Democracy: Changing landscape under Lokpal Bill & Black Money issue

Democracy, a notion that has evolved over time is at the helm of change again. For the Greeks, Democracy was a rule of a council dominated by the aristocrats with little power given to the proletariats. But that was a development over the Spartan way of monarchy. Solon did acknowledge the inherent drawbacks of managing all the factions and of giving Plebs an appropriate representation. Cleisthenes came with an improved structure after the Pisistratus hiccup. Pisistratus was required for giving the system a shock to realise the inherent deficiencies of the authoritarian system. The people's leader, a populist one would never be called a Tyrant in modern era but that was the irony of life that the Greeks who gave the world Democracy, Called a people's leader, a Tyrant.

Coming to the present World, Let us look at India, acclaimed to be a successful governance structure as well as the biggest democracy in the world. With a population of 1.2 Billion, Direct Democracy is impossible to accomplish and Representative Democracy has always been under question as it neglects the common man's concerns and ideas to some extent, hence we need to adopt a system that takes into consideration, the most important of all things, common man's opinion and civil society's point of view. 

The Lokpal Bill and the issue of Black money have brought Indians under one umbrella, alas after a long time. It is heartening as we have been divided on caste, race, and region for a long while. The British used the mantra of 'Divide and Rule', which was supposed to be buried under the ink of the preamble of our Constitution that promised Socialism, Sovereignty, Secularism but flourished under the mat of modern day politics and is still being wielded as a weapon in the hands of contemporary politicians.

Now, let us look at the issues that are under debate. How can civilians be involved in decision making in a representative democracy and if indeed they are involved, who are the ones whose opinions need to be heard and catered to?

The present situation does boil down to a classic chicken and egg problem. Representative democracy lets people elect the ones whom they feel are capable enough to express the opinions that are for the greater good of the society. To nominate a few select personnel who will talk on behalf of the civil society is as good as electing your representative in the house or the senate. The incorporation of civil society in the way it is being expressed to be done is a reinforcement of the system that the civil society is opposed to, a Representative Democracy as that has integrated corrupt means of operation in its nature of governance.

Anna Hazare & Baba Ramdev might seem ideal representatives of the Civil Society and they do enjoy a huge following. So were people like Fidel Castro, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, and Joseph Stalin; all were populist leaders and their ideologies well appreciated. But all those administrations did go haywire and the civilians of those countries were in need of help. Might be it is a pretty weird comparison, but my point is to say that power can transform the mindset of anybody.

This does point out the most important aspect of human nature, which has been highlighted in many movies of late like Lord of the Rings, Dark Knight Etc as well as in books like Devil & Miss Prym by Paulo Coelho. Human mind is susceptible to greed, power and can easily be corrupted. I would like to highlight Freud, He said "we all are born with animal instincts and the fear of law and society lets us curb them and live in peace; but given a chance we all will unleash the animal inside us". Greed, as in being corrupt is one of the seven sins which no one can escape from. A famous movie line says, "Everyone has a price". All will fall to greed at some point, few for thousands, and few for millions. People from the government especially congress are already questioning the integrity of Baba Ramdev. Maybe Digvijay Singh's statements need not be paid any heed given his comments on Karkare and Malegaon blasts. We can neglect this verbose as a ploy of congress to decoy from their own vulnerability given the circumstances of anti-corruption drive and a high inflation smothered economy. 

Another point, why would the existing representatives allow others to intervene in decision making and formulate rules that will allow independent bodies to prosecute them? Nobody would want to give away the power that they wield. But, things can change if people think on social grounds. Game theorists and social sciences folks say that "People enjoy more power by having less of it and sharing more of it". That is the power of Unison, when the whole society is in harmony and all share a part in decision making.

We, Citizens, have our own fault lines. We are so happy living our own life and always criticize the system and the dysfunctional nature of the government. We are so involved in flocking the net and supporting all programs by just mere clicks. Given 50% of the country is under 35, virtual world plays an important role in daily life but still we ought to live in reality and come out in open and support causes. Collective action, a thing long forgotten, rotting under communalism, and casteism need to revive like a Phoenix for our beloved nation to survive a long awaiting catastrophe. 

Proper checks and balances need to be incorporated like James Madison said in his federalist papers. Judiciary & bureaucrats are under the scrutiny of the Legislature in India, which was never the intention of the law makers. People like Mayawati transfer bureaucrats like piece of garbage. This is the core issue that needs to be addressed. 

Alienate bureaucrats and judiciary from legislature and give them adequate power to negate the pressure from power thirst and corrupt political babus. Corruption in bureaucracy can be eradicated if the pay scales can be revised by setting up an independent commission, rather than under one carpet called the Pay Commission.

The other issue is, can PM or the CJI, the ones who are the representatives of this great nation to the world can be under the purview of a civil body and be prosecuted under the civil code of law. 

At this point I remember a very famous saying, "Who will monitor the ones who monitor us". Also, the UN convention on Corruption sought to include everyone who holds a post in public office under purview. So, how are we different from the rest of the world? Is our PM really different from the President of US, who is considered to be the most powerful man on the planet? 

When the most powerful man in under the radar, why can't our PM and CJI be under the radar? Hence, it is up to the people to decide; do they indeed want to make a bill that does monitor the ones who do monitor us - the people.