One day while getting a good haircut in a salon nearby, the hairdresser without even being acquainted suddenly asked me this question “what is your take on democracy and monarchy?”
This question truly fascinated me, as I am someone who has experienced both democracy and monarchy in my life by living in countries that adopt both these forms of government. He talked about his time living in Saudi Arabia for a couple of years and his perspective on a monarchical state from a common man’s viewpoint.
As Ezra Stiles said, “A monarchy conducted with infinite wisdom and infinite benevolence is the most perfect of all possible governments.”Even though this form of government does not consider the voice of the people, the quote mentioned above describes the ideal situation for a monarchical government, which favors this form of governance from a common man’s viewpoint. However, the usual human psychology of holding onto power for longer durations might, in turn, lead to hereditary dictatorship.
Now, when we talk about democracy, as Abraham Lincoln said, “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people.” This quote can be described as the fundamental foundation of democracy, which sets it apart from all other forms of government. But this basic principle of democracy also has its loopholes, which are not usually addressed by the constitution of democratic countries.
The basic principle of free speech, given by democratic countries, is often misused by many people, including anti-nationals who oppose the existence of the state and propagate agendas to break the unity of the state. This principle also hinders the rapid growth of a country, as it needs to cater to everyone’s opinions.
Let us simply take the example of China and India. Both were in the same economic state in the start of the 1970s, but after a couple of years, China, through its socialist and reformist measures taken under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, opened its economy, thereby increasing foreign investments and initiating rapid growth. Whereas in a democratic country like India, liberalization and the opening of the economy only happened in the 1990s under the leadership of P. V. Narasimha Rao, lagging approximately 20 years behind in opening their markets.
Continuing our discussion, he also mentioned another big problem with democratic governance — corruption. Corruption easily seeps into democratic institutions, where another fundamental principle of representative democracy opens up another loophole. It provides different tiers of government with opportunities for corruption through contracts given to well-wishers for commissions by government representatives. This, in turn, deceives the people who have elected them to be their rightful representatives of the state.
Corruption can also occur due to peer pressure, where there is pressure from higher authorities to engage in corruption in order to receive a share of the money. Corruption also happens in other forms of government, but the scale is higher in democracy since bureaucracy contains many people, unlike in monarchy where power is held by a single person. Corruption also leads to the stagnation of the state's economy, which, in turn, leads to various other factors contributing to the deterioration of the state. For example, places like Bihar in India have seen consistent corrupt governments, which in turn lead to an increase in poverty and illiteracy, leading to the stagnation of Bihar’s economy despite large funding from the central government to revive its economy.
After getting the haircut done, he showed no intention of departing and insisted on continuing our conversation. We then discussed one of the biggest dangers posed to society due to the loopholes in democracy — fragmenting society based on caste and creed to ensure votes in elections. Parties contesting elections do not think about the future consequences and make decisions to appease certain sections of society in order to gain their votes. These decisions later lead to tensions in society, resulting in chaos and leaving a deep scar in people's minds.
Parties that take a secular stand before the elections often exploit sensitive issues like caste and religion during the elections to appease the majority or pivotal voting populace. They even try to publicly appease the heads of these castes or religious groups to attract their attention and votes.
Reflecting on our views on democracy, we reached the conclusion that all types or forms of government have their own pros and cons, especially in the case of democracy. Parties, whether big or small, will always try to deceive voters during elections using all possible methods at their disposal. As responsible citizens, we should be mindful of the traps they set by increasing our awareness and educating ourselves on the concept of voting.
- Firstly, as citizens who have to vote for a representative, we should stop blindly following a political party and vote according to the candidate contesting in the election, rather than looking at the party for which they are contesting. We should consider the values and characters present in each candidate and vote accordingly, which will bring out an able leader from a specific constituency. Blindly supporting political parties will only bring negative outcomes of democracy, as it makes a representative more accountable to the party leader rather than the people who elected them. This happens because they are elected only due to the support of people for their party and their policies, rather than the merit of the candidate. Parties truly deviate from their ideas and theories in the present day society as we can see in the case of implementing capitalism in places like China where the government follows the communist ideologies.
All the points mentioned below are the benefits of executing democracy in the way mentioned above.
- This eventually will lead to a decrease in power concentration in the party, giving the elected representatives the authority to exercise their power. This, in turn, would provide more attention from that representative to the group of people who elected them. It would also help to reduce overspending during elections by parties, as parties with good and healthy candidates can win the election irrespective of the strategies or tactics they use. Thus, a party simply becomes a collective entity of representatives with almost the same ideas and thinking coming together to form a government, where the prime minister or president simply becomes a leader of this entity, thereby reducing the role and influence of the party in the government.
- This kind of representative model in democracy also reduces the risk of democratic dictatorship or can simply be called a one-party system, where voters have no choice but to vote for a single party contesting in the election. Since the system is more accountable, the representatives have to fulfill their duties in order to win the upcoming elections, where the prime minister or president also cannot interfere, as they also have to look after their duties to win the next election. This also helps on to reduce corruption as people are more accessible to their representative.
- It also establishes a proper connection between the representatives and the people who elected them. This connection helps representatives to achieve their goals for the constituencies provided for them, as it helps them to know the needs of each and every person.
- This, in turn, would bring about more trust in the government machinery among the people. It would also help eradicate anti-state elements due to the trust of the people in society and the government.
Now it was time to bid adieu to him. He was very happy that he found someone to share his views and ideas. Upon bidding farewell, I said to him, “it is the people who decide whether democracy is the right form to govern a state.”I glanced at his face and noticed a faint smile of approval as I departed.