R
I:

Is democracy really working?

Author Name: R Anand
SOCIOLOGY/POLITICS

Democracy is one great methodology for giving the poor and the poorest their due authority and so the equal opportunity for the rich, but it has many flaws that have evolved over the years. The majority has been stupid and can't see what its choices could do to it. The onus is on educated and sane people to be wise, but it also gets counterproductive when the majority is irresponsible and in great numbers. Great numbers means the choice is right in a democracy. Hence the reason for it's counter productive forms that we see today.


Democracy is failing us as we see autocracy prevalent in many countries that make decisions favouring their corporate masters and still get away with it with ease. People get poorer by the day, and accountability is washed clean every day. Unless there is a revolutionary change, democracy can be easily taken for a ride with media and narratives are set on one side. Majority have become followers of a camel in a desert - with no direction of their own. This is not an exclusive opinion, but we see it happening. This doesn't mean that I have no hope in democracy but I want the discussion to move forward and people participating may please generate hope in me. Let the ball rolling.

All Replies

R

A classic example to kill democracy: article from The Wire


Decentralised democracy in Gujarat is getting weaker day by day thanks to the politics of the state. Two developments seem to have contributed significantly in weakening democracy in the state in particular. One is the Samras Scheme for Village Panchayats and the other is the craze of candidates, mainly belonging to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), to get elected unopposed in civic polls. Narendra Modi became the chief minister of Gujarat for the first time on October 7, 2001. On October 26, 2001 he introduced the Samras scheme. According to this scheme, if a village develops consensus (samras) and unanimously decides who will become its sarpanch and village panchayat members, no election will be held in the village, and it will be declared a “Samras Village”. The state government will provide Rs 3 lakh to Rs 13 lakh as an incentive to the village as development fund. The exact amount of the development fund to be given to a village will depend on the size of the population and how many years it has been a Samras Village. There is special incentive fund to be paid to the village if only women are selected unanimously to all posts of the village panchayat and panchayat members. The two purposes of the scheme are, as laid down officially, (1) to foster unity and harmony in the village and (2) to avoid local election disputes. This scheme is fundamentally wrong, because villages in Gujarat, like villages in most states in India, are not homogeneous. They are divided hierarchically by caste and class. One finds the rich (farmers, traders and similar persons) belonging to elite castes have usually taken advantage of the Samras Scheme, and have dominated their respective panchayat.
Read full analysis on thewire.in

Please log in to reply.

V

Very interesting to Know Samras Village. Though on surface it looks like Samaras for electing unanimously their chief, as you said this will be highly influenced by rich upper caste Gram elders and untimately their successors will be in the panchayath. It looked like slow killing of Democracy. I dont understand what made them to come up with such a scheme.

On the other hand local politics and factions have made many families suffer in rural India.
Really toigh to decide which methos works

Please log in to reply.

V

the Problem with Democracy can be reduced only when the Majority poeple become rational and can get rational education.
Nations have mastered in educating the people but keeping their rationality at low levels so that only their Instrumental rationality at intact

on Surface everything looks rational but infact its not.

Please log in to reply.

New to Communities?

Join the community