Often used too fast and loose, Democracy is a term that embodies the basic tenets of freedom, prosperity, peace and harmony. The sovereign definition of democracy is “Of the people, by the people, for the people.” (Sorabjee 83). On the basis of this, true democracy would be one wherein the people are of the utmost importance. One where the rights and duties granted to the citizens, as well as the institutions, are ensured and fulfilled, respectively. Emerging patterns in contemporary times, however, are bringing into doubt the effectiveness of democracies to see this through. This article explores some of the basic tenets of democracy, bringing under the microscope the question of whether true democracy is a myth.
One of the hallmarks of a democracy is the function of free and fair elections. These elections are supposed to be such that they not only ensure legitimate representation but also provide the citizens of the country with a plethora of credible and reliable options to choose from (Sorabjee 83). Regular, free and fair elections, in fact, form the foundation of democracy which ensures that people can fearlessly choose their representatives. Representatives who truly will work in their interests. However, the reality stands in stark contrast to theory.
It is undeniable that rampant corruption has plagued this foundation of democracy, rendering the chances of conducting free and fair elections quite slim. The powerful and wealthy mange to subvert the system in their favour, far too often. Newspapers are filled with headlines of suspected rigging of elections, such as in the case of the supposed Russian intervention in the American elections (Scott), tampering with the voter ballots in India as well as the United States, or even committing electoral fraud through the use of violence and intimidation (Lehoucq 18). Moreover, political leaders and potential lawmakers, who are supposed to work within the laws of the country, abiding by the Constitution so as to ensure the wellbeing of the people, are often themselves frequent lawbreakers. Political parties with serious criminal elements manage to gain entry into the Parliament, becoming directly responsible for the country’s economy, and socio-political development (Rahn).
Another basic tenet of democracy is the freedom of choice. Within the legal constraints imposed on democratic citizens as part of the governing system, the people must have the liberty to exercise their freedom of choice, including when it comes to electing representatives (Vaishnav 24). Often it is found, however, that while there may be a plethora of choices on the face of it, citizens are left with only a handful of legitimate choices which have the ability to actually come to power. It is then no surprise that the interests of all are often not catered to in any one such choice. This may result in a sense of apathy or even cynicism among the voters, especially if their country has witnessed a recurring pattern of parties from the same limited pool coming to power (Sorabjee 86). There are plenty of examples to cite. India has recently seen its choices limited, realistically speaking, to the Indian National Congress, the Bhartiya Janata Party and, to a certain extent, the Aam Aadmi Party (Vaishnav 26). The United States of America, too, faces a dichotomy of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, even though independent voting is very much an option, but it is just that; an option (Miller, Schofield 433). Such lack of representational legitimacy may create a sense of fatalism, in turn hindering the very structure of democracy.
When deconstructing and analysing such basic characteristics of democracy, one is also faced with the potential encroachment of a very human phenomenon; that of hero worshipping. Political leaders and parties often engage in a pursuit of their ideologies which also serves as one of their major impetuses to strive for power (Rahn). The pursuit of these ideologies, usually based on class, caste, gender, and religious definitions, sometimes end up occupying prime importance in their agenda and/or manifesto, overshadowing their actual duty of protecting the interests of all citizens in the country and ensuring prosperity, unity, and harmony. This can further create divides, often corrupting the minds of the uninformed, the highly orthodox, the superstitious, or simply the easy to influence, who are sitting ducks for propaganda. The far-reaching, and negative, effect of this is the flourishing of personality politics (Sorabjee 89). Political leaders, or even entire parties, come to hold a revered position for some, further complicating voting patterns while simultaneously feeding into the cracks or divides which may exist in the society. The following and support that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has garnered is an extremely apt example of this phenomenon, the corresponding issues and problems of which are especially coming to light in contemporary times (92). The popularity that the Donald Trump administration has acquired can also be construed as a manifestation of hero worshipping, with Trump being the strongman figure (Wasserman).
These are patterns which may not be common to all democracies but are prevalent enough to question the legitimacy of the governing structure. However, this is not to say that democracy is essentially ineffective. The very rights and institutions bestowed upon a society by the virtue of adapting democracy make for a strong toolkit for people to see through the cover-ups and propaganda, and actually engage in critical analysis. Despite the inefficiencies and shortcomings, the platform to question and inquire is only provided by democracy, especially by institutions of the judiciary and the press, which can play a massive role in maintaining a checks and balances in the country (94).
The problem lies not in the unavailability of certain rights and institutions but rather in their failure to uphold the basic tenets of democracy. The powerful have seeped into the very nooks and crannies of even that form of governance which is, in theory, devoted to the people, all people. In execution, therefore, doubts pertaining to the effectiveness of democracy arise. However, does this translate to adapting a wholly different form of governance? Perhaps not. There is one thought which is gaining greater legitimacy in the current political climate though; the existence of true democracy might just be a myth.
Works Cited
Sorabjee, Soli J. “Indian Democracy: Reality or Myth?” India International Centre Quarterly,
vol. 33, no. 2, 2006, pp. 83–96. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23005873.
Miller, Gary, and Norman Schofield. “The Transformation of the Republican and Democratic
Party Coalitions in the U.S.” Perspectives on Politics, vol. 6, no. 3, 2008, pp. 433– 450.
JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20446754.
Rahn, Richard W. “The Democracy Myth.” The Washington Times, The Washington Times,
26 Nov. 2018, www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/26/the-democracy-myth/.
Shane, Scott. “The Fake Americans Russia Created to Influence the Election.” New York
Times, New York Times, 7 Sept. 2017,
cs.brown.edu/people/jsavage/VotingProject/2017_09_07_NYT_TheFakeAmericansRus
siaCreatedToInfluenceTheElection.pdf.
Vaishnav, Milan. “Understanding the Indian Voter.” Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, June 2015,
carnegieendowment.org/files/understanding_indian_voter.pdf.
Wasserman, Zack. “Washington, Trump, and Cults of Personality.” Foreign Policy, Foreign
Policy, 1 Jan. 4871, foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/30/washington-trump-and-cults-of-
personality/.
Lehoucq, Fabrice. “ELECTORAL FRAUD: Causes, Types, and Consequences.” Annual
Reviews, Annual Reviews, 2003,
www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085655.
Yorumlar