism as a profession. While journalistic ethics would demand that journalists remain unbiased, and report the truth; such an occurrence is rather rare. The journalists in the media often get swayed away by political spin-doctors; and in turn swing our opinions towards political entities.

Of course, India is not a democracy, it’s a functioning anarchy. Witness any debate in the parliament, and you’ll know why. John Kenneth Galbraith was right when he described India thus. The public is uninformed, and freebies are useful to decide election outcomes. A policy of “divide and rule” invoked by the British has been perfected by our politicos. Laws are frequently changed to suit certain influential individuals. Politicians who actually do work, but refuse to toe the party line are gagged and sacked. The fact is that as citizens of India, we may soon lose our freedom of speech on the internet, thanks to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Act. Of course, the people are sovereign, hence the elected representatives of the people are sovereign, hence the majority of the elected representatives of the people are sovereign, hence the person representing the majority of the elected representatives is sovereign. These were the arguments that lead to the death of democracy in India in the 1970s during the time of the emergency. I see the same arguments being repeated once again.

Of course, if you wish to read about the failure of the parliamentary system in India, I would recommend reading “The Parliamentary System” by Arun Shourie. It’s an excellent read, coming from someone intimately informed of the political system, both as an observer, when he was a journalist, and as a minister, who has seen the innermost workings of the system.

Popular posts from this blog

Progressive Snapshot: Is it worth it?

I turned 25 last year, which in the highly mathematical and calculating eyes of the US insurance industry meant that I had suddenly matured into a much more responsible driver than I was at 24 years and 364 days of age. As a result, I expected my insurance rates to go down. Imagine my surprise when my insurance renewal notice from GEICO actually quoted a $50 increase in my insurance rates. To me, this was a clear signal that it was time to switch companies.Typically, I score really high on brand loyalty. I tend to stick with a brand for as long as possible, unless they really mess up. This qualified as a major mess up. As a result, I started shopping for insurance quotes.Two companies that quoted me significantly lower rates (30%–40% lower) were Progressive and Allstate. Both had an optional programme that could give me further discounts based on my consenting to the companies tracking my driving habits. Now, I am a careful driver – I hardly ever accelerate hard. I hate using the brak…

Cornell Graduate Students United: At What Cost?

On Monday and Tuesday, we graduate students at Cornell will be voting on whether or not we want to unionise. Actually, scratch that, only graduate students who hold a TA, RA, or GRA appointment can unionise.This is a shitty arrangement, and I will be voting against it.For those of you who are not aware of how graduate school works at Cornell, you could be on one of many appointments.FellowshipA graduate student on a fellowship gets a stipend and tuition paid without associated teaching or research opportunities. Graduate students on a fellowship typically work towards their own theses, but will be excluded from the unionGraduate research assistantshipsA GRA gives a graduate student stipend and tuition without teaching responsibilities. However, this money comes out of a specific project grant, and the students typically work on their own theses. Students on GRAs magically qualify to join the union, whereas there is virtually no difference between a GRA and a fellowship for the most pa…

Reading List, April 2017

Adam Carroll, When money isn’t real: The $10,000 experiment, in TEDxLondonBusinessSchool, 9 July 2015. [Online]: Carroll presents an interesting point – we have abstracted away money through the use of a number of instruments, such as credit and debit cards, NFC payment systems on our phones, and in-app purchases, when we don’t realise how much we are actually spending. Carroll spends some time showing how his kids, aged 7–11 played monopoly differently when they were playing with real money. He goes on to lay his premise, that financial literacy must be taught to children at a young age, when they should be allowed to fail and learn from their failures at a small scale, not at the hundreds of thousands of dollars when they are in student loan debt and just out of college.Carroll’s talk hit a lot of notes with my own experiences with money, and I’m sure that it would resonate with your experiences as well.Brett Scott, If plastic replaces cash, much tha…