Opinion
The D Words
Democracy threatens to become our morphine, dulling our sensitivity to the world around us. Add to that another catch-word: “Development” - the one being used for framing the current debate over Maoism.

Indians are very proud of democracy. It remains the nation’s political horizon, so ingrained, a mere three-and-a-half decades after Indira Gandhi essentially outlawed it, that all political persuasions – Left, Right, “regional”, religious minority, caste grouping – cannot imagine life without it. The politicking of India’s democracy is essential, not only to this or that party, but even to all manner of social groups, be they Gujjars, Muslims, Patels or Reddys – not to mention all manner of groups to come, as new identities are formed, or old ones acquire a new political valence. In India, it seems, democracy is almost natural.

Almost. For one does not feel the need to celebrate that which is natural; we do not say it is good to breathe, because we expect to do so. The self-congratulation that accompanies the words “Indian Democracy” thus points to a certain anxiety. That, perhaps, democracy is an unlikely characteristic in a country like India; that democracy is periodically threatened in the country (the Emergency being the most naked, but certainly not the last, instance); that democracy puts India at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the imagined efficiencies of more authoritarian dispensations. And, if we are completely honest with ourselves, we would admit that democracy has also become our complacency, our smugness, imparting a badge of moral superiority, vis-à-vis certain sub-continental neighbours, for instance; or perhaps China, that might enjoy higher growth rates, but lacks democracy. The “D”-word, it seems, has become a bit like Deewar’s maa: Shashi Kapoor has her, and it is an unanswerable argument.

Some of these anxieties have (or ought to have) a bad conscience: for instance, the notion that the survival of democracy in a country “like” India is some kind of miracle (a notion implicit not only in the celebratory stance of Indians, but in the condescending praise of far too many “outsiders” as well) suggests that democracy is somehow incompatible with poverty and/or great social variety, that democracy is simply a stage in a society’s inevitable progress through the various stages of “development,” until it reaches the perfection of Holland; implicitly, it is not democracy that is deemed desirable in such formulations, but wealth. That democracy has flowered amidst India’s poverty thus highlights India’s exceptional nature, even as it confirms that we are “advanced” enough to gain entry to any club that holds out democracy as a prerequisite for entry. (It is no coincidence that just about the first thing President Pratibha Patil said about Indo-British relations to the BBC reporter interviewing her on her recent trip to the United Kingdom, was that “both the countries are committed to democracy, rule of law, and pluralism.”) In short, some of what we celebrate when we celebrate democracy has little or nothing to do with democracy.

At the same time, democracy threatens to become our morphine, dulling our sensitivity to the world around us. Or, even more bluntly: every time we celebrate democracy, we kill a little of it. Every time we offer democracy as a solution to all political problems, as ending all debate on legitimacy (whether we are, like Home Minister P. Chidambaram, calling on Naxalites to join a system that continually out-votes “tribals”/Adivasis, and even votes at their expense, while failing to adequately address the wider structural issues that perpetrate injustice against so many of them; or we insist on a referendum as the only correct solution to the Kashmir issue), we kill a little bit of democracy. Every time we deflect criticism on the grounds that we are a democracy, we kill a little bit of it. 

The question is more than merely academic. A conflation of one particular form – representative democracy on the Westminster model – with the thing itself – democracy, understood as the ceaseless quest for greater political justice, for all, within a horizon where “the people” are participants, and not merely subjects, bedevils contemporary political discourse in India. The current debate over the various “Maoist” insurgencies is a good case in point. Far too many in government and the media are content to frame the issue as one of “development” – i.e., were the areas in question “developed”, the thinking seems to be, the “tribals”/Adivasis too would be thrilled to be part of the “democracy” bandwagon. The assumption is that “democracy” and “development” are both self-evident categories. The reality is anything but: if by “development” is meant the dispossession of Adivasi populations in order to extract the minerals, build the dams, and sustain the lifestyles that the rest of us require to fuel our attempt to equal the post-industrial West’s consumption patterns (themselves wholly unsustainable as an ecological matter), and if democracy is used to place the imprimatur of legitimacy on this arrangement, then who can blame those shunted to the margins for not wanting to be part of this arrangement? 

