The Indian Democracy.

In 1888, John Strachey, a British colonial administrator wrote a premier called ‘India’. He stated in it that there is not, and never was a country called India which exemplified any sort of unity, be it political, religious, social etc. He stated in his premier ‘that men of Punjab, Bengal, the north-western provinces, and Madras, should ever feel they belong to one nation is impossible’. Perhaps John was right in a sense. Even today, there exist 1642 spoken languages and cultures & social norms change every few kilometres. Still there exist differences among different social groups owing to the varied beliefs they follow.

But today, despite these differences, populace of all these groups identify themselves as ‘Indians’ and consider themselves as a part of a nation-state called ‘Republic of India’. This unification, I believe, was possible because of the trust people of the country put in the idea of democracy.

Democracy is a political regime which is based on the notion ‘Of the people, For the people, by the people’ and a democratic regime thrives only when this notion is its core content and the populace firmly believes in it. Lack of either one would cause the regime to fall in the war of separatist politics and ultimately dictatorship (Ghana, Venezuela and North Korea are some popular examples of the same).

But in case of India, one may ask, how did the democratic regime not fall in a pit during its initial years? Considering the existence of stronghold of illiteracy, poverty and backwardness, separatist movements in the initial years and adherence to strong ethnic norms, India already had a bleak future as a democratic state. How? Well, in my view, the credit for this goes to our founding fathers. As most of us know that our democratic principles are borrowed from our colonial masters. But the real task was implementation these principles considering the then economic and social structure of the country. Political leaders reconciled the Indian culture and western ideology and formed a foundation for Indian constitution and presented it to the populace as a ‘way of life’ that can accepted by all. Dr B.R Ambedkar exemplified the same by saying “Political Democracy cannot last unless there lays at the base of it a social democracy. Social Democracy means a way of life which recognizes liberty, fraternity and equality which are not treated as separate items in a trinity.”

However, democracy is not a solution to all the problems of the nation. Rather, all that is provided to an individual, under democracy, is a fair chance for self-betterment. Whether that chance is used well or not is upon that individual. As political regimes come and go, there was never a single political government which flawlessly adhered to the democratic principles ultimately weakening the democratic stature of the nation. In such a situation it is the people who must recall and practice their rights and choose what is best for their own good.

Take 21 month emergency period as an example. In 1975, Indira Gandhi announced internal emergency throughout the nation. From June of that year started the darkest 21 months of the history of democracy where Indira Gandhi had power to rule by decree, civil rights were curbed, political opponents and dissidents of Indira Gandhi were imprisoned, news was censored, fundamental rights of people were violated and a mass sterilization campaign were run. On 21 March 1977 emergency was removed and 3 days later general elections were held. Congress had a massive advantage for the elections as there was no opposition until 3 days prior to election, news was censored in its favour and for a change government offices were working flawlessly. Yet the opposition candidates who were released 3 days prior to elections and who led campaign under same banner ‘Janata Dal’, won the elections and the congress regime came crashing down for the first time since independence. The reason was that the general public, affected or unaffected, realized that what Indira Gandhi led Congress did was fundamentally and democratically unethical and thus incorrect. 1977 Lok Sabha elections are the clear cut victory of democracy of India and remind the nation what being a democratic country truly means.

I want to conclude this article by saying that democracy is a bittersweet compromise when seen from the eyes of someone who just desires the good of the nation and for the same to thrive, it is necessary that voices of dissent and voices of acceptance are allowed to clash to come up with more refined practices of governance. This is what a democracy truly supports.