Is Democracy A Joke In India ?

"The Indian Parliament is a joke." If you think this is merely the twaddle of a columnist who writes unpleasant facts about his country, you are wrong. The statement was made few months ago by none other than Somnath Chatterjee, speaker of the lower house of the Indian Parliament.

And yes, he is right. The chair was expressing his concern about the behavior of the members of the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, when he found that the “honorable” members of Parliament were behaving in an unmannerly way, continuously interrupting the proceedings during a session.

Why did Chatterjee expect that the members he is supposed to control would “maintain decorum” from the moment they entered the Parliament? A majority of them have no past experience to stand on. Chatterjee will either have to sit back, enjoy his cup of tea and endure their behavior, or refuse to put up with them any longer.

Chatterjee’s position is not much different from the average Indian citizen. Indians are forced to accept — rather, destined to tolerate — some of the worst anti-democratic and anti-people legislators the world has seen. Yet this happens in the name of democracy.

Take for example the Union Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav. This honorable minister who was invited to Harvard Universityto give a lecture in management is one of the most notorious politicians Indiahas ever suffered. Before taking charge of the Indian Railways, Yadav was chief minister of the state of Bihar. Yadav’s tenure as chief minister is better known as the dark days of that state. Kidnapping for ransom was the easiest way of making money in Biharduring his time in office. When he faced prosecution for corruption he was forced to step down from office, but he continued to rule from home, appointing his wife as chief minister. This period is known as the “kitchen raj” in Bihar.

The fact that such a person could turn Indian Railways into a profit-making enterprise speaks volumes about the previous personalities that controlled the railways. There are hundreds of such unique examples in Indian politics.

The chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, is yet another example. Modi is one of the chief conspirators of the Gujaratmassacre. Report after report has accused him of being personally responsible for the massacre that killed more than 1,000 people in the Hindu-Muslim riot that literally burned the state in 2002.

At least in Modi’s case the Americans were reasonable. The U.S.government in 2003 revoked his visa on the grounds that Modi was responsible for violations of religious freedom. The bureaucrats in the U.S.government are apparently more capable of reasoning than the five-star managers at Harvard. Yet, all these specimens get elected again and again in the world’s largest democracy. The question is how this is possible. If you expect an answer, I do not have one. However, I could suggest some indicators.

Take for example the recently concluded election in Gujarat. Modi assuming office as the chief minister of Gujarat on Dec. 25, 2007, should have been viewed with horror by anyone who is serious about democracy and democratic values. There was no other choice, however, since the Bahratiya Janata Party managed to win 117 out of the 182 seats in the State Assembly. Naturally, the leader of the pack was chosen as chief minister and that was Modi.

What happened to the massacre, the futile prosecutions and the criminal charges? All has been lost in thin air.

What else can one expect from a culture defined by at least 2,000 years of systematic oppression? The Indian caste system is unfortunately one of the foundation stones of Indian culture. Though much has changed on the surface, the Indian mind is still under the influence of caste practices.

In a caste-based society there is no scope for challenge or questioning. The concept of equality does not exist. Discrimination is forced upon a person from top to bottom. The top being numerically small compared to the bottom, the caste society resembles a pyramid, where the lowest strata is expected to bear the weight of the top. Caste is not just about religion, but is more about oppression — of the majority by the minority.

Indiacannot be understood without understanding what caste is. There is a counter argument to this concept of oppression: What about the lower caste politicians who also have risen to authority? The response is: Can they be different from the social milieu they belong to? In the midst of a disorderly session, Chatterjee said the Indian parliamentarians were “working overtime to murder democracy.”

I beg to disagree; how many times can democracy die?