Stated differently, a solution to the problem cannot simply focus on incorporating the people the insurgents claim to speak for into the status quo – it is precisely the status quo that is atrocious. Any solution must change the contours of the system. Because, as we would do well to remember in this season, when counter-insurgency operations are in the air and angry ministers insist that all “right-thinking” people line up behind “democracy and development”, or risk being labelled a Maoist sympathizer, democracy is incompatible with complacency. Democracy is not a thing to hold in one’s hand, a possession to be proud of, a point on a chart, or a characteristic. Democracy – of which electioneering is no more than a part, and the parliamentary form merely a contingent manifestation – needs to be an urgency, a spur to action, and a permanent political restlessness in the interests of ever-increasing political fairness. Perhaps once “we” begin to appreciate that, we will be better positioned to invite the Maoists to lay down their arms and talk.


Umair Ahmed Muhajir, 31, is a lawyer based in New York City. He blogs at qalandari.blogspot.com

 
Daily Mail
COLLAPSE COMMENTS :
HAVE YOUR SAY
Nov 09, 2009 10:14 AM
8
dear sreekanth the same argument can be used for diet/culture/religion and if some r not willing to convert and wants to live like rodents which they have been doing for thousands of yrs who r we to force them.its not out of genuine desire to make them live comfortable we trouble them but to make ourselves more comfortable with the bauxite and aluminium found in their living places.will u be willing to dig up tirumala hills if its rich in minerals and shift the temple to another place.the temples and burial grounds of tribals r useless while ur temples r priceless.its u who have to come out of the rut
ganapathi
chennai, India
Nov 08, 2009 08:04 PM
7
The "worst form of democracy" is better than the "best form of any other type of Govt"- want proof, see Pakistan- and India is an efficient working democracy. The people of India have "voted out" politicians like Mrs Indira Gandhi, Mr VP Singh and Mr AB Vajpayee and still has the capability to repeatedly do it. How many Asian countries give such freedom to all it's people- can the people of China even dream of such power??

The nemesis of India is NOT DEMOCRACY nor it's elected representatives who have to face "selection by election every FIVE years". It is the NON-ELECTED part of Indian Govt which needs "chemotherapy"- the "corrupt" bureaucracy and the Judiciary. The "people who wielded the democratic power to VOTE OUT even Mrs Indira Gandhi" becomes totally powerless before a POLICE CONSTABLE, a PEON or a CLERK- the lowest bureaucratic dispensation with whom AAM ADMI interacts and who once selected continues in the JOB till retirement. Politicians can NOT indulge in corruption with out the support of BABUS and maximum that befalls a BABU who doesn't assist the politician in corruption is a transfer- he will not lose his job till he attains retirement age- and will become irrelevant if the newly posted BABU also refuse to assist the politicians in corruption. But more Development funds meant for AAM ADMI is siphoned off by the Govt Bureaucrats and with their assistance the politicians too indulge in corruption.

Slow dispensation of justice is another area of concern. The corrupt manage to drag the case on till the accused is dead. Again "DEMOCRACY" has no role in judiciary too and seeking justice for AAM ADMI has almost become like "banging one's head against a ROCK". JUDICIARY in addition to the "JOB assurance" does NOT have to fear even transfer as it is controlled by Judiciary themselves.
Akil
Bangalore, India
Nov 07, 2009 09:39 AM
6
>>>The reality is anything but: if by “development” is meant the dispossession of Adivasi populations in order to .... equal the post-industrial West’s consumption patterns (themselves wholly unsustainable as an ecological matter), ... not wanting to be part of this arrangement?

It might be the Indian people's aspiration to equal the living standards of NY (and hey, who can blame them). But you're making the mistake of trying to stop them, or at least guilt them, when they're still at step 1. By any reasonable metric of per-capita consumption, food, energy, etc,. Indians have a long long way to go before they need to re-calibrate as we did in the US in the 70's. It's grossly unfair for us to export our post-industrial guilt to a developing country.

So I'm not saying that dispossessing the tribals who happen to live over the resource-rich mid-section of the country is a good thing. Pay them a fair compensation. But if you ask them, they'd so want to be part of this "arrangement". Who wants to live in huts in the middle of jungles and gather roots and hunt miserable little rodents when you can live in a flat and watch TV. Have you seen National Geographic pictures of tribals ? Have you seen their teeth ? Their sagging breasts ? And that's just the men.

