Niti Aayog CEO Amitabh Kant. (Photo | PTI)
Niti Aayog CEO Amitabh Kant. (Photo | PTI)

Too much democracy for mandarins?

Over the centuries, the instrument of power passed from the common to the privileged, thereby perverting the sanguine spirit of democracy.

Democracy is both an idea and an ideal. It is also an initiation and an institution. It thrives and survives on the principle of maximum participation. An ancient Greek political and philosophical architecture of governance, the term surfaced around 507 BC in Athens. Its etymology is a combination of 'demos' (common people) and 'kratos' (power).

Over the centuries, the instrument of power passed from the common to the privileged, thereby perverting the sanguine spirit of democracy. The ballot in the hands of people has become a bullet in the hands of the executive, which imposes its subjective authority and restricts the contours of inclusive discourse.

The width, breadth and height of the democratic edifice are now decided by a cunning cabal, which acquires powers by selection not an election. Their postures and utterances have portrayed democracy as a demon. It is now diminishing the power of those elected by the people to work for their welfare. The erudite and highly visible faces of the New Establishment are scripting its new narrative.

Last week, Amitabh Kant, the NITI Aayog's flamboyant and cocktail CEO, defined democracy's quantitative limit. Speaking at a media conclave, he announced shockingly, "Tough reforms are very difficult in the Indian context, we are too much of a democracy."

Since Kant is considered the most powerful official voice on every subject under the political sun, his opinion is being interpreted as a reflection of the political leadership’s current mood.

His claim to fame is just one slogan. All other projects entrusted to him over the past two decades remain incomplete. He ignores the fact that it is the excessive democratic process that has ensured him plum posts in almost every government ruled by the extreme Left to the current one.

As he is the only retired IAS officer, amongst 100 other compatriots holding sensitive posts, who have been given the mandate to authoritatively articulate and interpret policies and initiatives, his remarks placed the blame for tardy decision- making on gagging internal dissent on the government.

In a democracy, it is the political leadership and not the Civil Service, which normally expresses opinion on the efficacy of institutions. Since most Central ministers confine themselves to their own departments and policies, Kant has acquired the image of an information treasure chest to be mined to gauge the sarkar’s mood.

Ever since Prime Minister Narendra Modi anointed him to his present post, Kant has expounded on all subjects from potatoes to politics. Subsequently, his comments, though querulously questioned by himself subsequently, became a major embarrassment for the government.

Both MSM (Main Stream Media) and SM (Social Media) questioned Kant’s prognosis of what ails the economy. At a time when Modi's detractors are charging his administration with gagging dissent and demolishing democratic symbols, Kant couldn’t have given a more lethal weapon to the Opposition with his unsolicited opinion.

As the furore took a furious turn, many Union ministers disowned Kant's words of wishful wisdom and declared their unflinching faith in democracy. The foot-in-the-mouth bureaucrat wrote articles in newspapers and behaved like a politician by accusing the media of quoting his remarks out of context. But video cameras record what the eyes see. Finally, it was left to Modi to publicly distance his government from the unacceptable conclusion drawn by one of his pencil pushers.

Though there wasn’t any direct connection, the PM, while speaking at the foundation stone ceremony of the new Parliament building, asserted: "Democracy is not merely a system of governance for us. Democracy is in India’s ethos for centuries. A democratic temperament is a part of our culture…democracy is a way of life in India... It won’t be long before the world would say that India is the Mother of Democracy."

Modi is aware that he, and many others like him hailing from ordinary backgrounds, is the creation of democratic power play. Unlike babus who enter the power palace through written and oral examinations, leaders have to convince the masses about their relevance and identity.

Modi could survive as the Gujarat's CM for 12 years in an extremely hostile national environment and later become the PM precisely due to "too much of democracy". The BJP emerged as the majority party after almost three decades, not due to bureaucratic file movers but because of the faith in the ballot.

Actually, it is the malicious mandarin who pollutes the minds of leaders to not only consolidate their own power and continuity, but also to cover up their own failures. In a democracy, public outrage takes an ugly turn when the masses discover that their elected leaders are falling short on their promises.

Since netas only draw the big picture, they leave it to the civil servants to ensure timely delivery. Rebellion is brewed out of distress everywhere. Mahatma Gandhi used "too much of democracy" to bring down the British Empire. So many freedom fighters died defending "too much of democracy".

Nelson Mandela used his prison torture to fan the democratic process and deposed apartheid. The entire culturally diverse Europe and the UK surrendered a part of their sovereign rights to form the EU, thanks to democracy because the people thought it was in their interest. It is also democracy that led to Brexit and the resignation of the UK prime minister.

If some Middle Eastern Islamic monarchies have partially liberalised their social order, it is due to the realisation on their part that democratic will ultimately get the better of their royal order. In Independent India, Jaiprakash Narain united wide swathes of his countrymen to combat Indira Gandhi’s non-performing and corrupt Congress government.

She then used state power to strangulate democratic voices. Finally, she had to yield and lost the elections. Most of the current leaders including the prime minister, Mamata Banerjee, Chandrashekhar Rao, Jagan Reddy, Jayalalithaa and Lalu are the fruits of  "too much democracy".

If some of them like Mayawati and the Gandhis have been marginalised, the responsibility goes to democratic hammer sledging. Despite cultural, linguistic and religious diversities, India has survived as a united nation because its citizens can exercise their right to elect or reject their rulers.

India has become one of the world’s top five economies due to the maximum participation of all its stakeholders. Half a dozen national and over 40 regional and state parties are not only flourishing, but also ruling some of the states owing to free and fair democratic verdict.

Since democracy demands vigorous scrutiny at every level, only incompetent dilettantes would cherish the idea of curbing the freedom of expression. India is truly a democracy ruled by a "government of the people, by and for the people".

Any Doubting Thomas should be dumped before they subvert the system. Or else, there will be no Credible India, only Indie-populism and Incredible Inanity.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com