30-04-2015
Democracy
The conquering General becoming the King, his word became law. The very measure of length was conceived as the length between the tip of his nose and the tip of his right hand extended. At least one king declared that he was the State. The emergence of monarchy blurs the basic truth that the whole–hearted support of the people helped him win the war. Life grows by consciousness, but the Mind that becomes conscious, being partial, alternates between two expressions of the truth it is trying to grapple. Greece where western democracy was born was a prosperous state made prosperous by the large presence of slaves. It is obvious that democracy was born in Greece as the slaves there made life possible and prosperous. During the same period, India conceived of life as a field of Spiritual expression. Spirit in life expresses as dharma. (The habit of translating dharma as ‘duty’ is to call a living being inanimate.) Dharma is the duty of society to God, as conceived by each man as he is placed in life. Dharma is defined by Sri Aurobindo as the highest ideals in one’s life executed by the greatest sincerity. The woman, the man of a caste, and age receive it as such. The Council over which the King presided elected the King and was empowered to remove him when he did not uphold dharma. That Council represented various interests that were diverse. In England where it was born in the 16th century, the power of the king at once shifted to the aristocracy that constituted Parliament. Gradually election to Parliament was introduced based on property and tax, till universal suffrage to all men arrived on the scene. The women were franchised in the early 20th century. This was a period of education becoming universal. The impression that literacy and education endows one with the discrimination that would be politically correct gained ground. Education, it is true, informs the mind. It is swabhava that acts. The psychological truth is education does not educate swabhava. It only strengthens it. Swabhava is selfish, egoistic. This great truth is missed till today. The education of the electorate is not enough to know the problems of the nation, as the leadership of no nation is capable of understanding her problems. The national government is an expansion of the municipality. At that level the electorate as well as the leadership has the knowledge necessary. The consciousness of humanity has grown global for over one hundred years and the global problems have their national versions. Neither the leadership nor the electorate is able to comprehend it. Obviously ecology is the best example. If any solution should come, it must come from the experts whose consciousness of study is narrower than human consciousness. Only a global consciousness can think of global problems. At the global level man outgrows his national culture and national outlook. The human well being, welfare, human rights, the right of existence must recast the conditions of food production, products for consumption, and the changing ways of life. It is basically a change from selfishness to selflessness. Man who has created innumerable tools and institutions has become a slave of them, as the first phase of development becomes efficient thus. The second phase does require his emancipation. Elections have to choose the leader who is to decide on these points. Such leadership is not yet born. When it is there, it is not this electorate that will choose it. In the initial stages of social formation, a leader who could defend the borders sprang up and almost imposed himself. It had the subconscious sanction of the population. Now such a leadership may emerge as Thought, not necessarily a person.
The French Revolution destroyed the existing structure and was unable to create a leader for nearly a decade. In 1945 war was abolished and the ‘structure’ that fostered war was abolished too. To replace the apparatus of war by an administration of people was not possible. The UN did it negatively and was vastly successful at the level below people – health, food, knowledge, etc. Peace is at the level of people. Health, education, food etc. are the aspects of life of the people. How does democracy elect the leaders? In India it is caste and screen popularity but not politics. When the electorate chooses to vote exercising its preference on the value of issues, it is the subconscious aspiration of the society that makes itself felt. Unfortunately, an ultimate analysis of electoral preference in the West goes by the same principle. Hitler gets elected. Worse still, a Reagan. Indian electorate is clear-headed on languages. Hindi vs Tamil is a clear issue for the electorate to choose. On electric bill, if a referendum is taken, the population is unable to appreciate their long term good in paying the bill. Not only among the illiterates, it is so among the most educated people. Let people pay taxes voluntarily. There will be no collection as it is selfish gain that acts here. Only in the measure the population has accepted values, democracy can be a viable tool. People elect corrupt leaders who are autocratic and tyrannical as it echoes their own subconscious. How then can democracy mature as a political institution? In India hundreds of improvements of a minor type – transparency – can be introduced and the implementation of the rule can be made rigorous. That way democracy all over the world can vastly improve in functioning. The rigorous punishment for perjury has made Western people truth-speaking. It is something largely true all over the world. The UN and all international fora, particularly the Associations of Science are SHY in condemning lying. Facts are distorted in all these platforms. Shedding blatant hypocrisy and an aspiration to foster truth can very much be fostered by the rigorous implementation of the rules. Violence is not something that can be encouraged by virtue of the majority. The subtle truth at the bottom that sustains falsehood and largely vitiated the functioning of democracy is the leaders of truth are believers in falsehood. Through some basic values of Truth -- 1) lying, 2) conniving falsehood, 3) honouring Man and establishing him at the centre, 4) granting him his rights, 5) abolishing speculation, 6) questioning Big Bang, 7) rigorously analyzing climate change, 8) NOT lying blatantly – democracy can come into its own if not as an effective institution. It is true a world of falsehood cannot be given a true government. Float a new United Nations and admit no lying or liars there. Just today an international Organisation that has viable ideas has the prestige to compel members to shed fundamentalism. Gandhiji was no spiritual leader. His spirituality was on the surface. His utter Truthfulness was unanimously appreciated even by those who disapproved of his policies. He crowned his truthfulness at the end by declaring the folly of Non-violence. For the rule of Truth, this is a small first step. Everyone who aspires for the presidency of an international organisation must pass this test of Truth – Gandhiji’s Test. It is central to the survival value of democracy. Even in corrupt conditions in India, the statutory institutions have asserted against the corrupt politicians. In other countries that truth is more valid.
Comments