Amidst the pouring of appeal for free and fair elections, Nagaland on February 23, 2013 stood to the test of democracy as it voted to elect a new set of representatives and a government of the people. While the Election Commission of India has given out the statistics of high voter turnout and stating, like everyone else, about how peaceful the elections were, perhaps the ECI should also give its verdict whether free and fair election took place. In fact the focus of the ECI throughout this period was on conducting free and fair election. Probably the ECI would be happy that “elections passed off by and large peacefully”. The quality of the process does not really matter it would seem. Everyone is happy that at least peace prevailed even if the principle of one man one vote did not succeed. In fact the ingenious Nagas have added new lexicons to electoral politics by indulging in creative ways of voting—one man as many vote, one village entire vote, one man one family vote, more cash most vote etc to name only a few.
It will be only honest to state here that if the past does not change, then we the people would have failed this test of democracy once again. And the past that one is referring to is the practice of democracy (in Nagaland) over the years, which in reality is tantamount to oligarchy (rule of the few) of the worst kind. And citizens are also to be blamed. After all it is they who elect based not on principles or issues but on money and muscle power. To add to this ignominy, the by-product of an adulterated election process clearly manifests in several ways such as high end political corruption and the evils of party politics marked by the spoils system and nepotism further debasing moral standards. In such a scenario, sloganeering on democracy and majority government by the politicians is the best way to give legitimacy to their position of power and pelf. Democracy in this sense is not enough.
Bertrand Russell a well known British philosopher and advocate for social reform once said that Democracy in order to be effective must measure its success in a distinctive way and judge itself by the character, achievement of the men and women who build it up and also the quality of lives they are able to lead. In other words has development benefited all sections of the people? Are the people enjoying the rights due to them—road, water supply, electricity, health care, education, security? In a few hours time the so called elected representatives would have been officially declared. These politicians who profess to represent the people must firstly equip themselves with honesty, a spirit of servitude and moral soundness when they take oath in the name of God. Without clean hands and a pure heart democracy is bound to fail even if the politicians claim that they are all democrats.
Democracy is a process, not an end-state. It is only a means and not a panacea. It is one among a set of instruments that promote a free, peaceful society but which is hardly sufficient. A healthy, open democratic state requires more than just elections; it requires the rule of law, good governance, an independent press, political and economic rights, social harmony, tolerance and active citizens. Many of these crucial elements are in short supply and therefore it needs to be understood that to produce a truly open, democratic state, simply voting alone is not enough. Citizens need to keep themselves educated on the issues important to them, and keep track of the performance of their elected officials. After all, uninformed voters are the easiest prey for the demagogue. The problem of practicing democracy in fact requires a complete overhauling of the system besides a moral changeover of both those who lead and those who elect them.
(Feedback can be send to consultingeditormex@gmail.com)