My point is there is nothing noble in living in poverty. I'm typing this from my comfortable house in the Boston suburbs. You probably typed your article surrounded by the comforts of a post-industrial civilization, created for our benefit when we were still industrial. How can you even think of denying it to others ?
SreekanthBoston
Boston, United States
Nov 06, 2009 10:27 PM
5
good sensible article.hope the manmohan ahluwalia chidambaram trio(all three will lose their deposit if they have stood as independents in all 543 constituencies)reads
ganapathi
chennai, India
Nov 04, 2009 05:38 PM
4
Democracy is continuing process & operates through a set of constiutionally accepted social rules. Independence & seperation of powers of legislature, judiciary, government , freedom speech & expression, equity etc. are it's preconditions. Each of these verticals however has its own undefined , inherent limitations. These limitations are not codifiable but their nuances are apparent & needs be respected by each of the plillars of democracy.

Let us grant in the outset that perfect dispensation of equity, juctice , development is utopia & not achievable. Having said that, continuous effort towards achieving these goals is workable & are signs of vibrant democracy.

We in Idia has developed a system ritual casting of ballots in the ballot box & that has become an democratic end in itself. Inevitably those with more muscle , physical or financial , will hijack the democratic process to their own maximum advantage.

Increasingly the nexus between a set of small group in the soceity with greater access to those who passed the test of the ballot & gets elected, therefore yeilds political power, is tilting the fruits of democracy towards these groups. They are becoming more equal. And to keep their influence base intact they are out to disorient this small mercy of casting the ballot also. So many get elected not by pristne route.

Dut democracy is the only political process wich still can achieve greater common good & needs nurtured. As the cliche goes vigillence is the eternal price of democracy. A meaningful democracy are the ones which tolerates vibrants criticism & take serious note of the critique.
MANISH BANERJEE
KOLKATA, India
Nov 04, 2009 01:29 PM
3
In one word Mr. Umair, excellent. The fact of the matter is that the environmental catastrophe (forget the other disasters) that we are staring at now is the end result of the unbridled 'development' model that we've been following for all these years -- in most parts of the world democracy has been pulling this 'development' cart. An alternative narrative is something which our urban minds cannot come up with. The earth just cannot sustain our opulence -- a direct result of our alien to nature lifestyle.
Democracy, development, progress, growth, etc. need to be redefined.
Maybe it's also time for us to ask ourselves who our real leaders ought to be -- politicians, economists, academicians and the rest OR tribal populations, people working with the earth, people working at the grassroots, wise environmental/social activists and the rest.
sajosam
new delhi`, India
Nov 04, 2009 01:57 AM
2
Democracy does not resolve certain entrenched injustices in the short term. A pro-active redressal initiative to help an aggrieved section of society may impact negatively on other sections of the society which may have a destabilizing effect on a democratically elected government. Fits and starts characterize the path toward justice even with the best of intentions on all sides.
Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Nov 04, 2009 01:43 AM
1
"whether we are, like Home Minister P. Chidambaram, calling on Naxalites to join a system that continually out-votes “tribals”/Adivasis, and even votes at their expense, while failing to adequately address the wider structural issues that perpetrate injustice against so many of them;"

Narmada Andolan is the Biggest example of people protesting peacefully and through proper channels. Look where they are today. Democracy should not mean the tyranny of Majority of voters. There should be built-in safeguards. It is like somebody said don't criticize us on Gujarat we are democracy.

" The reality is anything but: if by “development” is meant the dispossession of Adivasi populations in order to extract the minerals, build the dams, and sustain the lifestyles that the rest of us require to fuel our attempt to equal the post-industrial West’s consumption patterns (themselves wholly unsustainable as an ecological matter), and if democracy is used to place the imprimatur of legitimacy on this arrangement, then who can blame those shunted to the margins for not wanting to be part of this arrangement? "

" The reality is anything but: if by “development” is meant the dispossession of Adivasi populations in order to extract the minerals, build the dams, and sustain the lifestyles that the rest of us require to fuel our attempt to equal the post-industrial West’s consumption patterns (themselves wholly unsustainable as an ecological matter), and if democracy is used to place the imprimatur of legitimacy on this arrangement, then who can blame those shunted to the margins for not wanting to be part of this arrangement? "

The time has come to re-evaluate the mantra of "Development". Whose development ? Since the "development" started the number of people under poverty line has increased significantly. It doesn't mean we should stop the development, rather we should evaluate each project for pluses and minuses and see who is getting benefitted. Most of the new "Developments" in Tribal areas are simple mining of natural resources and shipping it abroad. Some companies are may be putting up plants to utilize maybe 10-20% of the total feedstock to show "Development" but rest 80-90% ore is going abroad. It should be kept in mind that this is prime quality ore and which is much needed in the country for manufacturing.
JayKay Chraborty
Kolkatta, India
COLLAPSE COMMENTS   
Post a Comment
You are not logged in, please log in or register
ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY